Powered speakers show audiophiles are confused

@thespeakerdude 

I refer you to the other threads here to discuss that other website, @donavabdear mentioned audio BS so I chimed in.

As for a "reality check" I am still waiting for you to post your system, your measurements, etc. So, reality check time, mine are posted in the virtual system area, still waiting on yours.

@kota1,

If you posting your system's pictures is supposed to lend any credence to what you say, I am sorry to say that for me, it does not sway me one way or the other. Like musicians often having crappy sound systems, I know some excellent people involved in speaker design who have relatively modest systems. Personal and professional passions don't always align. However, if you know speakers, it would take about 2 minutes of talking to them to know they know their stuff. Hence I place more value in what people say and know.

I will give you an example. You post pictures of near flat room corrected responses in your system pages using Audyssey apparently. Critical is your front left and right. I assume, based on some things you wrote that you think this is a really good thing. If you know the limitations of the Audyssey correction system (and Arc) you know this is not a good thing. That flat of a room response given the pre-corrected response means that other aspects of the response that are also critical were compromised. That is why advanced systems like Lynggdorf and Trinnov have both better measurement (out of necessity to work properly), and more flexibility on correction.  Dirac is somewhere in the middle, though I am looking forward to how Dirac Active performs in the wild, not to mention the expected patent battles.

Dolby Atmos and active speakers are the future. The AES should set up a foundation to start from as far as speaker setup and acoustic response to keep mixing consistent. 12 speakers are hundreds of times more complicated than stereo. The AES should leave room for creativity and they should get together with SMPTE to at least pick the channel that the Sub and center Chanels should take. 

L, R, C, Sub, SL, SR, RL, RR, FLT, FRT, RLT, RRT easy.

In a thread on active speakers kota1 shares he is an advocate of active speakers, uses active speakers, and posts his system and pics of active speakers.

@thespeakerdude , who has nothing posted about his system is not impressed.

Like, who could have seen that coming? 

@donavabdear wrote:

As far as dynamic correctness, hard to answer that i don’t think there is any speaker that can reproduce thunder or a real symphony because no microphone can record it, even our ears don’t treat dynamics as opposed to transients in the same way. [...] Real dynamics, impossible.

By that token every aspect of sound reproduction, as something that aspires to a live acoustic or even amplified event, could be shrugged off as "impossible," and yet here we are with each our priorities and you and @thespeakerdude conveniently sidestepping dynamics because it’s a bad business model working from an uninhibited size factor.

It’s damn semantics; if by "dynamic correctness" you hold that achieving such is impossible in reproduced form, you fail to realize that some speaker implementations are way more dynamically capable than others, to a degree that makes a very worthwhile difference - even without meeting the "real thing." How about emulating the Apollo missions’ Saturn V lift-offs (from safety distance) in your home - good luck indeed - but those Genelec’s and other small toy monitors would crack open trying, while other more efficient, properly sized horn-loaded/horn hybrid iterations would actually give you a sensation of what it would’ve felt like. Just as an example.

Going after more lifelike dynamics is absolutely worth it for those who aren’t restricted by size demands or otherwise simply wills it as a factor to pursue. The consumer can actually go with whatever speaker scenario one chooses, and accommodate accordingly.

@thespeakerdude wrote:

Dynamic correctness, dynamic excitement seem to be implying the same thing. How long can you play, and what effects of any concerning dynamic compression. Horn loading / compression drivers is not the only way to achieve this of course. Horns provide, properly designed, constant directivity, but using a standard woofer/mif-woofer and a wave guide tweeter provides similar benefits without the side effects of vertical directivity lobing which can cause unpleasant reflections off vertical surfaces, likely one of the reasons why some people "don’t like horns".

"Vertical directivity lobing" isn’t an argument against proper horn-loaded compression driver-fitted speakers that wouldn’t potentially befit a low eff. waveguide + tweeter solution. Dynamically however a standard, low eff. woofer/mids + dome tweeter on a waveguide certainly falls short by a mile compared to a high eff. pro woofer/mid and compression driver + horn combo - it’s no comparison, really, also as something that matters and is perceivable in a domestic setting.

I think we can agree that a real horn loaded speaker at 20Hz, even a tapped horn is rather enormous and outside the realistic realm for most people. To achieve true directivity at the frequency is just unrealistic and you are not going to avoid room modes. Velocity/position feedback eliminates power compression issues in subs, and cheap efficient amplification is plentiful. Just put in a bunch of power subs and be done with it.

We can agree re: size factor of horn-loaded subs @20Hz, yes, but that’s not to say it isn’t doable if one so chooses. 20cf. per cab is sizeable, but once tucked away in corners they actually stay there.

What you don’t do, categorically, is bend the laws of physics with small sub size wanting to maintain extension, but in multiples they can ameliorate some of the weaknesses here. You work from a limitedly sized physical package, I and others around here don’t, and don’t tell it doesn’t matter. You know it does (and if you don’t you haven’t heard the difference or just don’t care), but as a MFR you try and downplay the significance as it suits your case.

And to be clear: you don’t eliminate power compression as proposed. There’s only one way around that, and that should be clear by now.