Why Does The Need for (Proper) Speaker Enclosures Continue to Elude?

[Point353]

Golly. Makes me feel as though I got my current system at a K-Mart blue light special...

There will always be a few that must have (and possess the wherewithal to afford) the most expensive of anything.
If it's any consolation, the (recently retired) editor of Stereophile magazine uses the KEF LS50 speakers at home.

[DKS]

There will always be a few that must have (and possess the wherewithal to afford) the most expensive of anything.
If it's any consolation, the (recently retired) editor of Stereophile magazine uses the KEF LS50 speakers at home.

Yes, that is nice to know.

[jdcolombo]

If I sold everything I own, including my house and cars, I couldn't even afford one of those Wilson speakers, let alone the pair.  Plus they are among the ugliest things I've ever seen.  They do look like something out of Star Wars, but on the Empire side.

There is a ton of affordable but well-engineered hifi equipment available.  My Schiit DAC cost me $400 new.  Everything else in my stereo system I bought used, where you save at least 50% off the new price.  My Maggie 1.6's were $800 used; the tape decks are leftovers from days gone by, except for the Studer, which I'll admit was something of a luxury purchase by my standards (it came from a recording studio that was going all-digital).  The TASCAM I got basically free from a radio station trying to get rid of "old stuff."  My music source is a 6-year old Mac mini and the amp is a used Musical Fidelity A5.  Buy this stuff second-hand, after the more well-heeled use it for a few months and discard it for the next new thing, and you can put together a pretty nice system for relatively cheap.

Compared to the Wilsons, the Magnepan 30.7's are an absolute steal at $30K.  The folks in Bear Lake MN should have a line out the door for them!

John C.

[MK]

Makes N scale MRR look cheap!

[DKS]

Plus they are among the ugliest things I've ever seen.

Ain't that the truth.

[Jbub]

Those speakers are UGLY! They remind me more of a Dalek from Dr Who then something out of star wars though. If you you're going to pay close to a million for a pair then they better look good too. I guess some people with money don't have any sense.

[CRL]

That’s why it’s referred to as “stupid rich”.

[craigolio1]

With regards to EQing the sound so that more low frequencies can be heard, be mindful that just turning up the low frequencies is not a solution when the speaker just can’t produce the low frequencies. Unless there is a high pass cross over in use, the speaker is being fed the full range of sound at the same volume or what ever you’d like to call it. We’re not hearing it because as it’s been pointed out, the frequency response and there for the volume you can hear rolls off considerably after about 1000hz. If you increase the volume of those lower frequencies you risk damaging the speaker.

Some equalization to better match an enclosure is different but you can’t just turn up the low frequencies.

There is no replacement... for displacement!

 Craig.

[tehachapifan]

I wasn't thinking from the standpoint of simply turning up the volume of the lower tones, but rather engineer them in some way so they're not as low. Like bring them up an octave or two, if that makes sense and if that's even doable (I'm no sound engineer by any stretch).

[peteski]

I wasn't thinking from the standpoint of simply turning up the volume of the lower tones, but rather engineer them in some way so they're not as low. Like bring them up an octave or two, if that makes sense and if that's even doable (I'm no sound engineer by any stretch).

LOL!  If you did that, the Diesel engine would sound like the singing Chipmunks  (or like you on helium).   

[tehachapifan]

LOL!  If you did that, the Diesel engine would sound like the singing Chipmunks  (or like you on helium).   

Really? the next level up from a low rumble is chipmunks and helium? Sure seems like there would be something still very low in between there somewhere that the speakers can better produce. I'm not sure if octave is the correct term I'm looking for on this.

Interesting finding and one that may cost me some credibility points....out of all my sound locos (most of which are fitted with LokSounds), the one that produces what sounds like the lowest tone I've heard thru a 6x9 speaker yet is actually a Digitrax decoder with an aftermarket speaker and custom enclosure. It's not the diesel rumble that's low, it's when the compressor kicks on and there is a pretty impressive and low thump, thump, thump associated with it (this is the SD70 selection in the SDXN146K1E)....albeit you do need to be fairly close to the loco to hear the thumping. This leads me to believe that low tones can possibly be manipulated to sound reasonably good with these smaller speakers.

[peteski]

Really? the next level up from a low rumble is chipmunks and helium? Sure seems like there would be something still very low in between there somewhere that the speakers can better produce. I'm not sure if octave is the correct term I'm looking for on this.

Maybe I exaggerated a little, to prove the point that the motor would sound "funny".
As far as quality of recordings goes, there is more to it than just tone (frequency).  At least that is my experience.

[DKS]

Peteski, you exaggerated quite a lot. The technique is known as frequency doubling, and it's been around a long time. Cheap little transistor radios (back in the day) had simple circuits that doubled the frequency of the lowest tones so they sounded just a bit "bigger." It did not make anything sound like "chipmunks," and in fact it worked so well no one generally even noticed what was happening.

This is but one thing that could be done to improve N Scale model sound. Others include more aggressive equalization to prevent distortion. All speakers have a sympathetic frequency, or that tone which the speaker reproduces most easily, and this frequency tends to get exaggerated, so they'd sound a little better if this frequency was dialed back a little.

Granted, every different speaker and enclosure combination would have different characteristics, so the sound would need to be tuned specifically to the speaker, which would be impractical, so some generalized tuning would have to do. But it is certainly possible to hit a "sweet spot" that makes them sound better under most circumstances.

[peteski]

Peteski, you exaggerated quite a lot. The technique is known as frequency doubling, and it's been around a long time. Cheap little transistor radios (back in the day) had simple circuits that doubled the frequency of the lowest tones so they sounded just a bit "bigger." It did not make anything sound like "chipmunks," and in fact it worked so well no one generally even noticed what was happening.

I have never heard of that.  Sounds like those cheap portable Japanese transistor radios were more complex than anybody thought.  After all, when simplicity and low cost was important, they must have included some extra circuitry to filter the low frequencies and to double them. That sounds more complex than a 3 or 4 transistor radio. You piqued my interest.  Do you have any info on that, or do I need to do some online searches?

[DKS]

When my brother was studying for his electronics engineering degree, he learned of this little trick and passed the knowledge on to me. So, you'll have to learn about this on your own. I wish you luck--I suspect it's not the sort of thing you'll find in Wikipedia...