Are there any current high end dipole speakers (dynamic)?
Douglas, I’m certainly open to improvements, and assume current products can do better than my over 20 year old speakers, and will investigate but at a minimum they have to produce this experience (sorry for repetition but as audiokinesis describes): A bipole or dipole speaker...With proper set-up...results in a warm, relaxing, rich timbre. They also do a good job of conveying a sense of immersion and of disappearing as the apparent sound source. And thanks for taking the time to describe details in different types of speaker above. audiokinesis, "Direct radiator" speakers still generate a lot of off-axis energy and therefore a lot of reflections...At most normal listening distances in most rooms, most of the sound that reaches your ears is reflected sound Wouldn’t the amount of reflected sound that reaches listener be very different from dipole/bipole vs any random ported box speaker? And which is one is closer to what person would hear in e.g. symphony hall? mijostyn. Thanks, I understand what dipoles and bipoles are and that they are very different, and yet if my decades old memories are correct, maggies (dipoles) and my mirages (bipoles) produce a similar reaction in me. |
I heard the spatial speakers (not sure which models) at the capital audio fest and they were breathtaking.... dynamic, open, airy, natural, and live. One of the few speakers that produced that "she is here singing now before me" sensation. And the bass was shockingly good... tight and deep. Amazing considering that the base drivers are dipole! |
GT Audioworks open dipole Planars with OPen baffle servo subs hit of Capital Audiofest and Best sound of show Don’t believe me read the review https://parttimeaudiophile.com/2019/11/06/gt-audio-works-showstopping-sound-along-with-basis-my-soni... |
Berner99 asks: "Wouldn’t the amount of reflected sound that reaches listener be very different from dipole/bipole vs any random ported box speaker?" Assuming similar radiation pattern shapes, yes having two such patterns - one in the front and one in the rear - will result in a correspondingly higher reverberant-to-direct sound ratio. Berner99 continues: "And which is one is closer to what a person would hear in e.g. symphony hall?" Imo the dipole/bipole configuration has more potential to replicate what you would hear in a concert hall. Briefly, at a good seat in a concert hall, the direct sound is strong and the reverberant sound is strong BUT (and here is what largely differentiates a good seat from a poor one), the early reflections are weak. It is the early reflections which are the most detrimental to clarity. I find this to be valid in home audio as well. For instance, if you push your Mirages back near the wall, their "backwave" energy has a relatively short reflection path before reaching your ears, and clarity suffers. However if you pull them well out into the room, perhaps five feet or more, not only does clarity improve but so does timbre, and on a good recording you also begin to feel immersed in the soundstage on the recording. Sonus Faber’s top two models, the SE17 and the Aida, both have adjustable rear-firing arrays. Imo this adjustability is a good idea. Anyway the topic of how to replicate "what a person would hear in symphony hall" is a huge one, and this post just scratches the surface. Duke into dipoles, bipoles, and quasi-bipoles |
