Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 30

Thread: What's the absolutely most SQ speaker size selection?

  1. Back To Top    #11

    Re: What's the absolutely most SQ speaker size selection?

    Quote Originally Posted by geolemon View Post
    Some great points here - I think my prior post above was skimmed or ignored.
    ...
    I either totally missed it, or we were thinking the same thing at around the same time... but it is "on point".


    Quote Originally Posted by geolemon View Post
    ...
    It's why people tossing out brand names are just tossing out their own anecdotal fallacies - if even THAT.
    it is like a cult, and repeating the magic incantations.

  2. Back To Top    #12

    Re: What's the absolutely most SQ speaker size selection?

    The Scanspeak split-cone technology fights distortion ( less distortion . .. more "qualitative" enjoyment.

    Quote Originally Posted by geolemon View Post
    ... that causes intermodulation distortion.

    It's why people tossing out brand names are just tossing out their own anecdotal fallacies - if even THAT.

  3. Back To Top    #13

    Re: What's the absolutely most SQ speaker size selection?

    Quote Originally Posted by mlekk View Post
    The Scanspeak split-cone technology fights distortion ( less distortion . .. more "qualitative" enjoyment.
    But the split cone does not do anything for InterModulation Distortion" (IMD). And the discussion context was on non-linearity in stiffness.

  4. Back To Top    #14

    Re: What's the absolutely most SQ speaker size selection?

    Quote Originally Posted by Holmz View Post
    But the split cone does not do anything for InterModulation Distortion" (IMD). And the discussion context was on non-linearity in stiffness.
    My point is to emphasize why ALL design variables exist as exactly that - variables.
    If there's more than one way to do something - or more to the point, even: if this very mature industry hasn't coalesced around a single, inarguably "best" that has eliminated a design variable in favor of a single standard by this point...
    ...then there's a reason for that. Or possibly, tens.. or hundreds.

    Cones are the same. They have different damping factors, weight factors, flex factors... different shapes... each contributes to acoustical differences, not only directly but when combined with an intended use or application. Need a lower mass? Use a thinner cone. Oh wait, now it's flexing and has terrible breakup patterns? Use a different material. Etc.
    EDIT: But cone size is still not the significant determinant of SQ (or other response) concerns.

    There is no "best". Cones are just ONE of the variables, and even with all those words, I only barely touched on why there's no single "best", I only covered size/width and directionality!
    Last edited by geolemon; 05-28-2020 at 10:02 AM.

  5. Back To Top    #15

    Re: What's the absolutely most SQ speaker size selection?

    Their are many , "MANY" technological factors worth the money that Revelators bring to distortion fighting.
    I know that their are products that have tested or sounded different .

    If you attempt to fight distortion in a driver . . . This is leading towards subjectively better sound quality ?

    If OP were to go with a smaller midrange , would a 4.5" 12M w3rk or do other speakers come to mind ?
    Last edited by mlekk; 05-28-2020 at 11:53 AM.

  6. Back To Top    #16

    Re: What's the absolutely most SQ speaker size selection?

    Quote Originally Posted by mlekk View Post
    If you attempt to fight distortion in a driver . . . This is leading towards subjectively better sound quality ?
    Yes.
    Cone size isn't how you fight distortion. It's not even a contributing factor, not even a consideration.

    You can have a 1" tweeter that's horrible, and a 3" wideband that's amazing, and a 5.25" midrange that's terrible and a 6.5" that's clean as a whistle, and an 8" that's muddy and a 12" that's perfection, and a 18" that's... you get the idea.

    It's your application that matters.
    If you have a directional 7" - let's say a Revelator! - but then you mount it in an application that requires a lot of off-axis listening and isn't in an enclosure (like your typical door mount location) - the sound quality isn't going to be there. Doesn't matter how awesome it is in a small bookshelf cabinet that you listen to firing right at your face.
    In that case - directionality - speaker size matters.

    That's my point - that's all it matters for. It correlates directly to what frequency the speaker becomes directional at.
    Other than that and how it might impact your installation, there's other WAY more impactful variables that actually determine if a speaker distorts or not.
    Size isn't one of them.

  7. Back To Top    #17

    Re: What's the absolutely most SQ speaker size selection?

    Quote Originally Posted by geolemon View Post
    Yes.
    Cone size isn't how you fight distortion. It's not even a contributing factor, not even a consideration.

    You can have a 1" tweeter that's horrible, and a 3" wideband that's amazing, and a 5.25" midrange that's terrible and a 6.5" that's clean as a whistle, and an 8" that's muddy and a 12" that's perfection, and a 18" that's... you get the idea.

    It's your application that matters.
    If you have a directional 7" - let's say a Revelator! - but then you mount it in an application that requires a lot of off-axis listening and isn't in an enclosure (like your typical door mount location) - the sound quality isn't going to be there. Doesn't matter how awesome it is in a small bookshelf cabinet that you listen to firing right at your face.
    In that case - directionality - speaker size matters.

    That's my point - that's all it matters for. It correlates directly to what frequency the speaker becomes directional at.
    Other than that and how it might impact your installation, there's other WAY more impactful variables that actually determine if a speaker distorts or not.
    Size isn't one of them.
    Increased excursion increases distortion, more cone area means less excursion for a given spl, ergo more cone area can mean less distortion if you look at it from that side of things, sure there are lots of other variables, but to say cone area makes no odds is missing a bit of the picture for me

  8. Back To Top    #18

    Re: What's the absolutely most SQ speaker size selection?

    Quote Originally Posted by dumdum View Post
    Increased excursion increases distortion, more cone area means less excursion for a given spl, ergo more cone area can mean less distortion if you look at it from that side of things, sure there are lots of other variables, but to say cone area makes no odds is missing a bit of the picture for me
    That's only a true statement for a motor that doesn't have a flat BL curve.
    Or, a suspension that doesn't have a flat CMS plot.
    It's my very point -
    You engineer properly to avoid distortion.
    You don't just say "Well, just size up on the speaker and use it at 1/4 capacity. Problem solved!"

    You cause other problems that way - fundamentally, you now need to fit a larger cone speaker somewhere. You now need to deal with absolutely unavoidable directionality considerations. You now have to make sure your larger speaker has the larger requirements (air, vents, etc) that it needs. It's not just subwoofers - putting any speaker in a cabinet that's too small for it won't be good.

    If inter-modulation distortion is the concern (sounds like it is, if these linearity points are being raised - since excursion was mentioned), then solve them with good engineering. Slapping a bigger cone on a non-linear motor and a non-linear suspension won't solve the problem. That's what you call "a kludge". Not even a good workaround.

    I mean sure - if all you have access to is sub-par flea markets to shop at, it's good to be aware that stuff will be limited in linearity.
    But you can do better. Don't shop at flea markets, and buy linear drivers.

    You don't need to cause yourself more issues trying to counterproductively work around bad engineering. Just buy good engineering. It's not expensive to do.
    Last edited by geolemon; 05-29-2020 at 05:26 PM.

  9. Back To Top    #19

    Re: What's the absolutely most SQ speaker size selection?

    What about AMTs, and ribbons?

  10. Back To Top    #20

    Re: What's the absolutely most SQ speaker size selection?

    Quote Originally Posted by Holmz View Post
    What about AMTs, and ribbons?
    Points on loudness and directionality will still apply... there's no getting around physics.
    Same with magnetic planar.

    And for fun, how about the inverse?
    Google "plasma tweeters". It's as close to the SQ-ideal "single small point source" as you can get - a nearly zero-mass flame that makes sound.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Back To Top