Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
83.253.250.144
In Reply to: RE: 3.7i review HiFi+ thanks to QuadTodd.... posted by Mark Man on April 01, 2014 at 16:28:08
What does "lower noise floor" mean to You when it's about a loudspeaker?
Hehehehe.
Can't stop laughing.
In my point of view it actually means that the speaker can not reproduce low level information as it is damped by the "lower noise floor" of the speaker.
Please help me on this one!!! hehehe
Does it have more darkness too?
Maybe a hint of cinnamon?
I find it hilarious what expressions that have been invented to describe nothing or a faulty notion from a totally different product.
Cheers!
The one who succeeded was the one who didn't know it was impossible.
Follow Ups:
We as Americans....when in doubt....call in a drone strike...I am just saying....
Lowering the noise floor...translates to wall to wall carpeting...it is much quieter in my condo when I walk around....even in pumps...
Enjoy....
thanks
Mark
That was a funny answer too!But seriously!
The reviewer states that the 3.7i has "lower noise floor".
And then explains it with "meaning low-level textural and transient details sound clearer and are easier to hear"
This means the total opposite!
Maybe he means compression?When You compress audio, the lower level sounds gets higher and the higher gets lower towards the same collective output.
The one who succeeded was the one who didn't know it was impossible.
Edits: 04/04/14
I think he may be referring to diaphragm self noise -- the tizzy snare drum-like resonances, already much suppressed in the .7's. Those could plausibly obscure some low-level program details.
The tizziness is a feature I thought we had to accept. I'm not sure it's much reduced in the 3.7 over the 3.6 - at least, I still hear it. Oddly enough, it seems less audible with the MMGs. Then again, I don't crank the MMGs as hard - single, near-field listener in a small space (in the house). If they've figured out a way to address that without ruining the speaker in other ways, then I see the value in it, but I still can't understand the absolute secrecy. Is this some kind of game? Can 'we' figure how they sound different and how the manufacturer accomplished that feat? It appears that we're already moving in that direction. So, if it is a game, we'll win it. If it isn't a game, being so tight-lipped is only going to drive us to the discovery all the quicker.
I'll say it again and then I promise to shut up about it. I hate to be critical of Magnepan, but I don't understand the handling of this upgrade. What should excite me is only annoying me and I'm not alone in that reaction.
The first real clue about this upgrade is that shot from the rear on page four. By no means can we infer that is all which is changed, but it is an obvious difference. It won't be long before somebody exposes exactly what that is. As soon as someone is willing to do an exploratory on their improved version, I'm ready to do the same on my originals.
More and more, as time goes by, I feel myself drawn to replacing the midranges, a la Satie's example. I have visions of a future woodworking project that will transform my 3.7s. Okay, I am starting to get excited.
And here I thought the tizziness was my crappy framing job on my MMGs, and/or my old amp.
I fixed mine by relocating the MMGs to the storage closet.
If you want a new project, instead of trying to reinvent the wheel, why not build a pair of Linkwitz LX-521s? R&D, plans already laid out, excellent support through the Linkwitz forum.
I was thinking of it myself, but my room size was marginally too small, and financially it would of taken much longer to get "there", then the route I took (mini monitors).
Might be hard to change the midrange, given that the mid and woofer are sections of the same diaphragm but have to be as close as possible to one another for the best polar response. I think it would actually be more practical with a 3.6.
...the midrange section of the planar panel were integrated with the woofer section? Is it the same foil? There are a few things I need to research in order to gauge the feasibility of this maneuver, but I am coming to terms with the reasoning behind it.
I would build a new set of frames. It could be a fun project, but it would probably take a while. I'm only half-serious right now, but the more I think about it, the more I like it. ;-)
Check out the tuning dots on this picture that Roger posted:http://www.twin-x.com/groupdiy/albums/userpics/mg_3_7.JPG
There are now tuning dots at the border of the woofer and midrange, which used to have a clamp. There's no way of knowing precisely what frequencies the segments are tuned to without more information. But my guess is that they're using acoustical equalization to make it a 2.5 way -- a necessity because with a single-pole crossover, each driver has to cover a wider frequency range, and for good polar response you need to keep driver width small compared to wavelength. If so, the 3.7 isn't a very good candidate for an add-on midrange. You're either going to have too much of a gap (if you put it next to the old midrange) or you're going to have it on the side opposite the acoustical EQ. Both could exacerbate lobing.
But the first step I think would be to get more information. You could get the frequencies of the resonant sections with a microphone, an RTA, and a pink noise generator -- just move the mic along the grille cloth and see what happens to the frequency response.
Edits: 04/10/14
...it would be simple enough to swap the left and right panels. That would put the unused midrange section on the opposite side from the midrange and tweeter. I imagine that it would be good to mechanically damp the non-driven section. As I said, this is just an idea that I'm beginning to entertain. Lots of research would have to be done before venturing down this path, and this is a start - thanks. ;-)
Mechanical damping might work. You'd want to leave the bottom part undamped, e.g., imitate a 3.6 with its solid clamp. This would shift the acoustical center of the bass frequencies back towards the center of the woofer section. It would also reduce the output at the frequency of the full width of the speaker. This would definitely require some experimentation and measurement.
OK, so here's another idea -- put a line-source electrostatic midrange (an Acoustat, say) between the woofer and the ribbon.
Why haven't I heard/read about this (for me a serious fault) in all the raving/uplifting reviews out there?
Are people suddenly getting rid of the cotton eyes when a new product arrives?
I am just saying that a self noise like that would have stood out in the reviews... strange...
And in this review we are told that the "noise floor" is lower...
So the kazoo is still there but better suppressed?
Cheers!
The one who succeeded was the one who didn't know it was impossible.
It's been mentioned in a lot of reviews. "Mylar sound" is one common description. Check forex Jon Valin's review of the 3.7 (I think it was the 3.7, maybe the 1.7), in which he notes that the quasi-ribbon models have significantly less of it than the older wire ones (I assume because the foil damps the diaphragm more effectively than the wire did).
All speakers have this -- in dynamics, it's often referred to as cone breakup. There's a remarkable recording somewhere online of the self noise of various drivers, with the exciting signal filtered out. You hear immediately how it contributes to the sonic character of different driver types.
Thanks for clearing that odd expression from that review!
I would however use the term IMD as that is the measurable result of it.
And yes, it will be a worse problem the smaller area of a membrane that is active.
Wire are the worst and electrostatic the best.
Cheers!
The one who succeeded was the one who didn't know it was impossible.
We talked about it most recently with Helmholtz and his RD50 driver vs. Neo8 array, and referred back to the discussion of segmented drivers we had with Doug Schroeder after his review of the kingsound king with its segmented tweeters and woofers.
The kazoo effect is much reduced - if not eliminated - by segmenting the drivers so that longitudonal resonances on the mylar/kaladex are at a higher freq than the operational range of the driver. The speed of sound in mylar is far higher than in air, so the distortion is only heard on long drivers. It is an extra brightness with a rough texture to it. Suposedly it is better on the 3.7i than it was on the 3.7, which is reported by many to have less of it than prior models. Probably caused by the better damping of the QR vs. wire.
The effect is probably reduced with the 3.7s compared to the 3.6s. It surely seemed so at first, but it is far from gone - with some material, I find it impossible not to notice it (to the point of distraction). The weird thing is that they didn't do it as much when they were new. Thinking back, it was the same with the 3.6s.
Considering the real cost of the upgrade to 'i' status, I may be better served by purchasing 16ea Neo8 transducers. It would be fun to build another set of frames. Is this crazy talk?
Not at all.
But if you are going that way, you should sell the 3.7 and buy an older 3.x with a recent rewire, and tear that apart to put the tweeter and Neo8 array mid in a separate frame, and use the bass panel either in the original frame or in a new heavier and stiffer one. The difference in values would likely cover most if not all the cost of the Neo8 arrays.
...predicated upon cost alone or is there another reason why the 3.7 panel wouldn't be the best to use? Since it's all foil, I was thinking about the possibility of merging the midrange loops into the woofer. That woofer would still be relieved of the heavy lifting, thereby reducing the importance of mechanically isolating the ribbon and new midrange from it.
When I modified the connector plates, I knew that I was hurting the resale value of my 3.7s*. Heck, my wallet took a bruising just getting them - thanks to buying the 3.6s first. If I sold them, I think I'd go a different route - probably to ESLs.
*Yes, I can put things back like they were, but honesty dictates that I must disclose the fact that I messed with them. Some might appreciate the changes. Many would be fearful and I can understand that - they don't know me. ;-)
Well, Josh pointed out that the 3.7 is more "tuned" and he suspects that the tuning makes it into a 2.5 way speaker more than a 3 way. That would be like the TIV/IVa that had a tuned midbass and plain bass to make it a 3.5 way. The 3.6 would have a clearer XO transition. But the main issue is the cost difference.I don't think you would have a problem reselling once you put things back. If you take a pro with a storefront to finish it then you can say it was professionally returned to spec..
While I have no doubt that you could get this level of performance with a pair of subwoofers and a good large panel ESL, so you can overcome the dynamic limitations, it will cost you in space and money. The very top end will need a ribbon supertweeter to give you back the sparkle of the maggie ribbon on the top octave. Competing ribbon tweeters are not quite line sources unless you stack a number of them, and no ESL I heard does that top octave like a ribbon. The ones that might have it in them are the Kingsound and the Soundlabs.
I don't know if you need the dynamic scale of the Neo8 array. If you do, then there is no other planar that can do that so far as I know. It also sports a 95/6 db spl sensitivity (theoretically it is > 98 db but I don't think I get that in real life).
With a pair of subwoofers it is probably not going to be an issue to have the whole speaker in a single frame unless you play loud like I tend to.
Edits: 04/11/14
But seriously!
The reviewer states that the 3.7i has "lower noise floor".
That particular term is one I have personally not used...
With cables and gear, I have noticed blacker backgrounds or better instrument definition or separation...does that constitute a "lower noise floor"???
How that applies to speakers???? I would differ that to others, that know more than I....
J, what are your speakers??? Without having to do a bunch of searching, if you would be so kind...
thanks
Mark
The speakers I currently have are 2 Apogee Duetta II, 1 Apogee Duetta Signature, 1 Apogee Scintilla 1 Ohm, 1 Infinity RS1b, 1 Quad ESL57, 1 heavily modded Acoustat Spectra 1100, 2 Audio Pro A4-14, 3 Audio Pro B2-50, 1 Magnepan MG-MC1.
I had a pair of Magnepan MG3.6 but sold them some months back.
The one who succeeded was the one who didn't know it was impossible.
I thought I remembered you as a 3.6 owner...
But had no idea, you owned such a murders row of stats....WoW...
Any particular favorite???
Just curious....
thanks
Mark
Are your amps...solar, wind or nuclear powered??? Or a combination of them all??? Knowing you Scandinavians are only 25 years ahead of us in Green Power and water management.....
My amps are physically powered by nuclear power from Forsmark.
I tend to neglect all these selling and buying of power as You actually can NOT choose where the actual power comes from but merely whom You like to give your money too.
Never mind.
I DO use American amplifiers though. Carver Sunfire.
Those amps are INCREDIBLE!!! I am TRULY sorry that Carver stopped making those.
It's a bit too early to choose a favorite as I am sill reviewing them.
I am however finished with the MG3.6 and sadly they had to go.
Will though be continued...
The one who succeeded was the one who didn't know it was impossible.
A little company in White Bear Lake, MN makes a speaker you might be interested in...it is known as the 3.7....."I" can highly recommend that speaker...the beauty of that company...many models have production runs that have been 10 years or longer....so there are no worries that you won't own the latest and greatest....
Sunfire amps, I personally have not heard, have been known for their ability to drive difficult speakers, which you own plenty of...so I am glad you are happy with your amps...I am guessing it is a short list of amps capable of driving your speakers...
thanks for the fun banter....
take care
Mark
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: