How should 1.2TLs appear on spectrum Analyzer
Answers
-
How do you think they should look ? Most here don't use them so that may be why you aren't getting the answers you want.
Your question is like asking how should x receiver sound. There is no right answer because it all sounds different to different people. How a speaker looks on an analyzer and what that means will be very different for people.
So I ask you, how do you think the 1.2's should look ? Do you have a baseline to reference how they should look to see if your off ? Is there even such a thing aside from the manufacturers data taken in special room to measure these things ? If so, who's baseline and how was it obtained ? Do you think another's baseline would offer the same results in your room on your system ?
You measure frequency response to get rid of, or accentuate certain "in-room" responses....and to what pleases your ears. How the 1.2's look, or measure in another person's room and preferences has no bearing on yours. Thus makes those spectrum analyzers a nice light show, but not much use for anything else plus they add noise to the signal which most try and avoid....hence why most don't use them and why your not getting any answers.
Not trying to be a putz here, but it's not the forum's fault your asking questions about a piece of gear hardly anyone uses anymore let alone with 1.2's.
Since SDA works by canceling crosstalk, I was wondering if this would also affect the results of measuring them. If they can make a sound disappear to my ear, could it also do it to the mic/analyzer.
A mic is a single receptor while our ears are 2, so I do not think the crosstalk cancellation would be of a concern.Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
As a side note. What does it matter why I'm doing this? People do lots of things just because. Why try an AC power cord that cost hundreds of dollars? Why try silver path cords? Why angle in your SDAs to hear the effect when the manual clearly states not to? Why try modifying the base your spikes sit on?
Curiosity is important. If there's something you want to try, why not? It might be low or nonexistent on someone else's list, but that doesn't make it a waste of time or effort.Driver carries only 20 dollars in ammunition
Pedestrians have the right of way, unless they are in the way -
How do you think they should look ? Most here don't use them so that may be why you aren't getting the answers you want.
Your question is like asking how should x receiver sound. There is no right answer because it all sounds different to different people. How a speaker looks on an analyzer and what that means will be very different for people.
So I ask you, how do you think the 1.2's should look ? Do you have a baseline to reference how they should look to see if your off ? Is there even such a thing aside from the manufacturers data taken in special room to measure these things ? If so, who's baseline and how was it obtained ? Do you think another's baseline would offer the same results in your room on your system ?
You measure frequency response to get rid of, or accentuate certain "in-room" responses....and to what pleases your ears. How the 1.2's look, or measure in another person's room and preferences has no bearing on yours. Thus makes those spectrum analyzers a nice light show, but not much use for anything else plus they add noise to the signal which most try and avoid....hence why most don't use them and why your not getting any answers.
Not trying to be a putz here, but it's not the forum's fault your asking questions about a piece of gear hardly anyone uses anymore let alone with 1.2's.
Since SDA works by canceling crosstalk, I was wondering if this would also affect the results of measuring them. If they can make a sound disappear to my ear, could it also do it to the mic/analyzer.
Where and how was the mic located, when you measured?
Was it up really close, or at one meter, or way back in the room? and was it at the height of the tweeter that plays full range?
The mic was in the position my head occupies when listening. It's about 6' away and 4' high. It was slightly angled upwards towards the drivers.
Pointed towards the speakers I would assume?
Centered between the speakers, you will lose the upper octave sounds somewhat, as they are off axis a good bit.
Have you tried it at say one meter and in line with the tweeters?
That may be more accurate as far as the uppermost octave goes.
-
How do you think they should look ? Most here don't use them so that may be why you aren't getting the answers you want.
Your question is like asking how should x receiver sound. There is no right answer because it all sounds different to different people. How a speaker looks on an analyzer and what that means will be very different for people.
So I ask you, how do you think the 1.2's should look ? Do you have a baseline to reference how they should look to see if your off ? Is there even such a thing aside from the manufacturers data taken in special room to measure these things ? If so, who's baseline and how was it obtained ? Do you think another's baseline would offer the same results in your room on your system ?
You measure frequency response to get rid of, or accentuate certain "in-room" responses....and to what pleases your ears. How the 1.2's look, or measure in another person's room and preferences has no bearing on yours. Thus makes those spectrum analyzers a nice light show, but not much use for anything else plus they add noise to the signal which most try and avoid....hence why most don't use them and why your not getting any answers.
Not trying to be a putz here, but it's not the forum's fault your asking questions about a piece of gear hardly anyone uses anymore let alone with 1.2's.
Since SDA works by canceling crosstalk, I was wondering if this would also affect the results of measuring them. If they can make a sound disappear to my ear, could it also do it to the mic/analyzer.
Where and how was the mic located, when you measured?
Was it up really close, or at one meter, or way back in the room? and was it at the height of the tweeter that plays full range?
The mic was in the position my head occupies when listening. It's about 6' away and 4' high. It was slightly angled upwards towards the drivers.
Pointed towards the speakers I would assume?
Centered between the speakers, you will lose the upper octave sounds somewhat, as they are off axis a good bit.
Have you tried it at say one meter and in line with the tweeters?
That may be more accurate as far as the uppermost octave goes.
When the mic comes back from being tested, I'll give that a try.Driver carries only 20 dollars in ammunition
Pedestrians have the right of way, unless they are in the way -
[/quote]
When the mic comes back from being tested, I'll give that a try.[/quote]
And try with just one speaker playing.
-
SDA is a timing thing, not making things disappear. Think of it in the simple terms of making things arrive in the correct order.
H9"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul! -
SDA is a timing thing, not making things disappear. Think of it in the simple terms of making things arrive in the correct order.
H9
Good point.
This thread really explains it well.
http://forum.polkaudio.com/discussion/166073/how-does-sda-work-with-a-pin-blade-ic
Ken did a great job of making it sound simple! -
Hi tugboat,
Your question is certainly valid and deserves a reasonable answer. I've sent it to the person who, if available, can certainly give a meaningful response. Why don't we all take a few deep breaths and calm down a bit.
No need to be quite so terse.
Thanks, Ken -
Great way to close a thread guys...Lexicon RT-10, Parasound P5, McCormack DNA 0.5, Polk SDA CRS+, SVS Sub
Schiit Modi, Luminous Audio Axiom II, McCormack DNA-1, Digital Phase AP 2
Marantz AV7701, Emotiva XPA-5, Paradigm 11se Mkii, DCM Time Windows, NHT 2C, SVS Sub
Spares - Kenwood C1 Pre, NAD 2200PE, Polk Monitor 10B, Polk Model 11, other odds and ends -
KennethSwauger wrote: »Here's the reply from Matt Polk:
"Ken –
In general, never trust results from an analyzer, like the Audiosource, that shows only full-octave bands. You need at least 1/3rd octave resolution. The other big problem is that this type of measurement doesn’t distinguish between what the speaker is doing and what the room is doing. Since lower frequencies bounce around the room much longer than high frequencies this type of measurement will always show much more mid and low frequency energy than high frequency energy. Making meaningful measurements in a normal room can be done but not with that piece of equipment.
Then there’s the problem of SDA. It’s very difficult to get measurements on the SDA’s that have any relationship to how the speakers should sound. This was always a problem with reviewers who would use their standard measurement techniques and get strange results which sometimes influenced their reviews. The 1.2TL’s are especially hard to measure due to the number of different drivers and tweeters all covering different frequency ranges. Then there’s the SDA stuff which is still doing something even when the interconnect isn’t connected. We used a dummy head with mics in the ears to make measurements using a B&K FFT system but only as a guide. The final voicing was done by ear and this is what counts.
What makes the SDA’s unique is that they work the way our ears work. Microphones don’t. If you tried to design an SDA speaker based on microphone measurements it would sound horrible. He found this out when he tried equalizing the speakers according to what the Equalizer was telling him. Experimentation is always a good way to learn something!
-msp
Cheers, Ken
Wow, from Matt Polk!!Pio Elete Pro 520
Panamax 5400-EX
Sunfire TGP 5
Micro Seiki DD-40 - Lyra-Dorian and Denon DL-160
PS Audio GCPH phono pre
Sunfire CG 200 X 5
Sunfire CG Sig 405 X 5
OPPO BDP-83 SE
SDA SRS 1.2TL Sonicaps and Mills
Ctr CS1000p
Sur - FX1000 x 4
SUB - SVS PB2-Plus
Workkout room:
Sony Bravia XBR- 32-Inch 1080p
Onkyo TX-DS898
GFA 555
Yamaha DVD-S1800BL/SACD
Ft - SDA 1C
Not being used:
RTi 38's -4
RT55i's - 2
RT25i's -2, using other 2 in shop
LSI 15's
CSi40
PSW 404 -
I stand corrected about the mic.Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
Couldn't ask for a better answer.Driver carries only 20 dollars in ammunition
Pedestrians have the right of way, unless they are in the way -
"Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul!
-
Yes I see that
Thanks
![[Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/83b82048d67877ca27bbc25d5d38f9d3_100.png)
