2. speakers
  3. 125362-293

Loudspeakers have we really made that much progress since the 1930s?

Since I have a slight grasp on the history or loudspeaker design. And what is possible with modern. I do wonder if we have really made that much progress. I have access to some of the most modern transducers and design equipment. I also have  large collection of vintage.  I tend to spend the most time listening to my 1930 Shearer horns. For they do most things a good bit better than even the most advanced loudspeakers available. And I am not the only one to think so I have had a good num of designers retailers etc give them a listen. Sure weak points of the past are audible. These designs were meant to cover frequency ranges at the time. So adding a tweeter moves them up to modern performance. To me the tweeter has shown the most advancement in transducers but not so much the rest. Sure things are smaller but they really do not sound close to the Shearer.  http://www.audioheritage.org/html/profiles/lmco/shearer.htm
128x128johnk
inna
5,245 posts
 
An ideal violin should have no voice of its own either - it should just be able to convey the music that is in the mind of the performer.
mikewerner
93 posts
 
OK. Thanks for your clarification of the point. 
What if you could have a dead neutral (not bright or strong, Merriam-Webster's definition) speaker with great equalization.
Then add lots of power - modern technology, you see.
Distortion from lots of assorted nasties engineered out - it's an ideal speaker, remember.
What then? Is it possible?
Are modern techniques ineffective at doing this. Pick something to measure about a speaker and then do it. 
MEASURE the response to the step function and improve it.
The voicing is a deviation from this.
Just think of it - the process of engineering! 

A violin is way different.

almarg's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
almarg
8,673 posts
 
Pick something to measure about a speaker and then do it.
MEASURE the response to the step function and improve it.
The voicing is a deviation from this.
Just think of it - the process of engineering!
A violin is way different.
As I mentioned earlier in the thread I have no strong convictions either way about the subject that is primarily under discussion here. But as an electrical engineer I feel compelled to respond to this comment.

It always surprises me how non-engineers often and perhaps usually seem to view the process of engineering as being based primarily on measurements. While I can’t address speaker design specifically (my background is in the design of electronic circuits), in general the process of designing and developing an engineered product involves A LOT more than measurements. First there is the design process, done on paper and/or with computer-based software tools. That is often the most major part of the entire effort. Then extensive ANALYSIS is performed, on paper and/or with computer-based software tools. Computer-based simulations may also be performed. That is followed by fabrication and test of a prototype. Testing of the prototype, in the case of an audio component, will include both measurements AND LISTENING. Inevitably changes will be made to the design during those phases of the project, followed by further measurements and listening, and often additional iterations of the design, analysis, and simulation phases of the project.

In other words when it comes to development of an audio product, at least one that is properly done and is intended for audiophile (as opposed to mass market) applications, "voicing" is one of several integral and important parts of the overall engineering process. Not a deviation from the engineering process.

Regards,
-- Al

mikewerner
93 posts
 
OK again.
Measurement, analysis, and opinion are not the same thing. I understand that. 
Listen to an uncolored system. Either it is to your liking or not. 
When you have something you like, then there are no arguments.

Mike
timlub
1,649 posts
 

Hi Mike & Al,

     I'm thinking back to the late 70's & early 80's.  We hand measured all our own drivers, we listened to each driver individually for beaming/dispersion characteristics, based upon the basics of each driver, we chose crossover slopes for the drivers character and to maximize phase and time alignment... Yes,  even then at least at Marcof, we practiced time and phase alignment.  We would then build the piece, listen extensively and make changes based upon our sessions.  It was quite a process. 

Today, as long as the measurements are correct,  I can run a program and know with a high degree of accuracy pretty dog on close what a speaker will sound like.... Its never far off like "wow, that fooled me"....

Yes, after listening  there is tweaking, but these days, it usually isn't much. The big deal is to understand what different slopes and combination of slopes sound like.  Looking at Frequency and phase charts carefully and then proper choice of slopes and frequency of crossover, you can come fairly close maintaining decent phase slopes using odd order crossovers,  its not always 6db per octave slopes required like so many believe that you must have. 

Ok,  a bit off subject, but I wanted to add to the earlier comments.

Tim

More to discover