help on choosing speakers

Sam Kapasi · 4th August 2005, 11:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by navin

Ooops!!! I thought I was simplifying things as much as possible. My deepest appologies to any who did not understand my postings/rantings. Please PM me and I will do my best to re word them.

NAHEE!! Dont apologise, i'm only kidding man. But even you know that your ravings can be understood completely only by enthusiasts (serious ones too) not laymen.

navin · 4th August 2005, 12:04

hey my wife and sister do. in fact untill my sister got married i used her ears to test small changes to my XOs (really small changes in the midrange can be detected). These changes included changes to the Baffle Step Compensation of the midwoofer (baffle dependant) etc... Vivek can elaborate on this.

navin · 4th August 2005, 12:06

But then we agonise over the differences of a 300B SE over a EL84 PP.

Vivekphadnis · 4th August 2005, 12:58

Quote:

hey my wife and sister do. in fact untill my sister got married i used her ears to test small changes to my XOs (really small changes in the midrange can be detected). These changes included changes to the Baffle Step Compensation of the midwoofer (baffle dependant) etc... Vivek can elaborate on this.

NAHEE!!! Not the baffle step compensation bit again. Navin probably remembers the time when I wanted to build a 2.5way speaker. I read and read and read and researched about BSC (and drove many up the wall with my questions). I also remember Navin suggesting one midbass driver on the rear baffle. Finally, Shiva of Corrson had come up with a good sounding Vifa MTM speaker. I liked what I saw. I then went for an MTM.

Vivekphadnis · 4th August 2005, 13:23

For the benefit of some of the members here, I would like to say something about BSC. It is to compensate for frequencies when the width of the baffle plays a part in the response. At lower frequencies, the radiation is more spherical than higher frequencies, which are more directional. That is why the extra woofer in the 2.5 way speaker. Right, Navin?

Sam Kapasi · 4th August 2005, 13:32

This NAHEE! business is catching on (heh heh heh)

Speaking of funny names, where's Fusseem?

navin · 4th August 2005, 13:39

the reason i prefer 2.5 way over MTM is to do with the radiation pattern of the speaker....this is a serious digression from car audio...if anyone wants me to do this in public please let me know. In short I do not believe (after long listening tests) that the cylindircal wavefront of the MTM is in any way beneficial to the stereo image. I think saying more at this stage will merge this thread to www.diyaudio.com.

Vivekphadnis · 4th August 2005, 13:46

I think the guys here need to do some reading on diyaudio.com. They will benefit greatly from some reading.

navin · 4th August 2005, 18:24

no need vivek. that is what we are doing. distilling information from diyaudio into this thread. that forum would drown most in info overload.

Vivekphadnis · 4th August 2005, 23:03

Right. This is what we will continue doing I suppose.

Puffdamgcdragon · 5th August 2005, 14:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buffetfan

Aseem,
I am thinking of incesting in components....I thought of purchasing the [font=Arial][size=5][color=#3399ff]GTO606C series...any comments on that[/color][/size][/font]

Didn't know U had a mechanical relation. Go ahead and enjoy, but make sure it is consensual. Don't want kid sister comp. to cry Rape later!

4th August 2005, 12:04	#17
navin Team-BHP Support Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Mumbai Posts: 25,196 Thanked: 9,296 Times	hey my wife and sister do. in fact untill my sister got married i used her ears to test small changes to my XOs (really small changes in the midrange can be detected). These changes included changes to the Baffle Step Compensation of the midwoofer (baffle dependant) etc... Vivek can elaborate on this.
	() Thanks

4th August 2005, 12:06	#18
navin Team-BHP Support Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Mumbai Posts: 25,196 Thanked: 9,296 Times	But then we agonise over the differences of a 300B SE over a EL84 PP.
	() Thanks

4th August 2005, 13:23	#20
Vivekphadnis BHPian Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Bangalore Posts: 690 Thanked: 2 Times	For the benefit of some of the members here, I would like to say something about BSC. It is to compensate for frequencies when the width of the baffle plays a part in the response. At lower frequencies, the radiation is more spherical than higher frequencies, which are more directional. That is why the extra woofer in the 2.5 way speaker. Right, Navin?
	() Thanks

4th August 2005, 13:32	#21
Sam Kapasi Distinguished - BHPian Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Mumbai (but wat Posts: 6,997 Thanked: 2,378 Times View My Garage	This NAHEE! business is catching on (heh heh heh) Speaking of funny names, where's Fusseem?
	() Thanks

4th August 2005, 13:39	#22
navin Team-BHP Support Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Mumbai Posts: 25,196 Thanked: 9,296 Times	the reason i prefer 2.5 way over MTM is to do with the radiation pattern of the speaker....this is a serious digression from car audio...if anyone wants me to do this in public please let me know. In short I do not believe (after long listening tests) that the cylindircal wavefront of the MTM is in any way beneficial to the stereo image. I think saying more at this stage will merge this thread to www.diyaudio.com.
	() Thanks

4th August 2005, 13:46	#23
Vivekphadnis BHPian Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Bangalore Posts: 690 Thanked: 2 Times	I think the guys here need to do some reading on diyaudio.com. They will benefit greatly from some reading.
	() Thanks

4th August 2005, 18:24	#24
navin Team-BHP Support Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Mumbai Posts: 25,196 Thanked: 9,296 Times	no need vivek. that is what we are doing. distilling information from diyaudio into this thread. that forum would drown most in info overload.
	() Thanks

4th August 2005, 23:03	#25
Vivekphadnis BHPian Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Bangalore Posts: 690 Thanked: 2 Times	Right. This is what we will continue doing I suppose.
	() Thanks