64 replies to this topic

[268669♫]

Aris, on Jan 15 2010, 06:43 PM, said:

<br />I'm thinking of rebuilding the door trims in a current shape caprice to fit them, the tweeters are roughly 3&quot; X 4&quot;. I'm hoping they work well once placed on the doors. Note that the off-axis response is flat to almost 20KHZ. I know of no other tweeter that measures that well off axis other than the focal TLR which is flat to 12kHZ off axis. All dome tweeters are useless off axis after about 3KHZ.<br /><br />These aren't the small RAALs, they are only available to OEM companies and require approval from RAAL to use. They are superior to the RAAL tweeters you buy from Madisound or other such retailers.<br /><br />I'm also going to use a second tweeter (scanspeak 3/4&quot; illuminator) for a masking effect.<br />

<br /><br /><br />

I meant the 140-15's are bigger but I dont believe as deep as the 70-20's. I looked into these for use with an ambiophonics system i'm designing but the great off axis response means alot more reflections in a car as the spherical wavefront propegates pretty much without polar loss in every direction, meaning it will reflect off everything in the car near the driver. As ~thematt~ said you would need to mount them with waveguides to direct the sound in a car. I'm not sure if your chip would eliminate these problems but I dont think thats what your designing it for.

It would be great to hear these in a car though, flush mounted to the firewall with a custom dash built around them.

Do you have approval to use the 70-20's in a car?

Ant

[Luke352]

Aris, on Jan 15 2010, 11:12 PM, said:

I'm not familiar with Dr Geddes Summa's work. Our philosophy is way defferent to his field of thought according to your quote.

You can have a read of Dr Geddes work here:
Webpage: http://www.gedlee.com/

Whitepaper: http://www.gedlee.co.../Philosophy.pdf

He aso did the design work for these guys http://www.ai-audio.com./

[Fhrx]

SPL Samuel, on Jan 15 2010, 11:19 AM, said:

Interesting, would be good to get Marty in here to voice his views

Without sounding immodest; between the 3/6 of us here (depending if you count part timers) we have nearly one hundred years of experience in audio visual related fields. We have all done countless years of study both here and overseas covering all matter of things from audio / visual through to engineering. We are well aware and understand what 'should' happen in relation to acoustic characteristics in cars.

Now I say this to the theory boffins and textbook wizards with the upmost respect; sonically speaking, some things that should happen in cars don’t whilst other things that shouldn't happen do. Why not have a listen to Paul's Hertz car before judging it saying we've done it all 'wrong'?

I'm of the opinion we should all afford everyone at least that courtesy.

Edited by Fhrx, 16 January 2010 - 09:35 AM.

[Tiger]

Well spoken, Marty! I respect that totally

[br85]

Fhrx, on Jan 16 2010, 08:58 AM, said:

Without sounding immodest; between the 3/6 of us here (depending if you count part timers) we have nearly one hundred years of experience in audio visual related fields. We have all done countless years of study both here and overseas covering all matter of things from audio / visual through to engineering. We are well aware and understand what 'should' happen in relation to acoustic characteristics in cars.

Now I say this to the theory boffins and textbook wizards with the upmost respect; sonically speaking, some things that should happen in cars don’t whilst other things that shouldn't happen do. Why not have a listen to Paul's Hertz car before judging it saying we've done it all 'wrong'?

I'm of the opinion we should all afford everyone at least that courtesy.

It's a fair call mate, but at the end of the day you just have to accept cynicism from forum goers for what it is, and if they offer no practical alternative, then they're not taking your business away from you

For example, I don't have to listen to that car to know what it's problems are, but I also don't know to what extent the problems are masked or are unbearable. I might actually find it a very pleasant experience (albeit unrealistic or inaccurate). In my own setup I have found that dropping the 1-4khz region by quite a bit allows me to listen much louder for longer periods of time. It's not "pure sq", but it's the experience I'm after 90% of the time.

[Fhrx]

Remember too that we're human just like everyone else; we're also still constantly experimenting and trialing all matter of different techniques in order to continually learn what works and what doesn't in cars and homes - regardless of whether the technique is supported or refuted by 'theory'.

If people discover new and interesting techniques that work, I encourage them to post it here. After all; no one is above learning new things.

Edited by Fhrx, 16 January 2010 - 02:49 PM.

[muzzy66]

Aris, on Jan 15 2010, 11:22 PM, said:

The Scan-Speak 6600 is relatively good tweeter, but cannot produce the micro dynamics or detail of RAAL. Yes they sound smooth but they lack some detail. I use the Scan 6600 in a range of speakers that we are about to market. Our reference range of speakers use the RAAL along with our algorithm. I can appreciate that some people don't like ribbons even though the RAAL is not a conventional ribbon.

Fair enough - I've not heard the RAAL drivers so I can't say whether i feel they are or aren't better.

Just felt that referring to 'all dome tweeters' as 'severely limited' was a little overkill! I guess as with anythin though, it does depend on your application. Compared against other dome tweeters out there the 6600 is exceptionally versatile, but if you need a high frequency driver that can be crossed at 1khz (or play to excessively high output levels) then it's ability will indeed be limited.

For most common applications, they are more then capable though.

[Aris]

muzzy66, on Jan 16 2010, 06:36 PM, said:

Fair enough - I've not heard the RAAL drivers so I can't say whether i feel they are or aren't better.

Just felt that referring to 'all dome tweeters' as 'severely limited' was a little overkill! I guess as with anythin though, it does depend on your application. Compared against other dome tweeters out there the 6600 is exceptionally versatile, but if you need a high frequency driver that can be crossed at 1khz (or play to excessively high output levels) then it's ability will indeed be limited.

For most common applications, they are more then capable though.

The 6600 is my second choice of tweeter, and I can happily live with it if I couldn't have the RAAL. The quote "All dome tweeters" was a genaralization. My business partner and main inventer of our technlogogy prefers the 6600 to the RAAL as he feels it has slightly more relaxed sound and is not fussed by the slight lack of detail compared to the RAAL. We have access to some of the best ears in the industry, and although the consensus is towards the RAAl, some prefer the Scan 6600 and no one has said anything bad about either tweeter.

Edited by Aris, 16 January 2010 - 08:23 PM.

[br85]

muzzy66, on Jan 16 2010, 05:36 PM, said:

Fair enough - I've not heard the RAAL drivers so I can't say whether i feel they are or aren't better.

Just felt that referring to 'all dome tweeters' as 'severely limited' was a little overkill! I guess as with anythin though, it does depend on your application. Compared against other dome tweeters out there the 6600 is exceptionally versatile, but if you need a high frequency driver that can be crossed at 1khz (or play to excessively high output levels) then it's ability will indeed be limited.

For most common applications, they are more then capable though.

Pete, ribbons, electrostats and planars are an inherently superior design to a dome tweeter. I just don't think they've had the same amount of R&D put into them as domes have, so we're nowhere near reaching the full potential of these designs, whereas, I think, domes aren't going to get much better than they are now.

[muzzy66]

You may be right - but until they get to the point where they can actually outperform a good dome tweeter in the real world (which seems uncommon at this stage) There theoretical advantages mean all but nothing.

In the future - maybe.

We'll see about that when the time comes

Edited by muzzy66, 17 January 2010 - 09:25 PM.

[Cyberpunky]

br85, on Jan 16 2010, 03:45 PM, said:

For example, I don't have to listen to that car to know what it's problems are, but I also don't know to what extent the problems are masked....

Wow impressive. I prefer to listen but that's just me.

If a theoretical problem is masked then is it still a problem ??? If a tree falls....

Marty is 100% right, I went floor pods when no one had done it and it worked for me, but if I listened to conventional theories the doors or kicks are only options, then it would never have happened till someone else went *hey lets try this*. If you haven't heard the car how can you possibly know how well it works or fails to ?

peace

Cyberpunky

[Luke352]

Cyberpunky, on Jan 18 2010, 05:24 PM, said:

Marty is 100% right, I went floor pods when no one had done it and it worked for me, but if I listened to conventional theories the doors or kicks are only options, then it would never have happened till someone else went *hey lets try this*. If you haven't heard the car how can you possibly know how well it works or fails to ?

peace

Cyberpunky

No offence Bruce, but if people had gone through the theory they would have realised why doors suck and that there is no reason why floor pods shouldn't work and theoritically are a superior position.

I'm in both camps myself, but at the end of the day I'll use whatever seems to work.

[Cyberpunky]

I guess my badly worded point was sometimes you just gotta try stuff despite conventional wisdom. The theorists can postulate all they want about what will and what won't work but the ppl who try stuff may just prove the theorists wrong, even if theoretically they shouldn't

peace

Cyberpunky

Edited by Cyberpunky, 18 January 2010 - 10:44 PM.

[br85]

It is often a good idea to go against conventional wisdom, but you are still going with some sort of wisdom. YOu did not choose floor pods completely at random, you realized that doors=fail and kicks=small airspace, so you went with the only remaining option with any wisdom whatsoever.

You still used theory, sorry Bruce.

[Cyberpunky]

Jeff you obviously haven't seen my car lol. The kicks are curved because they are the front wheel arches. The door is about 2.5 inches thick and an 8 just wont fit(not just from thickness) because there literally wasn't enough room due to seat, on the door surface. My only wisdom was that I had paid for them and was going to get them in car no matter what, as I needed some midbass bad(was running 5s at the time). I built the boxes to temporarily hold them while I tried to work out a way to fit them in the doors. Was only once I listened to them that I forgot all about door mounting. When I fitted the dyns I knew why to go floor pods though lol

peace

Cyberpunky