Home » Audio » Speaker » Rationale for single driver speakers
Rationale for single driver speakers [message #19690] Fri, 09 January 2004 14:22 Go to next message
akhilesh is currently offline  akhilesh
Messages: 1275
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (3rd Degree)
Hi Everyone,
Just wanted to start a thread on WHY single driver speakers are a good (or bad) idea. Let's consider some initial ideas:

1. Some people believe the crossovers in multi driver speakers result in phase shift, and the placing of diffferent drivers result in different frequencies coming from different sources. I have not been able to hear this. A well made pair of multiway speakers sound pretty good to me.

2. Having one driver reproduce the bulk of the audible spectrum
results in more natural sound (somehow).

IMHO, I like a single driver speaker becuase i have an inherent bias against a $100 multiway unit where 90% of the spectrum is reproduced by the $5 unit (the tweeter). I'd much rather spend the money on a high quality driver that reproduces most of teh spectrum. IMHO, this approach should lead to subjectively well produced sound (does anyone know how to quantitatively measure the accuracy of reproduction of a trumpet, or a saxophone or a piano?).

Does anyone have other thoughts? Anyone know of any real scientific studies that PROVE that crossovers (if well executed) will still be AUDIBLY worse than no crossovers?
thanx
-akhilesh

Re: Rationale for single driver speakers [message #19693 is a reply to message #19690] Thu, 15 January 2004 02:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adrian Mack is currently offline  Adrian Mack
Messages: 568
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)

Hi Akhilesh

Phase shifts can be minimized well below audibility, so thats not a concern in a multi-way system. Comb filtering between subsystems can also be highly minimized by using steep order crossovers, controlled dispersion horns, close driver spacing, and avoiding very high crossover points (above ~5KHz or so).

Fullrange drivers are good in that theres only one subsystem so theres no issue of path length differences between two sound sources which cause nulls at various frequencies and positions. But fullrange drivers become extremely "beamy" at high frequencies, so polar response is very poor (i.e: very bad off-axis response). That happens because the speaker ceases to function as an omni directional point source when the speaker itself is acoustically large compared to wavelength being produced. Sound is radiated into a continuouly smaller angle as frequency rises. Diffraction can even occur across the diaphram at these frequencies. Intermodulation distortion is also higher on a fullrange driver at the upper bounds as well, for obvious reasons. Fullrange drivers also often have difficulty reaching the highest frequencies, as well as the lowest frequencies as it needs to find a balance between cone weight and suspension stiffness. If the cone is too heavy it will extend deeper, but it will also limit its HF extension at the same time - a balance must be found and it is always a trade off.

No real studies that I know of prove crossovers are audibly worse than no crossovers. Reason is, they arn't. Selection of the correct crossovers in a multi-way system, and using high quality parts in those crossovers to keep distortion low is what you want to do. And if you do, then there's nothing wrong with them.

Here is a good document concerning the audibility of phase.

http://www.music.miami.edu/programs/mue/Research/dkoya/title_page.htm

It's long, and boring (university paper), but its good stuff. Its one of the best studies I know of.

Everything into account, a good multi way system can excel in terms of distortion, polar response, bandwidth, and output capability.

Adrian

Re: Rationale for single driver speakers [message #19694 is a reply to message #19693] Thu, 15 January 2004 07:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
paba is currently offline  paba
Messages: 21
Registered: May 2009
Chancellor
There must be something to the simplicity of single driver speaker, no crossover makes the signal path much shorter, the single point source is closer to what you get in nature as well. Granted it is a tall order for one driver to cover 20Hz to 20kHz. In fact it is a tall order for many multi driver systems as well so in that case why not go for simplicity.

Just my 2 cents.
Paul



Re: Rationale for single driver speakers [message #19695 is a reply to message #19693] Thu, 15 January 2004 08:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
akhilesh is currently offline  akhilesh
Messages: 1275
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (3rd Degree)
Hmmm... So it seems that single driver designs don't really offer
an audible advantage. Of course, they are simpler to build.
My experience with my single driver is that it is clean and, if you use a good driver (like I did) there is a purity to the sound. However, it is not as "impressive" as a 3 way system (my other speakers are 3 way horns).
Stereophile did a review of 2 single driver speakers, primarily becuase they have a SET/single driver fanatic on staff (Art Dudley).
The single drivers they measured seemed inferior to most high end multi way designs, and yet, they were very listenable.
Maybe single drivers capture some aspect of listenability that we cannot measure yet.
-akhilesh


Re: Rationale for single driver speakers [message #19696 is a reply to message #19694] Fri, 16 January 2004 01:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adrian Mack is currently offline  Adrian Mack
Messages: 568
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)

Hi Paul

Certainly, there are advantages to single driver's. But then there are disadvantages as well, and taking all into account, the advantages aren’t enough to make them better than a multi-way speaker.

Remember that no loudspeaker act's as a true point source for every frequency. When wavelength approaches diameter of the cone, then the speaker ceases to act as a point source and is more like a planar source. That is, the listening window is effectively limited to being directly on-axis. Every loudspeaker functions as a point source at the bottom end of its range, where wavelength being produced is much larger than cone diameter. Unless the loudspeaker is infinitely small to function as a point source at 20KHz, which would mean the cone is a fraction of an inch in diameter, then it'll function as a planar source and that's when beaming starts to occur. And with a full range driver, cone diameter is often around 6" diameter or more, so the driver becomes beamy very early. You'll find that most full-range driver's become increasingly attenuated off-axis from as low as 3KHz, or even lower if cone diameter is larger. The Single Driver Website has a number of frequency response curves published for several fullrange drivers which demonstrate this narrowing radiation pattern. On the other hand, multi-way speakers make use of tweeter's which are small in diameter so they act like a true point source to a higher frequency. And if a tweeter horn is used - then smooth polar response can be obtained to an even higher frequency. Of course, the issue of getting each subsystem to combine coherently becomes a factor. The solution to this is to use high order crossovers, close baffle/driver spacing, lower crossover points, and directional horns to limit interaction between subsystems. A properly designed multi-way speaker can combine to produce a very flat frequency response over the entire audio spectrum, and phase shift's between subsystems can also be reduced to below audible levels. Static phase is inaudible to our ears anyway; it's really only large, multi cycle phase shifts which are a problem. Phase shifts which are only inside of the time domain are indistinguishable, but when they show up as anomalies in the frequency domain, then they can be identified.

As I mentioned in my last post, and as you've just noted, it's exceedingly difficult for a single driver to cover the full audio spectrum. It's also pretty hard for a multi-way speaker as well, unless the number of subsystems is increased to three or more if intermodulation distortion is desired to be kept low. While its impossible for a single driver to cover 20Hz to 20KHz, it isn't impossible for a multi-way speaker to do that. That's because to reproduce 20KHz requires that the ratio of voice coil mass and cone mass be as small as possible, and that isn't what happens on a fullrange driver - the cone is heavier so that LF response isn't minimized, but then HF response is limited too. It's kinda a balancing act when you want to make a single driver cover the widest bandwidth possible. Voice coil inductance will also become a factor in upper frequency rolloff, and generally inductance is greater as cone weight is increased. Use of a faraday ring in the motor assembly of a fullrange driver would be one way to counteract this to an extent. A lot of the commercial multi-way speakers on the market use 6" drivers or so, so bass extension is usually limited to 40 or 60Hz at the low end, but they reach 20KHz easily as they employ tweeters with extremely light mass, very low inductance and they're small in diameter to minimize beaming. A subwoofer would generally be used with speakers like this. They're usually 2-way bookshelf’s or tower's or MTM towers, which is why they don't reach 20Hz; cone weight needs to be heavy to reach 20Hz, and since there's only one woofer in a 2-way speaker (or 2 woofers in an MTM speaker, but each woofer is exactly the same and each cover the same bandwidth), then that woofer is expected to operate right from lower cutoff and all the way up to 3 or 4Khz where it's crossed over to a tweeter. So cone weight is less so it can extend into a few kilohertz where it’s crossed over, but it also means it's lower cutoff is increased to 40 or 60Hz. Another reason for not having the woofer in a 2-way system reach down to 20Hz is to reduce intermodulation distortion in the midrange. In a 3-way system though, one can easily have a woofer covering 20Hz through to 200Hz or so, and then a midrange from 200Hz to 3KHz, and then a tweeter from 3KHz to 20KHz. As you can probably see, in a 3-way system, bandwidth can be maximized further over a 2-way system and distortion can be kept low by having each subsystem in operation over a limited range where the driver performs best.

Single drivers still do need some sort of filter to protect them from low frequencies. A highpass filter is typically used below cutoff to prevent the driver from mechanical damage caused by low frequencies which require high excursion, and xmax is small on a fullrange speaker.

Added to that, cone resonance modes, or breakup modes cause frequency response to become very rippled, or "not smooth" at higher frequencies. There are ways to damp cone modes, but they still become a huge negative in a single driver, especially since they'll start from a lower frequency than what a smaller speaker such as a tweeter will do. Cone breakup modes are also a form of distortion, which isn't a good thing. A multi-way speaker can be designed to operate each subsystem so that none of them are operating in a region where cone resonance modes are interacting.

Whizzer cones and center cap type fullrange drivers typically generate a peak in response where both cones are active. The spike can be over 7db on some drivers.

Intermodulation distortion is typically higher on a fullrange driver too. That's because large diaphragm movement at low frequencies interfere's with higher frequencies which are trying to generate only small diaphragm movements at the same time, and that increases intermodulation distortion at both midrange and high frequencies. Bandwidth is expected to be huge on a fullrange device, so intermodulation distortion is increased further over a multi-way speaker. Each subsystem in a multi-way speaker is running over a much smaller bandwidth, so each component generates less intermodulation components.

The point is, a multi-way speaker is able to perform much better in all of the important categories. Single driver's are always faced with the problem of a highly uneven polar response, rippled frequency response at higher frequencies, inability to reach both the highest and lowest frequency extreme's, higher distortion, and lower output capability and dynamic range than that of a well designed multi-way speaker.

Adrian

Re: Rationale for single driver speakers [message #19697 is a reply to message #19695] Fri, 16 January 2004 01:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adrian Mack is currently offline  Adrian Mack
Messages: 568
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)

Hi Akhilesh

That's my take on it too. It's impossible for a single driver to match the polar response, distortion levels, bandwidth, dynamic range and linearity of a multi-way speaker. That in mind, it doesn't mean single drivers are completely bad and unlistenable. I've seen lots of people use them with success (Fostex seems to be talked of very well), it's just that they cannot match what a multi-way speaker can do. What fullrange driver did you use by the way?

The front speakers in my system also utilize horns, and are 3-way type.

Adrian

Re: Rationale for single driver speakers [message #19698 is a reply to message #19693] Fri, 16 January 2004 03:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
elektratig is currently offline  elektratig
Messages: 348
Registered: May 2009
Grand Master
Adrian,

On the other hand, with no crossover it's a lot harder to screw up. Have you seen some of the measurements made at Soundstage? Similarly, Dennis Murphy (I think) has been discussing the bizarre measurements he got from one of the Norh speakers and designed a brand new replacement crossover. Particularly when I see a speaker with three or more drivers, I get very nervous because you have no assurance that the designer had any idea what he was doing.

One other factor, for me at least -- and I recognize it is utterly subjective -- is that I just find single drivers (at least the Fostexes I've heard) non-fatiguing and easy to listen to. I can listen to my $140 tube-amp-on-a-board driving a pair of Fostexes all day without fatigue.


Re: Rationale for single driver speakers [message #19699 is a reply to message #19698] Fri, 16 January 2004 04:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adrian Mack is currently offline  Adrian Mack
Messages: 568
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)

Hi elektratig

I agree with you, no crossover is a lot harder to screw up! I've seen a lot of DIYers completely wreck the crossover's. And I don't doubt that some of the smaller companies probably don't know what they're doing either. In any case, I refer to a well designed multi-way speaker. But I see your point, for sure.

Adrian

Re: Rationale for single driver speakers [message #19700 is a reply to message #19697] Fri, 16 January 2004 06:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
akhilesh is currently offline  akhilesh
Messages: 1275
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (3rd Degree)
Hi Adrian,
I used a stephens trusonic 80FR, an 8" vintage full range driver.
Very sweet midrange, decent highs, and OK lows.
Come listen if you are in the Tulsa area.
akhilesh

Re: Rationale for single driver speakers [message #19701 is a reply to message #19696] Fri, 16 January 2004 06:36 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
akhilesh is currently offline  akhilesh
Messages: 1275
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (3rd Degree)
And yet, as we all seem to agree (incl. Stereophile Jan 2004) , single drivers are very listenable, especially when driven with a low powered tube amp!
Also, and I think this is part of the listenablility, they somehow reproduce instruments, voices, etc. in a very NATURAL way.
-akhilesh

Previous Topic: Whiteley Stentorian HF-1012's
Next Topic: Difference between studio monitors and home speakers?
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Fri Nov 29 16:27:49 CST 2024

Sponsoring Organizations

DIY Audio Projects
DIY Audio Projects
OddWatt Audio
OddWatt Audio
Pi Speakers
Pi Speakers
Prosound Shootout
Prosound Shootout
Miller Audio
Miller Audio
Tubes For Amps
TubesForAmps.com

Lone Star Audiofest