Anyone familiar with the Manger driver?

Up the thread a ways, in a reply to Essentialaudio (Brian Walsh), D edwards wrote:

"I cannot write an experience for you but no SoundLab is ever going to win an award for clarity, not with the reverb off the back wall (100% distortion)...",

I'd like to address that comment.

Twenty something years ago I held essentially the same opinion, but then my ears-on experiences as an amateur speaker builder didn't bear it out. Seems the ear doesn't always hear the way the mind reasons it should. So I spent many an hour in the public library poring through old audio engineering journals trying to gain a useful, if rudimentary, understanding of how the ear/brain system works.

Now for the record, we could certainly write a definition of distortion that would necessarily classify a dipole's backwave energy as "100% distortion", but our definition would be arbitrary and inconsistent with the psychophyisics of human sound perception. [Distortion perception is an area still being intensely researched by some of the top minds in psychoacoustics.]

To the ear, the backwave of a dipole is not 100% distortion; rather, it is reverberant field energy. If reverberant field energy were undesirable, concert halls and recital halls would resemble anechoic chambers (which they don't). As long as the reflections aren't too strong and distinct (diffusion helps here), you can have rich ambience and excellent clarity at the same time, as routinely demonstrated by live unamplified performances in good venues. SoundLabs are exceptionally good at getting the reverberant field right, something that live voices and instruments routinely do but few loudspeakers emulate. A spectrally correct reverberant field is conducive not only to natural timbre, but also long-term fatigue-free listening. I can explain why this is so if anyone is interested.

Also, note that a line source speaker like the SoundLabs generates a much higher ratio of direct to reflected sound energy at the listening position than does a typical direct-radiating point source speaker, even factoring in the backwave. This can be readily demonstrated by comparing the actual SPL measurements recorded at different distances with the predicted anechoic SPL, the difference being reverberant field contribution.

Arguments over subjective impressions are usually fruitless, but I will go on record as saying that in my opinion SoundLab electrostats have exceptionally good clarity and inner detail. Those who feel that a dealer's opinion can't possibly be sincere, discount mine accordingly. Apparently D edwards arrived at his negative assessment by reasoning rather than by first-hand experience. We all make assessments by reasoning things out to the best of our ability - there's nothing wrong with that approach, but in this case I think that his assumption regarding the effect of the speaker's backwave energy is incorrect.

Duke

Duke,

This thread is about the Manger driver and Manger speakers. Your marginally factual, misleading post and assumption about how I came to my opinion is poor form. Maybe you should ask me to clarify my position so you understand what I'm talking about.

Look I don't want to pick on the Sound Labs to address your assumptions and very creative interpretations. but let me suggest that you are behind the curve and the world is not "ideal" which you heavily count on to make your point.

Maybe you should measure your Sound Labs and see what they really do like I have, then maybe we can talk about it. As you took great pains to tell us about what we hear and what we measure maybe you'll find that what you think you hear and what your really hearing is just as incongruent.

Duke;

I know how convenient it is to think I've never heard a Sound Lab M-1 or U-1 but you forget that these speakers are almost unchanged for 25 years or more, It hasn't been difficult to get to hear a Sound Lab when their have been dealers and clients near by.....try to find a manger dealer 10 years ago!

Like Essential Audio Duke, please share your Manger systems experience with us so maybe we can arrive at a mutual understanding of my Sound lab (or any dipole speaker) comments. Or maybe you simply find my comments unimaginable.

There is much better ways to getting a proper reverberent field than spilling a 100% out of phase fullrange signal into the room and bouncing it off "spectrally correct?" drywall...

D Edwards,

I think it's more than fair to enter a thread to address what I believe to be misinformation, and that's what I did.

If I have misinterpreted your statements I apologize, and invite you to clarify. I also invite you to let me know which of my statements you're characterizing as "marginally factual" and "misleading".

Fo now I'll hold off responding to your final paragraph, as there may be a better place for that discussion. I have measured my SoundLabs and I can talk about it, but once again there may be a better place to do so.

How about this: Let's see if we can narrow down exactly where we disagree, and then if you are interested, we can start a thread on the subject and present our respective views. This might well end up being of general interest to others.

Rather than my risking mis-interpreting your position, in the interest of continuing our discussion in a dedicated thread, would you clarify exactly what you see as detrimental about the backwave energy of the SoundLabs?

Duke

"Rather than my risking mis-interpreting your position, in the interest of continuing our discussion in a dedicated thread, would you clarify exactly what you see as detrimental about the backwave energy of the SoundLabs?"

Its the backwave energy of ANY fullrange dipole or bipole, its a delay channel. My Apogee's, magneplanars and Martin Logans all have the same issue, and as you indicate can be minimized to a degree but is that what I want? Some people do, but I'm way past that.

How can a speaker with a marginally controllable fullrange effects/reverb system win a clarity contest?

Psycho-acoustics? please, thats a pretty broad stoke.

Our disconnect is you cannot articulate any quality experiences with the Manger, then that is where our miscommunication is going to remain. One day when you hear the Manger....I recommend Overkill Audio product then you will have my perspective about clarity.

I don't want to talk negatively about Sound Labs and other Dipoles but they have issues which hurt them in areas like clarity, even though some fake clarity very well, its just that, a fake. You're a speaker expert I'm sure I don't have to explain how its done.

A multichannel surround system clearly will demonstrate that although pleasing this fixed dipole "reverb" clouds and homogenizes the image of a dipole speaker like the Sound Lab. You just want to overlook the detrimental aspects of slapping a fullrange signal off some drywall and assume psychoacoustic will explain this very un-ideal situation into a positive, I can't imagine anyone not thinking this is very very optimistic.

I think what you failed to take into consideration is these comments were in reference too the Manger driver, a vastly superior drive element to the technology used in the Sound Lab. And because it appears you have little or no idea what the Manger can do you take my comments as a big insult to the Sound Labs, well it wasn't, because the Sound Lab has to do very many things extremely well to simply lose out to the Manger on clarity.

So why should I debate someone who simply cannot put my comments into proper context?

The backwave lesson will cost you, you want academic information you gotta pay the academic fees.

----------I also invite you to let me know which of my statements you're characterizing as "marginally factual" and "misleading".----------------------------------------

"To the ear, the backwave of a dipole is not 100% distortion; rather, it is reverberant field energy. If reverberant field energy were undesirable, concert halls and recital halls would resemble anechoic chambers"

Complete false analogy and misunderstanding of how the backwave is working and the difference between reproducing sound through speakers and listening to live sound. You glorify two delay channels, why not get a surround system? Can you really be a two channel guy when you listen to 4 anyway? off the topic kinda but I'm curious.

"SoundLabs are exceptionally good at getting the reverberant field right, something that live voices and instruments routinely do but few loudspeakers emulate."

Can you answer how they get the reverberant field right, or is this just a quantification of your experience. How can something that makes everything sound 7 feet tall be getting the reverbent field right? Maybe you just like the extra reverb on your music....singing in the shower type thing?

"A spectrally correct reverberant field is conducive not only to natural timbre, but also long-term fatigue-free listening. I can explain why this is so if anyone is interested."

Correct timbres relating directly to the frequency response of your drywall....no need to explain. Theory is nice but reality is difficult and non-linear.

Note that a line source speaker like the SoundLabs generates a much higher ratio of direct to reflected sound energy at the listening position than does a typical direct-radiating point source speaker, even factoring in the backwave.

Over what listeing window or to be specific gate time? Over a very short window yes, but open the window wider and here comes the 2nd blip....what to do with all that maybe correlated maybe not correlated signal?

"D edwards arrived at his negative assessment by reasoning rather than by first-hand experience."

You're the one who never heard the Manger, you should be sorry for making a completely false statement to set the record straight about the Sound labs?

Isn't that ironic? LOL!