Re: What Makes a Loudspeaker Musical?
Posted: 2023-11-20 08:36
Sure, you can hear the difference a good source makes, it doesn't mean a good overall result.
https://www.lejonklou.com/forum/
”the sound of the music” can be bettered using very good loudspeakers , agree. But the intentions of the musicians will be perceived in a better way with a good source , even If the loudspeakers are very simple.sunbeamgls wrote: ↑2023-11-20 08:36 Sure, you can hear the difference a good source makes, it doesn't mean a good overall result.
I agree that setting up a pair of loudspeakers correctly in a room only apply to that specific room.sunbeamgls wrote: ↑2023-11-20 08:42 When you tunedem a system, the room is a key part of the system being tunedemmed. When you find the least worst position you've only achieved it for that particular complete system (which includes the room).
For me, it’s not possible to prevent energy loss, so it’s not if energy is lost, it’s how energy is lost that’s really important. As you say, maintaining the time order is possibly the most important design task and contributes significantly to a speakers ability to play tunes.Rutger wrote: ↑2023-11-20 08:06 I guess it comes down with how music works. Its ordered frequencies in the time domain. Less order, worse sound. If energy is lost somewhere in the system it cant be recovered later in the chain. If one hifi system makes you tap your feet more than another - its a better system and most probably more pitch accurate. Those products can ofcourse also be found outside the Linn brand.
Each and every step in loudspeaker construction can, in my opinion , be evaluated using tunemethod , - the crossover, the drivers, the cabinet and the internal cables and the terminals.
I dont agree that source first cant be used in loudspeaker building . The crossover is always before the drivers , ie its more important for the sound than the driver itself . A bad crossover with the best loudspeakerdriver in the world will sound bad. A good crossover with a bad driver but with a good source will always sound good.
I didn't refer to room optimisation at all.Rutger wrote: ↑2023-11-20 08:47I agree that setting up a pair of loudspeakers correctly in a room only apply to that specific room.sunbeamgls wrote: ↑2023-11-20 08:42 When you tunedem a system, the room is a key part of the system being tunedemmed. When you find the least worst position you've only achieved it for that particular complete system (which includes the room).
However, I really dont like roomcorrection programes like space optimisation . I think it sounds better turned off.
We can conclude that for best sound , we want to preserve as much of the energy from the source as possible coming to the speaker. This will have consequences how we construct our speakers. The room is least important because its the last in the chain. The source is most important. Music information coming before the drive units are more important than the cabinet.Spannko wrote: ↑2023-11-20 09:59For me, it’s not possible to prevent energy loss, so it’s not if energy is lost, it’s how energy is lost that’s really important. As you say, maintaining the time order is possibly the most important design task and contributes significantly to a speakers ability to play tunes.Rutger wrote: ↑2023-11-20 08:06 I guess it comes down with how music works. Its ordered frequencies in the time domain. Less order, worse sound. If energy is lost somewhere in the system it cant be recovered later in the chain. If one hifi system makes you tap your feet more than another - its a better system and most probably more pitch accurate. Those products can ofcourse also be found outside the Linn brand.
Each and every step in loudspeaker construction can, in my opinion , be evaluated using tunemethod , - the crossover, the drivers, the cabinet and the internal cables and the terminals.
I dont agree that source first cant be used in loudspeaker building . The crossover is always before the drivers , ie its more important for the sound than the driver itself . A bad crossover with the best loudspeakerdriver in the world will sound bad. A good crossover with a bad driver but with a good source will always sound good.
Also, I’m now thinking that the crossover, particularly when series connected, forms an electro-mechanical system with the drive units which can’t really be thought of hierarchically: they’re too intertwined.
This isn’t something I’ve considered previously, but I suppose it must do. Can you expand on this, or provide a link to further information please?sunbeamgls wrote: ↑2023-11-20 11:00 ……… the cabinet is mechanically intertwined with the driver and alters its electrical behaviour……
You have a very , by nature, unlinear coil in series with the bass driver and a capacitor in series with the tweeter.
I wondered whether this was the case too.matthias wrote: ↑2023-11-20 12:52Not true for a first order series crossover without resistors.Rutger wrote: ↑2023-11-20 11:38 Its true though that a passive crossover are more intertwined with the driveunits in a passive speaker, but not in a good way. It looses the direct amplifier connection with passive components that can only do damping of the energy coming to the drivers. It makes the amplifier loose the control of lower frequencies - those frequencies are very important to maintain the rythm element in the music.
The coil in series with the bass driver always has some resistance, enough to make the amplifier connection to the driver worse at low frequencies where they are needed the most . This is where active crossovers has their biggest advantage because of the directly coupled power amplifier.matthias wrote: ↑2023-11-20 12:52Not true for a first order series crossover without resistors.Rutger wrote: ↑2023-11-20 11:38 Its true though that a passive crossover are more intertwined with the driveunits in a passive speaker, but not in a good way. It looses the direct amplifier connection with passive components that can only do damping of the energy coming to the drivers. It makes the amplifier loose the control of lower frequencies - those frequencies are very important to maintain the rythm element in the music.
Yes, very true. The demands of first class quality for the active crossover is higher than for the passive crossover because of the source first hierarcy. And a dsp crossover is very vunerable , more than most active analog crossovers, If not constructed accurate.lejonklou wrote: ↑2023-11-20 12:20 Interesting discussion!
Can I just point out one detail that seems to be missing (likely by mistake, as I’m sure you all know this): Active crossovers are placed before the power amplifiers, while passive crossovers are placed after the power amplifiers. This makes their respective negative impact on the music different in character.
True, but even If one uses a thick wire coil with very low resistance of, maybe 0.3 ohms its still more than 0 ohms that you get from a directly coupled amplifier. Using a thin wire coil can make the series resistance as high as 1 ohm .matthias wrote: ↑2023-11-20 13:13These are theorical considerations. You get coils with very low resistance. An active crossover is always a parallel crossover so you never get the musical aspects of a series crossover.Rutger wrote: ↑2023-11-20 13:04 The coil in series with the bass driver always has some resistance, enough to make the amplifier connection to the driver worse at low frequencies where they are needed the most . This is where active crossovers has their biggest advantage because of the directly coupled power amplifier.
That can probably be the case - I havent heard every loudspeaker out there. I guess that the Klångedang loudspeaker has such a crossover, and they say the sound is very good ?
Yes, Klangedang but there are some others: