Have the nearfield meas. if you're interested... *PIC*

[paul_n_oneal]

Nearfields tell a lot. That usher has a little glitch around 500hz. I figure 450hz for the xover to the mid. On the tweeter looks anywhere between 2500hz and 3200hz. The nearfield is really only good to a little over 1000hz so disregard the rest no matter how hard it is. I think we got us a winner .

Paul

[Pete Schumacher ®]

> Nearfields tell a lot. That usher has a
> little glitch around 500hz. I figure 450hz
> for the xover to the mid. On the tweeter
> looks anywhere between 2500hz and 3200hz.
> The nearfield is really only good to a
> little over 1000hz so disregard the rest no
> matter how hard it is. I think we got us a
> winner .

> Paul

All that matters is how they sound!!! ;o)

[dlsbobby]

> Nearfields tell a lot. That usher has a
> little glitch around 500hz. I figure 450hz
> for the xover to the mid. On the tweeter
> looks anywhere between 2500hz and 3200hz.
> The nearfield is really only good to a
> little over 1000hz so disregard the rest no
> matter how hard it is. I think we got us a
> winner .

> Paul
That glitch at 500hz is only 3db's. Can you really hear that? I think it's going to be very nice when your done. Robert.

[paul_n_oneal]

> That glitch at 500hz is only 3db's. Can you
> really hear that? I think it's going to be
> very nice when your done. Robert.

I'm running the woofer full range right now to see how the bass sounds and break it in before farfields are done. I'm pretty impressed. It's a slightly different bass sound from the RS225s but definitely there. I think the bass is a bit tighter sounding with the passive than a vented box from this woofer anyway. Very nice sounding all the way up to tell you the truth. I can hear ringing up high, but male vocals sound excellent. I will then break in the mid and see how it sounds. That's what I really want to hear. Hopefully the sound from the two blend nicely. All I have to say at this stage is not much. But the bass end is very nice sounding. I'm starting to get a warm a fuzzy feeling over it but don't want to say too much until I hear that mid for awhile.

Paul

[paul_n_oneal]

> All that matters is how they sound!!! ;o)

That is a very true statement but meas. sure helps out . What it really all boils down to is--does it sound good to more people than not, especially the judges whomever they be. I see boxes out of mdf and tape at these events. Hey if it works and sounds good that's what it' all about. You have a good one Pete, I know you entry will sound very nice. I just have that gut instinct. You've spent a lot of time on it. Now it's time to enjoy.

Paul

[Jim Holtz]

Provided Link: 2006 Iowa DIY Speaker Event


> What it really all boils down
> to is--does it sound good to more people
> than not, especially the judges whomever
> they be.
> Paul

Hi Paul,

Everyone who wants to fill out a form is a judge at the event's I've attended. I think most importantly, the speakers that are in a comparable class should be listened to back to back and volume matched for fairness.

Here's a link to the 2006 Iowa DIY Speaker Event website. The form is posted on the bottom of the page. Doug was kind enough to host the page for the event. This year there will be lots of pictures to post after the event if Doug and I have our way. We're both bringing cameras. A warning! We *do* plan to take your picture if you attend the event. :-) Nice pictures only, of course...

Jim

[paul_n_oneal]

I really like the way they did it in Seattle. The put up a cloth so that you couldn't see the speakers. That way your judging sound and not letting looks interfere with the process. IIRC they had three judges maybe 5 not sure but Dick or Ed West would know and be able to fill in the blank spots.

Paul

[daryl]

Provided Link: Daryl's Speaker Stuff.


Listening is almost useless.

The only use they have is to gauge the relative impact of flaws identified by measurements.

Just listening is like pin the tail on the donkey.

Sounds nice or it doesn't but does it sound nice because of a flaw that happens to cast what you have listened to so far in good light?

Will it not sound so good on other stuff?

Measurements tell almost all.

They will show the frequency of resonances, the amount of harmonic distortion vs. frequency and dispersion vs. frequency.

This will cause you either not to use that driver or tell you the frequency range you will want to use it in and what SPL it is capable of or how many you will need for the task.

Once you have made your compromises and maybe have a couple of ways you could go with your design you might listen to the options to see what the preference is and how strong.

For Pauls measurement I would wan't to use an anechoic measurement.

Also listening to drivers by themselves is useless.

Listening impressions by humans are always wide band.

You cannot judge what is in just a certain frequency range or classify what is happening to the sound by listening.

Daryl

[DougP]

> I really like the way they did it in
> Seattle. The put up a cloth so that you
> couldn't see the speakers. That way your
> judging sound and not letting looks
> interfere with the process. IIRC they had
> three judges maybe 5 not sure but Dick or Ed
> West would know and be able to fill in the
> blank spots.

> Paul

I want to see the speakers. They don't have to be perfect, mine are far from it. Like Jim said everyone that wants to will be able to fill out the feedback sheets. The more feedback someone gets the better.

Doug

[Pete Schumacher ®]

> That is a very true statement but meas. sure
> helps out . What it really all boils down
> to is--does it sound good to more people
> than not, especially the judges whomever
> they be. I see boxes out of mdf and tape at
> these events. Hey if it works and sounds
> good that's what it' all about. You have a
> good one Pete, I know you entry will sound
> very nice. I just have that gut instinct.
> You've spent a lot of time on it. Now it's
> time to enjoy.

> Paul

I hope you know I was just yanking your chain Paul. I'm a HUGE fan of measurements. I couldn't do any of this without guys like Zaph posting their measurements.

[Pete Schumacher ®]

> Listening is almost useless.

> The only use they have is to gauge the
> relative impact of flaws identified by
> measurements.

> Just listening is like pin the tail on the
> donkey.

> Sounds nice or it doesn't but does it sound
> nice because of a flaw that happens to cast
> what you have listened to so far in good
> light?

> Will it not sound so good on other stuff?

> Measurements tell almost all.

> They will show the frequency of resonances,
> the amount of harmonic distortion vs.
> frequency and dispersion vs. frequency.

> This will cause you either not to use that
> driver or tell you the frequency range you
> will want to use it in and what SPL it is
> capable of or how many you will need for the
> task.

> Once you have made your compromises and
> maybe have a couple of ways you could go
> with your design you might listen to the
> options to see what the preference is and
> how strong.

> For Pauls measurement I would wan't to use
> an anechoic measurement.

> Also listening to drivers by themselves is
> useless.

> Listening impressions by humans are always
> wide band.

> You cannot judge what is in just a certain
> frequency range or classify what is
> happening to the sound by listening.

> Daryl

Daryl, I was JOKING!!!!

[daryl]

[Pete Schumacher ®]

[paul_n_oneal]

[Pete Schumacher ®]

[paul_n_oneal]

[brianwalter]

> Also listening to drivers by themselves is
> useless.

> Daryl

Your certainly right about that Daryl, I find it much more enjoyable when you play music through them ;-)

Brian

[damkor]

> Just listening is like pin the tail on the
> donkey.

Not critical listening.

> Sounds nice or it doesn't but does it sound
> nice because of a flaw that happens to cast
> what you have listened to so far in good
> light?

Firstly, making a speaker that sounds right because of compensating flaws may not be the ultimate approach, but its not the worst thing in the world.

Listening to a woofer full range usually doesn't sound so nice. But the ear can identify the same peaks and the rolloff that the mic can if you use sine wave or shite noise sweeps.

> Listening impressions by humans are always
> wide band.

The same is true of microphones. Haven't you ever listened to sine waves or other test tones? You can tell a lot from doing that.

[damkor]

> That glitch at 500hz is only 3db's. Can you
> really hear that?

Good question. IME, it depends on the width of the glitch, how wide it is, and, sometimes, how it may be compensated for, subjectively, by other non-perfect aspects of the flat response, which goes directly to the importance of listening tests.

[paul_n_oneal]

> Good question. IME, it depends on the width
> of the glitch, how wide it is, and,
> sometimes, how it may be compensated for,
> subjectively, by other non-perfect aspects
> of the flat response, which goes directly to
> the importance of listening tests.

I checked the impedance plot and there is a glitch at that same spot. This leads me to belive that the is an anomoly there and not baffle related. When I go outside (hopefully today), I will redo all the meas. and see if maybe room bounce had anything to do with these glitches.

Paul