The Ultimate Near Field Monitors... at cost!

[barefoot]

This is not an advertisement, and I hope it doesn't seem like I'm trying to sell anything on this BBS. It's just that I have a design for the ultimate set of near field monitors, which I am dying to build, but I don't have the money. So, I'm offering them at cost to anyone who is willing to front the money for the parts. What's the catch?.... Nothing, but a mere $5000!

Why in the world would I pay five grand for a set of monitors, you ask? Well, you wouldn't unless you had tons of spare change, and you wanted the very best that money could buy.

So what is this design?... I thought you would never ask! It's based on an amazing ribbon mid/tweeter unit out of France called the Raven R3. It is an ultra light weight 175mm(7 inch) aluminum ribbon stretched between extremely powerful neodymium magnets. It's response is ruler flat from 500Hz to 30kHz at 99dB/W/m efficiency, and the waterfall plot (transient response) looks like El Capitan! This is an absolutely incredible unit. The problem is the R3's go for $1650 a piece. Way out of my budget, but maybe not for some very fortunate soul out there. I just want the pleasure of building these things.

The main reason I can make the ultimate set of near fields using this R3 unit is because of that beautiful 500Hz-30kHz spec. You can cross this thing over at 500Hz! At 500Hz the wavelength is over 68cm (2 feet), which is twice as large as the physical separation between all of the drivers in my two-way design (R3 plus twin 165mm midbass drivers down to 40Hz). I won't get into the physics, but this means the near field (quasi-anechoic) response is virtually immune to all positional dependences. This is not true for normal designs where the crossover is in the 2-3kHz range. Most of these monitors are designed for flat "near field" response at a very specific listening position relative to the drivers. Small variations in distance, vertical or horizontal angle relative to the monitors can wreck the response. My R3 based monitors will not have this problem.

Another great thing about the R3 is that it acts as a line source above 4kHz. So, it's vertical polar response becomes sharper at higher frequencies. This will dramatically reduce early high frequency reflections off the mixing console or workstation which alter response and smear imaging, without the inherent distortions induced by directional horns. Finally, there is the sound....... These monitors will sound like nothing you have ever heard before.... linearity, detail, and transparency unequaled by anything out there today.

[Couple them with comparable subs (for which I also have big ideas!) and you'll effortlessly fill a large studio with immaculate earth quaking sound.]

Do you have about an extra $5k laying around to help me bring this monitor idea to life? You'll be the envy of us all

barefoot

 

[Sound Cracker]

A nice theory friend!

They at one time thought that wax would be a great physical medium to record music to.

Let me know how they work out. I suspect a bit different then what you think. If theories held up true, products would go to market after the drawing were done without ANY testing at all!

This all sounds very interesting though.

Peace.

 

[barefoot]

Sound Cracker

Actually the R3 has been around for several years, it's well tested, and has been incorporated into many very high end systems.... usually custom. You can take a look at it here: http://www.orcadesign.com/raven/raven.htm The only really new thing I want to do is design it into a near field system.

I'm relatively new to recording, but I've been designing and building loudspeakers for over 10 years. (Unfortunately, I don't do it for a living anymore. I engineer these funky computer chip measurement systems based on "Picosecond Ultrasonic Laser Sonar") Anyhow, even a quick back of the envelop calculation of traditional monitors will tell you the glaring limitations in their design. On th other hand, some calculations based on the R3's parameters, the near field response of various woofers, and the practical geometries of such a system allow anyone to see that the near field performance will be significantly improved. Of course the price you pay is, well, the $price$.

Calculations are all fine and good, but you wan to see data. I'll see what I can do.

thanks for the feedback,

barefoot

p.s. – wax was a big technological advancement over the previous generation of cardboard and tinfoil recordings. It was used for almost 10 years until Berliner's hard rubber gramophone disks finally took over.

 

[The Green Hornet]

Yo FEET WITH NO SHOES:

Try out a pair of Yorkville YSM-1 monitors -- $108.75 each. Just divine compared to many monitors out there that cost much more, namely, Alesis 1's or 2's or whatever. Yea, verily, there are some out there that cost more that do the job; however, for the person who likes to do more with make do than doo doo, the Yorkvilles are great speakers.

Sorry, 5k is out of my budget for research and development or investment. But, good luck.

Green Hornet

 

[jrlemonz]

You could try proposing the idea to whoever akes those R-3 things. If you're using their product as a base to make a new one, you might run into patent issues anyways if you tried to market them. I really don't know much about anything like that, but that seems pretty common-sense type stuff. For all you know they'll love the idea and put you on their staff making these things.
Jake

 

[barefoot]

Jake,

Yes, I've spoken with the head guy who distributes Raven products in the US. He's a talented speaker designer. He was quite interested in the idea and offered good advice, but he didn't offer to lend me a couple R3's for development.

Now if I had called from JBL or some other big company, I'm sure he would have sent me a pair right away.... but, of course, if that were the case, I wouldn't need to borrow them!

barefoot