TLS Guy -vs- Studio 100's

[WmAx]

For those that want to know how to read a waterfall:

The waterfall plot shows, approximately, the energy decay of frequencies vs. time. The top is the on axis response, and the decay should theoretically have an even, gradual reduction down to the lowest point of the graph. The lower frequencies will take a little longer, as you lower in frequency, so the lower frequencies will have a gradual increase in decay compared to higher frequencies. Very few residual ridges should exist, and when they so, should only be present in the very bottom of the floor. Also, note dB range. YOu need at least 25 dB from top of averaged plot to floor. Sometimes, a manufacturer will try to fool you with using only 15-18dB actual signal to floor resolution. Follow the average power of the top response line with a straight edge over to the left to find dB value, and then note how far down the graph floor is from this point. Here is a near perfect theoretical waterfall and on axis response graph, that a speaker should aim for (almost no speaker will come close to this graph - it is shown for example only of what is ideal);


The above waterfall and FR (+/- 0.7dB up to 15kHz) are measured response from my computer monitors.

Also, please realize, the waterfall is useless under 1-2kHz. To analyze decay under this frequency, one needs an anechoic chamber, and use far longer time decay plot axis.

-Chris

[WmAx]

Originally Posted by ParadigmDawg

I hear that you can trade 10 Y2K Focus (is it Foci when you have more than one?) in for a pair of Dynaudio Consequence. I am certain you will be happy with them.

Wow.. what a terrible driver layout! You never place the higher-frequency drivers near the floor (or ceiling), as this creates a strong early reflection. This is why on most speakers, the HF driver(s) is(are) located far from the floor. Also, there has to be some substantial HF drop off at the listener, with the tweeter so far off axis from the listener, vertically.

-Chris

[ParadigmDawg]

This speaker is only to be used by drunk, rich people who stand on their head when listening to music...

Originally Posted by WmAx

Wow.. what a terrible driver layout! You never place the higher-frequency drivers near the floor (or ceiling), as this creates a strong early reflection. This is why on most speakers, the HF driver(s) is(are) located far from the floor. Also, there has to be some substantial HF drop off at the listener, with the tweeter so far off axis from the listener, vertically.

-Chris

[STRONGBADF1]

Originally Posted by ParadigmDawg

This speaker is only to be used by drunk, rich people who stand on their head when listening to music...

What room are yours in?

[Warpdrv]

Originally Posted by WmAx

Wow.. what a terrible driver layout! You never place the higher-frequency drivers near the floor (or ceiling), as this creates a strong early reflection. This is why on most speakers, the HF driver(s) is(are) located far from the floor. Also, there has to be some substantial HF drop off at the listener, with the tweeter so far off axis from the listener, vertically.

-Chris

THANK YOU !!!!

I was looking at that speaker layout and design and wondering who the HEL_ was in charge of that speaker.... good lord... Lets aim the tweeter and mid range at the peoples feet and knees and see how that sounds....

I was kinda hoping that they provide the buyer with at least a 40 degree upward angled stand to try to improve things with them...

[PENG]

Originally Posted by Warpdrv

THANK YOU !!!!

I was looking at that speaker layout and design and wondering who the HEL_ was in charge of that speaker.... good lord... Lets aim the tweeter and mid range at the peoples feet and knees and see how that sounds....

I was kinda hoping that they provide the buyer with at least a 40 degree upward angled stand to try to improve things with them...

He turned it upside down before taking the photo, then he sit back and wait for bites.

[TLS Guy]

Originally Posted by WmAx

Wow.. what a terrible driver layout! You never place the higher-frequency drivers near the floor (or ceiling), as this creates a strong early reflection. This is why on most speakers, the HF driver(s) is(are) located far from the floor. Also, there has to be some substantial HF drop off at the listener, with the tweeter so far off axis from the listener, vertically.

-Chris

I have heard former versions of the Dynaudio Consequence loudspeakers. They have a long history, and go back to the era when the vogue was to chase transient perfect loudspeaker, which meant using a full range driver, first order filters, or the Quad ESL 64. That is still your options, and the late Jim Thiel was consumed with first order filters his whole professional life.

I was caught up with this also, especially after seeing Peter Walker cancel a square wave in free space reversing the connections to one of a pair of Quad ESL 64s. I still regard that as a remarkable feat by the way.

Now back 30 to 25 years or so ago, speaker manufacturers were much more forthcoming about their research drivers and speakers. The founders of Dynaudio, were a very open and decent lot, who would honestly answer anything you asked them. They also made their drivers freely available unlike now.

So smitten with this bug, I went to work on a largely first order filter system for a loudspeaker. The Dynaudio drivers at that time were specifically designed to make first order filters a realistic possibility. I embarked on this about the end of 1982. I had a system up and running by 1984, but it took me a full decade to get it right. It was an absolute nightmare. Like Dynaudio, I ended up using one series rather than parallel filter. These are horrid to work with because both sides of the filter are interdependent. They also present an absolutely grueling load to the amplifier.

I already had a TL with two KEF B139s topped out with four JW modules as a line source biamped at 400 Hz, topped out with a KEF T27 above 6 kHz, built in 1976.

So I decided to revise these speakers. I kept the low end and changed the crossover to 180 Hz third order active between the KEFs and Dynaudio M75 in its own overdamped TL to absorb the rear radiation without coloration, which is a driver in the conquest, but now souped up, mainly with gold trim I suspect. The KEF B139 needs a relatively high order crossover because it resonates violently between 1 and 1.2 kHz. Then I had first order crossover to Dynaudio D54 with a series first order crossover and a parallel first order crossover to a Dynaudio D21. Sounds simple but it proved anything but. I got so frustrated I built another pair of speakers to have something decent to listen to while I labored away on these. I was sorely tempted to ditch the project on many occasions.

Now the reason that the Consequence has to have the tweeter on the bottom is because of the lobing pattern of odd order crossovers. There is 15 degrees of tilt. So you have to put the tweeter high or low, not on the listening axis.

The Consequence uses for the bottom four, updated versions of the D21 AF, D28 AF, D76 and M75, I'm not sure what the woofers are.

The Consequence is actually a very good speaker. Bass is firm and tight and the rest of the range is smooth and articulate. You do however feel as if you are looking down on things. The speaker is sufficiently self effacing to imagine you are up in a balcony. It is quite an unusual design.

For my speakers, I put the drivers the other direction. They ended up really nice speakers. I brought them to Benedict with new lines for the KEFs and used them as the rear speaker, were they continue to shine on SACDs of antiphonal material.





I hate to make a spacer to bring the M75s forward of the other drivers a bit.

The tilt is fortunate, as the speakers are above the chairs, and the listening area is actually on axis.

While they were in Grand Forks ND, they managed to impress the hell out of Bob Carver when he paid a visit.

Really though Dynaudio would be further ahead developing a decent wide band mid and cutting out a couple of drivers.

[Alex2507]

Originally Posted by WmAx

The above waterfall and FR (+/- 0.7dB up to 15kHz) are measured response from my computer monitors.

I thought my ears could detect a fourth order ripple in the second harmonic of the 8KHz roll off trickle.

-or-

Is that the best you could do?

Originally Posted by TLS Guy

These are your rear surrounds ?!?
Now that's just not right. From the pic's in Smug Mug I thought you ran 5.1 and those were bass traps but now I recall your disdain for room treatments. So what are the surrounds like then? Are they as impressive?

I don't suppose anybody ever tells either of you guys to get a hobby.

That comment about the upside down speakers making you feel like you're in the balcony reminds me of how my speakers sounded before I raised them up by 2 1/2" ... except I termed it like listening to a band playing in a pit. Before I heard Chris' speakers I didn't know it was a problem but once I learned to recognize the condition it bothered me enough that I did something about it.

Those Dynaudio's need to be placed upside down in a 4' pit as they appear to be about 7' tall.

[TLS Guy]

Originally Posted by Alex2507

I thought my ears could detect a fourth order ripple in the second harmonic of the 8KHz roll off trickle.

-or-

Is that the best you could do?



These are your rear surrounds ?!?
Now that's just not right. From the pic's in Smug Mug I thought you ran 5.1 and those were bass traps but now I recall your disdain for room treatments. So what are the surrounds like then? Are they as impressive?

I don't suppose anybody ever tells either of you guys to get a hobby.

That comment about the upside down speakers making you feel like you're in the balcony reminds me of how my speakers sounded before I raised them up by 2 1/2" ... except I termed it like listening to a band playing in a pit. Before I heard Chris' speakers I didn't know it was a problem but once I learned to recognize the condition it bothered me enough that I did something about it.

Those Dynaudio's need to be placed upside down in a 4' pit as they appear to be about 7' tall.

It never occurred to me that someone would think those were anything but speakers, but I suppose they are above average in height!

I need full range powerful speakers there, as I have SACDs where those rear speakers get as big a work out as the fronts, so they have to keep their end up, so to speak. The surrounds are silent on SACD as SACD and a 5.1 layout is different.

So the speakers with least to do are the surrounds, but theses fit in well.
They used to be my location monitors for outside recording and broadcast.

They were built around 1985. These are the only speakers in the room that are not TL. They are minimal ripple sealed speakers with an F3 of 53 Hz. They are 2.5 ways using extended range W-75 EX drivers for the bass and bass/mid, and Dynaudio D28 tweeters. Crossover is at 3 kHz with first order low pass and second order high pass electrical third order composite acoustic and electrical slopes.

One is on the amp case.





You can see its partner on a shelf in this picture.



Here is a picture of one of before they were installed in the studio.



The lobing pattern is downward, so the stand tilts them up. In the current location, the downward tilt is again an advantage.

So there you have the guts of it so to speak.

I must know what I like, as even though there are a lot of different speakers in the room, they all match very closely indeed and the acoustic spectral balance is very even round the room.

This inclines me to regard timbre matching as error matching.

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Originally Posted by ParadigmDawg

I feel like I should say something on this thread but I've got nothing....

Umm, yeah, you should have said, "I should have bought the Def Tech BP7000s"!