Do 1st Order XO's produce a smaller


In my mind I'm trying to come to terms with two possible conflicting desires:

1. The desire for transparency, accuracy, dynamics and a wide halographic soundstage presentation.

2. The desire for a much larger sweet spot to compensate for multiple listening positions. I want the advantage of on-axis detail, but I don't want this space to be limited by inches or a few feet.

The concept of time coherency makes perfect sense to me and seems to be a superior design philosophy in conjunction with the ability to control phase shift (smear). However, based on what I've read it appears most of the 1st order time coherent designs being created today have relatively narrow sweet spots. If you're on-axis these designs can be musical nirvana, but what if you're off-axis or move to another location in the room? Typically you tend to lose the benefit of this design.

Conversely one has the option of going the Ohm "Walsh" or Meridian route and get an incredibly wide/deep soundstage because of the 360 degree sound dispersion. I've heard you can move around within a room and the sound quality does not deteriorate significantly. In other words this type of speaker design fills up an entire room and sounds great where ever you are sitting or standing. However, are we giving up a critical level of accuracy with this design approach? With sound esstentially arriving at our ears at different times are we really getting an accurate representation of each instrument? Is the music being smeared in some way?

I guess like most audiophiles I want my cake and eat it too! I want transparency/accuracy/dynamics as well as a wide and deep soundstage that doesn't depend on a 12" on-axis listening/positioning limitation. Are there any designs that meet these qualifications?
128x128dawgbyte

Showing 5 responses by dawgbyte

Phasecorrect, I was hoping a GMA owner would chime in and comment on the sweet spot of their speakers. I've got my eye squarely fixed on the C-3's. FYI, Srajan Ebaen of 6Moons is suppose to be doing a review on the C-3's in the near future.

Thanks for your response.
Howdy bombaywalla... your post does confirm the only hesitancy I have regarding 1st or time coherent speakers.

Like I said I'm struggling with what is more important to me. Because my listening/HT room is open to a kitchen area I'm not sure if it's better for the 360 approach of the Walsh design or Gallo Ref. III's or a first order design like those of the C-3's. If only I had access to in home demos.

Cheers,
DB
Konus Audio Systems (http://www.konus-audio.com) single driver speakers are supposed to be even better than the Carolina Audio version. Having said that, I've read enough reviews on single driver designs to suspect they just don't demonstrate the full spectrum of dynamics that a full three-way can provide.
Cdc - I think you may be on to something. A few years ago when I was auditioning speakers I visited a B&W dealer and was amazed at how narrow the sweet spot was for virtually all their speakers except the most expensive Nautalus series. The dealer switched out CD players and altered the position of the speakers and still if I moved my head 10 inches in either direction I was off-axis. Call me crazy, but I just can't imagine anyone enjoying that type of experience at home.

If 360 degree dispersion designs can create a wide and deep soundstage, generate compelling dynamics and the transparency and realism that audiophiles crave then why aren't more people buying into this design theory. Gallo's Ref. III's and Ohm's Walsh series are both getting good press reviews, but I don't see a lot of posters on this board or others flocking to those designs. The Ohm Walsh series is very intriguing, but IMO they aren't the least bit aesthetically pleasing. The Gallo's look very cool, but can they really deliver?

Dynamic vs. Passive, Stats vs. Planars vs. Horns et. al. When are we going to get a speaker that fills a room with the type of sound that blows us away and doesn't cost the same as a Mercedes? Why buy a $8K pair of speakers that require one to sit at the exact spot to recieve the full measure of the design? It's all so confusing.
Ecclectique - regarding the Duevel's and Tannoy's. With respect to the Duevel's I've read some reviews on the Bella Luna and they sound very promising, with some inherent limitations. You can probably get some dealer info. from this site:
http://www.cd-konzert.de/loudspeaker.htm

Another interesting speaker design concept worth noting is the Oskar Heil A.V.T. (Air Velocity Transformer). Oskar Heil Speakers has recently introduced a new model called the Kithara ($4,900). The A.V.T. uses a lightweight diaphragm, folded into a number of accordion-like pleats to which aluminium foil strips are bonded. The Diaphragm is mounted in an intense magnetic field and a music signal is applied to the aluminum strips. This causes the pleats to alternately expand and contract in a bellows-like manner in conformance with the music signal forcing air out of the pleats and sucking in on the other side, the air movement is 5 times bigger than the movement of the membrane, therefore also the velocity must be 5 times bigger. The benefit of this transducer design is better differentiate sounds.

Tannoys! I've worked in the multimedia industry for over 14 years and spent many hours in professional editing suites in NYC, Los Angeles and Atlanta, so you know I've heard a lot of Tannoy professional monitors. The Tannoy monitors I've heard are absolutely fantastic, practically an industry standard in the '90's. However, I didn't think their floorstanding speakers were able capture the same magic, especially when I listened to them next to Vandersteen 5's and Martin Logan's. I thought my Hales T-5's were far superior to any of the Tannoy's I listened to.

You're right this is a very interesting subject. Perhaps the ultimate speaker is a hybrid that includes an active sub and mid-range and a 360 degree tweeter design.