2. speakers
  3. 1290558159

Transmission Line Bass

As a long time proponent of good bass without subs, I like tinkering with different ways of approching the age old problem of recreating all energy below 100Hz.
Seriously, if you look at loudspeaker responses, everything seems goes to hell just below that point, swinging wildly in output response, almost independent of many of the typical factors that would be indicators of performance.
So, the question.
Who among us has had extensive Transmission Line Bass Experience in listening, (like me with the IMF's in days gone by, with Bud Fried being a wonderful mentor to me).
In Jim Thiel's lab, one time he told me 'candidly' that Transmission Line Designs 'in theory' don't work. (Another discussion for another time). But he, like me was a bass freak of the first order, loving a rich full bottom end, hence some of his equalized designs early on. They were an all out attempt to bend the laws of physics.
So, what do we think of Transmission Line bass--so, if you're familiar with the sonics though actual listening, and can express first hand opinions let us hear your impressions of the differences between ported, passive radiators and transmission.

Thanks in advance...

Larry
lrsky
frommerstop
38 posts
 
I've had a few TL speakers (dcm,Freid & TDL),and the main draw with all of them was base performance. For me, TL systems seem to just sound "right". I'm not sure if they are really better, but they sure seemed to go lower than their little woofers had any right to!
transaudio
96 posts
 
I think the appeal of Transmission lines was (when done properly) was they did not have peaky low end boost as so many short port speakers offered at the same time. There were a lot of crappy cone speakers around when Freid was hot in the late 70s. Really nice extended lows from very small drive units. However, the TL vs port is a bit unfair, like comparing apples to oranges. A transmission line is BIG, and even a long port speaker was much more compact and workable into a room. Most purchasers would not be comparing a TL to the more compact monitor for a host of (non audio) reasons. A Dahlquist DQ10 was easier to work into a room than a big tall wide top of the line Freid..


Brad
frommerstop
38 posts
 
My DCM TF700s go much lower than DQ10s ever could, and with a much smaller foot print. They are about the same size as DQ20s, but have better low end than those as well. I'm not sure I'd be so quick to dismiss TL speakers as overly big for their base response.
transaudio
96 posts
 
Frommerstop:
I don't think TL speakers are overly big, that was not my point. My comment was the TL is not free of cost to the consumer; there is a size "price" for a long transmission line (even folded as much as possible).
Brad
frommerstop
38 posts
 
Brad,
I would still tend to disagree with your assertion that TL speakers shouldn't be compared to ported. Since small and large speakers, with deep, and not so deep base, have been offered in both designs... as well as sealed & infinite baffle, for that matter. I think most people look for the best compromise between price, sound, and size.

Since there are small speakers made with each of these base systems the listener has to choose based on those three criteria, even if they are looking for a small speaker. The only base system I'd categorically eliminate from their choices would be horn loaded... even a "folded" horn loaded design would not be competent for a small, say "bookshelf" speaker.

Fried, DCM, and others, have offered true bookshelf sized speakers over the years, that benefited from TL porting. Of course, due to their size (and subsequent TL length), they didn't go super low, but then again neither did their Vented, or sealed counterparts.

Cliff
More to discover