Ron’s New System

[DasguteOhr]

...may I offer a process that I find a bit easier and I think just as precise. Since I almost never have a helper, I am always figuring out ways to work solo.

I place an extended tape measure, piece of wood or foam-core...anything that extends up from your chair to about the height of your head/ears.

Then I use a laser measure against the speaker, shooting to the object I have placed in the chair. I match up the measurements from each speaker to the chair, nudging either speaker as needed.

By locating the laser at the tweeter level, to the side if room allows, you can also confirm the height/location for your ears. I sometimes use foam-core so I can mark off midpoint, ear height, etc. on a grid.

If using a grid, or a midpoint line, you can also use this method to figure the speaker angles (distance to midline).

The above has worked well for me. I have used grids on the floor, protractors, and fashioned various over-engineered sighting devices on the speaker, but simple wins the day for me.

Thanks ,i'm old school and 4 ears hears more then two

 

[microstrip]

That's not really true. The speakers are fullranger crossoverless and have basic impedance essentially identical to a resistor.

It is very true - can you list the real values of the measurements of the Ron speakers, not speculative guesses?

It's not rocket science. Ron can tell us the distance from the speakers and the margin of error in basic calculation will be low enough to make your statement completely feckless.

Exactly because it is not rocket science and has been addressed by knowledgeable people we know my statement is founded. I said technically why, you just write coffee talk with pseudo-elegant words.

 

[microstrip]

You seem to forget that I own a shorter pair of these exact BG planars…I know how they work and worked extensively with them…not mere speculation.

As far as I know you have not measured them in Ron's room, so it is just speculation.

You don’t need complete data to make educated guesses…this is a false assertion by those who don’t really understand what is going on and what scientific method is really about.

Educated guesses and scientific method in the same sentence about stereo - you said it all. No more comments are needed.

 

[Alrainbow]

I don't need no stink'in platter mat!

Why would I need a platter mat? The Balance has, I think, a glass top layer.

Do you use a weighted hub ? Or ring ?

 

[Ron Resnick]

when i see some ceiling treatment then i will know you are serious.

I am open to ceiling treatment. J.R. is not prescribing ceiling treatment, at least not as a first step.

I will be putting absorption panels on the front side wall sections up to the ceiling. Reverberation between these upper side wall sections are his biggest concern.

He also had me add carpet pieces on the wood part of the floor to dampen ceiling reflections.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

That depends on the room, Mike. Mine desperately needed ceiling treatment, yours apparently needed it too. Having heard Ron's room I am not sure it's a requirement, but it still might improve things.

the issue is not that for sure ceiling treatment is needed, it's that when you decide to start treating, taking that first step, then you can't ignore the ceiling. you absolutely have to find out. the ceiling is crucial. the speakers are dipoles, so the ceiling might not be significant.

in my room i went 11 years not thinking i needed to do more with my ceiling, and turned out i was very wrong. it was key.

are you all in? or not quite?

 

[Ron Resnick]

Do you use a weighted hub ? Or ring ?

No -- see photo of platter.

 

[Alrainbow]

I am open to ceiling treatment. J.R. is not prescribing ceiling treatment, at least not as a first step.

I will be putting absorption panels on the front side wall sections up to the ceiling. Reverberation between these upper side wall sections are his biggest concern.

He also had me add carpet pieces on the wood part of the floor to dampen ceiling reflections.

View attachment 117461

May I ask now that you have made major changes
Is it in the plan to remove the panels in the front ?
Try some direction panels in the front alone ?

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I am open to ceiling treatment. J.R. is not prescribing ceiling treatment, at least not as a first step.

I will be putting absorption panels on the front side wall sections up to the ceiling. Reverberation between these upper side wall sections are his biggest concern.

He also had me add carpet pieces on the wood part of the floor to dampen ceiling reflections.

forget geometry, and forget intuition. if you have a flat (or curved) surface, it can be reflecting musical energy and smearing the sound.

it's not trivial to test any treatment. i would take two weeks and hours and hours of listening every time. took me 9 months. no hurry. but after i was done, not touched it now for almost 8 years. the effort was worth it.

 

[Alrainbow]

No -- see photo of platter.

I’m not a pro on tables so not sure just looking I know , does this use a screw down hub ? Aside of my dumb questions it’s really nice to the eyes love it

 

[microstrip]

The new configuration:

View attachment 117411

What is the distance between the centers of the ribbons?

 

[Ron Resnick]

Is it in the plan to remove the panels in the front ?

Not presently.

Try some direction panels in the front alone ?

What is a direction panel?

 

[Alrainbow]

Not presently.

What is a direction panel?

lol well it’s what I post not using glasses
Diffusion panels. Sorry typo

 

[Folsom]

It is very true - can you list the real values of the measurements of the Ron speakers, not speculative guesses?



Exactly because it is not rocket science and has been addressed by knowledgeable people we know my statement is founded. I said technically why, you just write coffee talk with pseudo-elegant words.

I think I lost the PDF that states the sensitivity of the Pendragons so I can't screen shot it. It was hard to find 7 years ago, impossible now. But what's more important is that the BG is available.



IIRC the Pendragons are rated under that, I've been basing them at 86db. So if anything they're potentially derating. (Somewhere I posted them on WBF, forever ago). But take note they most likely measured how they did because because a line source of such length at 1m isn't accurate representation.

I don't need to measure them in Ron's room. There's no need. That isn't how the frequency spectrum works that they play in for one - we aren't talking about bass. Ron has measured not for sensitivity but the response is flat. There is no comb filtering of any kind of significance - and they're dipoles so they don't have side reflections. But if you knew anything at all about speakers you'd know that was a fruitless point to be had because you can tell how much comb filtering to expect prior to even measuring. Crossovers offset comb filtering to some degree in small narrow amounts, but physical distances create it - which are visible to the eye. When it comes to additive, the measurement is gated so it's just not there.

Who are these people substantiating what you say? You're claiming they do, but I see nothing at all. What do you have? Stereophile measurement guys that find a bunch of speakers are overrated for sensitivity that everyone who's familiar with speakers can take one look at and tell you if the manufacturer is probably lying? These are not significant things nor pertaining to you.

Instead you're arguing with two guys who actually do measure speakers. Hell we (Folsom) have run thousands of test of microphone calibration on top of measuring playback. We design actual electronics. You spout bullshit. You're not technical. You're just Amir in audiophile clothing - who is wrong about so many technical things it blows my mind he runs a website based on technical cred.

 

[Folsom]

Too much concerns over reflections that are trivial/don't exist. Look up how dipole speakers, particularly line arrays... There is no sound within a time gate window directly above the speakers that will have any affect except added 3D spatial feeling since it's time delayed and not first reflection.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Shot of the Avaas? Curious about that.

 

[pjwd]

Too much concerns over reflections that are trivial/don't exist. Look up how dipole speakers, particularly line arrays... There is no sound within a time gate window directly above the speakers that will have any affect except added 3D spatial feeling since it's time delayed and not first reflection.

True but the base towers go up to 250hz .. well above the fr where direction is percieved .. that is one reason moving base towers further away from side wall sounds better .. I did suggest this a million posts ago !

Once you move away from the plane of the baffle dipoles will be reflecting a lot of energy from walls and ceilings ... but if it after 10ms or so prob not so bad

Phil

 

[pjwd]

I am open to ceiling treatment. J.R. is not prescribing ceiling treatment, at least not as a first step.

I will be putting absorption panels on the front side wall sections up to the ceiling. Reverberation between these upper side wall sections are his biggest concern.

He also had me add carpet pieces on the wood part of the floor to dampen ceiling reflections.

View attachment 117461

Ron
Really tall folks will benifit but those of us less than 3m tall dont have our heads in that reverberent field so why treat it.. if the room had an overly long reverb I could understand it but that doesnt seem to be the case
If you focus on first reflections from walls and ceilings... then try additional stuff if needed ... you will get a better result

 

[microstrip]

I think I lost the PDF that states the sensitivity of the Pendragons so I can't screen shot it. It was hard to find 7 years ago, impossible now. But what's more important is that the BG is available.

View attachment 117464

IIRC the Pendragons are rated under that, I've been basing them at 86db. So if anything they're potentially derating. (Somewhere I posted them on WBF, forever ago). But take note they most likely measured how they did because because a line source of such length at 1m isn't accurate representation.

I don't need to measure them in Ron's room. There's no need. That isn't how the frequency spectrum works that they play in for one - we aren't talking about bass. Ron has measured not for sensitivity but the response is flat. There is no comb filtering of any kind of significance - and they're dipoles so they don't have side reflections. But if you knew anything at all about speakers you'd know that was a fruitless point to be had because you can tell how much comb filtering to expect prior to even measuring. Crossovers offset comb filtering to some degree in small narrow amounts, but physical distances create it - which are visible to the eye. When it comes to additive, the measurement is gated so it's just not there.

Who are these people substantiating what you say? You're claiming they do, but I see nothing at all. What do you have? Stereophile measurement guys that find a bunch of speakers are overrated for sensitivity that everyone who's familiar with speakers can take one look at and tell you if the manufacturer is probably lying? These are not significant things nor pertaining to you.

Interesting that you only see the tip of icebergs and seem to ignore that a couple of dBs error in these matters are enough to make these simulations an useless and misleading loss of time, particularly as we also have other sources of error.

Bohlender Graebener manufactured the RD75 as a general ribbon available to the DIY people and custom versions using at less four types of magnets and several types of films with different sensitivities - how do you know what was used in Ron speakers? Do you thing that Gary Koh and Flemming E. Rasmussen got their panels from Parts Express?

FIY I was with Rasmussen when he presented the Pendagron in my country in 2015 to commemorate Gryphon 30th anniversary. Although he was very rigorous and proud of the specifications and measurements of his electronics he was not interested at all in speaker measurements - it is probably why we never had an official sensitivity measurement in the Pendragon brochures or factory pages.

Instead you're arguing with two guys who actually do measure speakers. Hell we (Folsom) have run thousands of test of microphone calibration on top of measuring playback. We design actual electronics. You spout bullshit. You're not technical. You're just Amir in audiophile clothing - who is wrong about so many technical things it blows my mind he runs a website based on technical cred.

Now you move in obfuscation and insults, as you systematically do with any one that disagrees with you in WBF. We are used to it.

 

[cjfrbw]

The ribbon on the Pendragon is an upgraded animal from the previous BG 75 incher. This is the sensitivity spec for the Pendragon with the passive crossover element. I presume stronger magnets, better high frequency dispersion, and higher sensitivity. Pendragon does augment with the additional tweeter element, so that bat audiophiles are not comprimised.