Boring Neutral Speakers

Tony, just out of interest but isn't it the other way around, i.e. this NAD is actually based on a Gryphon integrated?

Last week, this NAD appeared able to drive Dynaudio contour 1.3SE's (a pretty neutral though highly musical speaker BTW :MILD: ) to remarkably good results in my rather resonating room.

 

I think discussing the frequency response of a speaker is pointless unless the room is severely treated for 1st reflections, standing waves, RT60 etc.

 

Agreed. But he did ask!

 

I thought it was the Tabu Century that was pretty much identical. Is the Callisto 2100 derived from the Tabu?

 

JTC, looks more like +/- 4db to me I'm afraid? Not trying to criticise, I'm sure they sound great.

 

You're quite right greg, it's the Gryphon Tabu Century and the NAD S300 that are pretty much identical. There was a thread about it here a while back.

The Callisto 2100 looks to be a quite different design.

Michael.

 

I do not agree (I'm speaking about classical Music).
The position of the microphones are close to the Instruments and detect only a very small part of the concert hall ambient sound comparing to what a listener would hear sitting at the bests seats. Some recordings even have hardly any ambient sound!
If all ambient sound would be recorded, nobody would buy the CD because it would sound terrible in most of the places.

 

..and especially when using an equalizer to archieve a linear frequency response at the sweet point.

 

Indeed, but a RCS should get the room out of the way and not correct the speaker IMHO.

 

But it doesn't, it has no way of telling the difference between the speaker and the room. Apart from having a very high adjustment resolution the RCS doesn't really do anything any better than other corrective EQs as far as I know.

BTW, are you talking about 'an' RCS (room corrective system?) or the TACT RCS?

 

Yet to hear any RCS give a geniunely musically and involving sound

 

What is the difference to use a RCS, or anything else which allows you to have a linear frequency response at the sweet spot, than a non linear speakers with lots of faults which also lets you have (per chance) a linear frequency reponse?

I know this is an ipothetical question.

What I mean is that using these electronic devices make any speaker non linear so if you use them, what is the point of buying linear frequency speakers (studio monitors)?

 

Not at all Thorsten. I am suggesting that controlling reflections with room treatment is preferable to artificially controlling the directivity of the sound to my ears.

Whilst I fully understand your point, and have listened to similar systems, the majority of listeners do seem to prefer a less controlled presentation, particularly those who listen predomenently to studio material.

 

Tenson, it's only +-4dB outwith the extremes - and bear in mind that's a Stereophile test plot, so their methodology might differ from Ap's. Official spec if +-3dB through 28Hz to 40KHz. Anyway, yeah, they sound magnificent, even with a paltry 8w!

 

Greg, Michael, thanks for your comments. The owner who brought in the (heavy weighting ) S300 actually also reffered to the Gryphon.

 

Hi,

Some noteworthy observations.

Very early in my Dipole experiments I got to measure a friends open baffle in an very "life" room, no treatment etc.

A few things stood out, namely a rather flatter than average far-field response and most shocking, a flat and rather low RT60, especially one that missed the usual boost at low frequencies, plus room-modes where much less in evidence than with traditional speakers. Sound was very good too and that froma really inexpensive and not at all well measuring driver (a now discontinued Audax Fullranger with Whizzer from Maplin).

Placing a pair of coneventional (and pretty good) 2-Ways in the same room sounded and measured completely horrible, total loss, no insurance.

Ciao T

 

Hi,

Not neccesarily. I know many of the newer recordings of major labels are guilty as charged, but many historical recordings from major labels used more realistic miking as do certain specialist "labels" in this day and age.

These are what I call "bad" recordings. If you catually wish to give these recordings anything like a reasonable spatiality you need what we used to call in my Pro-Audio days "An Eventide", after one of the first boxed up digital room simulators from Eventide (horribly expensive at the tyme). More modern Items are available including suitable ActiveX Plugins for windows based audio programmes. You can also get excellent remastering Equalisers in software and hardware.

BEST OF ALL, using a dedicated Effect, rather than your speakers and room to do the job of creating fake ambiance and adjusting tonal balance is that the degree of the effect is not only adjustable, but that a BYPASS option is fitted.

Funny, many Decca LP's recording using the Old "Decca Tree" Mike arrangement sound extremely natural, realistic and with excellent tonal balance. And that while using omnidirectional microphones far from the instruments, while picking up a lot of ambient and indirect sound as well and without loosing much imaging either.

My view anyway.

Ciao T

 

Do you know much "far" is?

PS: don't omnidirectional microphones avoid interferences from the room? Our ears aren't working like omnidirectional microphones, or do they?

 

Hi,

Matter of taste perhaps, but perhaps also of exposure.

I find most room treatment visually unacceptable, so in the interest of a good sound integrated into my living space I prefer a solution that inherently limits the interactions of speaker and room.

Ciao T

 

Controlling room reflections is first port of call, as these are nigh impossible to correct with an RCS. But also RT60 and reducing impact of standing waves is better done with acoustic treatment. RCS should be 'the icing on the cake'

3D, dipolar speakers have very little sideward energy, so are great if you want to place them close to a side wall. Also, the dipolar nature of the bass greatly reduces bass problems in most rooms, if correctly placed in regard to the wall behind the speaker.

Tensen, indeed will you correct speaker response with an RCS, but if there is less to correct, the end result will probably be better... When some dips in the speaker are phase related for example, correcting them with RCS could have nasty effect (just an example). Amplitude aberrations of the speaker are less of a problem them time/phase problems.