Basic information about monitors

  • Thread starter Thread starter Xipe
  • Start date Start date
Ok, so let me see if I understand. I run pink noise to the amp and adjust it until I get the right voltage coming out of the amp. I then join the speaker to the amp using the a light bulb, trying different light bulbs until I get one that starts to glow orangish after 1-2 seconds.

Ok, three questions. 1. Does that mean that the light should not be lit at all originally or during normal use? So in normal use it is pretty dark and only orangish when it is getting hit hard? 2. What happens if, then, I take my faders and whack 'em up to the top. 250 Watts at 8 ohms goes screaming down the wire and what? The lightbulb gets bright but my speakers survive? Is that it? That'd be cool. 3. Where do I get a pink noise generator? Is there a standalone computer proggie that'll work?

And just to re-remind myself, I wire the light bulb into the BLACK wire, right?


So, the completed setup would be :

black wire from amp ----- light bulb ----- speaker
white wire from ap ------------------------- speaker

Sound right?

Is there any guidance on what size of bulbs to use, say with 70 watt 6 ohm speakers? (YSM-1s) How do you calculate what voltage you are supposed to get for a 70 watt, 6 ohm?

I guess that is 5 questions, but thanks very much for the help!

(btw, Tragically Hip "New Orleans is Sinking" Live at New Orleans bootleg ROCKS. God, that is a great example of just playing and rocking out in front of an audience)
 
To answer one of my own questions, there is a site
http://xsspl.tripod.com/Audio/Voltage.htm which will calculate the voltage given two of Watts, Amps and Ohms. Since I have 70 Watts, 6 Ohms, it is telling me I should be looking for 20.494 Volts

Does that sound right? Thanks very much for your help. If I get this right, I'll get funky cool blinky lights in the studio :)
 
answers:
1) Yes- dark under normal loads, if you push it it starts to glow with the peaks. Urei monitors used to have the same protection.
2) Your lighbulb pops, breaking the circuit, leaving your speakers intact.
3) For ther pink noise shop :) I think if you look for freeware, you'll find a number of them. Or you can use a trial version of an analysis program, try looking for ETF5
4) Yes
5) Thats exactly why I didn't answer myself -- I forgot the formula, and iys a complex one. Try sending an email to your speaker's manufacturers tech support? or give thenm a ring?
 
Cool. I'll email Yorkville see what they think.

Thanks very much for the help!
 
A few thoughts:


Power

In general using an amp with surplus power is better because this usually (not always) indicates a lower output impedence. But, it also depends on the speaker. Higher impedence speakers (16 ohm), ones with small magnets, or speakers with cheep crossover components benefit less. The up side is, the speaker's performance is less dependent on the quality of the amplifier.

Biamping is always a good idea, since it isolates the hi and low pass sections of the crossover.

One thing I forgot to mention was the reason for all those drivers in my ideal design. Why a dozen midbass drivers? Once again it's not for sound pressure level – not directly. The thing most people don't realize is all those nice specs given on speakers are for small signals (1 watt). Most midbass drivers will start to become nonlinear at about 5 watts! I like to use arrays because it spreads the power over several drivers so each one can work in it's linear range. Horn loading also helps this situation by boosting the efficiency, as well as controlling the horizontal directivity to avoid early reflections. Vertical directivity in this design is controlled by the fact that these are line sources. Interference cancels most of the vertical off axis energy.

Protection

Better than dead speakers, but even better to just be careful. Light bulbs are both resistive and microphonic. I don't like the idea.

Which Commercial Monitors?

That's a tough question because most of the discussions in this bbs center around monitors costing a few hundred dollars. I have more experience designing systems which start at a few thousand dollars, so I'll defer to the opinions found in many other threads regarding lower priced monitors.

I did an online survey of several professional studio monitors. I looked at ATC, Audix, Genelec, Hafler, JBL, KRK, Quested, Studer, Tannoy, and Westlake. I have only actually heard a few of these, namely ATC, Genelec and JBL. I must say I was unimpressed.

As for the others, I'm just going by what I see and what I read about their designs but, once again, I'm unimpressed. The only product which sparked any interest at all was the KRK. The KRK monitors use Focal Kevlar drivers. The midbass drivers are good performing units, though there are better for the money. I don't like the Kevlar tweeters at all. In fact not many people must have, since Focal has discontinued them from their standard OEM line. If one were considering a KRK, I would seriously suggest buying a kit speaker instead. If you can use a soldering iron and a screwdriver, in the same price range as a KRK you can build yourself an Aria 5 or Aria 7. Zalytron sells these kits with very well made cabinets. http://www.zalytron.com/ They also sell an Odin kit which uses the Seas Excel magnesium cone midbass drivers I talked about in my dream system. These are amazing units with pure piston action throughout their range. The problem is I'm skeptical about how the crossovers are designed on these kits. These metal drivers have nasty cone resonances starting at 6kHz. They require sharp crossovers and fairly complex notch filters to prevent these resonances from coloring the treble. The Odin kits have relatively simple circuitry with shallow electrical rolloffs. http://www.speakerbuilding.com/content/1037/odin4.pdf I'd have hear it to be convinced, but this could potentially make for a world class near/mid field monitor.

barefoot
 
Hey barefoot. very cool stuff, and I now see ehre there is a big difference. You are, I think, looking at it from a hi-fi perspective, rather than a studio monitoring one. Criteria are entirely different.
 
barefoot,

Your comments re: protection are understood but I don't wanna pop these things even if someone else using them does something stupid. What about just fuses? If I put a 3 amp fuse in the path, what sort of sound problems might I have?
 
sjoko2

I don't draw any distinction at all between what would make a great monitor or a great hi-fi speaker. The criteria are the same in my opinion. There is even an advantage in designing recording monitors because you shouldn't have to make the compromises necessary to help the speakers live comfortably between the bookshelf and the potted plant.:)

OldGrover

I would definitely choose the fuse over the light bulb. Seems harmless, but I just don't know what's in those slow blow fuses? Are they inductive? How resistive are they and what's their temperature coefficient?

Adding resistance to the circuit will defeat the purpose of using a low impedence amp. And adding a high temperature coefficient resistor will cause dynamic compression. I think fuses and light bulbs (especially light bulbs) are devices specifically designed to have high temperature coefficients. You'll probably get much better performance from using a high quality, high current capacity 60 watt amp.
 
barefoot - that's another often heard argument. I do this for fun, so I'm not going into tech details, suffice to say, if I had monitored everything I did over the last 30 years on the most accurate, most expensive and "best" hi-fi systems available at the time - I'd still be wondering why everything I ever did sounded so damned horrible.
The criteria for what makes a good monitor is entirely different than the criteria of what makes a great sounding hi-fi speaker system.

Let me stick to giving you just one example.

For the longest time the Yamaha NS10's was the favorite nearfield monitor. You could find them in almost every facility, all over the globe, and you still can today.
That more records, more hits have been referenced on NS10's than anything else has never been disputed.

Would you ever sit down at home and play some cool music on a pair of NS10's? Hell no!! They are horrible!
But get a mix to sound good on NS10's - and it will sound good on everything, from the cheapest transister radio to the best hi-fi system. It designed to do the job, as are all monitoring systems.
 
sjoko2,

If your argument is true, then why does Abbey Road studio use B&W Nautilus 801's?
Check out the Penthouse studio http://www.abbeyroad.co.uk/ The 801 is a classic reference monitor for both recording and hi-fi. I've played all sorts of music through them and they sound wonderful.

Can you make us a list of the different design criteria used for hi-fi and reference monitors?
 
The B&W are very good speakers, more of an exception that the rule. Still, I wouldn't use them as monitors. B&W's are used quite a lot for mastering, for which they are fine.
However - you mention aone speaker, more the exception than the rule isn't it?
 
OldGrover said:
Ok, so let me see if I understand. I run pink noise to the amp and adjust it until I get the right voltage coming out of the amp. I then join the speaker to the amp using the a light bulb, trying different light bulbs until I get one that starts to glow orangish after 1-2 seconds.


Click to expand...

Bear in mind that you are gonna get hit in the face with about 100watts of pink noise!! So remember the ear plugs, I bet you still jump when it hits though. ;)
 
The 801’s are only an exception in that they are often used as recording monitors, but there are many other "hi-fi" speakers out there of comparable performance. There tends to be a lot orthodoxy in professional audio. Just because a particular product has gained wide acceptance doesn’t mean that there is necessarily anything of lasting uniqueness about it. The NS-10 is a perfect example of this. It’s a less than mediocre design that has become ubiquitous simply by virtue of history. Everyone learned on NS-10’s, so that’s what they stick with.

Now this idea that if you get it to “sound good on NS10's - and it will sound good on everything” is just fascinating to me. It’s akin to saying if Rembrandt had painted wearing super dark, scratched up, $1.99 sunglasses his paintings might have even turned out better. Why in the world would you want to hide sonic information from yourself while monitoring??? I thought the who idea was to hear as much detail as possible? I'm not arguing that one can learn to compensate for a handicap, but you usually don't find people volunteering for handicaps.

I still have yet to hear from anyone what the actual differences in design goals there should be for monitors and high fidelity speakers? This is my fundamental goal for any loudspeaker design:

The instantaneous change in acoustic pressure at the listening position is directly proportional to the program voltage.

In other words, the sound the listener hears should exactly track the recorded signal. This is what most hi-fi manufacturers are shooting for. This is what most professional audio manufacturers are going for as well. Certainly there are many different philosophies on how to achieve this goal, philosophies heavily influenced by tradition, cost, aesthetics, and the environment in which the reproduction takes place, but the goal is the same.

If you're going to lay down $12k on a set of 801's you'll probably want to put them in a well setup listening room. A good listening room should take into account the same considerations as a studio. In both cases you want to hear every dynamic and detail of the music. Why should the criteria be different? So in the rare cases I'm allowed to design a speaker without much consideration for size or aesthetics, and I know the listening environment will be optimized, I don't need to ask whether it's for home or professional use. I've said the 801's are great, but I wouldn't design mine that way, because I think I can do better. Likewise, Genelec and Quested are some of the better pro monitors, but I don't design mine that way either. What I shoot for are the most accurate speakers I can build, regardless of the end use. Somebody please explain to me how and why I should make a distinction????
 
barefoot said:


I still have yet to hear from anyone what the actual differences in design goals there should be for monitors and high fidelity speakers? This is my fundamental goal for any loudspeaker design.....

In other words, the sound the listener hears should exactly track the recorded signal. This is what most hi-fi manufacturers are shooting for. This is what most professional audio manufacturers are going for as well.

Somebody please explain to me how and why I should make a distinction????
Click to expand...

Ok, let me take a shot at it. As you know there are no perfect speaker systems, like you stated above manufacturers set a target and shoot for it, none have yet achieved a completely accurate system.

With this in mind when you are designing a consumer system, if it is going to be slightly innacurate you would rather design it so that the flaws are hidden and the system sounds 'smooth' or 'sweet'.

I think the opposite should be true for a monitoring system, you should want to hear everything, even if it sounds harsh and nasty to the ear.

I think this was the case with the NS10, it was a fatiguing bitch with a nasty tone, but you could hear most of what was going on pretty well (except of course the bass).

Of course, you work in the field and I don't so I might just be talking out of my ass.
 
I don't want to go into long technical crap!!!!!!! LOL sorry!!

This is an old discussion, I've heard it many times. Barefoot, with all due respect, I know sound, its my job, and I'm good at it, so are many of my collegues. If we choose what to use for monitors, we know what we need to hear, we know what we want, we also know what we don't want. Advertising, or any form of "everyone uses........." does not come into play when you build a facility for hundreds of thousands.
Like I said, different criteria for different uses.
Also like I said, the NS10's success as reference monitors was / is due to the fact that mixes translate well.
No more!!
 
sjoko2 may not want to answer my questions about what the technical differences are, but maybe someone will? I'm not asking rhetorically. I'm currently developing some pro audio equipment and I would seriously like to know if I am missing some fundamental design principles.
 
barefoot,

Your definition of what makes a good speaker may be very useful to someone designing speakers, but its nearly useless to anyone buying speakers whether for the home or studio. How accuyrately the air moves directly in front of the speaker is something I can neither measure myself nor easily find good measurements for. Audiophile magazines and sites don't usualy dwell on such mundain aspects of the speakers nor do recording magazines or web sites.

You already argued that simpler measurements such as frequency response are misleading and I suspect many professionals realize this as well. So all we are left with as the measure of a "good" speaker with is how it sounds. Since no speaker is perfect what happens is a recording professional will make one set of compromises when buying a studio monitor and a different set for a home speaker. For example, in a studio monitor hearing everything clearly gets higher priority than it would in a home speaker.

I think this is the gist of the argument. It's not that I'd disagree with your definition of what makes a good speaker, or that I could give you a different one. It's just that my ears and a few misleading specs are all I have to go on most of the time. Ask for criteria in terms of how it sounds and I'm sure you'll get plenty of answers. Ask for a more scientific answer and you won't find it here. Most of us are not equiped to perform an extensive study of how percieved differences in studio monitors and audiophile speakers translate into scientific measurements.
 
As an aside, regarding the protection issue, Yorkville emailed me back recommending that I don't bother with anything simply because you can't rely on fuses or lightbulbs and they might colour the sound

<shrug> I *suppose* I can always buy new monitors if I screw up :)
 
thats no doubt why they gave you that recommendation :) They like selling them.

Regarding the "colouring the sound". Total nonsence. You decide the resistance of your bulb - in other words the bulb only starts to glow when the signal becomes excessive, and pops when its simply to much.
This means that below this level, the signal passes through without any significant resistance.
If this system was so bad, or coloured the sound - what about every Urei / Altec main monitor system??
 
Then, after you've built your ideal mon's and gone through all the trouble to calculate the exact type and wattage of bulb, hook the whole thing up with 24 guage "off the shelf" speaker wire making sure to leave an extra 50 feet looped on the floor for each speaker (just in case you ever decide to move them further away).
Just kidding...although you would be surprised how often I see similar things done!
I post this comment as an important hint. All too often I see people spend tons of money on monitors and amps only to hook them together with dog-sh*# wire. Would you try to jump start your car with speaker wire?...Then don't try to run your monitors with telephone wire!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top