advertisement


Floorstanding speakers - thin versus fat

Big Tabs said:
I always like the look of my old Leak 2060 sandwich speakers, 12" woofers > eye pleasing.
Click to expand...

That name takes me back a bit - I used to lust after a pair of (I think) Leak 3030's as I passed a hifi shop on my way to college. I vowed I would own a pair but, by the time I could afford such things, Leak were no longer in existence!
 
Last edited:
Antifon said:
I really don't want to have to deal with a sub - my experience of having tried it several times is that it is so hard to get the balance between sub and main speaker right, and then keep it right at all volume levels. So I don't want to go there again!
Click to expand...
One sub is of little use for sound quality in the sense of controlling room modes but it can provide more low frequency extension and reduce the low frequency deflection of the woofer in the mains lowering distortion. So some benefit but well short of what can be done with 3 or 4 individually DSP controlled subs, a microphone, and some software to calculate the filters for each sub from various measurements. Although some commercial systems suggest a push button solution in truth where the subs are sited influences how well the troublesome modes can be controlled and so an iterative process guided by some knowledge of what is going on is likely to be most successful. Expensive and fiddly but pretty much the only viable option in the home to get high sound quality for the lowest couple of octaves. Will almost certainly still have significant room issues above these frequencies but subs can't help with those.
 
Dozey said:
H.g - have you actually heard the Fact 12s?
Click to expand...

Not to my recollection but they are not a type of speaker that I would take much interest in so I might have done in passing. The issues mentioned above are not to do with how they sound (at modest SPLs) but their inability to play cleanly at standard levels in a typical room and the unusual reason for it given PMC also make professional speakers. They have certainly made some distinctive design decisions with their home product range and it would be interesting to know why and if it has been successful. Anyone?
 
h.g. said:
Not to my recollection but they are not a type of speaker that I would take much interest in so I might have done in passing. The issues mentioned above are not to do with how they sound (at modest SPLs) but their inability to play cleanly at standard levels in a typical room and the unusual reason for it given PMC also make professional speakers. They have certainly made some distinctive design decisions with their home product range and it would be interesting to know why and if it has been successful. Anyone?
Click to expand...

Based on their measured performance the Fact12s don't meet the strict requirements needed to go on my worth-listening-to shortlist.
 
James said:
Pick the one with the biggest woofer. There's no replacement for displacement. I'm now a firm fan of classically proportioned loudspeakers that are wider than they are deep.
Click to expand...
Once again, James, and you know I'm a fan of your speakers designs... What is it about a wide baffle loudspeaker that gives it a special quality? And also what is it about a large stand mount as opposed to floorstander that furthers this? Thanks.
 
@yuckyamson

You're putting me on the spot now, having to do a search of my memory files. If they serve correctly, the main advantage of a bigger baffle is that the baffle-step occurs at a lower frequency. If mid and tweet drivers are located on a baffle non-equidistance from edges, that also yields less diffractive effects. Higher frequencies, with much shorter wavelengths, take less kindly to baffle edges compared to the longer waves. This is why I had large radius compound curves on my narrower-baffle designs like the E-III, E-IV etc. All of this assumes the drivers are flush-mounted and the baffle plane is flat and smooth. With less 4pi radiation, wider baffles fire forward only (for frequencies above baffle-step), which reduces time-smearing reflections from the back and side walls of the room.

Not sure if stand mounts have any special qualities over floor-standing equivalents, other than an inherently stiffer structure.
 
@James

Something in the back of my mind that someone mentioned something about having the cabinet off the floor changes the interactions with the floor, and radiation patterns. Regardless I've always had a soft-spot for large, wide baffle standmounts. (I was kind of begging Eric Alexander from Tekton to do a huge wide standmount version of his Double Impacts....which I felt would be kind of a neo JBL-ish design if you can imagine it....but again....I know f-all about speaker design other than listening to stuff and having an opinion). Interesting you say about firing forward only, (depending on frequencies) because you definitely get that kind of "push" or "tidal wave" like effect from speakers which have this quality. I can't say when I'm listening to narrow baffle loudspeakers, regardless of bass impact, that I fully like the extra spacial spread or the added "imaging". I don't. I'd just rather have the coherent snap and push of a wide baffle, obviously depending on execution and just plain how much you like the sound of the speaker.

Anyway I loved your IX's but I fear given the distance I shall never hear your beloved 10's.

That being said, if you're tinkering with an 11 and are aiming to do something in the Heybrook HB-3/Brik/Wharfedale Linton/ATC 50 school of thought, please DOTH LET US KNOW. I might even finance a build if I could talk a friend into letting me use his wood-shop.
 
@yuckyamson

I had a Yamaha NS-1000M tribute in mind before I retired from DIY builds. It would be based on a 13" Scan-speak woofer in a 50-60l sealed box, but couldn't find a high-quality mid that could cover 400Hz - 4kHz cleanly at 90dB/w/m. That was seven or eight years ago.

I don't know if I'll ever crank out another design. The last time I looked, LspCAD doesn't work on Macs, and I'm not sure I have the strength I used to have to lug heavy cabinets around. Ageing is a bummer.

Actually, the real reason is I have no motivation for another build. You can blame my near-perfect listening room, since moving to my current residence about eight years ago. I still have a pair of unfinished PFM-Special IIs in a closet, three pairs of Ergos (IIIR, IX and X) to play with, and the Yams of course.

If I should have a change of heart, I'll be sure to let you know.
 
Ugh. This is torture. I have full confidence that your 3-way would have rocked. It hits all the right design notes.

Scanspeak didn't make anything worth it? I guess they don't reach up high enough.....What about a volt?
 
There might also be from something cheaper like a tang band or something of that nature. That being said, of course, I know nothing about building loudpseakers or designing them.

Go James Go! Ergo XI!
 
Appreciate the support and encouragement, but the perfect midrange driver still seems somewhat elusive.
 
The perfect midrange driver exists IMO and it’s the Scanspeak 12MU8731T00.
A friend of mine built a 5 way speaker and he used this little Scanspeak driver for the portion of the female voices and the results are really jaw dropping.
I am a big fan of the LS3/5A for the human voices in general but this midrange driver beats them all.
I am not good enough to build my speakers but if I was, I would design it around this driver.
My friend did some trials and error for a period of 4 years until he found this one and he has no desire to try anything else.
 
Gervais Cote said:
The perfect midrange driver exists IMO and it’s the Scanspeak 12MU8731T00.
Click to expand...
I 'm a big fan of Scan-speak drivers, and most of my Ergo designs include one or more of their drivers. But the 12MU8731T00 fails on one count, and that is voltage sensitivity. I'd like 90dB/2.83V/m and 8-ohm nominal impedance.

My E-IIIR uses the Seas M15CH001, which is pretty flat from 150Hz - 3kHz at 90dB/2.83V/m, meets the spec - but is no longer available.

I've thought about doubling up a pair of 4-ohm mids, wired in series and mounted D'Appolito style flanking a tweeter, but that is just unnecessary complication.
 
The remit for the Fact 12 was to design a pair of speakers that sound like their big standmount monitors but in a domestically friendly cabinet. They did a remarkable job in achieving this IMO. My first impression on hearing them was that they sound like speakers twice their size, and it's a common comment when friends hear them. "How do such thin speakers produce so much bass?" was another.

I have no problem with anyone who's actually heard them passing negative comment, but don't make assumptions based on the Twenty series or sub-par measurements.

The Fact 12 are far from "lean" or "bright".

There's a good review with more thorough measurements here: https://pmc-speakers.com/sites/default/files/attachments/HiFi Critic fact.12 Review_0.pdf

I will admit PMC speakers can be over-priced, but now that the Signature model is out the original version are a great deal.
 
James said:
I 'm a big fan of Scan-speak drivers, and most of my Ergo designs include one or more of their drivers. But the 12MU8731T00 fails on one count, and that is voltage sensitivity. I'd like 90dB/2.83V/m and 8-ohm nominal impedance.

My E-IIIR uses the Seas M15CH001, which is pretty flat from 150Hz - 3kHz at 90dB/2.83V/m, meets the spec - but is no longer available.

I've thought about doubling up a pair of 4-ohm mids, wired in series and mounted D'Appolito style flanking a tweeter, but that is just unnecessary complication.
Click to expand...

Or you can go active with an electronic adjustable crossover with 3 pairs of amplifiers but this is also unnecessary complication.
 
James said:
@yuckyamson

I had a Yamaha NS-1000M tribute in mind before I retired from DIY builds. It would be based on a 13" Scan-speak woofer in a 50-60l sealed box, but couldn't find a high-quality mid that could cover 400Hz - 4kHz cleanly at 90dB/w/m. That was seven or eight years ago.

I don't know if I'll ever crank out another design. The last time I looked, LspCAD doesn't work on Macs, and I'm not sure I have the strength I used to have to lug heavy cabinets around. Ageing is a bummer.

Actually, the real reason is I have no motivation for another build. You can blame my near-perfect listening room, since moving to my current residence about eight years ago. I still have a pair of unfinished PFM-Special IIs in a closet, three pairs of Ergos (IIIR, IX and X) to play with, and the Yams of course.

If I should have a change of heart, I'll be sure to let you know.
Click to expand...

The Scanspeak 10F should do that, 8Ohm is 89dB and the 4Ohm is 92dB. Relatively affordable compared to the Volt/ATC mids.

http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/ScanSpeak-3W-Discovery.htm
 
Antifon said:
The best comparison I have is that I own a pair of ATC SCM40's - which I like very much, and which will be staying here - and a pair of PMC FB1i's. I don't actively dislike them, but I'm not so fond of the latter. However... I doubt that FB1i's tell me a lot about what Fact12's sound like!

I guess the question I'm ~really~ asking is this: I'm fairly confident that the SCM50's will be similar to something I already like the sound of. Are the "thin" Fact12's likely to hold unpleasant surprises for me?
Click to expand...

SCM50s have rather fat and slow bass, which is a shame because the rest of the frequency range is excellent.
I have never heard the 40s, but they may actually have better bass due to their sealed box alignment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top