"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...

Well, you haven't helped your case any here, Keith. These clips both
bear out the idea that top and bottom octaves are missing. There is
nothing significant below 60Hz, and they resemble the side of a cliff
above about 10kHz. Whether that is to do with the speaker, source
material or mic is tricky to say, but we work with what we have.


Hi Don, I am in my 50's and find I cannot hear a hell of a lot over 10-12k
these days. Therefore I could find the top end of the setup to be as good as
anything in the market place. While these speakers *may* be deficient in
the top end it won't necessarily exclude them from the purchase list based
upon me undertaking listening tests. Should those who cannot make use of the
full sound spectrum from a speaker because of their age still only buy
speakers that supposedly meet the highest standards of frequency response
when they may not get any benefit themselves? When we have products
predominantly for our enjoyment only, should we be concerned what others may
say or should we believe what we hear?

Keith's perceptions of his equipment are 100 valid for himself and maybe so
for many others who would like equipment that produces an enjoyable sound
but have the same age related hearing deterioration as I have myself.
Keith's perceptions of his own equipment may be the same perceptions that I
would arrive at if I were to hear it.

After all, for us who replay music the end requirement is enjoyment of it.
For all those who make/play, mix and master, etc (all those professionals in
the chain) , the goal should encompass the technical issues that result in a
quality product, one of them being frequency response, with the actual goal
being to make the music as enjoyable as possible to the widest range of
people so that they want to hear it and re-hear it.

In article ,
APR wrote:
Should those who cannot make use of the full sound spectrum from a
speaker because of their age still only buy speakers that supposedly
meet the highest standards of frequency response when they may not get
any benefit themselves?

There's a great deal more to a speaker driver than simple frequency
response. 'Full range' drivers are likely to have a poor directivity
pattern, transient response and distortion due to cone break up, etc. The
only valid reason for them is the efficiency is likely higher - which is
totally irrelevant since watts are cheap these days.

In other words, slight HF loss which is normal with age doesn't mean
you'll not get any benefit from a full range speaker system.

--
*When everything's coming your way, you're in the wrong lane *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
APR wrote:
Should those who cannot make use of the full sound spectrum from a
speaker because of their age still only buy speakers that supposedly
meet the highest standards of frequency response when they may not get
any benefit themselves?

There's a great deal more to a speaker driver than simple frequency
response. 'Full range' drivers are likely to have a poor directivity
pattern, transient response and distortion due to cone break up, etc. The
only valid reason for them is the efficiency is likely higher - which is
totally irrelevant since watts are cheap these days.


Can't agree with much of that - none of my FR units are rated at less than
20K at the top end...

Can't agree with much of that - none of my FR units are rated at less than 20K at the top end...

That's as maybe, but at HF, the sound will beam like ****.

The polar response plot will have a very narrow lobe at
zero degrees from the axis. To get decent treble, you're gonna
need to aim the axis at your ears with a red laser dot! Off axis, you're
not gonna get a decent response at many frequencies. At some positions,
at some frequencies, you'll get some kinda decent response, but at other
frequencies at the same position, you'll get a terrible response.

Tweeters are small partly to reduce this problem. Partly.

Still, if the sound suits you.... I'm a treble fiend myself, though.


Martin
--
M.A.Poyser Tel.: 07967 110890
Manchester, U.K. http://www.livejournal.com/userinfo.bml?user=fleetie

"APR" wrote


Hi Don, I am in my 50's and find I cannot hear a hell of a lot over
10-12k these days. Therefore I could find the top end of the setup to be
as good as anything in the market place. While these speakers *may* be
deficient in the top end it won't necessarily exclude them from the
purchase list based upon me undertaking listening tests. Should those who
cannot make use of the full sound spectrum from a speaker because of their
age still only buy speakers that supposedly meet the highest standards of
frequency response when they may not get any benefit themselves? When we
have products predominantly for our enjoyment only, should we be concerned
what others may say or should we believe what we hear?


The thing that matters here is not the 'measurements' but the perceptions -
I don't notice any lack of treble, the drivers in my speakers are all rated
to 20K at the top end (minimum - one of the drivers is rated at 30K) and the
bass will vary with the cabinets. There is no big 'pistonic' effect (air
shifting) with FR units but low notes are perfectly fine and (despite the
clips) there is no 'one note' bass.

Where they score bigtime (and here I remind everyone I still have Tannoys
and Ruarks here and have tried a vast number of speakers in the past) is the
*clarity* and cohesion - I have quite literally heard detail I had never
heard before on countless occasions now.

The other bonus is the efficiency of some/most (but not all) of these
speakers - they leap into life leap into life like no other and are lighting
fast with incredible attack. All other speakers sound blurry and sluggish
once you have got used to them.



Keith's perceptions of his equipment are 100 valid for himself and maybe
so for many others who would like equipment that produces an enjoyable
sound but have the same age related hearing deterioration as I have
myself. Keith's perceptions of his own equipment may be the same
perceptions that I would arrive at if I were to hear it.


My door is still open to anyone who wants to hear them - there's no
obligation whatsoever to like them!!


After all, for us who replay music the end requirement is enjoyment of it.
For all those who make/play, mix and master, etc (all those professionals
in the chain) , the goal should encompass the technical issues that result
in a quality product, one of them being frequency response, with the
actual goal being to make the music as enjoyable as possible to the widest
range of people so that they want to hear it and re-hear it.

Very nicely put!

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
The thing that matters here is not the 'measurements' but the
perceptions - I don't notice any lack of treble, the drivers in my
speakers are all rated to 20K at the top end (minimum - one of the
drivers is rated at 30K)

As you've found out with your mic what a maker claims and the reality are
not always the same thing.

--
*Where do forest rangers go to "get away from it all?"

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Keith G wrote:
The thing that matters here is not the 'measurements' but the
perceptions - I don't notice any lack of treble, the drivers in my
speakers are all rated to 20K at the top end (minimum - one of the
drivers is rated at 30K)

As you've found out with your mic what a maker claims and the reality are
not always the same thing.



No, I found that out with Jap bike speedos about 40 years ago....

;-)


(Since when I have never really taken much notice of
claims/readings/measurements unless I could verify them for myself - please
see my 17,328 'pinch of salt' posts here.....)

On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 08:56:57 +1000, "APR"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...

Well, you haven't helped your case any here, Keith. These clips both
bear out the idea that top and bottom octaves are missing. There is
nothing significant below 60Hz, and they resemble the side of a cliff
above about 10kHz. Whether that is to do with the speaker, source
material or mic is tricky to say, but we work with what we have.


Hi Don, I am in my 50's and find I cannot hear a hell of a lot over 10-12k
these days. Therefore I could find the top end of the setup to be as good as
anything in the market place. While these speakers *may* be deficient in
the top end it won't necessarily exclude them from the purchase list based
upon me undertaking listening tests. Should those who cannot make use of the
full sound spectrum from a speaker because of their age still only buy
speakers that supposedly meet the highest standards of frequency response
when they may not get any benefit themselves? When we have products
predominantly for our enjoyment only, should we be concerned what others may
say or should we believe what we hear?

Keith's perceptions of his equipment are 100 valid for himself and maybe so
for many others who would like equipment that produces an enjoyable sound
but have the same age related hearing deterioration as I have myself.
Keith's perceptions of his own equipment may be the same perceptions that I
would arrive at if I were to hear it.

After all, for us who replay music the end requirement is enjoyment of it.
For all those who make/play, mix and master, etc (all those professionals in
the chain) , the goal should encompass the technical issues that result in a
quality product, one of them being frequency response, with the actual goal
being to make the music as enjoyable as possible to the widest range of
people so that they want to hear it and re-hear it.


Hi APR. I've never questioned Keith's perceptions, and of course he is
welcome to them. The issue under examination here was whether full
range drivers reproduce the top and bottom octaves fully - the
contention is that they on't, and Keith's postings bore out that
contention. Since they were posted Dave Plowman has pointed out that
the mic Keith was using has serious deficiencies in these areas
itself. That is where we are currently - waiting for the next chapter.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

"Don Pearce" wrote


Hi APR. I've never questioned Keith's perceptions, and of course he is
welcome to them. The issue under examination here was whether full
range drivers reproduce the top and bottom octaves fully - the
contention is that they on't, and Keith's postings bore out that
contention. Since they were posted Dave Plowman has pointed out that
the mic Keith was using has serious deficiencies in these areas
itself. That is where we are currently - waiting for the next chapter.


OK, let's pull this back to reality a bit - when I post trax recorded with
the lapel mic they are not really intended for *measurements*, they are only
an indication of what I hear and are posted to counter the common dismissing
of FR drivers as having no top or bottom in the *hope* that some of the
qualities shine through. (Let's face it, by the time they have been
downloaded and listened to by anyone here, they've been round the block a
few times!! ;-)

If there were no bass/treble as is often implied, I would not entertain FR
speakers for a moment longer than it took to haul them back down to the
garage. My track record with drivers in both the Jericho and (In)Fidelio
cabinets so far is as follows:

Much-vaunted Fostex FE206E - out, gone and somewhere in France now. No bass
whatsoever and never will have, which made me think that the far more
popular Fostex drivers have dragged stuff like Lowther down in a blanket
condemnation of all FR units...?? (That said, in the right cabinet, the
smaller Fostex are quite superb and excellent VFM!)

Much-vaunted (and not cheap) Visaton B200 - also out and back in the box.
Nice bass but they have no top end and need supertweets which (if you stick
with Visaton) are not trivial at over a wunnah apiece:

http://www.visaton.com/en/chassis_zu..._horn/410.html


Much reviled Lowther EX3s - *Kaboom*!! At last, the real thing!! Bags of
everything, can make 'em buzz if you push them too hard. Stupendous
clarity/speed with plenty of top *and* bottom end. Can sound ****e XXXX
XXXXXXXXXX XXXXX*, otherwise the best all-round sound I have ever heard to
date and one I will settle with for the forseeable.

Much reviled (and outdated?) Lowther PM6Cs - BNIB (unused), these drivers
are a little bit more 'horny' and hard -edged atm than the EX3s but are
still a very beguiling sound and very crisp indeed. A little stark on SS but
I have just been listening to them for the last hour or more thinking they
were the EX3s....!! (Easily switchable, I forgot they were in!)

As to 'measurements' - currently, the plan is for Nick G to swing by here on
Friday and we'll give 'em a poke with his measuring mic....

Tune in to this station later in the week, for the next exciting
instalment.....!! :-)


* Not saying - don't want any *preconceptions* do we..??? :-)

In article ,
says...

There are a few 'wiseacres' here that know it all and will trot out the
stale, old 'FR drivers in horns have no top or bottom octave' hearsay
horse****.

Judge for yourselves - here are two 'identical' clips (end of one track,
beginning of another) of extremely complex/crowded music recorded OPEN MIC
with only a peewee little lapel mic

Never mind the width.. What are the tracks Keith ?

T.