 |
| Prelim ADAM ARTist 5 ........................................................................................................................................................... |
 |
| ARTist 5 with Protection Grill ............................................................................................................................................................ |
 |
| ADAM A3X ........................................................................................................................................................  |
..........................................................................................................................
ADAM A5X Ports Stuffed
..........................................................................................................................
B2031P with cotton
........................................................................................................................
B2031P
.......................................................................................................................
B1030A
........................................................................................................................
HR624 mk2
........................................................................................................................
Homemade
........................................................................................................................
Rokit 6
..........................................................................................................................
LSR 2325
..........................................................................................................................
Infinity Classia 336
Multiway/near field--low end poorly represented
...........................................................................................................................
Infinity Primus 363
Multiway/near field--low end poorly represented
.....................................................................................................................................................................
The Artist 5 and 1030A have wide horizontal dispersion, but it doesn't seem to be constant ( The off axis curves rise at 4 kHz for Artist 5 and 6 khz for 1030a) . Is that something that can be addressed in a 2-way design in order to achieve a constant wide dispersion, or is that something only a 3-way can address ?
ReplyDeleteThose are extremely small and not something I'd personally fret over. No matter how many drivers you use, you'd have a tough time beating that.
ReplyDeleteBut that would worsen if the woofer is larger ?
ReplyDeletethe Primus 363 , which is a 3 way, doesn't seem to have that issue... though its response itself is not that flat which is a different matter...
My mistake, primus also has that issue between 4-5k.
ReplyDeleteI was also wondering if 2030p is much wider than 2031p, couldn't find such a polar anywhere for it.
There should be measurements of the 2030 around. They were a big hit with guys making mods around the forums.
ReplyDeleteAny driver, crossover point details for your homemade project above ?
ReplyDeleteI still haven't started on it--life has been busy! In any case, for the garage, it would be nearly impossible for me to beat the diysoundgroup stuff. That's what I'm really thinking about now.
ReplyDeletei meant for the one above, for which you have published polar graph....
ReplyDeleteOoops, sorry. I realized that about an hour after I posted. Anyway, it was the Eminence Delta Pro 12A and a Selenium tweeter in a Parts Express 12" waveguide crossed around 1,700Hz.
ReplyDeleteSince you have listened to speakers of various sizes ( from 5.5" to 8.75" ) , do you find anything special about 8-8.75" speakers wrt vocals ? I found some mention of vocals being best on 8". Troel mentioned so in his 8" based 2-way and also Mark K mentioned being 8" being a much better mid than 6.5"....
ReplyDeleteI actually like the Mackie 6.5"(I think they are 6.5"ers) just because they have less of that "voice of God" effect. Larger mids if crossed at the same frequency as smaller mids
ReplyDeleteWill have a narrower pattern and thus less VOG effect. That might be what they are referring to.
ReplyDeleteStill, all mono vocals played through a stereo will sound like the voice of God. Should be less though with a narrow pattern.
ReplyDeleteBy "voice of God" effect, you mean unnaturally emphasized vocals ? And 6.5" being more natural/neutral ?
ReplyDeleteThe Apparent Source Width of the vocal becomes huge d/t early reflections. When a human speaks, the source of the sound is very small compared to 2 speakers reproving that same sound. I don't think it has anything to do with the size of the driver making the sound per say, but the measurable pattern the speaker creates. Another thing is how flat the FR of the speaker. The Mackie is very flat. I'm sure any DBT based on driver size on how natural the vocal is would fail to differentiate unless the speaker was too small or lacked the necessary dynamic range of the vocal recording.
ReplyDelete(I asked my last question before some of your replies came) . So its about horizontal dispersion [ again! :) ] , with narrow pattern more suitable here.
ReplyDeleteI guess then we have both a lower limit [ to avoid too small a sweet spot ] and upper limit [ to avoid unnaturally wide sources including vocals ] on the constancy of horizontal dispersion. So then its not like , the wider the better...
is it ? That also should give a range for ideal horizontal dispersion.
Maybe then this is the reason some folks find 3 ways having more emphasized mids than 2-way as some 3-ways can have quite wide dispersion...
So far, EVERY BIT OF EVIDENCE I know of says that the measured performance tells you how the speaker sounds. It doesn't matter what is making the measured performance, it just matters what the measured performance is.
ReplyDelete"Preferred" may not be "better". Well, unless you want to sell loudspeakers.
ReplyDeleteI agree. All I was saying, in a way, was this would explain differences between 2 speakers having flat on axis FR based on what I understood from your VOG explanation. Thanks for that...
ReplyDeleteAnd yes "Preferred" is the way to go when selling :)
I guess this should be a good DIY project to build a 2031/ hr624 equivalent
http://www.audioheuristics.org/projects_gallery/ER18DXT/ER18DXT.htm
I always liked that project. Wonder what the cost of that is now?
ReplyDeleteER18 woofer : $96
ReplyDeleteDXT tweeter : $63
PE 0.5 cuft cab : $112
crossover parts will be a big list to check :)
Not bad! Thank you.
ReplyDeleteAlso regarding 6.5" vs 8" , any audible difference (due to more Sd of 2031 woofer ) between HR624 and 2031 in the 80-300Hz range ? This is where the dispersion pattern also shouldn't matter, right ?
ReplyDeleteNothing that I recall. With all the modes, SBIR, LBIR, etc... Evidence says you can't really hear the speaker in that range other than its actual lower limit in the room.
ReplyDeleteOn "Inside the B2031P" you mentioned about they using LR2 crossover in the passive version, but active possibly being better. Where would the LR2 be lacking as compared to LR4 active ?
ReplyDeleteBtw looks like glasswool is not used inside, so should be safe to open one...
I didn't say LR2, but I'll explain why I thought the active version should be better: my biggest concern was the ripples in the response through the crossover region. I thought it was caused by cone break-up as was the case in my homemade 2-way. It turned out to be the ports next to the tweeter. I wrote a little "edit" a couple of days after I wrote it but failed to make it clear why I wrote the edit.
ReplyDeleteIf memory serves me well, the damping material feels like cotton.
Do you think its possible to make the 2031 smooth (say like the HR624) by completely blocking the ports , rounding the mdf edges etc ?
ReplyDeleteHR624/HR824 has nice smooth exterior unlike sharp edged 203x.
I see that (even after the cotton stuffing you did) the HF has some ripples.
Wondering if one can replace the tweeter ( in either 2031A or P) with some good 1" one which will match that waveguide.
The 2031P price sometimes look good enough for the cabinet and a nice waveguide :):) (with not so bad woofer if I see its FR on Zaph pages)
Let's just "maybe". Narrower dispersion speakers if done well will have less very early reflections and diffraction so the Mackie may indeed remain smoother. That said, maybe not.
ReplyDeleteReplacing the tweeter may be more difficult. That tweeter is very similar to the one in the Mackie(even looks to have better QC if my couple examples demonstrate typical QC).
"More difficult" meaning a change of crossover and possibly mounting. You'd have little if anything to gain and possibly a lot to lose.
ReplyDeleteSometimes I feel, If Behringer can do so much at current prices of their speakers, they should be easily take their products to real high level by eliminating the shortcomings, identified by folks like you, for say $100 more.
ReplyDeleteBtw the 1031A does have better baffle (but maybe not a better cabinet overall) but it didn't gain the popularity, even among aficionados, unlike the 2031s. Could it be because it lacks constant directivity aspect of 2031, even though it might be overall wider than 2031 ?
Though basically, if Behringer has got so much right at these prices, few more in product price should result in a gem of a product from them...
I agree wholeheartedly! Even if they just put the b2031 ports on the back it would be a much better speaker. They could easily change the baffle to something like the 1030 and all would be well in the world. The 1031 may have been just that, but we'll never know now.
ReplyDeleteI am waiting for some deal to come up, given that 1031s are discontinued, and may still pick up 1031As :)
ReplyDeleteThough (we have discussed this earlier) it has those improvements, it may not be exact replacement if one were to see the 45 deg response here of both 2031A and 1031A. But I guess that would be a minor difference in reality...
http://www.bonedo.de/artikel/einzelansicht/behringer-b1031a/2.html
This has responses for quite a few other monitors..
Nice site! Wish it had more detail, but it's better than most. Thanks for the link.
ReplyDeleteDo you have vertical directivity plots for all of the above speakers ? Would be great to have a similar page with all vertical plots.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately I never made such a page. It's on my "to do" list. It's a long list though.
ReplyDeleteIf I am not wrong , more vertical directivity is not desirable , right ? (unlike the horizontal one) To avoid ceiling and floor reflections. Should be between 45-60 deg ?
ReplyDeleteIt's another iffy question and I don't know of a great body of evidence on the question... One thing is for sure--if you are talking near field, you'll want a relatively large vertical lobe. In general though, I'd say you want narrow vertical directivity, but in the frequencies that matter it is hard to achieve in a practical size.
ReplyDeleteIOW, knowing the application would be critical in making that decision.
ReplyDeleteYes, that applies to horizontal as well.
ReplyDeleteI mean to sit closer, wider angles both ways are preferable.
But question was more about “ideal vertical directivity as compared to horizontal”
I wonder, technically speaking, if coax is better suited for nearfield given its equal dispersion both horizontally and vertically. Esp when used with a woofer below say 300 Hz to minimize cone movements.
Though a good coax is very very hard to find for DIY.
Without a standard there is no ideal and different applications call for different standards for any ideal. One thing that has been shown in regards to vertical patterns is that early vertical reflections are heard as frequency response problems.
DeleteSome small manufacturer was making KEF coax speakers for a while which had great measured performance. Their drivers were at one time available from Just Speakers(I think). Or maybe it was Speaker Exchange...
Now all demand a serial #. When tried locally they even ask the old drivers to submitted... :) Buying something like their cheapest Q100 is the only option...
DeleteSeas now has two coaxs as mid-tweet only (MR18, C18), though the excel version is very costly.
DIYing is tough unless you want to do something a bit more mundane. I'm still looking at options.
ReplyDeleteAre crossover slopes and horizontal and vertical directivity related ?
ReplyDeleteThe crossover won't really effect directivity. It will effect the shape of the vertical lobe and the power response. I'd bet if you asked this question on the PE board, you'd get some detailed responses with great info(and likely some BS that always comes with forums).
ReplyDeleteThat should say "shape and direction"...
ReplyDeleteHehe :)
ReplyDeleteI can ask there as well as diyaudio.
Need to find which filters results in largest vertical lobe which will be needed in nearfield.
Found your thread as well :)
ReplyDeletehttp://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/158012-importance-vertical-polar-response.html
I've always wanted to try a very short(like 3 driverr) CBT. All tiny full range drivers. Never found a suitable one though.
ReplyDeleteHere I see you made a comparable graph of 2031 to ER18DXT
ReplyDeletehttp://techtalk.parts-express.com/showthread.php?221189-Behringer-B2031A-vs-ER18DXT-which-would-win/page5
ER18DXT does look flatter, but not sure if that will be audible difference...
2031 has some dips and is also narrower in dispersion...
I believe when longevity/reliability and chances of getting a bad piece ( due to bad amp) are considered, passive is much better option , though most studio monitors are active. Given by your appreciation for Infinity P363 I wonder how P163 bookshelf will be... (measurement for 162 http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/speakers/infinity_primus_p162/ which also has the port issue i think)
ReplyDeleteI'd bet the 163 would be near identical. The new Reference Series looks very interesting to me. It has no port issue and uses flat cone mid woofers which should reduce diffraction to the bare minimum.
ReplyDeleteThe Primus center channel speakers do not have a front port either.
ReplyDeletefound these measurements for the new 162
ReplyDeletehttp://www.soundandvision.com/content/infinity-reference-r162-speaker-system-test-bench
This another one looks very good (though its polar could be not so good as there is no waveguide)
http://www.soundandvision.com/content/nht-absolute-zero-speaker-system-ht-labs-measures
The infinty don't look so good by their measurements. I'm not confident in their methodology though. None the less, they just don't look very promising.
ReplyDeleteThe super zero were well regarded in their time bang for the buck-wise. Not known to be too top flight though.
Looks like the MTM Primus could still be an option.
In case you know Arny Krueger, he once used 3 primus centres as LCRs :)
ReplyDeleteBtw some very new ones from JBL http://jblpro.com/www/products/recording-broadcast/7-series
Don't know Arny, but he might be on to something.
ReplyDeleteOne thing to note is, the port impact is eliminated when stuffed, when they are located at bottom ( Adams ) unlike Behringers ? Or its just coincidence
ReplyDeleteNot sure I'd say eliminated. In actual SQ, I'd bet the ports on the behringer have a bigger audible impact.
ReplyDeleteIf I were to guess about the repeat ability of these measurements, I'd bet it would hold up with other speakers.
Just FYI : Another promising passive : http://www.soundandvision.com/content/jbl-studio-2-speaker-system-test-bench
ReplyDeleteThat one does look good too. I'd love to give it a more rigorous test. I'd bet they hold up well judging by the LSR series. I with they made the LSR sans built in amp.
ReplyDeleteThis one does look like LSR 3 series minus the amp
ReplyDeletehttp://jblpro.com/www/products/recording-broadcast/3-series
as both have the reference M2 like waveguide. Wish sound and vision had published polars as well..
Btw, do you think, nearfield will require lower than usual crossover freq to sub i.e less than 80 Hz... ?
ReplyDeleteI would doubt you'd have any real issue with an 80Hz crossover. I can't remember where I have my near field set up at, but I don't think it's even that low.
ReplyDeleteOk.
ReplyDeleteBtw why do most active speakers have a hiss sound ! ? The passives with external amps are always quiet...
I have an external amp that hums.... None the less I have no real idea. Not all of them do it, and the ones that do may not be all the time. Check them in several outlets and try eliminating the 3rd prong. None of my ADAMs do it nor the Mackie. The JBL is the worst offender here.
ReplyDelete