Loudspeaker dispersion, Horn vs Domes vs Panels etc

[AJ Soundfield]

Didn't want to tread in other manufacturers forums, but I've seen this question asked innumerable times.
A large horn system, a narrow cone n dome speaker and a panel planar/stat/dipole etc will have very different polar radiation and dispersion characteristics. When placed in a bounded space/room, there will be large differences in the angles, strength and timing of both early and late reflections, vs the "direct" soundwaves launch from the speaker.
The resulting perceived sound at the listening seat is a combination of this direct/indirect sound, affecting imaging, timbre, etc, etc.
There are many other factors of course, but it is hardly surprising that the presentation of solo instruments vs full orchestra, will be markedly different, with imaging, soundstage, etc.

cheers,

AJ

 

[pdub]

Didn't want to tread in other manufacturers forums, but I've seen this question asked innumerable times.
A large horn system, a narrow cone n dome speaker and a panel planar/stat/dipole etc will have very different polar radiation and dispersion characteristics. When placed in a bounded space/room, there will be large differences in the angles, strength and timing of both early and late reflections, vs the "direct" soundwaves launch from the speaker.
The resulting perceived sound at the listening seat is a combination of this direct/indirect sound, affecting imaging, timbre, etc, etc.
There are many other factors of course, but it is hardly surprising that the presentation of solo instruments vs full orchestra, will be markedly different, with imaging, soundstage, etc.

cheers,

AJ

Exactly my suspicion, AJ. When I replaced Revels with AGs I was looking for a different perspective on the music. Subconsciously, because going to a more expensive speaker, I may have also been expecting "more...but better" across the musical spectrum when what I really got just different -- and different can go both ways ...

What I was looking for in the AG forum was the experience of other Mezzo owners with orchestral music and what conditions created the greatest musical satisfaction.

The most surprising thing with the big, dynamic horns is, at least in the constraints of my system and room, they seem to do intimate "better" whereas large-scale comes off a bit too broadly. It may be an "I-am-there" vs "they-are-here" difference in the way the various types of transducers reproduce ambiance cues, and in a domestic room -- with horns -- the "they-are-here" effect of large-scale ensemble is limited/down-sized/telescoped by the relative small-scale of the domestic environment.

Or I could just be talking out my netherparts and don't have the damn things set up right ...

Parker

Parker

 

[AJ Soundfield]

When I replaced Revels with AGs I was looking for a different perspective on the music. Subconsciously, because going to a more expensive speaker, I may have also been expecting "more...but better" across the musical spectrum when what I really got just different -- and different can go both ways ...

Well, those 2 examples are about polar opposites, pardon the pun. The Salon has extremely wide/even dispersion, among the widest examples of "narrow cabinet/cone n dome" category. The AG is a fairly large horn. Assuming the same room and roughly same listening position, you should get markedly different sound, including soundstage/imaging. The AGs will give you far higher direct/forward radiated to early/late reflected sound, the Revels the opposite. Quite a bit of sound will be radiated behind the Revel. It is well established what this results in. Apparent source width (ASW), spaciousness, depth, "precision" of instruments placement, etc, etc, etc, along of course with the perceived timbre and tone. A sweep measure at LP of both will reveal different sound power slopes from bass>treble, the Revels should have more energy going into the indirect field.
There of course may be differences in dynamics etc, but you were mainly asking (I think) about large scale orchestral imaging/soundstage. That part was highly predictable based on basic perceptual science.
Preference for one vs the other, is another matter entirely.
As a speaker manufacturer, I'll try to keep descriptions of things as generic as possible, lest accusations fly
So I'm speaking in general terms.

cheers,

AJ

 

[pdub]

You seem to be suggesting that the orchestral perspective I enjoyed with the Revels is not going to happen with the horns? I’m perfectly fine with using the horns for what they do best and getting my big classical fix elsewhere. I don’t want to waste a lot of time and effort (such as carrying those behemoths down into the basement, where I can exert more influence on the acoustics of the room) on trying to squeeze something out of the horns that really isn’t available.

 

[AJ Soundfield]

You seem to be suggesting that the orchestral perspective I enjoyed with the Revels is not going to happen with the horns?

Yep. However, maybe on smaller ensemble/solo the advantage tips to horns? Plus the horns were probably a heck of a lot less fussy with placement, plop them down, even relatively close to sidewalls, toe in a bit and hit play. The opposite of the wide dispersion cone n domes...
IOW, pro/cons...and preference.

 

[pdub]

Yeah, jazz groups sound like they’re in the room, and when I’m in the back of the room (kitchen) it basically sounds like the room is a jazz club. Neil Young Massey Hall puts a sonic hologram of the man and his guitar 9’ in front of me. Solo piano is usually a command performance (given appropriate miking).
I’ve got 5 Gallo Stradas with a pair of fathom 110’s in the basement — it’s a ton of fun on 5 channel classical as long as the engineer didn’t overdo the rear channel mix.

 

[AJ Soundfield]

I’ve got 5 Gallo Stradas with a pair of fathom 110’s in the basement — it’s a ton of fun on 5 channel classical as long as the engineer didn’t overdo the rear channel mix.

I hear you, judiciousness of the rear mix is absolutely critical, the science says it should be diffuse field reverberant ambiance only, not sax players jumping out at you.
Even my 2ch listening is 4ch enhanced, as to me, that is far more realistic with acoustic based live type sound. YMMV.

cheers,

AJ

 

[Joseph R.]

AJ: Would like to put my 2 cents in here if I may. I have lived with omni/polydirectional speakers for over 30 years. About 6 years ago I left my Shahinian Hawks at Dick Shahinians doorstep. I asked him to put together a direct firing ensemble just for me.


Was never a “Horn” person as they always sounded beamy to me. In addition I found the hard material or reflective nature of the horn bell to impose it’s own character to the presentation. No doubt AG has engineered out these drawbacks to great lengths. Nevertheless I still hear them.


After a number of years I visited a friend who has similar experience with Shahinians. He also has the Hawks, but with Double Eagle woofer bottoms. My Hawks used the stock Hawk bottoms. In any case, although the polydirectional transducers spewed sound “all over the place”, the actual soundstage was smaller than that which was produced by my direct radiating Shahinian prototypes. My friend eventually agreed that this is the case.


So my point is that wider dispersion does not necessarily translate to a more accurate image and/or soundstage.

 

[AJ Soundfield]

After a number of years I visited a friend who has similar experience with Shahinians. He also has the Hawks, but with Double Eagle woofer bottoms. My Hawks used the stock Hawk bottoms. In any case, although the polydirectional transducers spewed sound “all over the place”, the actual soundstage was smaller than that which was produced by my direct radiating Shahinian prototypes. My friend eventually agreed that this is the case.

Hi Joe, its been eons since I've heard Shahinians, but that should change Sunday.
Yes, it's clear when I saw pics of an Diapson with the drivers exposed, that it was "poly" directional rather than omni.
I knew exactly what I would see when I searched for a review with measurements. Tis the beauty of Physics, it applies regardless.
Your comments on the the soundstage vs your more conventional "forward" mounted drivers (which I noted, radiate a significant amount backwards also) doesn't surprise me. The "poly" radiation using multiple spaced(!!) point source drivers will create massive interference patterns, so will be very tricky to place and get to sound right in many rooms.

A true "omni" will have a far more correlated and coherent wave launch, as exemplified by MBLs

The resulting spatial reproduction will be markedly different. Next time we are at Mikes, we'll have to sit for a listen, he carries MBL now. The main drawback is that breathing room is a must, so small to very small rooms present a dilemma.
If one wishes to stay away from heavily treating a living room, a highly forward directional - like widely known horns, or widely unknown, like cardioids, could be advantageous. Could, because we know preferences vary quite a bit in this hobby. Just check out the SPhile comments for the Diapson! Or any speaker/amp/etc thread.:happy:

So my point is that wider dispersion does not necessarily translate to a more accurate image and/or soundstage.

That is largely in agreement with what I posted previously. Though opinions of "accuracy" can differ. YMMV.

cheers,

AJ

 

[Joseph R.]

AJ: Please don’t take anything Stereophile said about the Diapason as gospel. I know the real story here. This was a very political review with much jockeying for position between JG Holt and John Atkinson. This and the Bedini 150/150 review was mostly bogus. Till this day no one at Stereophile can say anything good about Shahinians without a side caveat. They all drink from the same trough.

 

[AJ Soundfield]

AJ: Please don’t take anything Stereophile said about the Diapason as gospel.

I'm an agnostic heretic, I don't.
I think you misunderstood what I wrote - I'm referring to the Reader Comments reaction to the article, which vary significantly vs the reviewer opinions. Exactly as I said, YMMV.

cheers,

AJ