advertisement


Active speakers - Kii Audio, Dutch & Dutch...

John Phillips said:
I think that when you cut peaks in SPL in the room at particular frequencies the total amount of audio energy in the room decreases. I think that may mean a user will compensate for this by turning up the volume a bit - at all frequencies - so driving the loudspeaker a little harder. The pre-power amp may well work harder too, of course. I think that will eat up a bit of dynamic headroom (how much? maybe it's only a little?).

The reason I am interested in this is that I have noted some unusual LF distortion measurements published for active loudspeakers with built-in equalization. I am not saying this matters - it may be inaudible - but it's an oddity that tweaks my inclination to try and understand why. I am speculating and if there's some other good explanation on offer I am all ears.
Click to expand...
Hi,
I understand the approach you are referring to. I would have referred to any dips in room response as being an issue. If you equalise for the notch/dip, then at that frequency you will be driving the amplifier XdB more than usual for a given volume level. This could cause amplifier increased distortion or clipping, as well as excessive loudspeaker driver excursion.

As transmission line speakers have a natural notch which is a low frequency mode of the line frequency (1/4 wave), then you can change the transmission line parameters (taper, port dimension) to reduce the notch, and equalise less aggressively.

Since most music energy is in the lower frequencies, then equalisation at these frequencies must be applied carefully - and perhaps this is where you are seeing the distortion - compensating for nulls/notches which cause the amplifier or loudspeaker driver to be over driven ?

Regards,
Shadders.
 
Shadders said:
Hi,
I understand the approach you are referring to. I would have referred to any dips in room response as being an issue. If you equalise for the notch/dip, then at that frequency you will be driving the amplifier XdB more than usual for a given volume level. This could cause amplifier increased distortion or clipping, as well as excessive loudspeaker driver excursion.

As transmission line speakers have a natural notch which is a low frequency mode of the line frequency (1/4 wave), then you can change the transmission line parameters (taper, port dimension) to reduce the notch, and equalise less aggressively.

Since most music energy is in the lower frequencies, then equalisation at these frequencies must be applied carefully - and perhaps this is where you are seeing the distortion - compensating for nulls/notches which cause the amplifier or loudspeaker driver to be over driven ?

Regards,
Shadders.
Click to expand...


That's always been my understanding ie that it's trying to boost the dips that causes the problems, not the cuts.
My own room correction device defaults to a max 6db boost and 10db cut. This can be overridden but the manual advices to be careful about increasing the max boost for exactly the reasons you have mentioned
 
Compensating for nulls with eq is rarely recommended. What sort of null are we discussing here?

If it’s room related then often all will happen is causing an unnecessary burden on the amp/driver as mentioned. Though if there’s a slight dip in a drivers response that isn’t related to the room, reflections or crossover cancellations it can certainly benefit to add a bit of eq, those tend to not be major issues with the qualities of drivers available though

Filling in nulls caused by room is far better sorted by multiple sources of bass (assuming that’s the issue ofc)
 
indus said:
That's always been my understanding ie that it's trying to boost the dips that causes the problems, not the cuts.
My own room correction device defaults to a max 6db boost and 10db cut. This can be overridden but the manual advices to be careful about increasing the max boost for exactly the reasons you have mentioned
Click to expand...

You can't cure room nulls from the same speakers that are generating them. You need another source of bass in a different location in the room.
 
Perceptually narrow nulls aren’t registered by the brain, and as you say should be treated with either absorbtion or
G T Audio said:
And you expect them to work well sited right next to those huge Cessaro Liszts and so close to the rear wall? Unbelievable...
Click to expand...
why?
Keith
 
Strictly Stereo said:
...Because historically that would have required soffit mounting or at least loudspeakers with very large front baffles, both of which are rather costly. Engineers want monitors which allow them to make better decisions and fewer mistakes. This directly effects their earnings. It's that simple.
Click to expand...

And this is an argument that has been made by many commentators when it comes to the Kii. It sounds different. It exposes weaknesses engineers were not aware of. If they had mastered a recording on a Kii, they would have mastered it differently. Great for engineers (although more expensive than a pair of HD650's :) ) The issue for us, as listeners, is that they didn't master on the Kii - so we get to hear their mistakes. I want to hear the music and that means using a top quality design, based on the technology used by the engineers when mastering as much as possible of my album collection. That way, I hear those recordings at their best.
 
guest said:
Pro out weigh any cons for me and many.
Click to expand...

I think that's the important bit. You didn't say the majority. You didn't say everyone or everyone familiar with music. You didn't suggest that there was a compelling reason to suggest that active speakers are inherently superior. I think that's what often offends people.

I personally went active not for sonic reasons. I did it for aesthetic and space reasons. That's a very real benefit. Loss of clutter. It also stops we upgrade addicts from experimenting with power amps. :)
 
I agree nulls aren't offensive like peaks because they don't ring, and I agree you shouldn't try to boost them.

When I've tried bass EQ bringing down the peaks only, I ended up with an overall light balance, as John mentioned, and then a "house" or "target" curve is the obvious next step - in fact these curves have appeared already in this thread, as they usually do when discussing EQ.

The best results possible will be obtained when the direct sound from the loudspeaker is flat, and the speaker and listener positions, and room acoustics have been dealt with as much as possible.

So in Darren's manifesto anyway, it says EQ is a last resort, and then only if you've done everything else you should be doing, and not a celebration. My manifesto also agrees with most of John Phillips' points.
 
Roger Adams said:
And this is an argument that has been made by many commentators when it comes to the Kii. It sounds different. It exposes weaknesses engineers were not aware of. If they had mastered a recording on a Kii, they would have mastered it differently. Great for engineers (although more expensive than a pair of HD650's :) ) The issue for us, as listeners, is that they didn't master on the Kii - so we get to hear their mistakes. I want to hear the music and that means using a top quality design, based on the technology used by the engineers when mastering as much as possible of my album collection. That way, I hear those recordings at their best.
Click to expand...
Both the Kiis and the 8CS simply allow you to hear more of the music, their design :- cardioid, constant directivity, perfect step/group, phase coherence , completely full range adjustable boundary and tone controls, built in EQ sum to create a better loudspeaker, really that’s it.
Placing the 8Cs close to a rear wall introduces 6dB more headroom and there is no cancellation , not unlike soffit mounting.
To appreciate them you just need to hear them side by side in your room with your current loudspeakers.
Keith
 
darrenyeats said:
I agree nulls aren't offensive like peaks because they don't ring, and I agree you shouldn't try to boost them.

When I've tried bass EQ bringing down the peaks only, I ended up with an overall light balance, as John mentioned, and then a "house" or "target" curve is the obvious next step - in fact these curves have appeared already in this thread, as they usually do when discussing EQ.

The best results possible will be obtained when a flat direct response is output by the loudspeaker, and the speaker and listener positions, and room acoustics have been dealt with as much as possible.

So in Darren's manifesto anyway, it says EQ is a last resort once everything else you should be doing has been done, and not a celebration. Also I agree with most of John Phillips' points.
Click to expand...
Just remove the bass that has been added by room reinforcement , they will be obvious from the REW plot, you can confirm with a boundary room mode calculator.
Keith
 
As I wrote, IME that leads to an overall light balance because of the nulls not being able to be boosted - I think this is why target curves very often pop up.
 
Roger Adams said:
I think that's the important bit. You didn't say the majority. You didn't say everyone or everyone familiar with music. You didn't suggest that there was a compelling reason to suggest that active speakers are inherently superior. I think that's what often offends people.

I personally went active not for sonic reasons. I did it for aesthetic and space reasons. That's a very real benefit. Loss of clutter. It also stops we upgrade addicts from experimenting with power amps. :)
Click to expand...

Me too. Exact same reasons. Spend more time listening, less time fiddling. Partner acceptance factor good, clutter low. And btw it goes without saying that the fidelity (old fashioned) and listening experience is also involving, enjoyable and compelling to my ears.

Am home alone this weekend, so it’s all getting a workout.

But I am seriously considering upgrading:

Dynaudio Xd 30/60
ATC50as
Kii
8c

Hence my continued interest.
As you state, one doesn’t need to be an electronic or acoustic engineer, a musician or academic to really enjoy active listening.
 
Roger Adams said:
And this is an argument that has been made by many commentators when it comes to the Kii. It sounds different. It exposes weaknesses engineers were not aware of. If they had mastered a recording on a Kii, they would have mastered it differently. Great for engineers (although more expensive than a pair of HD650's :) ) The issue for us, as listeners, is that they didn't master on the Kii - so we get to hear their mistakes. I want to hear the music and that means using a top quality design, based on the technology used by the engineers when mastering as much as possible of my album collection. That way, I hear those recordings at their best.
Click to expand...

This rationale is flawed. It does not matter that the speakers used in the production process are the same as those you are using at home. Most likely lots of speakers were used in the production process. What really matters is that those speakers allow the operators to make the best choices they can at each step in the recording and production process. That allows them to produce better results in less time, which makes them more productive. This is what is fuelling the adoption of designs like the Kii Three and Dutch & Dutch 8c in the professional audio space. If you still doubt this then go talk to some of the folks on Gearslutz or Sound on Sound about their production workflows and what matters to them at each stage.

For listening at home, you should choose whatever speakers make you most happy when used in your space, with all of the compromises that implies. If your particular happy calls for a genuinely full range, very resolving but still relatively compact speaker which can be used close to a wall or in a corner without sounding boomy and which can also compensate for some of the worst acoustic effects of an untreated or lightly treated listening room, then the Dutch & Dutch 8c has you covered.
 
Strictly Stereo said:
This rationale is flawed. It does not matter that the speakers used in the production process are the same as those you are using at home. Most likely lots of speakers were used in the production process. What really matters is that those speakers allow the operators to make the best choices they can at each step in the recording and production process. That allows them to produce better results in less time, which makes them more productive. This is what is fuelling the adoption of designs like the Kii Three and Dutch & Dutch 8c in the professional audio space. If you still doubt this then go talk to some of the folks on Gearslutz or Sound on Sound about their production workflows and what matters to them at each stage.

For listening at home, you should choose whatever speakers make you most happy when used in your space, with all of the compromises that implies. If your particular happy calls for a genuinely full range, very resolving but still relatively compact speaker which can be used close to a wall or in a corner without sounding boomy and which can also compensate for some of the worst acoustic effects of an untreated or lightly treated listening room, then the Dutch & Dutch 8c has you covered.
Click to expand...
Absolutely this, see Floyd Toole’s ‘circle of confusion’.
Took a pair of 8Cs to a musician/producer just yesterday the difference both in terms of subjective listening and objective measurement were huge, and he was already using a respected active three way design.
Keith
 
guest said:
Me too. Exact same reasons. Spend more time listening, less time fiddling. Partner acceptance factor good, clutter low. And btw it goes without saying that the fidelity (old fashioned) and listening experience is also involving, enjoyable and compelling to my ears.

Am home alone this weekend, so it’s all getting a workout.

But I am seriously considering upgrading:

Dynaudio Xd 30/60
ATC50as
Kii
8c

Hence my continued interest.
As you state, one doesn’t need to be an electronic or acoustic engineer, a musician or academic to really enjoy active listening.
Click to expand...


...although zero interest in a technical jerk off display. And this is where The Trade, loses mere punters....
 
Paul Burke said:
Compensating for nulls with eq is rarely recommended. What sort of null are we discussing here?
Click to expand...
Quite so AIUI. But as you say dips in a frequency response of a few dB are not always what comes under "nulls" in the way I understand the word - narrow band and caused by cancellation. They might be worth addressing if fairly wide band. However if you do boost there I do suspect it may come at a price WRT dynamic range. So limiting boost in this situation and relying on human adaptation may be a good thing on balance. I am not sure if you get that sort of control with automatic room correction. I hope so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top