AudioNervosa

Systemic Development => Speakers => Topic started by: dBe on August 21, 2017, 10:16:51 PM

Title: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: dBe on August 21, 2017, 10:16:51 PM
What would it be with these parameters:

Configuration
Driver type(s)
Frequency response and timbral characteristics
Sensitivity
SAF -  a BIG one

And anything else you want to throw into the mix.

Just thinkin' here.
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: BobM on August 22, 2017, 05:00:07 AM
No such beast.

Different types of speakers do different things well. Nothing does it all, especially considering WAF.

Ribbons are fastest, but you need surface area (no WAF) and power (no low watt SETs need apply)

Horns have dynamics, but usually have little imaging (not always though) and are large (low WAF)

Cone speakers don't always get the coherence thing right

lots of other shortfalls among all of them.
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: AJ Soundfield on August 22, 2017, 05:14:44 AM
They would be invisible, so audiophiles could only judge them by sound, using their ears.
That way unshakable sighted beliefs about cones, domes, horns, ribbons, monopole, dipole, aluminum, wood, etc, etc. would play no role.
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: Hugh on August 22, 2017, 06:38:49 AM
They would be invisible, so audiophiles could only judge them by sound, using their ears.
That way unshakable sighted beliefs about cones, domes, horns, ribbons, monopole, dipole, aluminum, wood, etc, etc. would play no role.

+1.
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: mdconnelly on August 22, 2017, 06:46:45 AM
Interesting... we'd all likely want to describe the perfect speaker based on sound qualities.  But I'm willing to bet we each are strongly affected by the visual design appearance.   Some speakers are truly creative design works of art, others are monoliths, and yet others - typically smaller - are meant to be heard and not seen.

A few years back I bought a pair of Von Schweikert VR-35s which are designed to go against the front wall.    Great for my room that must also meet WAF requirements and they punch well above their price tag.   But they are boring to look at and I occasionally find myself longing for something with a more elegant visual design appeal.

So I might propose that each of us likely has a different design requirement for the perfect speaker.  Or more likely, the perfect speaker is always the next one we buy.
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: rollo on August 22, 2017, 06:47:15 AM
 To start a flat frequency response from 20HZ to 20KHZ in one unit. A minimum of 94DB sensitivity. Does not matter if OB, Box, Planar, single driver, electrostatic or fieldcoil. No or minimal crossover to boot.
Get a going Men.


charles
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: spm3 on August 22, 2017, 07:56:46 AM
An electrostatic speaker with a killer woofer (or double woofer - OR MORE!) and an amazing crossover to tie everything together!
That's the sound I love haha
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: Folsom on August 22, 2017, 11:30:14 AM
What would it be with these parameters:

Configuration
Driver type(s)
Frequency response and timbral characteristics
Sensitivity
SAF -  a BIG one

And anything else you want to throw into the mix.

Just thinkin' here.

Depends on the budget and space.

Either way I like to make speakers respond as much like a pure voltage devices as possible, but not in the most traditional of ways. Generally I prefer anything but sealed to compensate for natural impedance without a crossover. And then the crossover takes some interesting modifications not typically seen.

When choosing drivers I have no reservation for any kind of mantra. If the spec's fit I am interested. Nice waterfall's are good to see. In general I like cone and dome. I have really enjoyed different planar types at different times, but feel like they don't have the full potential cone and dome done really well can have. I have yet to thoroughly jump into horns, but can say my interest in them would be linearity, not CD.

The QES/QMS/QTS does interesting things. Too much QES (lower number) and the speaker will be restricted a lot, especially for bass. With QMS it is funny because it's a mixed bag. While less of it makes a more voltage driven unit, you can also suffer from QES dominance it seems, with too little (higher number). QTS is the measure of the two, where QES is highly dominate. I haven't decided whether I prefer bass from a mid QTS woofer, or prefer to start with a lower QTS woofer that responds well to porting, then tune it up a little by lower QES (increasing the number).

I think higher BL is good.

Higher sensitivity is appreciated as I think low efficiency speakers are a pain to power, it's costly. I am not saying I would never have one, and the amps to back it up, it's just not my first approach.

Because of how I like to use drivers in the crossover I basically prefer higher inductance since there are attributes I want that come with it. I am able to negate the negative effects of it well enough.

Configuration... depends what you're building. I think 3 ways are pretty optimal. It is probably possible to do a good 2 way but I haven't been convinced just yet. While I am all about not going sealed, the frequency range of the midrange will be some of the reasoning on whether I want it sealed or not. If it's a long way from it's impedance spike/s then it's ok. And I actually am fine with using bipolar configurations as well. They are tricky and need tuning but I like their benefits for design of reducing the need for too many drivers and possible comb filtering.

I highly recommend fighting diffraction, it causes high frequency fatigue.

Box material is important. I prefer rigid construction. Aluminum is awesome, and a variety of other things beyond the average. Simple MDF works but isn't remotely close enough to deadened enough even with no-rez applied and braced; it can sound good but is limited ultimately. That is another reason bipolar can be useful, to circumvent needing more costly, heavy, box construction.

When it comes to treating the inside of the box I hate stuffing. IMO everyone is wrong to use more than the slightly puff you can see through. It kills sound. But almost ironically lining the walls seems to improve sound. The goal is to reduce return waves in the box, and reduce vibration. What you line the walls with does add a touch of dampening but doesn't seem to have as negative of consequences as stuffing does that over dampens the speaker. I think nearly all speakers sound very over dampened which greatly hinders believability as there is no believable reverberation in the instruments you hear.

On and on and on... this is why I haven't made a speaker project design just yet. Although I certainly am working on getting there.

 
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: rollo on August 22, 2017, 12:15:25 PM
Certainly NOT an easy task. Engineering and Art form IMHO.


charles
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: Folsom on August 22, 2017, 02:54:49 PM
I think the art part is a higher level of engineering understanding  :rofl:

Well, sorta. A competent engineer must understand the difference between value in a subjective response vs. a distortion reading. Polar plots may help. There's plenty of things going on where you apply engineering principles but have little to no ability to measure. Many people prefer to go with what they can faithfully accept and doesn't require judgment, but often lack success.

I think Danny Richie is interesting in that he'll sacrifice a little distortion to improve another aspect. Not many driver developers are willing to make this jump that may or may not measure in say a waterfall plot. I think that's a mature outlook.
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: jimbones on August 23, 2017, 08:37:00 AM
Have to agree with BobM, its all trade off. Depends on what is important to you and prioritize those in your design.
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: rollo on August 23, 2017, 11:14:33 AM
Have to agree with BobM, its all trade off. Depends on what is important to you and prioritize those in your design.


  What should be important to any speaker design is proper tonality, harmonic structure, proper timbre and full range frequency response with low distortion.
  Trade-offs should be type, size, shape and finish. Danny Richiees trade-off was to NOT pay attention to all the measurements but to stand fast in his conviction. Rant over. I need a nap.


charles
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: Scott F. on August 23, 2017, 12:21:11 PM
Shoot for the stars....right?


OK, I would want a thin film that is mounted on a wall and it should be transparent.
It would provide the depth and width of soundstage of an open baffle
No crossover
Highs should be as crisp and non-fatiguing as the best tweeters available
The midrange should have the clarity and presence of my old Lowther PM2As
Bass should be tuneful yet crushing and should go to at least 20Hz
They should be north of 110dB sensitive and not break up until after 125or 130dB (that way I can play them with 1 watt and still have ample headroom).


....oh, and they need to be cheap (not inexpensive). I'm talking in the $500 range.


Too much to ask for? :thumb:
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: bpape on August 23, 2017, 02:28:15 PM
A full range, no xover, version of the old Hill Plasmatronic tweeter.  Essentially zero mass, infinite speed but would be a bugger size wise to do the low end.
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: Folsom on August 23, 2017, 04:01:11 PM
I do not subscribe to crossoverless. I probably would if I didn't have special ways of changing them.


Trade-offs do happen, but in many ways they are more give and take in order to get compatibility with amplifiers. I'm not certain that I think you have to sacrifice a lot at any given point. The problem is if you go in one direction the speaker may not respond well at all to many amplifiers. That does not make me think it's wrong, just problematic for a manufacturer.
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: Nick B on August 23, 2017, 04:36:21 PM
Shoot for the stars....right?


OK, I would want a thin film that is mounted on a wall and it should be transparent.
It would provide the depth and width of soundstage of an open baffle
No crossover
Highs should be as crisp and non-fatiguing as the best tweeters available
The midrange should have the clarity and presence of my old Lowther PM2As
Bass should be tuneful yet crushing and should go to at least 20Hz
They should be north of 110dB sensitive and not break up until after 125or 130dB (that way I can play them with 1 watt and still have ample headroom).


....oh, and they need to be cheap (not inexpensive). I'm talking in the $500 range.


Too much to ask for? :thumb:

Not at all....I'm with you 😉
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: rollo on August 24, 2017, 07:08:07 AM
Great idea.


charles
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: rollo on March 12, 2018, 08:51:56 AM
  Interesting Doug. To date no DSP anything has sounded natural to me. However willing to listen.


charles
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: HAL on March 12, 2018, 09:09:03 AM
Open baffle line array with ribbons and planars, tied to open baffle array of servo subs with a DSP crossover.   Beamform the lines.  Then room correct it all.

Hmmm... already did that! No need for anything new at this point. :D

Direct drive of the planar/ribbon line array elements is the way to go for me. 
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: Nick B on March 12, 2018, 11:35:12 AM
while it's nice to have a flat speaker from 20hz-20khz in one unit, it will always sound better if you have the lowest octave in separate enclosures.  simply because the way the soundwaves interact with the room. subwoofers will typically sound best in locations different from the frequencies of your main speakers.  i found this to be true even when i owned 1-box speakers 20hz-20khz±2dB.  when i got outboard subs w/active x-over and crossed the mains at 70hz, w/the subs installed outside the mains a couple feet away, everything sounded better.  Does not matter if OB, Box, Planar, single driver, electrostatic or fieldcoil.  ;)  even if your mains are flat to 20hz, and you don't want to eliminate their low end output, adding outboard subs will still improve the sound, due to better room loading and lower distortion, imo.  now, if you have a ~10'x12' room, you may want to re-think having main speakers flat to 20hz, but you could still do a pair of subs flat to 20hz and make it work, w/active x-overs.

now, i have other ideas, but not certain there's only one "right way".  i like line arrays.  (i'd love to hear the curved audio artistry cbt36k line array iteration.)  i like the idea of a walsh driver. (i want to try the new german physiks iteration).  i like full range horns - real horns, like my oris 150's.  but i also like active x-overs, and even dsp.  even w/a "full range driver", you need an x-over for the low end, and depending on the driver, you need an x-over w/a super tweeter.

and, coax point-source speakers can also sound phenomenal, if done well - similar to a full range driver.  my kef ls50's are quite the sonic wonders.  if i ever hook them up w/my deqx, they should get even better.  of course, now, the active ls50's seem to be much more cost-effective; everyone who's tried them say you would have to spend a lot more to get the passive ls50's to even equal the active iterations.

regarding efficiency, yes, i like efficient speakers.  but, inefficient speakers can sound fantastic, when paired w/the proper amplification.  so i don't think that's a show stopper either.

and, charles, i have recently read about the kii audio 3's, that are supposed to take speaker design to a completely different level, all with dsp and electronic controls, that are pretty-much as close to what it is you say you're wanting in a speaker that you will find.  basically, besides being relatively compact, and w/flat frequency response from 20hz-20khz, they take the room out of the equation, which is easily the most serious impediment to good sound in 95% of audiophile (and non audiophile) abodes.  you should check them out.  ;)
https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/kii-audio-three (https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/kii-audio-three)
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews2/kii/1.html (http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews2/kii/1.html)
https://vintageking.com/blog/2017/06/kii-three-review/ (https://vintageking.com/blog/2017/06/kii-three-review/)
https://www.stereophile.com/content/kii-audio-three-loudspeaker (https://www.stereophile.com/content/kii-audio-three-loudspeaker)
https://medium.com/@conscienta/kii-three-review-a-revolutionary-speaker-759c15b014cf (https://medium.com/@conscienta/kii-three-review-a-revolutionary-speaker-759c15b014cf)
http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2015/10/futureshocked-by-the-kii-three-active-loudspeaker/ (http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2015/10/futureshocked-by-the-kii-three-active-loudspeaker/)

i am the 1st to admit i am not gonna ever get rich designing speakers, much as i'd like to.   :mrgreen:

doug s.

To start a flat frequency response from 20HZ to 20KHZ in one unit. A minimum of 94DB sensitivity. Does not matter if OB, Box, Planar, single driver, electrostatic or fieldcoil. No or minimal crossover to boot.
Get a going Men.


charles
Very interesting  speakers, Doug. Another company I hadn’t heard of. Not surprising that Bruno P is involved. Too bad it’s way out of my price range and speakers like HALs aren’t smaller. I’ve read up on some dsp speakers like the JBL 705p that Poseidens Voice has recommended as well as a JansZen monitor that another friend mentioned.
Too bad I’m not wealthly and closer to some big cities so I could hear more of these products
Nick
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: jimbones on March 12, 2018, 11:50:32 AM
As a speaker designer I have to agree with Bob M; there is no perfect speaker. I do however enjoy the strengths of different types of speakers as they all sound different.
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: P.I. on March 12, 2018, 12:31:06 PM
I do not subscribe to crossoverless. I probably would if I didn't have special ways of changing them.
Would you care to elaborate, or...

If OR, I get it 😎
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: Nick B on March 12, 2018, 10:38:25 PM
Very interesting  speakers, Doug. Another company I hadn’t heard of. Not surprising that Bruno P is involved. Too bad it’s way out of my price range and speakers like HALs aren’t smaller. I’ve read up on some dsp speakers like the JBL 705p that Poseidens Voice has recommended as well as a JansZen monitor that another friend mentioned.
Too bad I’m not wealthly and closer to some big cities so I could hear more of these products
Nick
nick, if you think those are interesting, check these out - even interestinger!   :D

https://dutchdutch.com/8c (https://dutchdutch.com/8c)
(http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews2/dutchdutch/1.jpg)

reviews:
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews2/dutchdutch/1.html (http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews2/dutchdutch/1.html)
http://realgearonline.com/thread/7786/dutch-8c-speakers (http://realgearonline.com/thread/7786/dutch-8c-speakers)

i understand your feelings about the money thing.  your feeling about not being so close to big cities, not so much.  ;)

doug s.,
so many speakers, so little time (and $$$)

Doug,
So it’s only a matter of money.....or my lack of it? 😳 I went to youtube and their website. Here's
another interesting company which is also out of my price range... $5,000 euros. No US distributor.
https://youtu.be/ce1YO2rHawo
Nick
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: P.I. on March 14, 2018, 05:46:41 PM
this is weird...

http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/news/article/origin-live-astute--pound;4995/20483 (http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/news/article/origin-live-astute--pound;4995/20483)
(http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/sites/17/images/article_images_month/2015-01/hfc_387_originlive_web.jpg)

hang 'em from the ceiling if floor space is an issue?  :shock:

doug s.
Back in the 80's I worked in a recording studio that had Urei 811 monitors that were hung from the ceiling with 1/4" link chains.  When I talked the studio owner into letting me build soffits for them and mount them on 3" thick laminations of plywood and MDF the bottom had extended another octave or two and the bass impact was finally there from those 604E's.

I realize that they are to be used with a subwoofer, but an 8" driver moving @ 80hz will still have to transfer the opposing kinetic energy somewhere.  I guess I'm jaded in my old age. Just sayin'...
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: dBe on March 14, 2018, 10:08:55 PM
this is weird...

http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/news/article/origin-live-astute--pound;4995/20483 (http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/news/article/origin-live-astute--pound;4995/20483)
(http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/sites/17/images/article_images_month/2015-01/hfc_387_originlive_web.jpg)
Perhaps they per ute physics.  Did they use a laser accelerator to measure displacement?  Me thinks not  :D
hang 'em from the ceiling if floor space is an issue?  :shock:

doug s.
Back in the 80's I worked in a recording studio that had Urei 811 monitors that were hung from the ceiling with 1/4" link chains.  When I talked the studio owner into letting me build soffits for them and mount them on 3" thick laminations of plywood and MDF the bottom had extended another octave or two and the bass impact was finally there from those 604E's.

I realize that they are to be used with a subwoofer, but an 8" driver moving @ 80hz will still have to transfer the opposing kinetic energy somewhere.  I guess I'm jaded in my old age. Just sayin'...
i had the same reaction.  but, according to the review, they don't move even a tiny bit.  wery strange, me-thinks...

doug s.
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: rollo on March 15, 2018, 10:53:12 AM
  Movement is a good thing. Since I installed the 7/8" wood dowels under mine the result was better sound, go figure. I think we need to rethink securing our speakers to floor.


charles
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: P.I. on March 15, 2018, 11:13:17 AM
  Movement is a good thing. Since I installed the 7/8" wood dowels under mine the result was better sound, go figure. I think we need to rethink securing our speakers to floor.


charles
Cool gonna have to try it!  Kudos to Gary.
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: rollo on March 19, 2018, 08:08:52 AM
   How about one that can put out a perfect square wave when a square wave is put in. That was what B&O was striving for.


charles
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: P.I. on March 19, 2018, 07:28:54 PM
   How about one that can put out a perfect square wave when a square wave is put in. That was what B&O was striving for.


charles
ah, yes: the massless speaker.  I'll get right on it!  That was one of the strengths of the Hill Plasmatrognic tweeter built here about 20 miles away 30+ years ago. Helium plasma modulated by an arc. Alan Hill was a laser physicist out at Sandia Base at the Air Force Weapons Lab here in Albuquerque.  Met him once many years ago and the man defined scientific / audio geek.
Title: Re: If you were to design the Perfect Speaker...
Post by: Danny Richie on March 23, 2018, 09:16:55 AM
I guess when discussions like this come up it's good to have your name thrown in there.

I think Danny Richie is interesting in that he'll sacrifice a little distortion to improve another aspect. Not many driver developers are willing to make this jump that may or may not measure in say a waterfall plot. I think that's a mature outlook.

I wouldn't say that I would sacrifice a little distortion, but I would say that if you are looking for a way to quantify performance then looking at distortion specs is a waste of time.

It's like looking at amplifier ratings and comparing .01% verses .02% verses .005% published distortion numbers and trying to say one is better than another. We know there hundreds of other aspects that effect how an amplifier will sound.

The same holds true for speakers. A way out there distortion number in a given range will point to a problem but it won't tell you how it will sound. And most people don't realize just how hard it is to get real distortion figures. There is no industry standard for it either. So there is no real bases for comparison.

Quote
Trade-offs should be type, size, shape and finish. Danny Richiees trade-off was to NOT pay attention to all the measurements but to stand fast in his conviction. Rant over. I need a nap.

Actually, all of our design work starts with the measurements. The measurements will point out an issue quicker than anything. But they won't tell you how good it will sound.