Improving loudspeaker crossovers (SBL's)
 

Wallpaper will make a very small difference, unless it's 100mm thick!

Overall it achieved my goal of reducing the echo in the room. Naturally it
was not 100% efficient so I went for further treatments as outlined.

While many of your suggestions is something I've heard mentioned before it
does not make a front room, home friendly! In the past I've used carpeted up
right panels filled in behind with loft insulation installed behind speakers
to reduce/eliminate echo. These did a fine job but when they were removed
from the room it was amazing how fresh & spacious the room became so I doubt
that method would be used again.


What do you think will be achieved by standing the 'speakers on
breadboards?

Before they were on breadboards I experienced some bass mudiness & thickness
which I would say was contributed by extra reverberation through the floor.
They were also very difficult to get stable as aligning 4 spikes to sit
correctly was not easy. I guess I am trying to rid the speakers of this bass
anomalie without attracting other anomalies in upper frequency areas. With a
solid base it is also very easy to get 4 spikes to sit correctly.
Having experimented with them for quite sometime I would say they have done
the trick but I feel they sound a bit light weight now so I'm not sure which
I prefer.

If you have suspended wooden floors I would isolate the 'speakers by
mounting them on rubber.

The floors are concrete but I like that suggestion for wooden floors :-)

Alternatively, you could use mass, but you'll need
an awful lot more than a marble slab ( a couple of tombstones might work!
I'd like to hear the discussions with one's wife over than suggestion....)

I'd like to see someone whom would use that suggestion let alone go and pick
them up (I do hope they liked music).

Improving loudspeaker crossovers (SBL's)
 

Stevie Boy wrote:


**ALL Connections. That includes connections to the drivers.


Easier said than done as the driver cabinets are extremely difficult to get
into as the drive units use a sealant to ensure a air tight fit.

* Cover all internal surfaces with a suitable damping material. I rather
like Bostik Sound Deadening panels.

Hmm I'm not saying this is a bad idea as I've used sound deading panels &
materials in car door panels before with great effect (car doors arn't
exactly rigid affairs) but the SBL's use some rather unique tuning devices
(not sure what they are made of) that are adhered to the inside of the
enclosures. I know this as I saw an internal unit at thier launch.

That sounds very odd indeed.


It's also a one of treatment, like it or hate it once it's done.

There's no question that more cabinet damping greater accuracy or neutrality
if you prefer. Unless you don't want that of course.

Graham

Improving loudspeaker crossovers (SBL's)
 

Serge Auckland wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote
Serge Auckland wrote:

What you're trying to achieve is a short reverberation time which means
plenty of soft furnishings, carpeted floor and so on.

Well it's a combination of reducing the reverberant field's *intensity* as
well as the reverberation time.

You don't want to 'overdamp' a room though, it won't sound natural. The
ear adaps naturally to dealing with a modest reverberant field.

Indeed. Too short a RT and the room sounds dead. However, in my view what
you don't absorb should be diffused, so I mix a certain amount of absorbtion
with diffusion. In a domestic setting, a bookcase with different size books,
and with several gaps which could have small ornaments (standing on felt so
they don't rattle) makes an acceptable diffuser. A slatted ceiling can be
very effective as both a diffuser and absorber, and look attractive if well
done.

Sounds good to me.

Graham

Improving loudspeaker crossovers (SBL's)
 

I've just plonked some Castle Harlech* speakers in my front room - they shouldn't work, but on a lot of music they sound
splendid.

What DON'T they sound splendid on? Can you analyse why?

Any pop/rock that sounds edgy/sibilant at the mid/top end - the Castles seem to exaggerate it. Classical sounds superb, on the
other hand, even relatively shrill strings. It's difficult for me to tell whether they're simply showing up bad recordings or
source, or they're 'tuned' that way. Also, when loud, the sound is simply uncomfortable and exaggerates this effect. I wouldn't
say distorted, more 'shouty'. They've taken the place of some Dynaudio Contour 1.1s, which never had these traits - so I'd
conclude the Castles have a tendency towards edgy treble. The bass, while a little uneven at times ('inaccurate'), is plentiful
and enjoyable.

Why did you replace the Dynaudios with Castles? Anything wrong with the
former? What did you do with them?

Difficult to tell whether they're here to stay. I've found some music sounds astounding, good as I've heard - well recorded pop
(Pink Floyd, say)

OI! GET YOUR FILTHY HANDS OFF MY DESERT!
What d'he say?

************* !!!

Sorry.


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

Improving loudspeaker crossovers (SBL's)
 

In article , Serge Auckland
wrote:


Crossover design has normally nothing to do with bass extension. The
bottom end of a passive loudspeaker's response is left to roll off
naturally, the frequency at which it does so is a function of driver
and cabinet.

IIUC Some loudspeakers use a large capacitor in series with the LF unit to
alter the low frequency behaviour and interaction with the cabinet effects.
I think KEF did this with various speakers, but I don't know how widespread
the practice may be.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html

Improving loudspeaker crossovers (SBL's)
 

In article , Serge Auckland
wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


You don't want to 'overdamp' a room though, it won't sound natural.
The ear adaps naturally to dealing with a modest reverberant field.


Indeed. Too short a RT and the room sounds dead.

Depends on the nature of the sound source, and what you want to hear. For
good recordings of classical or 'acoustic' music I prefer to hear the
recorded acoustic of the location where the recording/performance was made.
So a room that sounds 'dead' when you are speaking, etc, may be fine.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html

Improving loudspeaker crossovers (SBL's)
 

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Serge Auckland
wrote:


Crossover design has normally nothing to do with bass extension. The
bottom end of a passive loudspeaker's response is left to roll off
naturally, the frequency at which it does so is a function of driver
and cabinet.

IIUC Some loudspeakers use a large capacitor in series with the LF unit to
alter the low frequency behaviour and interaction with the cabinet
effects.
I think KEF did this with various speakers, but I don't know how
widespread
the practice may be.

Slainte,

Jim


I haven't come across this at all, so I don't think the practice can have
been very widespread. Of course, before split power supplies were common,
solid-state power amps had a large capacitor in series with the output, but
that was for DC blocking reasons. I can't imagine why a loudspeaker
manufacturer would deliberately roll off the extreme LF, unless it was for
power-handling reasons at the time when the main source was LPs and
consequently there could be a lot of subsonic energy due to warps and the
like.

S.


--
http://audiopages.googlepages.com

Improving loudspeaker crossovers (SBL's)
 

"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Serge Auckland
wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote in message
...


You don't want to 'overdamp' a room though, it won't sound natural.
The ear adaps naturally to dealing with a modest reverberant field.


Indeed. Too short a RT and the room sounds dead.

Depends on the nature of the sound source, and what you want to hear. For
good recordings of classical or 'acoustic' music I prefer to hear the
recorded acoustic of the location where the recording/performance was
made.
So a room that sounds 'dead' when you are speaking, etc, may be fine.

Slainte,

Jim


This may be a personal thing, but I find a room that's too dead somewhat
oppressive. The few times I've worked in an anechoic chamber, I didn't find
it pleasant. I get much the same feeling if I'm wearing earplugs or good ear
defenders, I'm too concious of my own internal body noises, breathing and
the like.

Of course, the phrase "too dead" is a subjective one, and I agree with toy
in that I prefer to listen to music in a room that tends toward the "dead"
rather than "live". I've never got on terribly well with the LEDE concept
(Live End Dead End) for listening rooms, I've always preferred a room that
tends towards "dead" but one can still carry on normal conversation, and has
a "normal" feel. What that means in actual RT and the frequency distribution
of that RT I don't know, as I haven't measured many rooms. The IEC standard
listening rooms I've been in have sounded "right", as have the radio studios
built to the old IBA Code of Practice.

S.


--
http://audiopages.googlepages.com

Improving loudspeaker crossovers (SBL's)
 

Of course, the phrase "too dead" is a subjective one, and I agree with toy
in that I prefer to listen to music in a room that tends toward the "dead"
rather than "live". I've never got on terribly well with the LEDE concept
(Live End Dead End) for listening rooms, I've always preferred a room that
tends towards "dead" but one can still carry on normal conversation, and has
a "normal" feel. What that means in actual RT and the frequency distribution
of that RT I don't know, as I haven't measured many rooms. The IEC standard
listening rooms I've been in have sounded "right", as have the radio studios
built to the old



IBA Code of Practice.

Is that online anywhere?...

--
Tony Sayer

Improving loudspeaker crossovers (SBL's)
 

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...
Of course, the phrase "too dead" is a subjective one, and I agree with
toy
in that I prefer to listen to music in a room that tends toward the "dead"
rather than "live". I've never got on terribly well with the LEDE concept
(Live End Dead End) for listening rooms, I've always preferred a room
that
tends towards "dead" but one can still carry on normal conversation, and
has
a "normal" feel. What that means in actual RT and the frequency
distribution
of that RT I don't know, as I haven't measured many rooms. The IEC
standard
listening rooms I've been in have sounded "right", as have the radio
studios
built to the old



IBA Code of Practice.

Is that online anywhere?...

--
Tony Sayer


Not that I know of. I have a partial set of the IBA Technical Review
booklets. Book 2 has the CoP for TV and ILR studios.

If anyone's interested, I can scan the relevant Radio Studio pages and post
them

S.


--
http://audiopages.googlepages.com