| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Horn-Loaded Speakers» How to USE “Resonating Oops” in loudspeakers (184 posts, 10 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 5 of 8 (184 items) Select Pages:  « First ... « 3 4 5 6 7 » ... Last »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  The elusive “absolute tone”...  Breeze......  Playback Listening  Forum     24  154747  07-28-2005
  »  New  The “Primary Frequencies”...  Melody range and the other octaves...  Audio For Dummies ™  Forum     5  49686  09-08-2005
  »  New  Don't position speakers but create Sound in room...  Listener position...  Audio For Dummies ™  Forum     1  28710  06-19-2006
  »  New  Great Cello Concertos..  János Starker passed away...  Musical Discussions  Forum     21  138562  07-04-2006
  »  New  SPUnisation of Macondo: how to catch own testicals...  Who? (shades of the old "musical" vs. "a...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     1  21479  02-01-2007
  »  New  Tannoy Red 1960s: some sober reality..  The Summer Monitors?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     10  108947  02-15-2007
  »  New  The inflatable speakers dumping and no only...  Labyrinth?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     8  48192  05-30-2007
  »  New  Macondo's Axioms: Horn-loaded acoustic systems..  No wonder...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     72  399670  07-29-2007
  »  New  Attention Sound Engineers (compression and loudness)..  Injection channel and Romy's rules...  Playback Listening  Forum     48  218494  09-09-2007
  »  New  The Macondo’s Upper Bass Channel: what is next?..  Görlich again...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     30  193770  10-28-2007
  »  New  Wilson Audio and the Moore's law..  Sneak peak of modesty...  Audio News Forum     19  53505  04-26-2009
  »  New  Other Ways of getting Special Tone from a loudspeaker...  Paul S....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     8  58010  11-27-2009
  »  New  How to play Bruckner Sound in Audio...  Being a pedagogical geniuses…...  Playback Listening  Forum     16  67372  06-15-2010
  »  New  An educational Eugenie’s installation...  Some more......  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     15  55516  07-15-2010
  »  New  Superbly interesting effect: Suspended decoupled floor ..  Superbly interesting effect: Suspended decoupled floor ...  Playback Listening  Forum     0  12287  10-08-2010
12-02-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Winnie
Herts UK
Posts 10
Joined on 12-01-2007

Post #: 101
Post ID: 5997
Reply to: 5996
Agreed
 Romy the Cat wrote:
From the above-linked 6moons’ site:  Publisher's comment:

Layered Sound as demonstrated at Marja & Henk's during my short visit consisted of running their Avantgarde Duos and the Model Ones simultaneously, the former inside at dominant volume, the latter outside as fill-in ambience providers. Varying the relative volumes of course shifted the percentages of point-source and omni-polar, direct and reflected sound. Muting the panels completely collapsed the sound by comparison to having them fill it in. The sound was unquestionably superior with the added panels. It made traditional two-speaker stereo obsolete by comparison.


I would agree with this sentiments – from what I know now and from what I experimented I would hardly found straight two-speaker stereo as interesting enough. From where I am staying Injection is not debatable. What dubious is - the methods of Injections. The large panels of Layered Sound has own advantaged and own disadvantages. I was considering in past to use another Red injection channel (driven form the same amp) and located at floor to contra-balance vertical image shift in my case. In case is listening is done not in extreme nearfield it would not be necessary.

From surface it looks like an Injection is just a forced substitute for our disability to have regular channels/drivers with right TTH characteristics (Tone, Transient, and Harmonics) where all necessary Injection benefits are included. However, recently I began to look at the things differently as I feel a need to moderate BETWEEN the elements of TTH as there are numerous external condition. Sure it would be great to have that ability to do it in the SAME driver but I do not know how it might be done properly. I can envision a Black Box through which a driver is connected with 3 knobs: Tone, Transient, and Harmonics. All that is necessary to figure out is how that Black Box will be working… :-)

The caT


Cat, I think we are on a similar quest, though perhaps by slightly different means.

I should pick up my Podium Sound .5s tomorrow. My horns are 'point source' and the .5s are omni-directional. Both give excellent sound in their own right, but very different (front seat vs back seat in the theatre).

I would not blend the sound of my horns with just any cheap and cheerful distorting panel, and I know SQ of the .5s is up to the task. For me the key is not in adding measured amounts of distortion (though inevitably there will be some) but in the blending of point source and omni directional sound.
BTW I am not afraid of distortion - the perfect SS amp sounded crap and SET amps are magic, go figure. 

Out of interest Podium Sound seem to have plans to market smaller panels - the 0.25 is the start, though no dimensions are available at present.
12-02-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
drdna
San Francisco, California
Posts 498
Joined on 10-29-2005

Post #: 102
Post ID: 5998
Reply to: 5997
Injection, Resonance, & Point Sources

 Romy the Cat wrote:
From where I am staying Injection is not debatable. What dubious is - the methods of Injections. The large panels of Layered Sound has own advantaged and own disadvantages. I was considering in past to use another Red injection channel (driven form the same amp) and located at floor to contra-balance vertical image shift in my case. In case is listening is done not in extreme nearfield it would not be necessary ... From surface it looks like an Injection is just a forced substitute for our disability to have regular channels/drivers with right TTH characteristics (Tone, Transient, and Harmonics) where all necessary Injection benefits are included.


 Winnie wrote:
For me the key is not in adding measured amounts of distortion (though inevitably there will be some) but in the blending of point source and omni directional sound.


In my mind these are very different goals.

Stereo reproduction is an odd thing.  We could think about reproducing the musical event in two ways:

1) We record and reproduce all the information received by each ear. We need two channels.  This is binaural recording.  This ignores the vibrations received from music throughout the body, etc.  Ideally we use headphones.

2) We try to reproduce the event.  We want an infinite number of channels at all locations 360 degrees around the event.  Microphones record all sounds directionally: what comes from the rear is trasduced via a speaker to the front and vice versa.  All sounds and vibrations of the musical event are reproduced entirely and directionally.

3) With stereo, as we have it, it is neither of these.  We have two channels for two ears, but we have speakers set up, interacting with the room, as if to try to reproduce the event.  The idea of blending directional and non-directional output is appealing because it accepts this compromise and is perhaps most true to the artifice of stereo as we have it.  It is important to keep clear of the goals here and not be confused by pleasant distortions and novelties however.

Regarding TTH injection/Black Box, it is a very different animal, the goal is to optimize the TTH of reproduction due to the limitations of the drivers, to create an ideal functional driver.

The problems inherent with each line of thought are that we must be careful to be seduced by distortions and novelties, and that we are still trying to reproduce a two-channel source.  As we move farther from two point sources (uni- or omni-directional), we encounter more problems.
12-02-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,535
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 103
Post ID: 5999
Reply to: 5997
You will have a lot of difficulties.
 Winnie wrote:
For me the key is not in adding measured amounts of distortion …. but in the blending of point source and omni directional sound.
I personally see it as meaningless objective. The point-source, line-source, omni-source, dipoles… etc… they are not the objectives but juts means. If they all done properly then they all might sound corrects. Still, I feel that “correct” objectives have sonic nature not the “language of sound” nature… Anyhow, I also feel that you will have a LOT of difficulty to mix horn with large panes as you will have a LOT of problems with time-aligning them.


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-02-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
drdna
San Francisco, California
Posts 498
Joined on 10-29-2005

Post #: 104
Post ID: 6001
Reply to: 5999
The compromise of stereo
 Romy the Cat wrote:
 Winnie wrote:
For me the key is not in adding measured amounts of distortion …. but in the blending of point source and omni directional sound.
I personally see it as meaningless objective. The point-source, line-source, omni-source, dipoles… etc… they are not the objectives but juts means. If they all done properly then they all might sound corrects. Still, I feel that “correct” objectives have sonic nature not the “language of sound” nature… Anyhow, I also feel that you will have a LOT of difficulty to mix horn with large panes as you will have a LOT of problems with time-aligning them.


Yes, exactly.  Stereo is by its nature a very limited method.  We optimize stereo reproduction by working to maximize the strengths and minimize the weaknesses inherent in the basic differences between how stereo works and how an actual musical event exists. 

As I mentioned above, I would disagree somewhat about omnidirectional and unidirectional radiation balance being a meaningless objective.  I think it is worthy to explore but very different from other parameters we look at; it is not just another way of doing an injection channel.  Also, it compounds the complexities of a system, which is often undesirable.  While I think it has a lot of potential, I worry that the added complexity may lead to new problems that may outweigh the benefits derived, even if it is done very carefully, one of which is time alignment as pointed out.
12-02-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
stevie7V
40 minutes NW of London, England
Posts 8
Joined on 11-25-2007

Post #: 105
Post ID: 6002
Reply to: 6001
Time alignment is not an issue
 drdna wrote:
While I think it has a lot of potential, I worry that the added complexity may lead to new problems that may outweigh the benefits derived, even if it is done very carefully, one of which is time alignment as pointed out.

Here I have a slightly different take.  The sound eminating from the NXT panel reproduces the 'dirty sound' from the concert hall and therefore aspects such as time alignment are not pertinent.  Think how randomly and variously the different direct and reflected sounds from the hall reach the listeners ears.

The problem with the approach in my view is that you will never achieve total realism because different instruments would require a different moving-coil/NXT balance.  Even so, I believe that some attempt at going with a compromise balance is better than none.  For me, the name of the game is the illusion of being there.


defy convention - make music
12-02-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,144
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 106
Post ID: 6005
Reply to: 6001
Well, said, Adrian
Indeed, the more you try for with hi-fi the further open you crack Pandora's Box.

Actually, I think that "good" injection is way down the road for most site visitors, given that they want real improvement as opposed to a big change.

The basic ideas of injection that I understand are tone and ambience, and neither of these come via outboard speakers without a substantial price, IMO.  The best things to shoot for with injection, IMO, are an "enriched" tonal palette and an "energized" sound field rather than some sort of substitute for surround sound, which is another subject altogether, IMO.

This is NOT to say or imply that "injection" is not do-able; rather it is [another] courtesy caution to hopeful copycats.

While I happen to like very much some things that panels do, I just can't imagine a harmonious pairing of panels with HE horns, for so many reasons that I am loathe to get into it.

Remember the Bose "omni-directional" sound?

'Nuff said?

Best,
Paul S
12-03-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,535
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 107
Post ID: 6008
Reply to: 6002
The NXTization of speakers.

Steve,

I hardly know what the NXT panels are and I hardly undusted them even after reading the 6moon article. I kind of understand what you are trying to accomplish, though I perhaps not exactly agree with the methods and means. Still, when we talk about Injection Channels it is very difficult to judge about anything “over the phone” and it is necessary to be in the room and to see/hear what is actually going on. The Injection Channels are in most cases providing their benefits do impact mains channels negatively and that trade off should be properly evaluated and balanced. So, after you play with your NXT panels please post your thoughts about the result, even preliminary results. In particularly I would be interested to learn what techniques you used to found that equilibrium between main channels and Injection channels. BTW, migh I ask you what main channels speakers you use?

Rgs, the Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-03-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
stevie7V
40 minutes NW of London, England
Posts 8
Joined on 11-25-2007

Post #: 108
Post ID: 6009
Reply to: 6008
NXT panels are like an old fashioned music box
Romy,

It's not actually me who's trying to accomplish anything.  I've just been commenting on Shelley Katz's 'Layered Sound' technique.  I have no connection with his company although I have met him and discussed the system with him.  I listen to my own speakers, although, sadly, the company is no more.  I have joined a new loudspeaker company as the designer and we will be coming out with a new product in the New Year.

NXT panels are simple panels, made of a lightweight material such as a honeycomb polystyrene type compound.  The exciters are like moving coil speakers except instead of a cone they work 'vibrators' which are then attached to the panel.  If you've ever seen an old fashioned music box, where you turn a handle and a wheel with spikes like a hedgehog turns and flicks metal prongs, you'll understand the basic principle.  The sound of the music box is enhanced by whatever surface or enclosure the mechanism vibrates against.

NXT panels do not generally have a particularly wide frequency range and are not as accurate as a normal speaker - plus or minus about 3dB is achievable.  Alone, they don't make a particularly wonderful sound to my ears and two of them will not produce a satisfactory stereo image.  However, they can be used effectively in parallel with the main speakers and running about 5 or 6 dB quieter.  I use them with a separate amplifier and adjust the volume until I 'just can or can't hear them'.  At this level, I can tell that they're on by listening to the sound from the back of the room.  They do seem to add something to the realism, and have some similarity to the Hafler system of placing an additional rear speaker driven by the out of phase component of the signal - at least they do the way that I use them.  It would be easy for any of your forum members to experiment with this by buying an inexpensive pair of NXT speakers and driving them via a cheap integrated amplifier or power amplifier with volume control.

I'm no expert on either NXT speakers or the 'Layered Sound' technique and I haven't listened to Shelley Katz's own interpretation of the technique but I hope this helps anyway.

Regards
Steve


defy convention - make music
12-03-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
stevie7V
40 minutes NW of London, England
Posts 8
Joined on 11-25-2007

Post #: 109
Post ID: 6010
Reply to: 6009
Not 'surround sound'
PS: They can't really be compared to 'surround sound'


defy convention - make music
12-03-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
el`Ol
Posts 225
Joined on 10-13-2007

Post #: 110
Post ID: 6012
Reply to: 6010
Very special exciter
http://cgi.ebay.de/30iger-Jahre-Telefunken-Lautsprecher_W0QQitemZ280179742817QQihZ018QQcategoryZ33154QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
12-03-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Winnie
Herts UK
Posts 10
Joined on 12-01-2007

Post #: 111
Post ID: 6015
Reply to: 6012
First a statement of fact
Podium Sound speakers are not NXT speakers. They use a central spine of transducers to vibrate a special panel that is supported almost exclusively on those transducers (four small sound bridges are used to help support the perimeter against a solid oak frame).

The transducers are equally spaced, in a straight line along the length of the spine, and as such are outside of the NXT patent. There are also other minor differences that I dont know of.

Shelly Katz is keen to differentiate his panels from those of NXT, which without being too rude IMHO do not really fit in Hi Fi territory.

Podium Speakers have been looked over several times by at least one of the NXT main people. If there had been an issue with patents I guess they would have brought it up.  
12-03-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
stevie7V
40 minutes NW of London, England
Posts 8
Joined on 11-25-2007

Post #: 112
Post ID: 6016
Reply to: 6015
Wise to avoid the NXT licensing
Thanks Winnie.  That's interesting. I think that Shelley is wise to avoid the NXT licensing.

Please send him my best regards if you speak to him.


defy convention - make music
12-03-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Winnie
Herts UK
Posts 10
Joined on 12-01-2007

Post #: 113
Post ID: 6017
Reply to: 6008
You asked about my system
In this exalted company its probably not up to much but I've not heard anything else demo-ed that makes me want to change. Smile

Front end: Vista laptop with XXHighend software (best sounding bargain in Hi Fi). Fireface 400 external soundcard
DAC/Pre amp: (gulp) Tact 2.2X - some room correction but mainly used as low frequency cross over
Mid frequencies: Rolled cone Lowther DX4s in modded Hornet Hedlund horns powered by EAR 861 power amp
Low frequencies: Pair of BD15 15" drivers in DIY BD 'reference' cabinets powered by Sugden A21a amp
High frequencies: Fostex T90As tweeters. High pass capacitor to Lowthers.
Mains: PS Audio PPP
Cables: Audionote silver

Because of my preferences I listen nearfield. I have none of the normal Lowther issues with this system, but would just like a bit of 'space' 'ambiance' 'reality' together with the clear dynamic sound. Hence my looking at Podium Panels and my interest in oops

I need now to work out a way of getting the horns and panels to play together. I have no knowledge of electronic so will look for help perhaps in AA. There seems to choices

1. Somehow split the spdiff cables from the Tact preamp and feed to another amp and then to the Podiums.
2. Take a second set of speaker cables from the EAR main amp and somehow get it connected to the Podiums

Being a Luddite in this field I will not attempt anything yet till I get a better understanding of what to do. I do have a S&B TVC that could be called into play.

Sorry have strayed a bit off topic

Cheers
12-03-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,535
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 114
Post ID: 6020
Reply to: 6009
Other ways to use the Injection ideology.

 stevie7V wrote:
… they can be used effectively in parallel with the main speakers and running about 5 or 6 dB quieter.  I use them with a separate amplifier and adjust the volume until I 'just can or can't hear them'.  At this level, I can tell that they're on by listening to the sound from the back of the room. 

Sorry, Winnie, stevie7V, Podium Sound and NXT.

You are new people to me and new speakers to me and I did not “get” right the way who is who.

It is apparent that we in one way or another use the same “Injection” ideas, this I am religiously for time aliment or at least attempts to do so. Since you both from UK you should know the specific of Tannoy Red coloration, so you should have an idea what I am trying to “Inject”.

The success of injection might derive from 3 elements:

1)     Coloration of the Injection channels
2)     Negative Impact it has on main channels
3)     Adjustability of Injection (crossover, volume, TTH similarity…. etc), that is included in #2

Still, instead of subjecting to people to search “interesting colorful” drivers I would propose, in addition, to look in another direction. We could inject colors (as I do) or… texture. Here is a very interesting fact - a proper amount if texture does expedite colors. If it is not enough then I perfectly can see two Injection Channels – one for Color Injection another for Texture Injection. Pretend a TV where you set with your main speakers brightness and contracts, set with your Color Injection the saturation level and set with your Texture Injection the sharpness of your TV of the ability of your super-duper high resolution TV to display the walk into fog during the Casablanca’s last episode.

I very recently began to think about Texture Injection as any former know to me way to “increase sharpness” were accosted in my experience with harmonic fuckunization and deformation of  acoustic-like TTH characteristic – a big taboo to me. So, the big question would be: what I might propose to deal with Texture Injection but do not screw up nether with tone, not with harmonics nor with transients?

Make an experiment. Buy, borrow or steal somewhere an amplifier with switching power supply, or class-D amplifier not any of them but the cheapest possible, the one that operated at lowers possible switching frequency. You might buy such an amp for $50 or even less. Some of the crappies of them call subwoofer amps, they have 200hz low pass filter and their pulses are switching juts above 50kHz. (It calls carrier-frequency). Get rid of any speaker level 200hz low pass filter and out EMI filer from this amp; connect your low-passed at 7khz Texture Injection channel to this amp. How you will have an amp that will pump into your mid- and sub-mid frequency loudspeaker a HUGE amount of HF noise all the way from 10K-20K (they uselessly have internal second order) to 1/2GHz.  BTW, so not feel that UHF will be too much attenuated with amp filers as ay high frequency the ESR of the flirting cap is too high and in these cheap amps no one will use good coils to filter. Surely, with your low-passed Texture Injection channel you will not be able to hear the UHF sweating nose but the fun part that it will be there and it will be auditable as none-random wide bandwidth forth that will stress and massage your  Injection channel adding to it a feeling of texture and sharpness.  From here you might use LC chins to mitigate the depth of the Texture Injection, along with the volume of the Texture Injection Channel relative to the main speakers. If you have a dedicated upper bass channel driven from own amp then you can use this principle of Texture Injection right combined with your main speaker’s upper bass channel. I tried it (using APS PurePower regenerator with 20kHz carrier-frequency) and it works wonderfully.

Now the biggest question is: can the Texture Injection + Color Injection substitute a spontaneous “Resonating Oops”? Why the hell knows. The advantage of deliberate injection is that it is managed and predicable, of course if a system designer has sensibility and sensitivity. I am sure we all when over the situations when we bought some 50-70 years old junk, brought it home, got hypnotized how interesting the “Resonating Oops” was working on that loudspeaker? Then the speaker was sitting in your room on pedestal and you were for years afraid to fart toward to it. Was that speaker able to do anything else good beside the “Resonating Oops”? I do not think so. Using the moderate and deliberate Injection is it perfectly possible to write into sound of properly performing playback the tone and texture that the 50-70 years old grandfather-speaker could not even dream off….

Rgs, Romy the Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-03-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
el`Ol
Posts 225
Joined on 10-13-2007

Post #: 115
Post ID: 6030
Reply to: 6015
Arrangement of exciters
 Winnie wrote:

The transducers are equally spaced, in a straight line along the length of the spine, and as such are outside of the NXT patent.



Hard to believe. Do NXT have hundreds of patents for hundreds of driver arrangements? And when it is sufficient to choose one that isn´t among them, why doesn´t everybody do it?
12-05-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Winnie
Herts UK
Posts 10
Joined on 12-01-2007

Post #: 116
Post ID: 6053
Reply to: 6030
How sound is perceived?
In talking with Shelly Katz a few days ago, I brought up the topic of how sound is perceived in the context of layered sound or indeed oops. He is a very busy man and we did not have long to develop the conversation, but this is the thrust of what he said.

With Layered Sound there is no need to time align drivers, the 'signals' being delivered from the panels are not compromised by being out of time alignment by a few milliseconds.

Apparently the sense of hearing behaves very similar to the sense of sight. If you look across a road to a car then the eye will bring the car into perfect focus, All around ,there will be objects that are closer and further away. They will contribute hugely to the overall picture even though they are not in perfect focus.

If you have (say) a horn speaker that is in perfect focus acoustically then it does not matter if the oops effect or indeed the panel speaker is some way 'out of focus'. The brain will acclimatise rapidly and will primarily hear the horn, but with 'enhanced' acoustics supplementing its performance.

The danger might be if you have the 'distortion/effect' at the same point source as the main speaker. In this case the brain can't discriminate and may only perceive that the main speaker is distorting.

I hope this is not all rubbish!
12-05-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,535
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 117
Post ID: 6054
Reply to: 6053
I absolutely disagree.

 Winnie wrote:
In talking with Shelly Katz a few days ago, I brought up the topic of how sound is perceived in the context of layered sound or indeed oops. He is a very busy man and we did not have long to develop the conversation, but this is the thrust of what he said.

With Layered Sound there is no need to time align drivers, the 'signals' being delivered from the panels are not compromised by being out of time alignment by a few milliseconds.

Apparently the sense of hearing behaves very similar to the sense of sight. If you look across a road to a car then the eye will bring the car into perfect focus, All around ,there will be objects that are closer and further away. They will contribute hugely to the overall picture even though they are not in perfect focus.

If you have (say) a horn speaker that is in perfect focus acoustically then it does not matter if the oops effect or indeed the panel speaker is some way 'out of focus'. The brain will acclimatise rapidly and will primarily hear the horn, but with 'enhanced' acoustics supplementing its performance.

The danger might be if you have the 'distortion/effect' at the same point source as the main speaker. In this case the brain can't discriminate and may only perceive that the main speaker is distorting.

I hope this is not all rubbish!


What Shelly Katz is saying might be valid ONLY in case is his loudspeakers are being use as ONLY source of sound. I still do not know how Layered Sound are design but from what I experienced with large panel speakers  was the fact that they could not be properly time-aligned even theoretically and they do the inner-bobbing and smear the wave front. Still, if the Layered Sound speakers is being used as an Injection Channel complimentary with other (presumably time coherent) acoustic system then what Shelly Katz stated is completely false. Furthermore the analogy with the car and the sense of sight is absolutely not applicable and frankly speaking I am surprise that he even brought such a bogus illustration.

Rgs, Romy the Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-05-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
drdna
San Francisco, California
Posts 498
Joined on 10-29-2005

Post #: 118
Post ID: 6059
Reply to: 6054
Time alignment and OOPS!
 Romy the Cat wrote:

 Winnie wrote:
In talking with Shelly Katz a few days ago ... he said [that] with Layered Sound there is no need to time align drivers, the 'signals' being delivered from the panels are not compromised by being out of time alignment by a few milliseconds ... They will contribute hugely to the overall picture even though they are not in perfect focus ... If you have (say) a horn speaker that is in perfect focus acoustically then it does not matter if the oops effect or indeed the panel speaker is some way 'out of focus'.

What Shelly Katz is saying might be valid ONLY in case is his loudspeakers are being use as ONLY source of sound. ...if the Layered Sound speakers is being used as an Injection Channel complimentary with other (presumably time coherent) acoustic system then what Shelly Katz stated is completely false. Furthermore the analogy with the car and the sense of sight is absolutely not applicable and frankly speaking I am surprise that he even brought such a bogus illustration.
I would agree with Romy that for ANY Injection Channel use, time alignment is critical.  However, it seems the use of layered sound is to primarily simulate hall/room reflections to make a artifical "ambience."  In this case, we actually want the time alignment to reflect the creation of delays of reflections we want to simulate.  In a complex acoustic space, it might be almost random and obviate the possibility of realistically doing this.  Essentially, lack of time alignment to create these reflections with panel speakers emulates the reflections of a complex or maybe homogeneous acoustic space.  The purpose here I think is very different from use of an Injection Channel.
12-06-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Winnie
Herts UK
Posts 10
Joined on 12-01-2007

Post #: 119
Post ID: 6060
Reply to: 6059
I agree
Well the discussion with Shelley was short and (obviously) about his panels. The oops effect was not mentioned. I'm sure in the context of his panels and Layered Sound that he understands what is happening. I have to agree though that in the context of oops/injection then you guys are correct.

I guess the best way to stop cross pollination of the 2 topics is to stop talking about Layered sound in this thread and to concentrate on the original oops theme.
12-09-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
drdna
San Francisco, California
Posts 498
Joined on 10-29-2005

Post #: 120
Post ID: 6095
Reply to: 6054
Ambience speakers

After thinking about this for a while, I have had a thought that should be relatively easy for anyone motivated to explore and I would be interested to see what others on this forum observe from such experiments.

Fundamentally I think the injection channel and layered sound are different things.  The injection channel is designed simply to compensate for the timbral shortcomings of a particular driver.  However, because of lobing effects, etc. it is never this simple.  There will be overlap into the realm of the Layered Sound effect, which is intended to mix directional sound with omnidirectional sound.

In most recordings, even simple two microphone recordings, there will be source input from several directions hitting the microphone diaphragm.  When we reproduce this unidirectionally with horn speakers it is a compromise.  BUT we cannot reproduce the exact directions of the original input, since this vector information is not recorded, only simply LEFT or RIGHT channel.  We therefore rely on small cues of secondary reflections etc. to clarify the data.  AND we cannot even begin to assess the vast majority of original musical source vibrations that occured at the many areas the microphones were not placed.

Layered Sound attempts to create semi-unidirectional sound to accomodate this.  But without time alignment, etc., really it is just an approximation of infinite reflections in a theoretical acoustic space with infinitely variable surfaces.

Most hall reflection sounds will be lower frequencies of variable localizability.  To approximate this simply, we might try to hook up a mid-woofer speaker in an out-of-phase configuration.  The exact cutoff frequency and loudness amplitude will remain to be determined.  For most of us using high efficiency horns, hooking up a low efficiency dynamic woofer speaker may be sufficient as it will be many dB down.  This also helps to explain why many designs with side or back firing woofers have reasonable sound.  Simply because it creates a simulation of hall ambience we associate with live music.

People using a multi-speaker woofer array may simply consider switching one driver on one side out of phase.

So, I wonder if hooking up a second set of woofers at very low amplitude out of phase in conjunction with the existing directional system may add an element of simulated hall ambience that makes the overall experience more like live music.

I would be very interested to see what other people think if they give it a try.

12-10-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,535
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 121
Post ID: 6100
Reply to: 6095
Color Injection vs. Texture Injection vs. Imaging Injection

 drdna wrote:
Fundamentally I think the injection channel and layered sound are different things.  The injection channel is designed simply to compensate for the timbral shortcomings of a particular driver.  However, because of lobing effects, etc. it is never this simple.  There will be overlap into the realm of the Layered Sound effect, which is intended to mix directional sound with omnidirectional sound.

Although I do agree that the “layered Sound” and my Injection are different things I do not agree with your characterization of my Injection. My Injection Channel is not juts designed to compensate for the timbral shortcomings of a particular driver.  The timbral coloration is a noble thing itself but my injection does more. My Injection does not just add colors but it adds colors along with some very interesting Texture. The works Texture is overly used by me lately but it is what it is. With activation of Injection channel the main line of sound begin to be filed with multi-colorful dots and the most interesting in my Injection is not the injection of colors but the Injection of the Dots that creates that “Doty Texture”. The key is the density of those dots and allocation of the colors along with the dense sarea of the dots. Here is where Tannoy Red from my point of view rules unchallenged. The Red are very colored speakers with a lot of phase problems and with a lot of problems of continuity of tone. The Reds almost digitalize sound converting a neutral reference “gray” tone into the… multi-colored multi-bits. Now, we take that fountain of overly-colored dots and overlay it with properly-continuing sound of main speaker. What happens – the Red’s colors do eject itself into total result but the second most imports thing is that the Colorful Dots somehow intermingle with the continuing presentation of Macondo, injecting the well-measured and well-moderated amount of Very Positive Texture.

Sure, I can run my mouth about benefit of my Injection in any direction – it is Internet and the words cost nothing. The only tangible and honorable thing in all of it is obtaining and predictable demonstration of Result. Here is an interesting fact. I did demonstrate to a number of people the effect of my Injection, running Macondo without Injection and then adding it. The first reaction that people have was not the “extension of timbral reaches” but increasing of the system’s micro-dynamics and adding finer texture to presentation. There are many other moments but they would demand too look deeper and unless a person is sitting in front of a playback with properly implemented Injection Channel it would be too much trying to explain the deeper view.

 drdna wrote:
Layered Sound attempts to create semi-unidirectional sound to accomodate this.  But without time alignment, etc., really it is just an approximation of infinite reflections in a theoretical acoustic space with infinitely variable surfaces.

I do not see any rational in the “unidirectional” approach that Layered Sound is trying to punch. They might have good Sound for whatever reasons  but I do not think that their Sound has anything to do with unidirectivery.


 drdna wrote:

Most hall reflection sounds will be lower frequencies of variable localizability.  To approximate this simply, we might try to hook up a mid-woofer speaker in an out-of-phase configuration.  The exact cutoff frequency and loudness amplitude will remain to be determined.  For most of us using high efficiency horns, hooking up a low efficiency dynamic woofer speaker may be sufficient as it will be many dB down.  This also helps to explain why many designs with side or back firing woofers have reasonable sound.  Simply because it creates a simulation of hall ambience we associate with live music.

People using a multi-speaker woofer array may simply consider switching one driver on one side out of phase.

So, I wonder if hooking up a second set of woofers at very low amplitude out of phase in conjunction with the existing directional system may add an element of simulated hall ambience that makes the overall experience more like live music.

I would be very interested to see what other people think if they give it a try.

This is completely different direction. You do not talk anymore nether about Colors Injection nor about the Texture Injection but about the Imaging Injection. I spent LOT of time to experiment with Imaging Injection. The Imaging Injection is very interesting subject but it is absolutely different subject all together. BTW, I generally never was successful with Imaging Injection.

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-10-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,535
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 122
Post ID: 6101
Reply to: 4382
One more unmentioned benefit of my Injection

Not will everyone “get” it, or would agree with it but… where did you see me to care….

Q: What is the worst aspect of sound reproduction?

A: Excessive HF response of playback. A flat response above 5-6kHz is indication of dynamic and transient deficiency of playback.

So, what it has to do with Injection Channel?  Well, when I properly setup Macondo Injection then I might slightly roll-off the HF knee of my MF channel for 1.5-2dB (of combined output) and it does have no negative (means positive in my book) impact to listening awareness.

Rgs, Romy the Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
12-11-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,144
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 123
Post ID: 6102
Reply to: 6101
Balance, texture and weight
I have long wrestled with the apparently relentless upward tilt of hi-fi.  It's like a rock skipping across a pond, and the overall direction of the rock's travel is upward in terms of frequency.  Also, the rock "wipes" or smears out the texture or "good granulation" as it travels.  I find this most noticable in the lower-MF/upper bass, but it also quite annoying in the range of the cymbal, where the "splash" seems to go mostly upward.

Injection seems like a perfectly logical - if very difficult - way to try to offset this failing (without screwing up other stuff).

Meanwhile, people speak of tubes as "warm", but it seems like tubes themselves are prone to this upward splashing, and different IC also serves up different versions of it.

Weekend before last, my AC was truly spectacular, and I "wasted" some of it to mess around with IC, thinking just as it relates to these issues.

I will write about the IC experiments elsewhere later, but I will say that the IC I tried was (pause for effect) solid silver, including connectors, and I have to say I got some very interesting results.  I think I mentioned a while back that the Mundorf silver caps (which I do not use, BTW) are "interesting", and by this I meant as they relate to these issues, and this is why I tried the solid silver IC.

Please understand (for the love of God...) that I do NOT think I am "solving" these problems with wire!  I am just experimenting with effects as they relate to the issues in question.

Best regards,
Paul S
12-11-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,144
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 124
Post ID: 6108
Reply to: 6102
Even with EQ
I wanted to add that I have found that the effects I just mentioned occur even when the sound is EQ'd to "compensate".  Setting aside the other issues raised by EQ, the notes in the EQ'd spectrum still "develop" with the upward tilt, where each "splash" of the skipping rock also tends upward, as well, etc.

Likewise, no EQ I know of does anything to help foster a "realistic" "texture", which is probably a kind of transient, but it is so closely related to sound "quality" in my mind that it almost wants a special category.  Under the right conditions the ML2s do some nice texture for their part, but the ML2s do not work as stand-alones, and we're still talking hi-fi.

So it is that the EQ gets run through special-purpose speakers that can perhaps effect/affect texture and do some slight-of-hand with real balance.

Now I'm waithing to read in other forums that people are solving all their problems with injection.

Best regards,
Paul S
12-12-2007 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
drdna
San Francisco, California
Posts 498
Joined on 10-29-2005

Post #: 125
Post ID: 6109
Reply to: 6108
Sound Texture
 Paul S wrote:
I wanted to add that I have found that the effects I just mentioned occur even when the sound is EQ'd to "compensate".  Setting aside the other issues raised by EQ, the notes in the EQ'd spectrum still "develop" with the upward tilt, where each "splash" of the skipping rock also tends upward, as well, etc.  Likewise, no EQ I know of does anything to help foster a "realistic" "texture", which is probably a kind of transient...
Well , in respose to both Paul and Romy, yes, my characterization of Injection was not exact, as I was more focused on differentiating Injection from Layered Sound concepts.  Yes, clearly, the Injeciton channel adds color and texture because it is a different transducer.  I think anyone who has ever listened to Jim Thiel's speakers will understand this concept.  The frequency response is good, but those metal and ceramic cones make a very horrible screeching sound that makes me want to run out of the room.  Texture indeed.  This is why the discussion of the Injection channel and the use of the loudspeaker like a resonant musical instrument is so apt.  The problem is that it changes more than one variable at a time, so the choice for Injection must be careful, deliberate, and it will be probably difficult.

This is a very different concept from the Layered Sound.  I hope some listeners out there will try the experiment I suggested.  I think the results may be very interesting.  It is not meant to substitute for Injection channel technique; they are not mutually exclusive.
Page 5 of 8 (184 items) Select Pages:  « First ... « 3 4 5 6 7 » ... Last »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  The elusive “absolute tone”...  Breeze......  Playback Listening  Forum     24  154747  07-28-2005
  »  New  The “Primary Frequencies”...  Melody range and the other octaves...  Audio For Dummies ™  Forum     5  49686  09-08-2005
  »  New  Don't position speakers but create Sound in room...  Listener position...  Audio For Dummies ™  Forum     1  28710  06-19-2006
  »  New  Great Cello Concertos..  János Starker passed away...  Musical Discussions  Forum     21  138562  07-04-2006
  »  New  SPUnisation of Macondo: how to catch own testicals...  Who? (shades of the old "musical" vs. "a...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     1  21479  02-01-2007
  »  New  Tannoy Red 1960s: some sober reality..  The Summer Monitors?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     10  108947  02-15-2007
  »  New  The inflatable speakers dumping and no only...  Labyrinth?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     8  48192  05-30-2007
  »  New  Macondo's Axioms: Horn-loaded acoustic systems..  No wonder...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     72  399670  07-29-2007
  »  New  Attention Sound Engineers (compression and loudness)..  Injection channel and Romy's rules...  Playback Listening  Forum     48  218494  09-09-2007
  »  New  The Macondo’s Upper Bass Channel: what is next?..  Görlich again...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     30  193770  10-28-2007
  »  New  Wilson Audio and the Moore's law..  Sneak peak of modesty...  Audio News Forum     19  53505  04-26-2009
  »  New  Other Ways of getting Special Tone from a loudspeaker...  Paul S....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     8  58010  11-27-2009
  »  New  How to play Bruckner Sound in Audio...  Being a pedagogical geniuses…...  Playback Listening  Forum     16  67372  06-15-2010
  »  New  An educational Eugenie’s installation...  Some more......  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     15  55516  07-15-2010
  »  New  Superbly interesting effect: Suspended decoupled floor ..  Superbly interesting effect: Suspended decoupled floor ...  Playback Listening  Forum     0  12287  10-08-2010
Home Page  |  Last 24Hours  | Search  |  SiteMap  | Questions or Problems | Copyright Note
The content of all messages within the Forums Copyright © by authors of the posts