|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
172.56.17.0
In Reply to: RE: driver pollarity posted by hifitommy on August 28, 2014 at 21:12:51
You've been brainwashed. inverted drivers cancel at their overlap, snd poor designers use that to simulate a steeper slope. sine wave sweeps are more even.
That being said music is not only sine waves. If a cheap ass speaker like a Spica can achieve time and phase alignment, what does it say about designers with mega buck product all claiming the latest computer programming using custom drivers,etc., etc.
What does it say about customers who buy them? Tens of thousands of dollars and not a true reflection of reality which is always in the correct polarity (at least if acoustic)
Follow Ups:
i haven't been brainwashed (i still have a dirty mind). i was just stating the fact that some manufacturers release speakers with this condition, inverted driver polarity, and the usual reason for it.
i haven't stated that its the proper way nor that the speakers are valid in this configuration. they usually exhibit the flawed impulse response curve shown in sterephile mag.
my dynaco a25s had this approach if i am correct, and they sounded very good but never imaged properly.
...regards...tr
I didn't mean my post to seem like it was aimed at you. I was commenting in general and for that gaff I do apologize.
The fact remains true though: We all have been fooled into accepting the designers' "explanations" for the need to invert drivers in a multiple driver system. This lie has been perpetrated so often, even reviewers accept it as gospel but the fact remains is our systems are supposed to reflect reality, nothing is out of absolute polarity in real life.
I simply do not understand why so many insist on this twisted version of reality and yet spend often tens of thousands of dollars for obviously flawed product. Designers are at fault , but then so is the general listening public.
Speakers which are correctly polarized: Single Full range electrostatics, Vandersteens, Ryan Speakers ( a simple rectangular cabinet giving lie to those who believe only staggered drivers can achieve time coherency).
As one noted speaker designer has stated on numerous occasions, if perfect frequency response and polarity and time alignment were the goals of all manufacturers, shouldn't there be convergence in sound after a certain price point? The fact that even at $100K there isn't, shows that is not the goal of most if not all designers.
not needed but here in the most recent Stereophile the kef r700 is reviewed. and here it is in print:
"In the time domain, the R700's step response on the tweeter axis (fig.7) reveals that the tweeter and woofers are connected in positive acoustic polarity, the midrange in inverted polarity. Some Internet know-alls have opined that this mixture of polarities is a problem. It isn't. What actually matters is that the decay of each drive-unit's step smoothly blends with the start of the step of the unit next lower in frequency. In this case, this results in the superb frequency-domain integration of the R700's outputs seen in fig.4. The cumulative spectral-decay plot on the tweeter axis (fig.8) also justifies the adjective superb, as in superbly clean."
having not heard this speaker, i can't speak to its sound as i might hear it. the shape of the impulse response curve in fig.7 doesn't conform to the shape that richard vandersteen prefers. so many of the exotic speakers reviewed in Stereophile exhibit the shape similar to the one shown in this review. some of them i have actually heard and can't fault their sound. usually a direct comparison is not available to me.
i do so love phased array type systems such as the dahlquist dq10, the vandy speakers, the spica tc 50s, and the like. the search for the holy grail isn't likely to be over soon..
...regards...tr
Over on the speaker asylum I argued with Atkinson about this very similar statement he made about the Wilsons under discussion.
Atkinson accepted the fact that an inverted midrange was common and did not reflect reality. His defense was that "studies" show that the majority of listeners deem frequency response more important than any other attribute including time and phase alignment.
Again to use Stereophile, if you look up their speaker test measurement explanation, Atkinson in discussing the step impulse test statees that the ideal is a sharp rise followed by a slow ramping down, looking sort of like a right triangle. Atkinson states that in all his years only 10 models from 5 manufacturers ever met anything close to that ideal.
The 5 manufacturers were; Vandersteen, Spica, Quad, Thiel and Dunlavy.
Thus time and phase alignment can be done and with reasonable prices too. The fact that it isn't merey reflects the large amount of advertising and IMHO the fact that reviewers are not either cognizant of the issue or maybe they simply can't hear it.
After many years of CES I am [retty sure they can't hear it, or maybe more accurately they can her something but con't identify the issue. Just my observations after standing behind many well known reviewers while listening to theri tst discs.....
OF cours YMMV and FWIW
Anything's possible, I guess...Most likely, these reviewers are *not* doing what most other listeners would not be doing. They are not wondering about things that are *not heard*. If they can't hear it then why should it matter... to them, you, or anyone else?
How do you know that you aren't the one with hearing problems? Could it possibly be that your ears are picking up on minor distortion artifacts that everyone else's ears happily ignore?
Edits: 08/31/14 08/31/14 08/31/14
My ears are bad.... I guess George Louis',Clark Johnsen's, Paul McGowen of PS Audio are equally bad since they can hear polarity, too.
Incidentally try comparing the sound of your Grados to your AKGs. The AKGs are supposed to be inverted in polarity. Curiously. the original Grado Signatures had a polarity switch built into their top line phones so someone there obviously could hear it.
If you don't hear it,fine. Just cause you do not hear it does not mean everyone else is the same.
... is the polarity that sounds best to the individual. Who are you (or Clark, or anyone else in your distinguished company...) to say what is most "realistic" sounding to another's ears? Hifi is artifice. All YOU really *know* is what sounds most realistic to YOU (and a small minority of others like you).So, Joe Grado - out of the kindness of his heart - put a polarity switch on his headphones. Is it possible that Joe might have done this so that everyone could decide for themselves which way sounded "correct"? Did John Grado eliminate the polarity switch only because he felt that "Simpler is Better"? Or, did John also suspect that searching for the "correct" polarity in many recordings was tantamount to heading the proverbial wild goose chase?
You cannot speak for everyone, you cannot assume that those who differ with you are somehow lost. The thought of anyone refusing to genuflect before your Holy Grail as they pass by seems to disturb the heck out of you but please, try to get over it. People have different opinions about what sounds most realistic. So what?
YOU are in the minority, remember? So, I'd say that a lot of people hear things a little bit differently than you do...
Edits: 08/31/14 08/31/14 08/31/14 08/31/14
And pray tell why do the vast majority of listeners seem to unanimously agree that audio playback can NOT approach the real life experience?Think about it. Perhaps a closer approximation of reality is not what you want, but i believe you are the one projecting your opinion on others.
Just because McDonalds sells more hamburgers than anyone else doesn't make them the best in either taste (highly subjective) or nutritious. They simply cater to the lower common denominator.
It is quite obvious that you have very different goals from your audio system. I define a realistic system as being much more than FR: you don't. That's fine by me.
And i'll leave it at that.
Edits: 09/03/14
I think that, most likely, there are a number of reasons (both explained and unexplained) why live music sounds different than reproduced music. But, it almost sounds as if you think there might be but ONE major reason for the differences: "If only all the drivers moved forward at once instead of backwards and forward...", etc... Whatever you say, Stu.I'm trying to let my ears define what realism is. I would suggest that others, including you, try to do the same thing. If you think that "perfect polarity" is the Holy Grail then more power to you. If someone does not hear the things that Unclestu *claims* to hear, more power to them.
OTOH if we review Unclestu's numerous posts on the subject at hand, it becomes laughingly obvious that you are the guy with the axe to grind here, going so far as to dismantle a pair of *incoherent* KEF LS50 speakers in the process. Hey, the evidence speaks for itself...
Anyone who dares to question Uncle's authority (John Atkinson, for example) is a villain, of course. The self appointed preacher of perfect polarity thinks that he's eating steak while everyone who disagrees with him is eating at McDonalds? Wow, now THAT is funny!
Get over yourself.
Edits: 09/01/14 09/01/14 09/01/14 09/01/14 09/01/14 09/01/14
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: