Re: [Sursound] Small multichannel speakers setup

[Ilpo Martikainen]

Hi,

What about the tiny  
http://www.genelec.com/studio-monitors/8000-series-studio-monitors/8010a-studio-monitor
A little larger with 4 in woofer 
http://www.genelec.com/studio-monitors/8000-series-studio-monitors/8020c-studio-monitor
  and same size with network and room acoustics measurements and calibration 
capabilities 
http://www.genelec.com/studio-monitors/sam-studio-monitors/8320a-sam-studio-monitor

Best regards,

Ilpo


On 12 May 2016, at 22:19, Emanuele Costantini 
mailto:lamacchiaco...@yahoo.it>> wrote:

Hello everyone,

due to the lack of space in modern houses, I am in need to look for small 
speakers to get on with my multichannel projects, here at home and ideally to 
bring them with me in small spaces to playback my works.
For my stereo projects I have been using Bose ComputerMonitor:

https://www.bose.co.uk/GB/en/home-and-personal-audio/speakers/stereo/computer-musicmonitor/

and I have been able to deliver final mixes matching bigger systems, or needing 
small adjustments. Ideally I would like to expand that system but I find 
annoying they use specific connectors and they work in couple, so connecting it 
from my RME ADI8 it would be a bit of a trick to do also because I will need an 
odd number of those (5 or 7 ?)
I've been scouting on the internet and I've seen few options.
I am intrigued by the JBL LSR305

http://www.jblpro.com/www/products/recording-broadcast/3-series/lsr305#.VzTQ5mbtZE4

being that brand the standard for cinema sound and that industry being my main 
income, I quite like to get that way, but despite being quite small they are 
still a bit big and heavy, unfortunately.
I found the Fostex PM03.d and PM 04.d

http://www.fostexinternational.com/docs/products/PM0.4d.shtml#content-3-tab-tab

Which are smaller and lighter, but the specifics are not that great, the 04.d 
are better though.
Adam F5:

http://www.adam-audio.com/en/pro-audio/products/f5/technical-data

They look like the best of the range. Obviously to deliver those 
characteristics they have to be heavy, a bit too much and not that small.
A friend of mine has a stereo system of MAudio AV42:

http://www.m-audio.com/products/view/av42#.VzSSzWbtZE4

Which doesn't sound bad at all even if they are working in couple they have 
more standard connections, so I could do my own extensions.
In that case I've been looking at the bigger brothers MAudio BX5 D2, slighlty 
bigger and heavier:

http://www.m-audio.com/products/view/bx5-d2#.VzSUrWbtZE4

I am wondering if anyone has an hint to suggest or other brands/model to 
consider or was surpises by the sound of smaller systems, Bose docet, like... 
ehm logitech? ;-)
:-)

Thanks a lot in advance for your suggestions.

Emanuele


___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Advice on new loudspeaker array... Genelec 8010 speakers?

[Ilpo Martikainen]

Different dispersion patterns of different drivers may not be a decoder 
question only, but should be solved in the acoustic domain. That has been the 
whole idea of so called waveguides, to match the directivity of a higher 
frequency driver - MF or HF - to the directivity of the lower frequency driver 
around crossover. Otherwise there will be a bump in power response as the 
higher frequency driver is practically omnidirectional at its low end while the 
lower frequency driver gets directive in its upper end. 

Ilpo

> On 16 Oct 2015, at 19:27, David McGriffy  wrote:
> 
> I've been thinking about how this discussion might apply to a couple of
> things I'm working on and it seems to me there are two different problems
> here.
> 
> First, there is the issue of higher order mics often not really being
> higher order at low frequencies.  But isn't this really a problem of
> encoding and not decoding?  It seems like we shouldn't have to know
> anything about the mic once we are in B-format.  And such considerations
> would not apply to synthetically panned higher order signals, right?
> 
> The other issues around cost of low frequency drivers, the ability to place
> the physically larger, heavier speakers, dispersion patterns of different
> drivers, etc. are certainly decoder questions.  With simple, linear
> decoders, one would have an 'ambisonic crossover' that not only divides
> frequency bands but takes care of scaling the different order components,
> followed by two or more decoders.  Since a parametric decoder is already
> working in the frequency domain, one could just vary the decode parameters
> on a bin by bin basis, thus generating all the outputs from a single set of
> input FFT's.
> 
> But these issues are about really decoding to speakers, which would not
> apply to creating say 7.1 stems to be later mixed and sent to a bass
> managed theater system, right?  Or to put it another way, crossed over
> decoders are doing the bass management in the ambisonic domain.
> 
> David
> VVAudio
> 
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Peter Lennox  wrote:
> 
>> plus, with the large numbers of speakers, it's cheaper and easier to cross
>> over in the b-format 'pinchpoint' than in the speaker feeds.
>> ppl
>> 
>> Dr. Peter Lennox
>> Senior Fellow of the Higher Education Academy
>> Senior Lecturer in Perception
>> College of Arts
>> University of Derby
>> 
>> Tel: 01332 593155
>> 
>> From: Sursound [sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Steven
>> Boardman [boardroomout...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: 16 October 2015 14:14
>> To: Surround Sound discussion group
>> Subject: Re: [Sursound] Advice on new loudspeaker array... Genelec 8010
>> speakers?
>> 
>> This is something I have alluded to before.
>> There is no need to have multiple transducers in the same box with
>> ambisonics.. In fact it should be more accurate, economical, aesthetic, and
>> space saving to have each transducer at its own separate point in space.
>> Tweeters are more directional so more are needed,  they are also cheaper.
>> Going all the way down the frequency range to the least directional and
>> most expensive, woofers and subs.
>> Separate decodes could be done for each transducer bandwidth, rotating the
>> soundfield to align. This would also benefit the transducer crossover
>> point, as there would be less interference from proximity. It would also
>> help room response, as crossovers could be tweaked and balanced on the fly.
>> Which is also alot of fun!
>> 
>> Steve
>> On 16 Oct 2015 12:47, "Peter Lennox"  wrote:
>> 
>>> we used a much cruder version of this back in 2002 - decoding a
>>> hemispherical 32 speaker array to second order, but crossed over the
>>> B-format at 90Hz (I think) to a horizontal-only 8-sub array, decoded in
>> 1st
>>> order. This was on the basis that we couldn't fly the subs, and anyway,
>>> elevation discernment, being largely due to pinnae affects, was not
>>> appealed to by the subs anyway. Had to work on the time alignment (the
>> sub
>>> decoder was analogue, the mid'n'tops 32 speaker array done in software)
>> and
>>> spatial alignment (rotating the subfield to match t'other, in the
>> b-format
>>> feed). It worked well, though could have been further refined; it was a
>>> one-off installation.
>>> But the principle of using decreasing order with decreasing frequency
>> made
>>> sense from the point of view of efficient use of transducers.
>>> 
>>> It made me wonder whether the same principle extends the other way -
>>> increasing order with increasing frequency, to make up for the
>> deficiencies
>>> in spatial resolution of lower orders at HF.
>>> Given that it should now be reasonably 'easy' to align the fields of
>>> multiple cells - even having differnt numbers of speakers for each
>>> frequency band, there might be less reason to assume that  point source
>>> speakers are strictly necessary.
>>> We're still using speakers designed as stereo projection systems, a

Re: [Sursound] Advice on new loudspeaker array... Genelec 8010 speakers?

[Ilpo Martikainen]

The protection circuits likely trip the tweeter first, as its thermal time 
constant is much shorter than that of woofer. Also the thermal power handling 
of the woofer is much higher. Normally there is an indicator turning red if the 
limits are exceeded and protection is activated. Without protection people keep 
replacing tweeters.


Ilpo





On 15.10.2015 11:38, "Sursound on behalf of Dave Malham" 
 wrote:

>One thing I would be careful of on small, active speakers is the protection
>circuits. Sophisticated protection circuits thermally model (or even sense)
>the drivers and reduce the gain if one of them is getting near the limits.
>This can cause weird, signal dependent, image distortions when one of the
>speakers is driven harder and drops in gain (usually in the bass). Because
>the speaker doesn't just switch off, which you would hear, but simply goes
>a bit quieter, in an Ambisonic array of, say, 16 speakers, this doesn't
>shout out at you but just subtly distorts the image. Can be a really
>annoying and difficult to diagnose problem, especially when you haven't
>heard it before (been there, done that, got the T-shirt). With passive
>speakers, this doesn't happen - you just get the rattle from the cone
>hitting the endstops or the scrape of the melted voice coil against the
>sides of the air gap but at least the first of these warns you when you are
>near to damaging the speakers. Note that with small active speakers in
>particular, getting to 'normal' monitoring levels gets you right into the
>zone where the protection will keep cutting in and out :-(
>
>   Dave
>
>
>On 14 October 2015 at 18:20, Charles Veasey 
>wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> We're upgrading our current 15.2 (Behringer) loudspeaker array. I'd like to
>> get more spatial resolution and higher quality speakers. Right now I'm
>> thinking about (32) Genelec 8010 and (2) Genelec 7050B subs.
>>
>> However, I have some concerns about the Genelec 8010s selling at only $350.
>>
>> Does anyone have experience with these speakers, or have advice for my
>> situation?
>>
>> thanks,
>> Charles
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20151014/902db591/attachment.html
>> >
>> ___
>> Sursound mailing list
>> Sursound@music.vt.edu
>> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here,
>> edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>
>As of 1st October 2012, I have retired from the University.
>
>These are my own views and may or may not be shared by the University
>
>Dave Malham
>Honorary Fellow, Department of Music
>The University of York
>York YO10 5DD
>UK
>
>'Ambisonics - Component Imaging for Audio'
>-- next part --
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL: 
>
>___
>Sursound mailing list
>Sursound@music.vt.edu
>https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
>account or options, view archives and so on.
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Advice on new loudspeaker array... Genelec 8010 speakers?

[Ilpo Martikainen]

Regarding the room response, delay etc. correction, which would be beneficial 
in this application, the smallest Genelec model having these features is 8320 
(4 in woofer). Next is 8330 with a 5in woofer. 

Best regards,

Ilpo Martikainen

> On 14 Oct 2015, at 20:31, Augustine Leudar  wrote:
> 
> Maybe out of your budget - but check out the Genelec 8351 a - they also
> have a room correction system that will work on arrays of up to 32 speakers.
> For those that do not have gear acquisition syndrome here is some
> ridiculous holywood styled marketing :
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lokCwTKjz0E
> 
> For those with G.A.S. - no. Don't click the link.
> 
> On 14 October 2015 at 18:20, Charles Veasey 
> wrote:
> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> We're upgrading our current 15.2 (Behringer) loudspeaker array. I'd like to
>> get more spatial resolution and higher quality speakers. Right now I'm
>> thinking about (32) Genelec 8010 and (2) Genelec 7050B subs.
>> 
>> However, I have some concerns about the Genelec 8010s selling at only $350.
>> 
>> Does anyone have experience with these speakers, or have advice for my
>> situation?
>> 
>> thanks,
>> Charles
>> -- next part --
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <
>> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20151014/902db591/attachment.html
>>> 
>> ___
>> Sursound mailing list
>> Sursound@music.vt.edu
>> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here,
>> edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> www.augustineleudar.com
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20151014/8ea9e4ab/attachment.html>
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
> account or options, view archives and so on.

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.