advertisement


Dutch & Dutch 8C - Where are they?

YNWOAN said:
But surely there still is output from the rear of the cabinets, similarly with the Kii’s - summed cancellation is not the same as zero output when reflective surfaces exist.[/QUOTE}

Say whatever you want. Get in a room with the Kiis and stand behind them and tell me if you hear or feel output. You don't.
If you put your ear directly up to the rear driver you can hear a very low level of output, but that is clearly so well cancelled out that once you pull back a short distance you can't tell it is there.
Click to expand...
 
But Dutch&Dutch had the advantage of an anechoic chamber, measurement is easy REW can measure every parameter, response,phase, impulse response, distortion generate waterfall, RT times it is very comprehensive , ARTA is meant to be good too.
Keith
 
Last edited:
Julf said:
Nobody listens to test tones, pink noise or frequency sweeps either, but they all still tell a lot about a speaker.
Click to expand...

I do, in fact the last episode of Late Junction was, titled Test tones, Pink noise and Frequency Sweeps, very good it was too! Looking forward to next weeks special, fossilised Narwhal penises whittled into flutes, played inside an Ice cave just outside Akureyri.

Yeah it's a odd one alright, you being booted off, if you hadn't introduce and eulogised about the Kii's, i don't think i'd have bothered with listening to them as i know you've got a good reference, shooting themselves in the foot it would seem.
 
Julf said:
Nobody listens to test tones, pink noise or frequency sweeps either, but they all still tell a lot about a speaker.
Click to expand...

Well that’s the problem with generalisations - your point about test tones is valid whilst your implication that they therefore suggest anachoic measurements are useful is not.
 
Last edited:
Strictly Stereo said:
It is great that you are happy with your existing system, but unless you have heard the Kii Three or Dutch & Dutch 8c, I do not see how you can draw any reasonable conclusions about either of those models.
Click to expand...

I agree, point is that these two speakers are by no means the holy grail Pureshite Audio makes them out to be. I have no doubts they are both very competent designs but this game is old and there's many ways to find a preference.
 

That’s not the point though. Yes the signals subjectively cancel, I have heard it myself. But the reality is that both + and - signals do exist and cancellation is best achieved away from room boundaries.
 
firedog said:
you can stand behind them and tell that there is basically no output behind the speaker (as with the Kiis); that surely makes a huge difference in front of that glass
Click to expand...
I'm going to suggest the opposite (bear with me!)

Obviously glass reflects a lot of mid/top - but conventional box speakers and cardioid bass speakers are similar in the mid/top area (neither send much mid/top energy directly backward), so let's move on ...

The difference with cardioid is mainly at the bass end. You get more bass energy reflecting back from solid walls. So I'm thinking the difference from cardioid would be more noticeable with a solid wall behind them - less noticeable with a glass wall behind them (and by same logic, the there'd be no difference with no wall behind them e.g. outdoors).
 
What both the Kiis and Dutch&Dutch attempt is to emulate a soffit mount, flush mounting the speakers into a sufficiently massy wall absorbs all of the rear projected radiation, and the flush mounting guides off axis forward response along the front walls, hence you hear more direct sound.
Keith
 
Purité Audio said:
What both the Kiis and Dutch&Dutch attempt is to emulate a soffit mount,
Click to expand...
Once again, the difference is at the bass end. Most of the mid/top is the same as with a wide dispersion box speaker.

Plus soffit mounting increases effective SPL, naturally lowering distortion. If anything cardioid is the reverse since part of the radiated bass energy is used to cancel other parts.
 
Last edited:
They both produce more direct ,less reflected sound, again instantly apparent when you compare the 8Cs with a traditional non cardioid design.
Keith
 
Cereal Killer said:
Give it whatever name you like but it still boils down to unnatural digital fcukery.
Click to expand...

All hi fi systems and speakers are "unnatural ****ery"; it's mechano- electrical encoding and decoding of sound waves (if recorded from actual playback). If just recorded digitally direct to a board, then it is totally "unnatural" from beginning to end. And BTW, the actual recording itself, in whatever format you obtain it, is also some kind of "unnatural ****ery" - either analog or digital or both.
Are you under some odd illusion that whatever you listen to isn't some kind of "unnatural ****ery"?
 
firedog said:
All hi fi systems and speakers are "unnatural ****ery"; it's mechano- electrical encoding and decoding of sound waves (if recorded from actual playback). If just recorded digitally direct to a board, then it is totally "unnatural" from beginning to end. And BTW, the actual recording itself, in whatever format you obtain it, is also some kind of "unnatural ****ery" - either analog or digital or both.
Are you under some odd illusion that whatever you listen to isn't some kind of "unnatural ****ery"?
Click to expand...

You’ve completely or intentionally missed the point.
Is there any kind of reflection cancellation or room compensation filtering (yes that’s it the digital fcukery both design elude to do) done in the recording process or in a live event? I’ll answer that for you...that’s a no.

Is there any such thing when listening to someone talk next to you... that’s also a no. So when would a well considered and setup system need such digital fcukery?

Or perhaps your saying these new designs compensate for a lazy ass system setup? If so do you think a person who’d spend £10k on a domestic rig knows nothing about setting up a system?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top