2. speakers
  3. 1017613167

Okay, the gloves are off. Let the fur fly

I would like to hear one single cogent technically accurate explanation of how a multi-way box speaker can be more musically accurate than single drivers or stats. As a speaker designer for more than 25 years, I have yet to hear an argument that holds water, technically. The usual response involves bass or treble extension, as if that is the overriding principle in music reproduction. My position is that any information lost or jumbled in the complex signal path of multi-way box speakers can never be recovered by prodigious bass response, supersonic treble extension, or copious numbers of various drivers. Louder,yes. Deeper,yes. Higher, maybe. More pleasing to certain people,yes. But, more musically revealing and accurate,no. I posted this because I know that it will surely elicit numerous defensive emotional responses. I am prepared to suffer slings and arrows from many directions. But, my question still remains. Can you technically justify your position with facts?
twl
muralman1
1,527 posts
 
I agree with Twl, common sense will tell you that a feather lite driver freely suspended will give more microtransient info than any dynamic driver. Planars and ribbons will also be able to dynamically rise and fall with ease. Seamlesness is not possible with box speakers using different driver construction and materials, whereas it is a natural fit for single source.
mikelavigne
2,226 posts
 
hi Tim, what i do in the privacy of my home and room is my business.....but if you must know.... i first get a big shit-eat'n grin on my face....think of how lucky i am to be able to enjoy my system....and then go to work (about 55 hours a week) to pay for all this great shit.

i hope when you make it out here to listen the system will measure up to all the hype...it is not perfect...but it doesn't do "bad" things and is about the musical message and not "parts" of the music.

someone once said; things should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.

i think this thread is all about technical execution, and how to remove as many barriers between the pure signal and the listener but still do the whole job to deliver the complete musical picture. my Kharmas have a series crossover....the mid-range "runs free" and the tweeter and woofer have subtractive crossovers....minimum parts count....everything is cryo'd.....my amps have no output transformer, i use a passive volume control.....neutral cables....put it all together and you have the POTENTIAL for magic.....and it seems i have been lucky enough to have it.
garfish
1,840 posts
 
Actually, I applaud Twl's beliefs, efforts, and persistence. It's probably people like him that do eventually make the major breakthroughs in any field of endeavor. But as I personally don't know diddley about speaker construction or theory (and have little interest in it), as an end user I can only judge products by listening-- regardless of what they are. I'm in it for the music, and if Twl can improve on what we've got, I say he deserves to get rich and famous. Cheers. Craig
herman
2,282 posts
 
I let most of my fur fly about 20 years ago so will not be able to participate in that part. I am now in the SET/ single driver camp. I think it easier to get there with that approach than trying to integrate a bunch of drivers and crossover components. Notice I said easier, not that it can't be done the other way. However, I cannot get the deep bass I want from my speakers (Lamhorns) so I am using an MBL sub to fill in the bottom. I guess that means I agree with both sides. I may run for congress.
Post removed 
More to discover