2. speakers
  3. 154643-20253

Direct or Reflect ... What's your flavor

Was thinking about this from another thread. When we think of a basic speaker we usually think of monopoles. That is, speakers with a single baffle or plane from which sound emanates out of to the room, but as long as I can remember there are examples at all price ranges of speakers designed specifically to reflect, or whose basic construction forced rear or side reflections. Among the "forced to reflect" categories:

  • Electro static speakers (Martin Logan, Sanders, etc.)
  • Open Baffle / di-pole
Then we have ambient reflectors, which I include:
  • Bose 901 and smaller direct/reflecting models
  • Snell with their rear tweets
  • Wilson 
  • Probably numerous others
Let be clear though, NONE of these ambient reflectors are accurate. None of these latter elements can be called a way of credibly and accurately increasing the transmission of information from the recording to our ears. To my mind these are all in the land of bass shakers. They add some pizzazz and excitement, and perhaps an illusionary venue.

So, still, for your music and tastes, who has gone with di-poles or ambient reflecting speakers and never looked back?
erik_squires
erik_squires OP
16,138 posts
 
@audiokinesis

I read no argument there.  The truth is we are all here to figure out what kind of illusions we like the most. Then we argue what measurements and tools make this illusion more easy to define and achieve.

Best,

Erik
erik_squires OP
16,138 posts
 
I wish somebody would come out with a contemporary version of the Definitive Technology BP 20.


You know, I'm kind of surprised no one is making add-on speakers to turn any speaker into a bipolar.  Self-powered, self calibrating accessories that would do more for you than a lot of tweaks. :)
tomic601's avatar
tomic601
12,928 posts
 
For overly dry close mic recording, many of the small Tulip DG variety, I just walk a few feet and activate the rear firing 100% distortion rear firing tweeter on my Vandersteen.... they are there for a reason.... 89% of the time they are switched OFF

who knows, perhaps tone controls and a stereo blend control are next...
gdnrbob
4,449 posts
 
@Tomic. 
I just walk a few feet and activate the rear firing 100% distortion rear firing tweeter on my Vandersteen@
I don't understand what you are saying. The rear tweeter is 100% distortion?
Bob
bdp24's avatar
bdp24
9,821 posts
 

Duke made at least one great point (there is more than one, but I’m focusing on the one): the off-axis response of a loudspeaker is ideally the same as it’s on-axis response. When accomplished, the total in-room power response (direct sound, reflected sound) is uniform, irrespective of frequency. Danny Richie discusses this important design consideration (as well as add-on tweeters and other related issues) in one of his Tech Talk Tuesday videos.

One other point needing to be made is that monopole loudspeakers (forward-firing enclosure designs) are monopoles at only certain frequencies---where the individual drivers begin "beaming" (a function of wavelength vs. driver diameter). Below the beaming frequency, the sound coming out the front of the speaker wraps around the enclosure and propagates towards the back wall, just as does the sound coming out of the rear of a dipole.

I know one Maggie owners who uses heavy absorption behind his MGIIIa’s, due to room constraints. He accepts the lack of a rear diffused sound field, preferring in some ways the more "direct" sound of a forward-only planar. Each to his own.

More to discover