butchgo
Emo VIPs
The Dark Side rules
Posts: 567
|
Post by butchgo on Jan 21, 2020 10:18:45 GMT -5
I 2nd this motion!!!!! I really want to know your impression of how the 4-10 sub integrates into the system. Your system looks phenomenal by the way.
|
|
|
Post by jmasterj on Jan 21, 2020 13:42:17 GMT -5
boom I've seen pictures of your systems and I know you have a large room for a pair of pendragons to play comfortably because they are large speakers and they require a large room. I've heard a room that was too small for tekton double impacts they were too large for the space and I believe this persons room is too small for that system. At some point he is going to realize it's more important to fit the speaker to the space than to get the largest speakers you can get. Lets see how long before he puts them up for sell. I'm not a tekton hater I've enjoyed a pair of mini lores for maybe six years too much speaker is just as bad as too small a speaker. But these are things we need to learn along this adventure. imhop
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2020 14:28:09 GMT -5
I 2nd this motion!!!!! I really want to know your impression of how the 4-10 sub integrates into the system. Your system looks phenomenal by the way. The 4-10 does a wonderful job at delivering music I play on the system. I tend to lean towards more woofers in quantity, that is more smaller diameter equaling the overall area of larger woofers. For my ears I tend to hear the distinction on quick successive or rapid notes played together. With the larger woofers what rumbles is more distinct and independent bass notes on smaller woofers, that is, when multiple bass notes are rapidly fired. Anyhoot, that's just my personal reasoning. The sealed enclosure plays everything but as you can see in the picture I only have one 4-10 on the left side of the front sound stage. An issue I am having is that the subs sounds great crossed up to 120hz where the mid bass starts to give away its location while making the hair stand up on the back of my neck. But being crossed upwards so high for a sub I begin to hear where the sub is located on the left side. The sealed enclosure sounds great with any music playing 20hz to 120hz. There's no abrupt roll off or overly peak area at a certain frequency range as with some ported subs the 4-10s just sounds great between 20-120hz with a wide range of music. In order to compensate for the one side "Presence" of the sub I plan to purchase a second 4-10 for the right side. This wasn't something I first thought about. I just planned to make a rack to house Four 4-10s for 16 ten inch subwoofers crossed over below 80hz but they sound so good between 20-120hz this is the direction I'm headed. The 4-10s are active with a 300rms watt amp built in and only when really playing the system insanely loud do they even look like they moving to a decent excursion. Enjoy, William
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2020 14:31:16 GMT -5
boom I've seen pictures of your systems and I know you have a large room for a pair of pendragons to play comfortably because they are large speakers and they require a large room. I've heard a room that was too small for tekton double impacts they were too large for the space and I believe this persons room is too small for that system. At some point he is going to realize it's more important to fit the speaker to the space than to get the largest speakers you can get. Lets see how long before he puts them up for sell. I'm not a tekton hater I've enjoyed a pair of mini lores for maybe six years too much speaker is just as bad as too small a speaker. But these are things we need to learn along this adventure. imhop Have you caught this video by Tekton on Room overload? I personally don't consider my entertainment room small having vaulted ceilings. The entertainment room is in an open floor plan house. So the listening area is 16 ft L x 14 ft W x 16 ft H. But that room is in an open area with no other walls in an area 30 ft by 30+ ft and 16+ ft H. As is now I have the L and R separated by 12 ft and equal distance to the listening position of 12ft forming an equal triangle.
|
|
|
Post by gsand on Jan 21, 2020 15:19:07 GMT -5
boom I've seen pictures of your systems and I know you have a large room for a pair of pendragons to play comfortably because they are large speakers and they require a large room. I've heard a room that was too small for tekton double impacts they were too large for the space and I believe this persons room is too small for that system. At some point he is going to realize it's more important to fit the speaker to the space than to get the largest speakers you can get. Lets see how long before he puts them up for sell. I'm not a tekton hater I've enjoyed a pair of mini lores for maybe six years too much speaker is just as bad as too small a speaker. But these are things we need to learn along this adventure. imhop Have you caught this video by Tekton on Room overload? I personally don't consider my entertainment room small having vaulted ceilings. The entertainment room is in an open floor plan house. So the listening area is 16 ft L x 14 ft W x 16 ft H. But that room is in an open area with no other walls in an area 30 ft by 30+ ft and 16+ ft H. As is now I have the L and R separated by 12 ft and equal distance to the listening position of 12ft forming an equal triangle. I agree, I have a pair of Tekton Double Impacts in a small 11' X 11 room for 2 channel listening and they sound great.
|
|
|
Post by boomzilla on Jan 21, 2020 17:55:32 GMT -5
Overload comes from volume - not from speaker size. You could put Klipschorns in a closet & they'd sound fine up to a certain volume. But as the room size drops, the sensitivity to distortion rises. What might not get noticed in an auditorium can irritate beyond belief in a small room. The advantage of a LOT of cone area is that each driver moves less and less (reducing distortion) at lower volumes.
|
|
|
Post by rbk123 on Jan 21, 2020 18:36:52 GMT -5
What Boom said. Too big of a speaker for a room is for when they're being driven louder than the room warrants. At regular listening levels, based on ambient noise and distance, a large speaker will sound effortless and should disappear far more easily than a smaller speaker. However I do agree his TV is too small.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2020 19:05:13 GMT -5
The advantage of a LOT of cone area is that each driver moves less and less (reducing distortion) at lower volumes. And what if the "overall area" of a large woofer is achieved by smaller drivers in quantity as the contrasting large woofer? I'll write an example below in the post.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2020 19:09:14 GMT -5
What Boom said. Too big of a speaker for a room is for when they're being driven louder than the room warrants. At regular listening levels, based on ambient noise and distance, a large speaker will sound effortless and should disappear far more easily than a smaller speaker. However I do agree his TV is too small. Ha on the too small TV! May be too small though when Top Gun 2 comes out. I might have to make way to the cinema. For me what changed my mind was when working for Lanzar. The then Lanzar van went from one extreme to another while trying to set an SPL record of over 150db. From 8s, 10, 12, 15, 18,21. The 18s and 21s rumbled quick bass notes especially when contrasted with 12s and smaller when equaling the same surface area. The Lanzar van ended up with 12s which set the then spl record that wasn't achievable with the larger woofers. What stuck out in mind while hearing this project was the clarity and distinction of the smaller woofers. Second time I heard an extreme bass solution came by way of a night club in Texas. Had to know what was rattling my glass across the table and hitting so darn hard. The DJ stated the custom subwoofer enclosure housed 48 4" woofers. I just haven't heard a system yet that when contrasted matched up to the smaller [more in quantity] to larger [less in quantity] debate.
|
|
|
Post by boomzilla on Jan 21, 2020 21:50:50 GMT -5
Multiple smaller drivers = single larger driver = no difference. Multiple larger drivers = single bass horn driver = no difference. Moving air is moving air.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2020 13:32:28 GMT -5
Multiple smaller drivers = single larger driver = no difference. Multiple larger drivers = single bass horn driver = no difference. Moving air is moving air. We're on the same page then. Let's go further. Large piston moving a semi truck up and down or several pistons moving several compact cars up and down. While there are many variables to consider the piston required to moving a semi truck must be much larger than the several pistons moving compact cars. In the end it comes down to how responsive may a piston moving a semi truck compare to moving compact cars. Imagine trying to switch directions up or down as fast with a semi on top of a piston rather than compact cars. Given that the piston for the compact cars is as powerful as the piston moving the semi. The piston required [force] to move the larger mass must be greater than for a smaller mass.
|
|
|
Post by boomzilla on Jan 22, 2020 14:26:04 GMT -5
Nope. The load is the same (ignoring analogies) - What you're "pumping" is air. The force applied is a function of the area of the cone(s), the excursion of the cone(s), and the coupling mechanism (if any) to the air.
The more cone area you have (ignoring coupling for the moment), the more air you can move. The area and displacement requirements are inversely proportional - the more cone area you have for a given sound pressure level, the less excursion you need. The converse means that the more excursion you can swing, the less cone area you have to have (again, for that same sound pressure level). That's why the old Carver subs worked despite their minuscule dimensions - those things had ungodly excursion!
But the more common application is to use more cone area - a 24" sub moves a LOT more air for the same excursion as a 4" one. That's why companies (such as Tekton) that want both high sensitivity and high volume use multiple bass drivers - they give more cone area.
One can get around the tight limits of cone area and excursion by using horns to couple the driver to the room air. This is the principle of the Klipschorn corner horn. Its 15" bass driver barely has to move at all to produce high volumes because the horn serves as an "acoustic amplifier" and provides a much better coupling to the room air (think of the bass horn as a megaphone for the woofer). In fact, the K-Horn develops something like 104 decibels from only one watt of input. And because the bass driver barely has to move to get that volume, the intermodulation distortion is also reduced.
Boom
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on Jan 22, 2020 14:32:30 GMT -5
Multiple smaller drivers = single larger driver = no difference. Multiple larger drivers = single bass horn driver = no difference. Moving air is moving air. We're on the same page then. Let's go further. Large piston moving a semi truck up and down or several pistons moving several compact cars up and down. While there are many variables to consider the piston required to moving a semi truck must be much larger than the several pistons moving compact cars. In the end it comes down to how responsive may a piston moving a semi truck compare to moving compact cars. Imagine trying to switch directions up or down as fast with a semi on top of a piston rather than compact cars. Given that the piston for the compact cars is as powerful as the piston moving the semi. The piston required [force] to move the larger mass must be greater than for a smaller mass. It takes many small drivers to equal a larger driver. If I'm not mistaken it takes 4 8 inch drivers to equal a 10 or 12 inch driver. Each of those drivers would require a magnet assembly etc. Not to mention one has to take in to account crossovers and making several drivers act as one without acoustic issues. So it's not quite as simple as the variable being numerous small versus one large. My Axiom M80's also use numerous drivers including tweeters. However with the twin tweeters per speakers, it comes at the price of comb filtering.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2020 14:43:53 GMT -5
Nope. The load is the same (ignoring analogies) - What you're "pumping" is air. The force applied is a function of the area of the cone(s), the excursion of the cone(s), and the coupling mechanism (if any) to the air. The more cone area you have (ignoring coupling for the moment), the more air you can move. The area and displacement requirements are inversely proportional - the more cone area you have for a given sound pressure level, the less excursion you need. The converse means that the more excursion you can swing, the less cone area you have to have (again, for that same sound pressure level). That's why the old Carver subs worked despite their minuscule dimensions - those things had ungodly excursion! But the more common application is to use more cone area - a 24" sub moves a LOT more air for the same excursion as a 4" one. That's why companies (such as Tekton) that want both high sensitivity and high volume use multiple bass drivers - they give more cone area. One can get around the tight limits of cone area and excursion by using horns to couple the driver to the room air. This is the principle of the Klipschorn corner horn. Its 15" bass driver barely has to move at all to produce high volumes because the horn serves as an "acoustic amplifier" and provides a much better coupling to the room air (think of the bass horn as a megaphone for the woofer). In fact, the K-Horn develops something like 104 decibels from only one watt of input. And because the bass driver barely has to move to get that volume, the intermodulation distortion is also reduced. Boom I don't understand how you can say they are the same when the mass sized speaker of a semi truck is contrasted to several compact car size speakers distributed across several pistons. When speaking of distortion I'd also think that a 24" sub area would be more prone to physical distortion in contrast to say 60 4" speakers equaling the same displacement [that number is random and not checked]. The greater the mass the greater the force required to deal with the inertia. Switching directions of a larger mass speaker is going to require a larger more powerful "piston". Unless I am missing something this also does bring into question efficiency and physical limitations of an area distorting.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2020 14:51:15 GMT -5
We're on the same page then. Let's go further. Large piston moving a semi truck up and down or several pistons moving several compact cars up and down. While there are many variables to consider the piston required to moving a semi truck must be much larger than the several pistons moving compact cars. In the end it comes down to how responsive may a piston moving a semi truck compare to moving compact cars. Imagine trying to switch directions up or down as fast with a semi on top of a piston rather than compact cars. Given that the piston for the compact cars is as powerful as the piston moving the semi. The piston required [force] to move the larger mass must be greater than for a smaller mass. It takes many small drivers to equal a larger driver. If I'm not mistaken it takes 4 8 inch drivers to equal a 10 or 12 inch driver. Each of those drivers would require a magnet assembly etc. Not to mention one has to take in to account crossovers and making several drivers act as one without acoustic issues. So it's not quite as simple as the variable being numerous small versus one large. My Axiom M80's also use numerous drivers including tweeters. However with the twin tweeters per speakers, it comes at the price of comb filtering. Agreed. What interests me is the previous example I gave with the Lanzar van using 8, 10, 12, 15, 18 etc speakers during prototypes when pushing the spl record. Why did the 12s hit hardest setting the spl record than with 8s or 10s or likewise larger 15 and 18s+? The then spl record was set with 12s [no smaller] but more in quantity than with larger woofers less in quantity. Spl aside it was a night and day difference listening to more in quantity rather than less in quantity larger woofers equaling the same overall area. As stated before to me that day was a game changer. Lets just say it is only about pushing air why then don't they make 9 inch tweeters rather than numerous tweeters in array? Can't the larger 9 inch area speaker produce the same equivalent of say 15 speakers in an array for a specific frequency range? Or is there a point of physical limitation with such a large surface area trying to move from one direction to another as well as physical area distorting [flexing]?
|
|
|
Post by boomzilla on Jan 22, 2020 16:21:30 GMT -5
The scope of this is moving faster than I can keep up... I think I can explain it, but some help from KeithL or DYohn might be better... So here's my best shot. Yes, as cone area increases, the moving mass of the cone and suspension goes up (a lot). But this need not be an impediment. If (and this is a big if) you can move enough current through the voice coil and/or provide a strong enough magnetic field, then driving a heavy cone and suspension is just as efficient as driving a bunch of smaller ones. If that's the case, then, why don't manufacturers all use HUGE woofers? In a word, cost. Big, heavy woofers require big, expensive boxes. It's also expensive to make voice coils that can tolerate huge amounts of current. It's also expensive to make magnets with very strong magnetic fields. So in garbulky's Axiom M80 speakers, for example, it's MUCH less expensive to use two or more 8" woofers than a single 18" one. Why did the multiple 12" cones put out more volume in the car than did the bigger speakers? I suspect that the 12" ones happened to have the best combination of cone/suspension mass, lowest voice coil inductance, and strongest magnetic field. In other words, using different parameters might well have allowed the other size drivers to rival or exceed the array of 12" ones that were actually used. Next - Why don't manufacturers use huge tweeters? Because as the wave length of the sound becomes (much) shorter with frequency, the driver tends to "beam." In other words, the dispersion of any driver is pretty good at wavelengths longer than the diameter of the piston - but as frequencies rise, dispersion narrows. This makes speakers sound funny unless you're sitting exactly on the tweeter axis. It's also difficult to make larger, heavier speaker diaphragms and suspensions vibrate rapidly enough to do treble frequencies. I've left out a LOT of stuff, but before I "do a Levkoff" and write a short book, I'll stop here. Boom
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2020 11:53:15 GMT -5
Can’t you get a shot with all the grills off? I bet it looks like your about to get shot at by a battleship! Finally took the grills off today for dusting. Here's some pictures of the Tektons without grills:
|
|
|
Post by pedrocols on Feb 19, 2020 12:12:19 GMT -5
I counted 53 drivers lol...
|
|
|
Post by thompson12 on Feb 19, 2020 16:07:35 GMT -5
I counted 53 drivers lol... I count 55 Mitch
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2020 16:24:49 GMT -5
I counted 53 drivers lol... I count 55 Mitch 55 is right.
|
|