Listening Get Together

Re: Listening Get Together

If the OP really takes promoting his box seriously, and wants our industry of professionals to take them seriously, then it would be highly advisable to hire the services of Pat Brown or Ron Sauro to test the box out and publish the EASE data. This is the *only* objective means of evaluating this product. Everything else is hearsay. Both Pat and Ron are very fair individuals, and have earned the respect from the industry for being impartial and extremely knowledgeable in their craft. If anyone will separate fact from fiction, it will be them.

Electro-Acoustic Testing Company
NWAA Labs -- Complete High-speed Speaker and Material Testing
 
Re: Listening Get Together

Sure, I'll send him cabs. I didn't realize it could be done quite that reasonably. All the checking I'd done appeared to cost in the thousands.

Another note, it was pointed out earlier that phone mics go into compression. I checked mine, and sure enough, about 106 db it started giving too high of readings. The max I could get it to misread was 8db. That makes the club level in the 108-112 db range. Which I find more believable, too. Thank you for pointing that out.

More later. Got a dinner invite.
 
Re: Listening Get Together

Leland Crooks said:
Sure, I'll send him cabs. I didn't realize it could be done quite that reasonably. All the checking I'd done appeared to cost in the thousands.

Another note, it was pointed out earlier that phone mics go into compression. I checked mine, and sure enough, about 106 db it started giving too high of readings. The max I could get it to misread was 8db. That makes the club level in the 108-112 db range. Which I find more believable, too. Thank you for pointing that out.

More later. Got a dinner invite.
Click to expand...

You really don't want to be paying me. My point was to show that not only do you not have appropriate data to be sharing with the professional community, you don't even seem to know WHAT data you should be sharing nor what a reasonable cost to find that data would be. My price was high enough to make you take notice, but low enough to account for the limited usefulness of that data.

I will revise the offer.

Since the data I would collect is of little value as publishable data, we can do this as a case study in measurement here on Soundforums. We make the raw data public and the method and conclusions subject to open peer review. Just measurements, no guessing at what goes on inside the box. If anyone really wants to reimburse me for the time, they can make a donation to Soundforums. It can also become the start of a road test.

Or

I agree about Pat Brown. Start a Kickstarter or other fundraiser to hire Pat and I will contribute the same $35 people are offering to send me.
 
Re: Listening Get Together

As I said, I can do a transfer function which would tell us the frequency and phase response of the source under test. if a single box is tested, it would tell us little about how the box performs in groups. The transfer function can be done at different physical angles which would allow me to do a rough polar but that may have accuracy problems due to changing the source/mic positions. I can easily test the claim that the box does not follow the inverse square law by measuring response at different distances. I cannot do any absolute measurements such as peak SPL, or THD that are meaningful.

The biggest difference between what I can do and what Pat can do is that Pat can provide traceable calibrations of his equipment, whereas I am a field technician and do just about all of my work with uncalibrated mics.

Since my purpose is to get a system ready for this evenings show, I need the measurements to show me gross problems and to create a baseline visual to match what my ears tell me. Because all of those measurements are relative, they do not require the extra expense of traceable calibrated mics.

In other words, I can produce measurements that are useful to me for answering my own questions about a system under test. Those same measurements are of dubious quality to anyone else without significant peer review and confirmation.

You could send the boxes to ten people like me and when we all get comparable results then those results would become believable, or you could send the boxes just to Pat and have data that will be instantly accepted by the professional community.
 
Re: Listening Get Together

Firstly, thank you for the generous offers. I think the donations to the forum is a great idea, as is the tutorial.
The measurements I do are very much like what Jay describes. Useful to me to compare changes in the cab or crossover, not really useful for anyone else. Third party, even if rough, are more believable than anything I would do.


I have looked into kick starter several times, just never decided whether to do that or not. I will certainly kick in here.


I need a week or so to build some cabs. I only have 2 of the MinE25. I am out of vifa's. I will order them tomorrow. I have a couple of requests for cabs along with this. This time of year even with a heated shop the glue requires a day to cure, the duratex at least a day, preferably 2.


In the meantime earlier there were requests for even something done with a handheld meter. I just figured these had been found. These videos were done with an iPad. Version 1 cabs, we are now on version 3, with the most changes to the subs.


BigE Dispersion Demo At SpeakerHardware - YouTube
DBTest - YouTube
 
Re: Listening Get Together

Jay Barracato said:
I agree about Pat Brown. .
Click to expand...
The problem with Pat browns method of measuring cabinet and how these "work" is that he uses Monkey Forrest to measure with. It is a VERY fast swept sine wave. So it would not around long enough for the highs to "catch a ride" on the low freq waves (as it has been explained)-so the data would be invalid-or so it would seem-as I understand it

That method works with normal cabinet however..
 
Re: Listening Get Together

100dBC...? About as impressive as my first home stereo... :lol:


I'll give you the benefit of the doubt with those iphone/ipad videos, but they just do not sound good. Lots of 250 & 400, and the mid/high range just sounds like its under a blanket...



Evan
 
Ivan Beaver said:
The problem with Pat browns method of measuring cabinet and how these "work" is that he uses Monkey Forrest to measure with. It is a VERY fast swept sine wave. So it would not around long enough for the highs to "catch a ride" on the low freq waves (as it has been explained)-so the data would be invalid-or so it would seem-as I understand it

That method works with normal cabinet however..
Click to expand...

Without trying to put thoughts into Pat's head, I am sure someone with his measurement chops could come up with a measurement protocol that is appropriate for new technology. Then it is fairly straight forward to show the validity of that protocol. I would start by measuring a known box with both the existing protocol and the new protocol followed by the new box with both protocols.

I would also start from the null hypothesis that there is no difference between the new technology and a conventional box. If I could establish some difference, that would be the time to start trying to decide what the difference is and whether it is for the better.

Science does not come with an instruction manual. But it does come with best practices. A truly new situation will require measurement techniques that are new, but best practices indicate you exhaust the tried and true methods before creating a new technique.

You have often said that just because you can take a measurement doesn't mean it is useful. This concept in science/statistics is called validity and is basically "does the measurement protocol/ method of interpretation actually lead to an answer to the question posed?".

Since the claims on the Big E webpage seem to indicate something is either wrong or unaccounted for in the basic work of Maxwell and Lorentz ( from my interpretation of their text that somehow one frequency affects another creating a condition where waves no longer interact with standard interference patterns), the first step must be to determine if their is a difference.
 
Re: Listening Get Together

And while on the subject of measurements in general-let's not forget WHY they are important and WHAT they are used for. And this is measurements in general.

1: Sensitivity-power capacity-freq response. These two are used together to get an idea of how much SPL a box can produce at a particular freq at a given distance.

1M is the "standard" but in most cases the boxes are not actually measured at 1M. They are measured further away (and back calculated)-so that the physical size of the cabinet does not "get in the way" of the next important part. When you actually measure the box at 1M-it will give a higher SPL than the rating-due to the physical size of the box and the boundary that it represents. But of course if you want to "cheat" then by all means measure up close and get higher numbers-but those numbers are not useful in the real world-but they ARE correct-at least for the measurement condition-which is invalid.

Why is that important to know? Because the whole purpose of determining the max SPL is to use normal inverse square calculations to be able for a designer to figure out how loud a box will be at a particular distance. So you can use this figure to see if the box is loud enough for a particular need/application.

It is also very important to have the actual freq response in the calculation-or else you do not know if the max SPL is across the intended freq range of the cabinet-or a single peak that can get very loud (but the rest of the cabinet cannot keep up). This is used pretty commonly-even by some major players to get higher numbers-no matter how useless they really are.

2: COVERAGE PATTERN This is very important to know how much area a particular loudspeaker can "cover" in both the horizontal and vertical planes. It is NOT a single number-as most manufacturers would like for you to believe. It varies with freq. The more consistent the pattern is in respect to freq-the more even the coverage is going to be across the listening area. If the pattern is 90 at one freq and 30 at another-there is no way the sound is going to be the same across the listening area. Some loudspeaker vary WILDLY with the coverage patterns making it next to impossible to predict anything useful.

It is also important when using more than one box-to figure out how to aim them.

3: Freq response (in particular high and low extension. For some people this is a big deal-for others-not so much. If you are doing material that has extension on either end of the spectrum-then you HAVE to know how loud a particular box will be at those freq-WITHOUT any processing. Then you can use the other numbers to figure out how loud it can get.

For example there is one manufacturer who claims very low freq extension. yes they cabinets can produce those tones (but so can a dome tweeter-just put a 1hz into a dome tweeter and watch it move in and out-it IS producing that freq-just not loud enough to be useful--------------------) but if you look at the sensitivity at those freq and the max power capacity-you will quickly realize that those tone cannot get loud enough for any practical usage-but they still make the claim.

You always have to look a bit deeper in order to get the real answer. Simple numbers DON'T EVEN begin to describe the performance of a loudspeaker.

I have rambled enough for now-time to get ready for a really hard load in LOTS of walking to get to the listening area 1000+ away from the speakers-and up and down LOTS of steps.

And of course there are lots of other parameters-but to me-those are the "biggies". If you don't have adequate information about those-then you simply have no idea what the loudspeaker can actually do. And sadly-this data is missing from MANY loudspeakers-even the largest companies. Maybe for a reason--------------------------
 
Re: Listening Get Together

Evan Kirkendall said:
100dBC...? About as impressive as my first home stereo... :lol:


I'll give you the benefit of the doubt with those iphone/ipad videos, but they just do not sound good. Lots of 250 & 400, and the mid/high range just sounds like its under a blanket...



Evan
Click to expand...

It's an ipad. Not exactly a high end recording microphone. And demonstrative of one of our problems, because the mid/high range is very good. But not on the recording.

At that point we had been running sound outside about 10 minutes. The local authorities had showed up telling us they were getting calls. If you look to the left you'll see his car in the video. I begged for another minute or two to run this. Not as much volume as we had been running. The closest house to the back of my shop is 6 blocks on axis, an apartment complex about 45deg off axis is 4 blocks away. The shop is next to the railyard, it's not like the area isn't used to loud. Trains run at least every half hour. Parsons does not have a sound ordinance until after 10:00pm, but it's nice to be a good neighbor.
 
Last edited:
Re: Listening Get Together

Ivan Beaver said:
1: Sensitivity-power capacity-freq response. These two are used together to get an idea of how much SPL a box can produce at a particular freq at a given distance.

1M is the "standard" but in most cases the boxes are not actually measured at 1M. They are measured further away (and back calculated)-so that the physical size of the cabinet does not "get in the way" of the next important part. When you actually measure the box at 1M-it will give a higher SPL than the rating-due to the physical size of the box and the boundary that it represents. But of course if you want to "cheat" then by all means measure up close and get higher numbers-but those numbers are not useful in the real world-but they ARE correct-at least for the measurement condition-which is invalid.
Click to expand...

I don't know for sure with the particular cabs I am sending out, but with the other models I have tested 1w1m indicates lower sensitivity than if you measure at power at 100w10m. We've established a minimum distance of 4m for spl testing. We've seen differences of up to 6db between the two distances. Outside measurements. Especially with the subs.


Ivan Beaver said:
2: COVERAGE PATTERN This is very important to know how much area a particular loudspeaker can "cover" in both the horizontal and vertical planes. It is NOT a single number-as most manufacturers would like for you to believe. It varies with freq. The more consistent the pattern is in respect to freq-the more even the coverage is going to be across the listening area. If the pattern is 90 at one freq and 30 at another-there is no way the sound is going to be the same across the listening area. Some loudspeaker vary WILDLY with the coverage patterns making it next to impossible to predict anything useful.

It is also important when using more than one box-to figure out how to aim them.
Click to expand...

By ear, for dispersion you have to get almost out of visual sight of a driver face before dispersion drops off on the comp driver cabs. The video is somewhat indicative of that. The MinE25 is not that wide, because of the vifa tweeter. I've been waiting for spring to do those tests. I have the place, just not the weather. The tops running in that video have 4 coax drivers per cab.


Ivan Beaver said:
You always have to look a bit deeper in order to get the real answer. Simple numbers DON'T EVEN begin to describe the performance of a loudspeaker.
Click to expand...
Hence why we want people to hear them.


Ivan Beaver said:
And of course there are lots of other parameters-but to me-those are the "biggies". If you don't have adequate information about those-then you simply have no idea what the loudspeaker can actually do. And sadly-this data is missing from MANY loudspeakers-even the largest companies. Maybe for a reason--------------------------
Click to expand...
We don't want to be those companies. We want the data. We run tests. I've seen the methodology wars on other forums for tests. I don't want it to be about the tests.
 
Re: Listening Get Together

Ivan Beaver said:
The problem with Pat browns method of measuring cabinet and how these "work" is that he uses Monkey Forrest to measure with. It is a VERY fast swept sine wave. So it would not around long enough for the highs to "catch a ride" on the low freq waves (as it has been explained)-so the data would be invalid-or so it would seem-as I understand it

That method works with normal cabinet however..
Click to expand...

The carrier is produced with swept sines. But it's just not as pronounced. Our spl and response testing show different values depending on the source. RTA's with noise show different output and frequency response as opposed to swept sine waves. The cabs are designed to produce music. Music is not a single source sound. Very hard to describe the sound of a BigE cab. They are just dynamic and alive. I have many cd's and mp3's that are just unlistenable. Every single detail is reproduced, you can hear the engineer working the mix. Most of the cd's I have that were remixed from vinyl are terrible.

Ivan you asked earlier about defining the problem. The original problem Steve and Tom set out to overcome was the huge amount of eq/dsp required for most high output loudspeakers today. And to see if they could overcome the placement issues of horn loaded cabs and still maintain that kind of efficiency. Both were achieved. At the listening party, everything was run absolutely flat. No eq, no dsp. In efficiency they do approach horns, not quite there in output per watt, but close.
 
Re: Listening Get Together

Leland Crooks said:
I don't know for sure with the particular cabs I am sending out, but with the other models I have tested 1w1m indicates lower sensitivity than if you measure at power at 100w10m. We've established a minimum distance of 4m for spl testing. We've seen differences of up to 6db between the two distances. Outside measurements. Especially with the subs.
Click to expand...
If outside on the ground then that may effectively be a half space measurement once the boundary area gets of sufficient size for the wavelengths involved, which happens to then explain the 6dB difference.

On some practical issues for the professional market, it seems that Big E develops the designs and then licenses those designs to builders such as GC Soundworks and Hart Designs Etc. That raises a number of questions such as who is the actual manufacturer? If multiple builders build the same model what is done to make sure the products and performance are the same? What is the warranty, who is providing it, can it be 'passed through', etc.? What mounting or flying provisions are provided, how are those designed and tested and is their any related certification? What is the pricing structure and if there are Dealer costs, what is required to become a Dealer? How do you handle parts inventory not only for new products but also for service and warranty repair? Do you maintain stock or is everything built after receiving an order? I'm sure there are many other issues but there is a difference between a speaker builder and a pro audio speaker manufacturer and I'm trying to understand how that transition is being addressed.
 
Re: Listening Get Together

Leland Crooks said:
It's an ipad. Not exactly a high end recording microphone. And demonstrative of one of our problems, because the mid/high range is very good. But not on the recording.

At that point we had been running sound outside about 10 minutes. The local authorities had showed up telling us they were getting calls. If you look to the left you'll see his car in the video. I begged for another minute or two to run this. Not as much volume as we had been running. The closest house to the back of my shop is 6 blocks on axis, an apartment complex about 45deg off axis is 4 blocks away. The shop is next to the railyard, it's not like the area isn't used to loud. Trains run at least every half hour. Parsons does not have a sound ordinance until after 10:00pm, but it's nice to be a good neighbor.
Click to expand...

Here in lies the problem with these anecdotal statements, you can hear our SRX rig from a few Km away if the wind is blowing right, doesn't mean that our SRX rig is appropriate to cover an area several Km in size.
 
Re: Listening Get Together

Brad Weber said:
If outside on the ground then that may effectively be a half space measurement once the boundary area gets of sufficient size for the wavelengths involved, which happens to then explain the 6dB difference.
Click to expand...

You get the full shift about 2-2/12 meters out.
Brad Weber said:
On some practical issues for the professional market, it seems that Big E develops the designs and then licenses those designs to builders such as GC Soundworks and Hart Designs Etc. That raises a number of questions such as who is the actual manufacturer? If multiple builders build the same model what is done to make sure the products and performance are the same? What is the warranty, who is providing it, can it be 'passed through', etc.? What mounting or flying provisions are provided, how are those designed and tested and is their any related certification? What is the pricing structure and if there are Dealer costs, what is required to become a Dealer? How do you handle parts inventory not only for new products but also for service and warranty repair? Do you maintain stock or is everything built after receiving an order? I'm sure there are many other issues but there is a difference between a speaker builder and a pro audio speaker manufacturer and I'm trying to understand how that transition is being addressed.
Click to expand...

I am the licensed manufacturer for the entire line, and control all the licenses. Doug, Mike Arnopol and Duke Lejeune are constrained by contract to narrow bands of the market. Doug can build and sell MinE25's, since he pretty much designed it. He and I overlap the most. Mike is bass guitar, Duke is high end home audio. For everything else they are sales representatives for the products I produce. I am the secondary source for their cabs if they get overwhelmed and cannot handle the volume. Which Mike is approaching with the bass cabs.

As for my capabilities, obviously I'm a small shop. But in my town is a cabinet factory. Sonny has the capability of producing up to 2k kitchen cabinets a day. Running a batch for me would not be a big problem, since they're running at reduced capacity for the last couple of years. Currently it's build to order, that will change. I do have inventory on a couple of the cabs. And replacement drivers. Parts I have a pretty big inventory due to my DIY site.

Flying hardware is in design, probably ready for engineering review fairly soon. Nothing will happen there until it is certified and tested. Until that time the target market is speaker on a stick, any place you can stack. More than likely the architectural cabs will appear before the portable style.


I've been on both ends of the distribution chain. This is a little different, with some distributed manufacturing. That's a new business model that's starting to crop up.
 
Re: Listening Get Together

Looking at the MiniE25, I strongly suspect that it is built from two SLS 5.25" woofers and a Vifa BC tweeter, x-overed at a fairly high frequency (2.5k or more likely above). Now, the units have got sensitivity numbers in the high 80s and low 90s, and you can probably with the right program material feed them 400w and survive. In my mind that should make them capable of 116-117dB/1m before any eq.
These are the numbers I'm expecting just putting the elements into a box.
What are the claims for this particular speaker? Is this the speaker that was used for the show after the demo? How many units?

Edit: A new look at the website gave me some extra information, like pricing and that the MiniE25 is a HiFi cab, and not likely to be the cab used for live, so I'm guessing the GC25???
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom