Hi all, I'm afraid this is yet another advice request. I am at the final stages of designing an active 3 way speaker and would like some advice or critique. I'm OK at carpentry and have friends with more experience, but my DIY experience is limited to a pair of Paul Carmody's Carreras and one CCS Criton 1TDX (as a gift but I made sure to test them first 
). I've also listened to most of the drivers I consider below but not all of them.
Objectives:
Given the requirement for low volume listening, after reading just about everything I could on this forum I am looking for drivers with sensitivity > 90 dB, low Rms and high Qms, especially for the mid-low frequencies. I know there's no guarantee but it seems like good guidance. So here's what I have concluded:
). I've also listened to most of the drivers I consider below but not all of them.Objectives:
- They need to work well at low volume, 60-75 dB. Occasionally I'd like some more but nothing past 95 dB.
- My main motivation is to listen to classical music. The Carreras are great but sound staging and instrument separation gets a bit confused with large scale recordings. Also, ideally I'd like more detail on high frequencies.
- Ideal sound: detailed, dynamic, clean, with good instrument separation but still musical and realistic.
- Budget is variable - I can save up and wait to get the right driver, but I don't want to go crazy given my limited experience. Currently sitting at ~£2k (w/o amps).
- Amplification: probably Hypex Fusion. I'm also considering a miniDSP Flex8 + DIY amp based on 3x TPA3225.
- I want to experiment a bit with XO points and slopes, so I'd like a bit of overlap and avoid drivers with bad cone breakup.
- I'm OK with F3 in the 40s if it means good quality bass.
- Volume for the woofer enclosure can vary up to 40L. Ideal is <30L. Mid+Tweeter will be sealed separately.
Given the requirement for low volume listening, after reading just about everything I could on this forum I am looking for drivers with sensitivity > 90 dB, low Rms and high Qms, especially for the mid-low frequencies. I know there's no guarantee but it seems like good guidance. So here's what I have concluded:
- Tweeter: Bliesma t25b is my favourite I've listened to. Others I have listened to and I like are Hiquphon OW1/2, Satori TW29R-B and the TX version. I'd like good dispersion as I want to enjoy the music even if I'm not sitting in the ideal position.
- Mid: I would really like to use the Morel EM-1308. Again, just because I've listened to it (paired with a OW1 and a Satori WO24) and was really impressed. But sensitivity is 88 dB and I don't know how good dome midranges are at low volume. Alternatives are Scan-Speak 15M/4531K00 (I like the midrange in my Carreras a lot, imagine not having to also do LF duties) or the imaging of the Satori MW13TX-04, maybe Wavecor? Suggestions are welcome.
- Low: This is quite critical I think for low volume. Wavecor WF223BD01 is my front runner. Planning to use a ~27L sealed enclosure with a Linkwitz transform as this driver can take a lot of power. I was really impressed by the WF182BD10 clone in the CSS Criton, but that one needs a little bit of volume (as in current) and after many comparisons I think that the T/S parameters of the WF223 should be more favourable. I have listened to Satori WO24 paper and found them impressively deep but not as dynamic as the Wavecor.
- I am a bit worried that the WF223 will have to be crossed relatively high to the EM-1308, at least 6-700 Hz, so it may have the same 'congested' lower midrange I feel in the Carreras sometimes. Especially with the Linkwitz transform. Should I be? Would a ported enclosure help? Any of the other midranges I mentioned would give me a much wider overlap to experiment with, but I just like the attack and detail of the Morel.
- Are my assumptions about what T/S parameters to look for sensible? Does anyone have experience with the WF223 at low volume?
- Any other suggestion, question or observation welcome.
Last edited:
Hi,
1) Low volume should not be a problem with loudspeakers(distortion is lower), but subjective perception & ear sensitivity can ask for somewhat different SPL/frequency relation IMO.
2) WF223BD02 seems to be better suited for small sealed box compared to 01 version judging from t/s parameters. Basically Qts should be between 0.4-0.5, Vas not large for sealed.
3) Can not comment about integration between 8.75" woofer and 2" mid. I think that diameter difference is on a high side, but since you mentioned liking EM-1308 it could still sound quite good even with 6-700 Hz xover freq.
Regards
1) Low volume should not be a problem with loudspeakers(distortion is lower), but subjective perception & ear sensitivity can ask for somewhat different SPL/frequency relation IMO.
2) WF223BD02 seems to be better suited for small sealed box compared to 01 version judging from t/s parameters. Basically Qts should be between 0.4-0.5, Vas not large for sealed.
3) Can not comment about integration between 8.75" woofer and 2" mid. I think that diameter difference is on a high side, but since you mentioned liking EM-1308 it could still sound quite good even with 6-700 Hz xover freq.
Regards
I listen to a lot of classical music at 70-80 db. I prefer woofers of 99 db 1w1m to 89. In the USA I do not have a problem installing 2 enclosures of 184 L in my room. I suppose in the UK 27 L is your limit due to your room. My music room is 4.5 m W, 3.5 m H, 11 m long. I sit 3 m from the speakers which are up on poles over a Hammond organ. Alternate listening positions are at the Dining Room table 7 m away, and at the breakfast table 9 m away.
Another observation, WF223BD01/02 definitely have cone breakup above 1000 hz. The woofer I am listening to now, 1505-8kadt is used by the vendor up to 1800 hz with a 12 db/octave crossover. The response is +-3db 54-17500. Unfortunately my cabs do not go below 54 hz at the front of a stage, but are enjoyable to 32 hz backed against a hard plaster wall for 3 db room gain. I do not aim to jiggle my innards as a real 32 organ' pipe would do. I do not use bass boost as cone excursion with a phono cartridge on a LP due to footsteps is a problem with a wood floor on 2"x14" joists.
As far as imaging, I find 2 mike recordings give me better stage simulation than multimike recordings like the infamous London FFRR. Imaging is not as good at the alternate listening locations, due to the speakers being pointed at the LR couch against one wall.
Another observation, WF223BD01/02 definitely have cone breakup above 1000 hz. The woofer I am listening to now, 1505-8kadt is used by the vendor up to 1800 hz with a 12 db/octave crossover. The response is +-3db 54-17500. Unfortunately my cabs do not go below 54 hz at the front of a stage, but are enjoyable to 32 hz backed against a hard plaster wall for 3 db room gain. I do not aim to jiggle my innards as a real 32 organ' pipe would do. I do not use bass boost as cone excursion with a phono cartridge on a LP due to footsteps is a problem with a wood floor on 2"x14" joists.
As far as imaging, I find 2 mike recordings give me better stage simulation than multimike recordings like the infamous London FFRR. Imaging is not as good at the alternate listening locations, due to the speakers being pointed at the LR couch against one wall.
Last edited:
Well, the DSP thing together with signal splitting is absurd in the logic of the title.
I'd favour a single amplifier and since low volume don't bring a driver to the limits ( break up, over excursion, etc?!?) the infamous first order one component filter for each way could be used. At low power a midrange could be used without filter, I guess. A tweeter with ferrofluid can be used with a single cap.
I'd favour a design with small drivers
The title suggests low efficiency, so a 30 W amplifier would be OK for, say, 80 dB?!
I'd favour a single amplifier and since low volume don't bring a driver to the limits ( break up, over excursion, etc?!?) the infamous first order one component filter for each way could be used. At low power a midrange could be used without filter, I guess. A tweeter with ferrofluid can be used with a single cap.
I'd favour a design with small drivers
The title suggests low efficiency, so a 30 W amplifier would be OK for, say, 80 dB?!
Do you have experience in measuring the acoustic output of speakers? Not only level, but also distortions and delay spectra? If no, I'd strongly advise to start with learning that. You can't design a proper three way loudspeaker system without performing the right kind of measurements. You also will have to master some basic knowledge wrt dispersion behaviour of loudspeaker drivers in baffles/enclosures.
That is, if you want to spend your 2k well. But see it like this. The necessary investment in an audio interface and simple measuring microphone (or USB mike, since you're going active) is about one tenth of those 2k and that investment will pay out for 2k or more easily.
That is, if you want to spend your 2k well. But see it like this. The necessary investment in an audio interface and simple measuring microphone (or USB mike, since you're going active) is about one tenth of those 2k and that investment will pay out for 2k or more easily.
Hi again,
I was not satisfied with MiniDSP as well. Long time ago I have purchased couple of 4 channel boards. They had high noise floor(hiss), horrible screeching noise on shut-down, that sounded like it was about to blow tweeters up, and finally one of them started refusing to connect to a PC. Maybe it was fixed in newer iterations, who knows ?
So later I threw it and bough an ESX DSP that is used for automotive applications, and it works well so far.
With active DSP & DAC systems there is one caveat, and it's performance on low level. The full resolution of these systems can not be utilized in such a case and sometimes there is a problem of hiss. That means it's quite useful to have volume control between DSP & power amp. High tolerance 4 channel volume pots or attenuators are already expensive and difficult to find, while 6 channel is perhaps near unobtanium. Given this the DSP/DAC for a 3 way system becomes a critical component and should be chosen carefully.
Regards
I was not satisfied with MiniDSP as well. Long time ago I have purchased couple of 4 channel boards. They had high noise floor(hiss), horrible screeching noise on shut-down, that sounded like it was about to blow tweeters up, and finally one of them started refusing to connect to a PC. Maybe it was fixed in newer iterations, who knows ?
So later I threw it and bough an ESX DSP that is used for automotive applications, and it works well so far.
With active DSP & DAC systems there is one caveat, and it's performance on low level. The full resolution of these systems can not be utilized in such a case and sometimes there is a problem of hiss. That means it's quite useful to have volume control between DSP & power amp. High tolerance 4 channel volume pots or attenuators are already expensive and difficult to find, while 6 channel is perhaps near unobtanium. Given this the DSP/DAC for a 3 way system becomes a critical component and should be chosen carefully.
Regards
Thank you for your replies!
1) I am worried that at low volume, the details and dynamics won't be there. I had a pair of KEF LS50 and they needed >80dB to come alive and make me understand why people like them so much, at low volume they were flat, even in midrange. I am planning to build in a 'loudness' present in DSP.
2) Thanks for the tip, the 02 models better for the same volume - will I be OK with 3dB lower sensitivity? I was restricting my choice to >90 dB
3) Yes, bit of a punt on that one. Morel says 600 Hz but I expect that's optimistic, and Wavecor says 1k to a waveguide tweeter should be possible. Perhaps I'm being naive, but I won't be pushing the drivers to their max and I can always sell them if I can't make them work and learn the hard way
Yes, the breakup for WF223BD01/02 is not ideal. I've looked at some Satori MW19TX as they look better behaved, but they are quite a bit more expensive and have a lower Qts (would have to use in a BR). Would they be much easier to use you think? Also, I haven't listened to them.
That woofer looks amazing! It would be ideal, but Vas is 143.5 🤯 which rules those type of drivers out. Thank you!
Well, you are kind of proving the point to me: I am happier to get the active setup than to design a crossover. Regarding amps, I still want to have dynamic sound at average low volume. I feel more comfortable having some headroom, given that with Class D it is very attainable. But yeah if I was confident with crossovers I would probably do it differently...
Hi, some thoughts, so you can make yours and find your way through
you only need to figure out max rating where it needs to work, low level always sounds better as long as the system is also tuned (by ear!) to low level, as hearing is not linear in this sense. Balance changes per level. But any transducer is always more linear with less excursion if that is what you are afraid of. Look for DSP system that can provide you some simple tone/ loudness control to adjust for hearing system.
How much dynamics there is in classical music? Wikipedia says 20-32db dynamic range, which is more than with pop/rock. So, 75db listening level 1 meter from speakers + 20db dynamics requires 95db capability from the system. If you sit 2 meters away then it's likely bit less, could be up to 6db less, so now requirement is already 101db / 1m. 32db dynamic range above 75db at two meters would be 113db/1m, this is already big PA system territory. I think pop music at "party" level might be 90db at one meter + 15db dynamics, so 105db/1m capability might be fine for occasional party.
Then bandwidth? You say mid 40Hz, which might be fine if room supports. Since ear is not linear, and given above vague definition of enough SPL capability, I'll just take a target SPL 105db/1m from 30Hz and up to questimate how the system could perform. You could pick any numbers you like, you think would work for you.
See volume displacement to SPL chart here:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/volume-displacement-for-spl-chart.5668/
It's for closed box, and doesn't take account how room affects things, but it's nice reference to get hunch what is needed to really get some output from a system. The 105db / 1m / 30Hz target I picked up above requires about 500cm3 volume displacement. If you have single 8" woofer with Sd of 220cm2 it would need to have more than 1cm xmax in order to sweep ~2cm p-p to have that kind of volume displacement. On the other hand, typical 15" woofer has about 850cm2 Sd, so even modest few millimeters excursion would make that kind of SPL. So, it looks like single 8" is a stretch for 75db classical listened few meters away, or a pop music party, and likely sounds distorted especially if the woofer does any mids, because the excursion would distort the whole bandwidth the woofer outputs. But, you can just turn it down, perhaps it's enough anyway because 75db is quite loud already.
WF223BD01 datasheet says Sd 213cm2 and xmax 6.5mm, so it can do only 276cm3, which is perhaps 93db / 1m / 30Hz in free space, 87db two meters away, so about 60-70db listening level for classical. To really enjoy clear dynamic sound, consider more Sd, more and bigger woofers somewhere in the room to have enough output on lows. High pass filter is effective reducing excursion, but of course some lows are cut out.
This is philosophical stuff, "upgrading" a system makes sense only if you have found best possible (suitable) listening position, and sound isn't good there. Similarly, upgrade system and listen with bad positioning, what's the point? Although, a good system likely sounds good anywhere, while there still is the optimal spot somewhere.
positioning, SPL (bandwidth) capability, acoustic design and implementation of a playback system that is optimized for your situation, your practical positioning, and is in general problem free, should give good sound for anyone. But, you also need to be able to listen and reason when the sound is good and when it's not and what to do about it, basically have a lot of listening skill and practical skills how to observe and manipulate the system to be better, what ever the better is, until it meets your goal and expectations.
btw. deciding drivers is perhaps last thing one needs to do making a good sounding system. If you start thinking philosophically like so to make good system you'd first need to be able to mentally hear what it should sound like to you, how to make that sound happen considering your room, what the speakers should be acoustically radiating to make sound at your ear such your auditory system shapes it just right into your perception. At this point size and other specs for transducers are pencilled in, so there is only budget constrain left anymore basically, perhaps aesthetics. The transducers need to fit the requirements you have, and selection is likely very easy, perhaps only few candidates. You might buy them all and compare side by side which one is fine. If you oversized the system it is likely most drivers sound about the same, except the worst ones. You could just pick out the cheapest good sounding one. In this sense starting from drivers is backwards process. But still, starting from drivers could still sound just fine, perhaps even better than you anticipate, as long as some thought is put into it.
Anyway, there is many ways to build a speaker and everyone should do what feels most relevant and fun, in order to be motivated and have fun all the way through! Have fun!
you only need to figure out max rating where it needs to work, low level always sounds better as long as the system is also tuned (by ear!) to low level, as hearing is not linear in this sense. Balance changes per level. But any transducer is always more linear with less excursion if that is what you are afraid of. Look for DSP system that can provide you some simple tone/ loudness control to adjust for hearing system.
How much dynamics there is in classical music? Wikipedia says 20-32db dynamic range, which is more than with pop/rock. So, 75db listening level 1 meter from speakers + 20db dynamics requires 95db capability from the system. If you sit 2 meters away then it's likely bit less, could be up to 6db less, so now requirement is already 101db / 1m. 32db dynamic range above 75db at two meters would be 113db/1m, this is already big PA system territory. I think pop music at "party" level might be 90db at one meter + 15db dynamics, so 105db/1m capability might be fine for occasional party.
Then bandwidth? You say mid 40Hz, which might be fine if room supports. Since ear is not linear, and given above vague definition of enough SPL capability, I'll just take a target SPL 105db/1m from 30Hz and up to questimate how the system could perform. You could pick any numbers you like, you think would work for you.
See volume displacement to SPL chart here:
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/volume-displacement-for-spl-chart.5668/
It's for closed box, and doesn't take account how room affects things, but it's nice reference to get hunch what is needed to really get some output from a system. The 105db / 1m / 30Hz target I picked up above requires about 500cm3 volume displacement. If you have single 8" woofer with Sd of 220cm2 it would need to have more than 1cm xmax in order to sweep ~2cm p-p to have that kind of volume displacement. On the other hand, typical 15" woofer has about 850cm2 Sd, so even modest few millimeters excursion would make that kind of SPL. So, it looks like single 8" is a stretch for 75db classical listened few meters away, or a pop music party, and likely sounds distorted especially if the woofer does any mids, because the excursion would distort the whole bandwidth the woofer outputs. But, you can just turn it down, perhaps it's enough anyway because 75db is quite loud already.
WF223BD01 datasheet says Sd 213cm2 and xmax 6.5mm, so it can do only 276cm3, which is perhaps 93db / 1m / 30Hz in free space, 87db two meters away, so about 60-70db listening level for classical. To really enjoy clear dynamic sound, consider more Sd, more and bigger woofers somewhere in the room to have enough output on lows. High pass filter is effective reducing excursion, but of course some lows are cut out.
There is likely number of things at play why you might perceive such things, including: SPL capability isn't enough as per above. As passive speaker, manufacturing tolerances might leave several db difference between Left and Right frequency responses. Assuming you have typical living room situation without any special acoustic treatment and practical positioning of things, so positioning isn't likely optimal. Edge diffraction isn't considered in any way in that speaker, which also makes special requirements for positioning and toe-in (more difference between left and right). Edge diffraction makes system response vary with angle, so there literally is perhaps only one good toe-in and head position for "best" highs and stereo sound. You might go and find it, try small 1m listening triangle with such speaker, and try really optimize toe-in.
This is philosophical stuff, "upgrading" a system makes sense only if you have found best possible (suitable) listening position, and sound isn't good there. Similarly, upgrade system and listen with bad positioning, what's the point? Although, a good system likely sounds good anywhere, while there still is the optimal spot somewhere.
I bet most people have very much similar idea of good sound, while listening experience/skill might vary expectation and adjectives used
positioning, SPL (bandwidth) capability, acoustic design and implementation of a playback system that is optimized for your situation, your practical positioning, and is in general problem free, should give good sound for anyone. But, you also need to be able to listen and reason when the sound is good and when it's not and what to do about it, basically have a lot of listening skill and practical skills how to observe and manipulate the system to be better, what ever the better is, until it meets your goal and expectations.After you build you speaker, and measure it, you'll find out there is only few xo configurations that work for the particular set of measurements you got. Well, it's all analog in a way that you can implement any crossover (in DSP), while some xo might sound better than others with plenty of middle ground in between. But, if you find yourself trying to optimize some things like directivity and frequency response to some particular listening angle (toe-in) and can't quite get what you are looking for you'll notice the system is going to be only as good as your measurements! The crossover is trivial to "optimize" for any measurements with modern tools, so the xo is about most trivial part in a system, and the problem is actually how to get good measurements! Which basically means building the thing over and over again until it measures as it should. And even harder problem is to know what is a good measurement, given your room and your practical positioning which would vary how any measurement (visual) actually sounds like. In general how measurements and perceived sound relates in your context, which is basically dependent on listening skill you've amassed. Philosophical for sure!
btw. deciding drivers is perhaps last thing one needs to do making a good sounding system. If you start thinking philosophically like so to make good system you'd first need to be able to mentally hear what it should sound like to you, how to make that sound happen considering your room, what the speakers should be acoustically radiating to make sound at your ear such your auditory system shapes it just right into your perception. At this point size and other specs for transducers are pencilled in, so there is only budget constrain left anymore basically, perhaps aesthetics. The transducers need to fit the requirements you have, and selection is likely very easy, perhaps only few candidates. You might buy them all and compare side by side which one is fine. If you oversized the system it is likely most drivers sound about the same, except the worst ones. You could just pick out the cheapest good sounding one. In this sense starting from drivers is backwards process. But still, starting from drivers could still sound just fine, perhaps even better than you anticipate, as long as some thought is put into it.
Anyway, there is many ways to build a speaker and everyone should do what feels most relevant and fun, in order to be motivated and have fun all the way through!
Have fun!
Last edited:
I do not, but I read and watched some tutorials, I think I should be able to learn how to. Hopefully even enjoy the process. Hoping to get away with ~£100 budget for a microphone. I'm also expecting to have to experiment with stuffing and do a lot of room correction as well. The room is 4W x 8L x 3H approx, with rugs and soft furniture but no acoustic treatment. Speakers will have to go near the walls, but I can do some basic treatment of the wall behind them. To be honest, the room and positioning is the main reason to go DIY!
It's likely that every speaker system needs >80 dB "to come alive" for you. Either that or a "loudness control" to boost frequencies extremes, especially the bass -- ideally a variable control (like on some old Yamaha amps). There is no escaping the nonlinearities of human hearing at lower volume. Fletcher-Munson. A DSP loudness switch customized for you & your system is smart.
I use a couple of the minidsp digital crossovers dissed by some others in this discussion, the 4x10 HD, and OpenDRC DA8 for 3- and 4-way systems. The residual noise is high enough to be audible from tweeters close up, but with good gain level matching, that's the worst thing I hear. More than compensated by the comprehensive user friendly interface. I use all 4 presets (of crossover + EQ) for different curves to fit... 1) high quality recordings at moderate to higher volume, 2) recordings with thin bass or HQ recordings at lower volume, 3) recordings with exaggerated highs, 4) TV /movies sound emphasizing speech intelligibility. It's not perfect but good enough tailoring to allow immersion even with less than ideal sources or at lower volume.
Last edited:
There is a large chorus here saying classical music cannot be enjoyed at below 80 db. I listen to hours of classical radio at 1 vpp on my speakers. That is .7 vac. With 8 ohms impedance that is < 1/16 watt. I cannot measure what sound I am hearing, but my speakers are charted at 97 db 1w1m on axis. So I say, I disagree. I do not miss the bass or treble. 20log(1/16) is -24 db. So 73 db? If my speakers are linear.
Appassionata is the same in my living room on speakers as on my piano. It is a Steinway 1940 console, not an 11' grand.
Last edited:
What is your noise floor? Road noise, neighbors, fridge running? Our listening habits and expectations vary greatly but at 73 db I'm hearing way too much extraneous sound at my house.
@tmuikku Thank you very much for your reply and the time you took to write it. I really appreciate it.
I read that article, it's a very good way of framing my requirements. I will do some more measurement of what low volume means at different distances and have a rethink. 10 or 12 inch drivers are not off the table, but it will mean that I cannot cross them to a 2'' midrange, so different compromises!
Regarding what type of sound quality, definitely, I can only compare with what I have listened to and describe it as I can. I have EQ-ed the Carreras, but they still can't give the instrument separation and dynamism that I remember noticing in my friend's system using Morels. Or FWIW from listening to 3-way ATC speakers (I did a trip to their factory 🤤). Speaking of which, that's the sound signature I like the most. I've used Genelecs for work as well in the past, and while outstanding they just lose to even 2-way (affordable) ATCs because of musicality. I think the KEFs came close, but they had a narrower sound stage and a less defined and tone rich bass. The Carreras have a very rich midrange and with a bit of EQ they are good at low volumes - I really like them. But they are slightly warm and they definitely have a narrower sound stage than the ATCs - even if this may be due to positioning etc. I have done a bit of experimenting...and concluded that I don't want fussy speakers. It's the separation and clarity that suffers, I wouldn't have known if I hadn't listened to ATCs and that Morel system but once I had, the bug bit.
I totally get what you are saying about imagining the sound I want to achieve. I've been doing something like this for 6 months now, simulating rooms, baffles, etc and bugging people to demo drivers. I don't have the time or the space to get multiple drivers and test them out properly - I would like to start with my best bet and change only if needed. Or get a pair of ATCs and call it a day!
I read that article, it's a very good way of framing my requirements. I will do some more measurement of what low volume means at different distances and have a rethink. 10 or 12 inch drivers are not off the table, but it will mean that I cannot cross them to a 2'' midrange, so different compromises!
Regarding what type of sound quality, definitely, I can only compare with what I have listened to and describe it as I can. I have EQ-ed the Carreras, but they still can't give the instrument separation and dynamism that I remember noticing in my friend's system using Morels. Or FWIW from listening to 3-way ATC speakers (I did a trip to their factory 🤤). Speaking of which, that's the sound signature I like the most. I've used Genelecs for work as well in the past, and while outstanding they just lose to even 2-way (affordable) ATCs because of musicality. I think the KEFs came close, but they had a narrower sound stage and a less defined and tone rich bass. The Carreras have a very rich midrange and with a bit of EQ they are good at low volumes - I really like them. But they are slightly warm and they definitely have a narrower sound stage than the ATCs - even if this may be due to positioning etc. I have done a bit of experimenting...and concluded that I don't want fussy speakers. It's the separation and clarity that suffers, I wouldn't have known if I hadn't listened to ATCs and that Morel system but once I had, the bug bit.
I totally get what you are saying about imagining the sound I want to achieve. I've been doing something like this for 6 months now, simulating rooms, baffles, etc and bugging people to demo drivers. I don't have the time or the space to get multiple drivers and test them out properly - I would like to start with my best bet and change only if needed. Or get a pair of ATCs and call it a day!
@indianajo noise floor is very low I think - the room is far from any noisy appliance and my road is very quiet. I'd say that at 70 dB I can still hear no distracting noise, apart of course when the kids are up in which case, well... I tried to get a measurement and I got ~35 dB but I don't know if I can trust it or if it helps. Also, my neighbours are moving, you never know who's next.
I agree with you that if I want to experience an orchestra...well I just go and listen to one! My brain can fill in missing frequencies I think and even imperfect dynamics. But I can still try my best right? Within the constraints of my house, 80 dB here at 1m feels loud - English terraced houses have 0 insulation. I guess low volume means really low volume for me then
BTW I measured the LSO and it rarely went past 80-85 dB about 10 rows away from the stage. I have friends playing in orchestras and they are definitely not deaf!
I agree with you that if I want to experience an orchestra...well I just go and listen to one! My brain can fill in missing frequencies I think and even imperfect dynamics. But I can still try my best right? Within the constraints of my house, 80 dB here at 1m feels loud - English terraced houses have 0 insulation. I guess low volume means really low volume for me then
BTW I measured the LSO and it rarely went past 80-85 dB about 10 rows away from the stage. I have friends playing in orchestras and they are definitely not deaf!