Slashdot Mirror
Flat Panel Speakers
ugene sent us a link
to something I've never seen before:
7mm thick speakers. They
claim they sound as good as conical speakers, but they project
sound 360 degrees. Nifty looking if you're aestheticly
anal, or low on space. I wonder if they can be removed from
their stand and hung right on a wall.
Update: 04/11 06:17 by CT : Cyberdiva sent me a review
as did Alan Dang
from 3DGaming.
Got em - hung on wall - look good - sound great!
A friend of mine has a pair of those. (Well, same type -- several years old, so somewhat different looking.) Believe it or not, I wasn't too impressed with them. Brilliant high end, but the bass response seemed REALLY flat. I have a sneaking suspicion that they sounded a lot better in the showroom than they did in his apartment.
Not trying to be a wet blanket; ribbon/electrostatic speakers are an intersesting technology and I like 'em on space/asthetic grounds alone. But caveat emptor in a big way, kids. There's a reason they haven't displaced cone speakers yet.
You left Quad electrostatics behind because they were "too big" to bring with you?
Can you buy a pair of B&W 800 and move six months later (that should give them enough time to break in, methinks), please?
(don't forget to let me know where you live so I can hang around when you move)
damn it scares me as to how stupid some people are. i mean, havn't these people done basic physics? ohms mean anything to you, dickhead? obviously an efficient speaker will sound loud at 3watts in comparison to a inefficient speaker which would sound soft at 3 watts. this ain't rocket science.
look at cone speakers. prime example.
As I said, you don't need to be a serious audiophile to hear the difference between different pieces of gear.
Nor do you need to know "what to listen for", nor do you need any form of weird esoterical training nor...
You only need to *listen* to the music you are playing.
You only need to *get familiar* with the records/cd's/whatever you are listening to.
If you listen to music you are familiar with, but with different gear you are used to (and for argument's sake, better equipment), you will hear the differences. You might notice instruments that were not there "before", or might note that the piano sounds different, that percussions have more "zing"/"immediacy" (can I say that? is it a real word?), etc.
Unless you're deaf (and downright dumb), anyone can make out the difference between significantly different pieces of gear -- like virtually anyone can make the difference between live and recorded music. You just have to listen and pay attention, that's all.
I really hate those "audiophile myths" (sign here and we'll give you magical hearing)...
Exactly... I have a set of the Benwins, and I can face them backwards, down, at the wall, whatever, and they sound just as good. They are completely nondirectional, which is why the 300Hz crossover doesn't hurt the directionality. Not as good as a higher end system, but definitely on a par with other $100 speakers. The subwoofer isn't GREAT, but not too bad. It is still a computer speaker system, and if you use your computer as an mp3 jukebox, you're still better off running it into a real receiver and speakers, but I'm really happy with the benwins.
If you guys have a good sound shop in your town you should go take a look at these speakers from Martin Logan they run about $2500 per speaker and about $5000 to $7000 dollars for the special amp that they use. They consist of two wire meshes on either side of a thin plastic type membrane. They charge the two plates to vibrate the membrane. They produce GREAT sound, and wonderfull frequency response. Take a look and read the specs.
meGamAN
Because unless they have come up with some new physics, what they have made is a dipole radiator. The sound intensity plot is going to hae two lobes, to the front and the back. The sides will not have nearly as much direct radiation. You can cheat a bit by curving the planar surface.
The planar speakers that I've heard have been extremely directional (martin logans of several sizes, including the 3.5k/ea big honkers, some magneplanars, all with good electronics), and frankly, I haven't been too impressed with them as compared to good dynamic speakers (i.e. cones). The directionality really annoys me in the vertical direction, generally because the speakers are shorter than I am. If I stand up from a slight stoop, the sound field changed dramatically. (I'm talking about 2 inches of movement of my ears) Tonally, the flat panels are good, there's lots of detail, but there's also some life missing from the music.
Actually, you can go even further back: when did Quad come out with their electrostatics? 40 years ago, even longer?
You are right: flat panel speakers are nothing new.
The best info I have come across on this is on the NXT site.
http://www.nxt.co.uk/tech nology/white_paper/technical_1.htm
Some highlights:
There are others licenced to use the technology, so its not just comp. speakers...
NXT are the people behind Quad, Wharfdale and Mission.
NXT licence the basic technology from the UKs Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA)
It also explains about 360 sound, as opposed to bi-polar and how the technology differs from previous efforts.
>NXT's technology came out of military research >used to cancel sound waves inside a cockpit >without using headphones, according
>to NXT. Quite frankly, I believe that this >technology came out of military research aimed at >cancelling jet engine and helicoptor rotor noise >*outside* the aircraft, so as to create sonically >stealthy aircraft.
The first description matches what New Scientist
reported when DERA originally licensed this stuff.
Its also quite believable - one of my friends did
research work on the worsening reaction time of
pilots due to noise, particularly in night flying.
(which can be summarized as - fly in a war at
night without headphones and you are dead meat)
Silencers/headphones help to reduce sensory
crosstalk.
Baz
It's not the fact that they are flat but that fact that they don't use either a cone or an electrostatic panel, in fact they don't really fit in with conventional thinking about the way speakers should behave, ie. pistonic movement etc.
:))
Pretty cool, and they work quite nicely, and the price ain't too bad either, but don't expect them to sound quite as good as your $15K Martin Logan's
There was an article here a month ago or so about NXT's flat speakers, it's been covered before.
Since blind people don't listen to music (sarcasm), they really don't care what their website looks like in the oh so text-to-speech friendly lynx. A taste of the first screen at their site:
[INLINE] [INLINE] [INLINE] [INLINE] [INLINE] [INLINE] [INLINE]
[LINK] [LINK] [INLINE]
[LINK] [INLINE]
[INLINE] [INLINE]
[INLINE] [LINK] [LINK] [LINK] [LINK] [LINK] [INLINE]
Try to figure out what THAT means...
You're comparing them to cone-speakers, conehead!
Not the shape, but the sound. One of my friends had a pair of Mageneplanars, and the docs for it said to place them a couple feet from the wall for best sound. Kinda defeated one of the main advantages of flat speakers imo.
Wonder if these have a decent efficiency? I seem to remember the Magneplanars needing plenty o watts for the same db's
jeffb
My Acoustats are pretty flat too. But, to the claim that they project sound in a 360 degree pattern: Impossible. AAAAANT. Sorry, but that's incorrect. Thanks for playing our game. Next contestant please!
The best that flat panels can achieve is a bipolar sound field.
Seed a blowtorch with some ionizing salts (boraxo might work), insert two probes attached to speaker wires (ideally run through a 10 voltage step-up transformer) placed about a centimeter apart in the flame, and crank the music up.
Anyone else ever do this? (I didn't think it up, I was told how by some friends). The high-end is sweet (but the flame itself adds noise)
Dolby digital AC-3 is the codec used in theaters and on DVDs. It is composed of 6 discreet channels: front right, front left, front center, rear right, rear left and a sub-woofer channel. This should never be confused with the simulated surround crap that is "dolby surround" which is used in the majority of home theater recievers.
In fact in a small room they may well sound better than your four speaker setup 'cos they have a better room interaction pattern than conventional 'box' speakers... Much less of the interference/reflection effects that box speakers can suffer...
:))
I still say the best way is to have a nice big room
Flat panel speakers are certainly nothing new.
The original Quad ESL was introduced in 1957, and some still consider it to be one of the best loudspeakers.
There have been some other successful (as far as sound quality) electrostatic designs, including Beveridge, Acoustat, Sound Lab, Martin Logan, and Audiostatic.
There have been some other planar technologies used, including ribbons (Apogee, Genesis, and Magnepan, for example), while Magnepan has also made planar magnetic speakers for many years.
I heard an early demonstration of the NXT speakers, including some large floor standing models, at a press conference at the Winter CES a couple of years ago. The technology was intriguing, but the sound was not. I can't quantify what was wrong (for those into double blind testing etc.) but it definitely wasn't high end sound. For noncritical applications such as architectural installations and perhaps laptop computers, the NXT panel has something going for it. For accurate sound reproduction, it's not up to par, IMHO.
For more info you might read newsgroups such as rec.audio.high-end and rec.audio.opinion
I own a pair of Carver Amazing Silver Edition Loudspeakers (the smaller ones, with three subs each).
The ribbbons are crossed over above about 100 Hz, with the subs handling everything under that. They operate on the principle of four metal ribbons bonded to a kapton sheet suspended between two powerful magnets. Need lots of current but sound real sweet.
3 watts is all you need if your speakers are efficient enough. Ever look at some high end tube amps? The popular Western Electric 300B is only capable of 7 watts. Thats plenty of power to fill a room with music.
NXT have actually demo'd a home theatre system where the projector screen was actually a large NXT panel. I think there's some info on their website about it.
you obviously have cloth ears, or simply no idea if you think that cambridge sound works are the height of hi-fi. get a life retard, look at some hifi mags, go to a hifi show. find out what real hifi is all about.
sheesh
In my opinion an audiophile is someone who does not like to "settle" with the pure crap that some companies try to sell to us for insane ammounts of money. I for example make all my own stereo equipment including my cd player, amplifiers and speakers. So with a relativly modest budget and a little honest work I can have a pair of speakers that would sell for $10k in stores and an amplifier made with $300 in parts that rivals $3000 amps. Then there is the CD-player that I put together from standard parts that sounds so good that even my father who is tone deaf can tell the difference between it and your average cd player you buy down at the local electronics store.
Real men don't whine and complain about the crap people try to sell them, they make their own and laugh at the people who don't.
Too bad Martin Logans are $10k +. If you want decent sound from computers, get an awesome soundcard with a digital output and hook it up to your stereo ;p No need for the flat electrostatic speakers...
While I acknowledge quality is subjective, I think they did not. They were at BestBuy with a CD Sound sampler (Quake, jazz, etc) along with other speakers ranging from $39.99 to $250.00.
To me, they sounded like speakers you pay about $50.00 for. The $70-$99 seemed better, and the cambrige soundworks (sp?) and (YES) the Microsoft sound system sounded much better.
... is the price. due to some new manufactureing techniques, flat panel speakers have dramatically come down in price. this is very good news since they have the potential to sound much better than standard speakers.
just heard them this afternoon ay CompUsa....no thanks, I'll keep my $100.00. No mid-range and can be overdriven quite easily.
Argh, but.... Up until now most people have tried to make there panel behave as a piston. The NXT system forgets all this and actually tries to resonate in as random a way as possible, that's the cool bit about them... at least in my opinion :))
We discussed this.. I try to get an artical I found in 'Audio' magazine that was talking about digital speakers..
I ate my tag line.
-=Ellis (D)25=-
well... at least i remember them rocking...
i had a pair of quad's from the late 60's i found in my uncle's attic. used them for a while but they were to big for me to take w/ me when i moved.
big ass things, and sort of curved, about 4 inches thick.
henri
and didn't fit in the moving van.....
i had them in Beirut Lebanon and am now in Tempe Arizona... so yeah, unfortunatly i had to leave them behind...
henri
Posted by keithk:
If it can produce sound in 360 degrees, why hang
it on a wall? Why not just hang it from the
ceiling in the middle of the room? =)
Posted by Fleeno:
They're only $99 with a sub! I wonder if they sound better than other $99 speakers, but they certainly look neat.
Also, speaker sound tends to be significantly affected by their environment. Especially if there is supposed to be sound coming out the back, I bet the high frequencies would sound weird bouncing off a wall if it were too near.
--Chouser
--Chouser
"To stay young requires unceasing cultivation of the ability to unlearn old falsehoods." -LL
Neat. They'll look nice when I have a flat panel display.
But like the flat panel display, what I really want is to eliminate the analog connection to the device from my computer. I have a big problem with interference on my speakers, especially when I'm at home. A few companies are already making USB speakers (Microsoft comes to mind...), but I don't think any serious high-end speaker companies are.
Of course, drivers for a non-windoze OS is a must, too.
I'm not a smorgasbord.
Thanks for the mention - I'm an engineer at the company that manufactures the Monsoon speakers ( Sonigistix Corporation ) and I have an MM-1000 system at home. Over the next few months we will be introducing some new models at lower price points, which we hope will be as well-received as the MM-1000 has been.
For anyone interested in the technical details of the MM-1000, it's a pair of 4x8" planar-magnetic speakers using Neodymium magnets and a mylar/aluminum diaphragm, with a regular (cone) subwoofer. The core technology has been around for many years, but we've made some advances in optimizing it for the desktop and for 3-D audio.
Another planar-magnetic computer speaker with excellent reviews is sold by Eminent Technology in Florida.
>Can a magneplanar speaker be used in this sense, since it is an array of many small speakers?
>Has anyone tried to create a simple/single 3d sound solution out of a magneplanar speaker?
To produce "3D" audio (or even "2D") you need two independent channels of audio, corresponding to the sound going into the listener's left and right ears. If you're using headphones, this is a relatively easy exercise; just send the right signals to each side, and you can get excellent image placement.
The problem with trying to do 3D through speakers is that normally the sound from the left speaker reaches both the left and right ears, and similarly for the right speaker. This crosstalk results in the standard "1D" stereo audio - you can only place sound sources on a line between your speakers.
However, there are algorithms which can anticipate the crosstalk which will occur, and can pre-correct the signals to cancel the crosstalk. It turns out that planar magnetic speakers are quite good for this, because they have a larger, more uniform radiating area than a cone speaker, and also because the dipole pattern of sound radiation decreases unwanted reflections from desktop clutter.
Also note that planar magnetic speakers are not really an "array of many small speakers", since there is typically only one set of electrical connections to the diaphragm, and thus the same electrical current passing through every part of the diaphragm. Therefore, you can't feed different signals to different parts of the speaker, and can't do any neat phase tricks to get better 3D.
Conical speakers actually arent that great. I've auditioned a whole bunch of high end speakers for a home music centre, and the Martin Logan flat speakers just blow everything away. You're literally hit by a 'wall of sound' from these lovely things.
I get Spanish radio on my leads, so I called the mfr. and they told me to get a ferrite core (i.e. a chunk of iron, aka an "RF choke") at Radio Shack, and wind the wires around it. The extra inductance sucks the wind out of the high frequency RF without affecting the 20 khz audio range.
Also try shielded leads.
---- "If we have to go on with these damned quantum jumps, then I'm sorry that I ever got involved" - Erwin Schrodinger
I have heard of plans for NXT speakers to be used as projection screens, laptop screens, and to be placed in car roofs. I think Mission are planning some proper HiFi NXT speakers.
;-).
Interestingly, NXT was originally invented as a noise cancelling technology for fighter aircraft.
Wharfdale do some wall-hanging NXTs (they look like whiteboards, and sound OK). My Linns may take up more space, but it's definitely worth it
I have heard of plans for NXT speakers to be used as projection screens, laptop screens, and to be placed in car roofs. I think Mission are planning some proper HiFi NXT speakers.
;-).
As far as I know, NXT was originally invented as a noise cancelling technology for fighter aircraft.
Wharfdale do some wall-hanging NXTs (they look like whiteboards, and sound OK). My Linns may take up more space, but it's definitely worth it
These were probably worth quite a lot of cash. Quad still offer service for them, I think.
;-)
I listened to an NXT + sub combo when I got my Linn Keilidhs. Can't say that I thought there was much competition
They look pretty weak at only 3 watts. Their frequency range doesn't cover the whole range of a cd either, "300Hz-20KHz". It's probably better than the speakers that come with most computers, but I don't think I'll trade in my stereo yet.
I think the idea is that your flat panel HDTV will also *be* the speaker.
BTW, Fisher and poly-planer were doing the flat panel speaker thing about 25 years ago, the same time as the whole Quadriphonic (that was one of the spellings!) / 4-channel fiasco.
Does anyone remember the piano sounding board-shaped musical instrument speaker from, IIRC, Yamaha?
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
NXT's speakers can supposedly be placed next to a wall.
--Be human.
I see a lot of FUD about speaker technology in the replies to this post. For the record:
-Planer speakers were developed *before* cone-driven speakers. The original amplified sound transducer is an electrostatic speaker. It dates back to something like 1917
-This technology is, indeed, new. It works by setting up complex interference patterns between multiple transducers placed on a stretched membrane. By contrast, magnaplaner, electrostatic, and ribbon speakers all apply a uniform force over the entire membrane. The advantage of NXT's approach is that problems with bass cancellation from the back wave and the front wave are compensated for by the complex interference patterns. To demonstrate this, move your hand through a bathtub full of water. If you move it swiftly, you get waves in the water. If you move it slowly, the water from the front side of your hand moves around your hand to the back side before any waves can be set up. Move both your hands slowly through the water, spaced apart by some distance, and you will get waves. Basically, if the wavelength at a given frequency is less that 1/2 the width and/or height of the transducer, it will "beam" forward. If it is greater than 1/2 the width and/or height, it will eminate radially from the tranducer, allowing the front wave to travel around the speaker and cancel with the back wave. This is why most "traditional" planer speakers (electrostatics & magneplaners) are mounted in large panels (in the case of electrostatics, the speakers *are* the large panels). It also explains why electrostatics (with the exception of Quad ESL speakers) "beam", as the high frequencies eminate from the *entire* surface, where the waves don't eminate radially (Quads filter the high frequencies, and transmit them through a very small area at the center of the speaker). This is why most electrostats "beam", providing only a single listener with the rich, accurate sound for which they are famous. BTW, you can get much the same effect by using cone drivers mounted in a baffle that is not enclosed (no box). It is not intrinsic to the transducer technology; it is intrinsic to the baffle technology.
-NXT's technology supposedly can produce deep base with a small panel, due to the interference of the waves from the multiple transducers. They shouldn't be limited by speaker size the same way as other planer speakers.
-NXT's work is *new*, and extremely mathematically complex. In fact, the mathematics are so complex that they can only be performed on high-powered computers that have been available in recent years. We can model point sources very well when looking at wave interactions. Planer sources must be modeled using techniques similar to Finite Element Modelling. FEM has been the single biggest market for Cray's supercomputers over the past 20 years--and simulations still can take weeks with today's massively parallel computers. NXT's technology came out of military research used to cancel sound waves inside a cockpit without using headphones, according to NXT. Quite frankly, I believe that this technology came out of military research aimed at cancelling jet engine and helicoptor rotor noise *outside* the aircraft, so as to create sonically stealthy aircraft. This, however, is pure speculation (anyone have access to Jane's? maybe they elucidate the matter).
-This technology is still young. These speakers are a first pass at implementing the technology in a commercial product. I suspect that future iterations will get much better, particularly at producing deep bass.
-This is the same technology that was talked about in a previous slashdot article, about producing sound from plexiglass windows. In fact, some of the technologies that have been discussed are: producing sound from the front of a TV picture tube, producing sound from the roof on a domed stadium, producing sound from panels that fold out from a laptop, and producing sound from the walls of a home. There is no theoretical limit to the size of the tranducer (no "beaming" effects at high frequencies, as with other planer speakers).
In short, this technology is neat stuff. If you're not convinced about the quality of sound from planar speakers, don't judge them from thes $99 speakers. Instead, go down to a high-end audio store and give a listen to some Martin Logans (electrostatic), Quads (electrostatic), Magnepans (quasi-magneplaner), or Apogees (true magneplaner). The sound is really quite stunning. Furthermore, I believe that when this technology is mature, the sound produced by NXT drivers will be absolutely exquisite, packaged in an uncumbersome form factor, and rather inexpensive. In many ways, this may be the Holy Grail of speaker technologies.
--Be human.
70Hz for a subwoofer is pretty bad. I would expect as low as 20-30 Hz for true butt-shakin' Quake2 sound. :)
As far as headphones go, I have always found that poor sounding speakers are less noticible than poor sounding headphones. And price isn't the only factor in the quality of either speakers or headphones. I have a set of custom modified Baltec 90's (no longer in production, made in Latvia) that cost less than $300 (even after all the mods) and they sound very good; even my dad (who owns a $6K modified pair of B&W 801's) is amazed how good these cheap speakers sound, all for ~$5,700 less!
I'd love a nice pair of Seinheisser headphones.
-beb
Awhile back Carver had a Ribbon speaker which was flat... the speakers were pretty cool looking but rather on the expensive side.. Here is a link with several manufactures of ribbon speakers
"One of these days... milkshake... BOOM!!!!" - emb
I received a pair of these for Christmas and I reviewed them for NesTrolls.
DIVA REVIEW: Benwin Flat Panel Speakers
I really enjoy them, especially because of their 360 degree/non-directional sound emission. You can be behind or to the side of the speakers and here the same as if you are in front of them. Also the SRS-3D technology on the subwoofer ROCKS!
The $99 ones are best for computer speakers or jambox/shelf stereo speakers. They are coming out with higher wattage ones soon. The current model is only 3W+3W and 6W subwoofer with a frequency range of 60Hz to 18kHz.
diva Pasty Drone NewsTrolls, Inc.
First, correcting 2 typos above (please excuse the oversight):
"NewsTrolls" not "NesTrolls" and
"hear" not "here"
Yes you CAN hang them on the wall...I believe the current packaging includes them...mine did not, but did include fixtures for attaching it to the side of the computer.
Also, for those who complained about it's sound...consider it's frequency range and wattage. Again, these are rather lightweight in those departments, but bigger ones are coming. I hope they do a wireless version so they'll REALLY look cool on the wall (or in the ceiling)...
--diva
diva Pasty Drone NewsTrolls, Inc.
Come on! It seems that most of us /.ers are satisfied with the audio quality of MP3s. What possible use could we have with quality audio equipment? :)
I picked up a pair of these Benwin speakers about three weeks ago. They are the one of the cooler geek toys I've seen, but the sound isn't up to par with other speakers in the price range.
/must/ plug the speakers into this module. You can not drive them off a laptop or disc player otherwise. The problem with the sub module is it stinks. Really there is no good sound coming from it. My soultion was to pass the signal first through a yamaha powered subwoofer to clean out the bass. This sounds really good, and never fails to impress.
The problem is not however with the flat-panel speaker part. The panels sound good. It is the amplifier/subwoofer module. You
As for mounting them on the wall, I can't figure it out. There is no way given the provided supplies to mount them on anything other than the provided plastic pedestals. They are very light though, 3 oz by my best guess, so it should be easy to hack something together.
All in all though, for the price, they aren't worth it yet. Once Benwin comes up with a better sub module I would recommend them.
Yeh we sell those, they sound pretty nice are do indeed have black ones also. And yes they can hang on the wall. These are my current personal fav speakers (at this price range) and I asked them today and they said they might be releasing clear ones in the future. Awesome eh?
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
Thin speakers aren't a new concept, but this is a pretty good price for a set (assuming they're not a POS). That type of speaker has excellent high end response, but very little in the way of low end response, so people putting them in a hometheater type setup generally have a seperate powered sub sitting somewhere in the room (since placement of the sub doesn't matter all that much). You can actually buy fairly large speakers in this style, I've seen 5 feet+ tall super-thin speakers, and they sound excellent.
Though I doubt they sound as clean as my Cambridge SoundWorks FourPoint speaker system.
For how small they are, they can really put out allot of sound.
----> FourPoint
010110000010110101010100011110010111000001100101
Yes, what would you like, Mike?
010110000010110101010100011110010111000001100101
X-Type?
Mike
--
Mike
--
"Wi nøt trei a høliday in Sweden this yër?"
you are wrong. ML Aerius go for 2K, SL-3 for
3.4 K (mine), ReQuest + CLS are more. They do not
need 'special amps' they need high current amps
a 1.5 K amps would do very nicely. The wire mesh
is the 'stator'.
the original 'flat' speakers were developed in the
1920's !
The major types are:
electrostats: Quad (late 50's up)
Accustat (out of business) 70-80's
Martin-Logan (80's 90's)
Sound Labs (70's up)
planar magnetics:
Magnepan (70's up)
Apogee (bass panels)
Ribbons:
Apogee (looks to be out of business)
Magnepan tweeter strips
Ribbons have the best high's
electrostats have the best mids
magnetic planars have the best low mids/upper bass
none of them really has great bass for whallop
below about 60 Hz. The Martin-Logans are the best
in terms of real world use, most of the models are
integrated with really fine sub-woofers, and are o
often used in high end home theatre set-ups
W (owner or past owner of: Magnepan I, II, 3.4 +
Martin-Logan Aerius and SL-3)
There is plenty of literature around on these both
technical and marketing
That's not new... My magnepans are flat panels, had them for years. In fact, they've been making planar speakers for something like 30 years.
I have zero knowledge about directional audio. However, since we humans have two ears, and we can still locate sound sources in 3 dimensions around us, isn't it theoretically possible to have a 3D audio environment provided by only 2 speakers?
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
Subwoofer is good for 70Hz-300Hz, fwiw. Looks like a fairly nice set of computer speakers, but probably audiophile grognards will hate 'em. Unwashed heathens (like me) probably couldn't tell the difference.
Maybe I'm crazy, but if I were a serious audiophile, I'd probably be the only person in any given room who could tell the difference between $300-500 speakers and $3000-5000 speakers. Wouldn't I be better off with a very nice (and radically less expensive) pair of headphones?
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
How's the view from that high horse? I'd argue that real men not only pursue technical excellence, but share it with others. From the tone of your post, I guess we're all supposed to bow down in awe of your technical prowess. You know what I think I'm going to do instead? Write you off as a pompous windbag.
Have a nice day!
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
Interesting. One could assume that since the left edge of an LCD can be a different color than the right edge, one could make the left edge of that speaker sound different from the right edge. However, the fact that the thing's a continuous membrane might make that, well, challenging to say the least. It's hard to figure that it'd give you better quality than two individually addressable membranes. Of course, I am talking out of my ass here. I have zero applicable knowledge in this field.
That 1 foot tall curved speaker would look cool above the enormous flat panel HDTV of my dreams. : )
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
My AKG headphones do 15Hz - 20KHz, a very large and powerfull subwoofer (i.e. a club bass box) should be able to do less than 10Hz. Of course you can't hear that, but you can sure as hell feel it. >)
If these speakers really can't do anything less than 300Hz they're just tweeters AFAIK.
I notice they aren't precisely flat on the back, so they may not hang elegantly.
During his mid life crisis my dad bought two 5 foot infiniti magnetic ribbon speakers - 7 midrange/3 tweeter ribbons per enclosure and two seperate 5' 6-cone bassy enclosures. He attached the best vacuum tube power amps and a CAT-SL1 for pre.
So like several people have said- flat is nothing new. I am very curious to see how these perform though- and for $120(w/shipping) I might find out. If I do, I'll let ya know:)
Also- the website says they are hangable.
Momerath
Er - the crossover is at 300hz. That's biting well into directional range. These things would suck for most game playing and techno/pop music.
Martin Logans are very respectible Electrostat's, you can get a pair for 6k and the will beat and Speaker in exsistance. paired with a McIntosh Stereo System that is all there is too it !
M@tt
http://www.martinlogan.com
I bought a pair of these from PcMall. They aren't worth $100.. perhaps $40 (which is what I paid for my ACS-40's, which sound just as good).
Well, to be more accurate, the panels sound fine.. clear, untroubled highs with a large sweet spot. Tight high end response. For a vibrating quarter stuck to a piece of silvery styrofoam, they sound pretty decent. However, in the case of the Benewin models, they are mated with a small combo sub-midrange speaker, that has all the controls on it. Which means you can't put it on the floor like a conventional sub. You wouldn't want to -- it produces nothing close to sub-like wavelengths.. mostly muddy midrange, which is very bright. Apparently Benewin thought the mids were not being represented well, or perhaps they bought the world's cheapest crossover, but the sub, IMHO, bites.
The panels would sound good if they were a bit bigger, (to handle more of the midrange), with more power and a decent floor-sitting sub.
As for the technology of the flat panels, it's COOL.. you can make a speaker out of a ceiling tile, a picture, mouse pad, wrist rest or whatever.. but the price you pay for versatility is a clean smooth ramp from high end to mid.
Keep an eye out for several other manufacturers coming out with NXT's technology -- I believe the URL for them is http://www.nxtsound.com (may be slashdotted right now).
This is heavily prior art from the Sumo Aria/Museatex Melior. I can and will furnish reference- the Sumo Aria was reviewed in The Absolute Sound, v14 #62 november/december 1989 (yes, the date written on the spine of the mag is Y2K compliant ;) ) It's a very good detailed and insightful review- when I made some speakers along these lines, mine showed many of the same characteristics as the reviewed, $3000 speakers.
One aspect of their claim is very strange- the vibration pattern of center-driven membranes is not remotely random. It is ripple-like, radiating from the center. If the ripples persist too much, the speaker develops unpleasant 'drumheadlike' colorations. If you drive it in lots of places you could overcome the sound pressure level limitations, but the really _phenomenal_ imaging the design can produce is hosed.
All very interesting, though- I'd love to see where they place the multiple drivers they apparently use, if their reports are not misleading.
It's the same idea as the old Sumo Aria (aka Museatex Melior). I wonder if these are using stretched mylar membranes, or something semirigid like flat paper? :P
You can make your own with stretched mylar and a central moving-coil driver. Caveats: 'wide range' means the thing _insists_ on producing super wide range even into areas where the speaker just breaks up (low frequency resonance modes esp.), and the phenomenal dispersion means the efficiency at any given point is really weak- it's just the same really weak anywhere in the room or indeed adjoining rooms- the sound 'carries' phenomenally well. Use a musical instrument speaker for efficiency and surgically remove the cone and basket as much as possible, and do not (trust me) run the little magnet wires over as moving parts- they will crack and cause the speaker to go intermittent and rasp on loud or low notes
Also, the membrane speakers at least are bidirectional- the back wave is _out_ of phase, so you can't reasonably hang them on the wall without obliterating the low end. And, you can't simply make huge versions to get more volume- the whole thing is severely volume-limited as the entire sound output is coupled through a point attached to flexible membrane, so if you want other than ultra faint, make a sphere-like or egg-shaped driver attachment, and make the drive point a _wide_ point on the membrane, not the tip of a cone (easier to construct, but you never heard anything so faint, trust me)
*blink* yeesh, suddenly I'm doing open source speaker design? Guess I'm just surprised- this principle was PATENTED I thought. I could have been making speakers of this type all this time, if only I'd known... I know, I'll write them and _ask_ if they're on solid legal ground. Maybe the Sumo/Museatex concepts failed patenting under prior art or something...
Magnepans aren't electrostatic, they're planar magnetic, and don't require the extra power supply that electrostatic speakers do. (And they're definitely not made of styrofoam; I'm not sure what the "poly-planar" speaker Bruce talks of was.) Planar magnetic speakers work with a diaphragm suspended between two magnets; either the diaphram itself is conducive, or there are conducive strips connected to it.
As someone else pointed out, the frequency response on these flat panel speakers isn't that impressive. The satellite speakers only go down to 300 Hz, and the subwoofer only to 70 Hz, meaning that it's not going to have much better response than my (subwooferless) Roland monitor speakers. (Ugly and not magnetically shielded, but they sound great, and they were about $80 for the pair.) Also, subwoofers rely on the principle that you can't localize low-frequency sound, but "low frequency" means "under 100 Hz." A crossover frequency of 300 Hz is silly.
Quadrophonic, incidentally, isn't really the predecessor of Dolby Surround except in a spiritual sense. The quad LP formats used distinct tracks for front, side left, side right, and rear, with the idea that the speakers would be 90 degrees apart from one another. Analog home theatre sound really just uses the two standard front left and front right tracks, and mathematically encodes a limited-frequency rear 'effects' channel and center dialogue channel. (Dolby Digital makes all of the channels full frequency separate tracks, separates the rear effects channel into left rear and right rear and adds a limited-frequency separate subwoofer channel.)
These aren't electrostatic...I recall reading about the development of the "exciter" that they mention on the web site several months ago. In the press release, they claimed that they could make speakers of almost any size, so long as the transmitting medium was stiff enough.
I see a couple of problems with planar speakers, although they are more personal in nature than objective.
1. They are not a point source, so they are very poor performers in creating a spatial sound field, such as that generated by 3-D sound cards. Since the sound is radiated 360 degrees in a horizontal plane (or nearly so...there are "dead" areas at the sides of the speakers), there is no "focal point" or discernable origin of the sound.
2. Frequency response from planar speakers has always been problematical at best. Infinity probably made the best use of the characteristics of planar elements in their ribbon tweeters of 20 years ago or so. These speakers produce great mide and high range sound, but they are simply too large in area to move coherently over large distances to create any kind of substantial bass frequencies. You'll see that most fans of planar speakers are also fans of subwoofers for this very reason. That's also why these speakers come with a subwoofer.
As far as speaker tech goes, these are really more of a curiosity than anything else, I think. But there are other uses for the technology, such as panels built into walls or ceilings that can produce sound without the physical intrusiveness of a speaker box.
I suppose that a case can be made for the smaller footprint that these speakers have. And they do look very cool...and that's certainly worth something!
The new technology is very interesting indeed. New ideas come along in the speaker world maybe once a decade or less, and this is one.
But this is hardly ready for prime time.
I'm intrigued by the flat panel approach because it makes the idea of creating a "mini sound stage" more feasible.
At the moment I have two Crown CE1000s, two JBL 15s and a Cerwin Vega 18 sub. Compared to that, these flat panel things are toys -- can't handle real power and produce serious SPLs, don't have the frequency response.
In a few more years, this may develop into an interesting submarket though.
signed,
/The Beat That Goes BOOM/
-------
Bill Gates Is My Evil Twin.
Depends on what you are claiming is nothing new...
Magneplanar/Electrostatics, no...
NXT's flat panel? Yes.
Instead of driving the surface of the panel which drives the air to create the sound, you 'inject' the panel with energy in such a way as to create the panel to vibrate, and these vibrations help to create the sound...
So instead of a driver pushing the entire plane, or a ribbon or a strip across the panel, molecular clumps of atoms become drivers. The interplay and interaction of the fundamental vibrational modes of the panel(which is required to be rigid and inflexible, for these purposes) with the air cause the sound...
Perhaps an inverse example might make more sense. A panel of glass will vibrate when any sound impacts on it. Laser mics use this property to capture sound off a flat rigid purpose. The glass itself isn't moving, like a speaker driver and cone moves, but rather vibrations across the surface of the glass can be detected on a laser beam reflected off the surface, and these vibrations can be used to reconstruct the original source sound.
Reverse this technique, and create sound from the vibrations off a rigid flat panel. It can be 1/4 of an inch thick, rigid and transparent(Like an LCD screen on a notebook!), is very frequency independent, which means no more need for the tweeters and midrange, at least, and because it isn't drive by a 'point' source, the sound isn't directional; it's a flat plane of sound energy!
That's why it's new tech...
AS
-AS
*Pikachu*
Several comments thus far on this being old-tech.
This is new stuff, but you are right in saying it's an old form...
Not only is it flat, it's thin; the company who designed and owns the patent is working on making a thin acrylic or plastic sheet an active speaker device, and thus make LCD screens in notebooks or even a sheet layered upon a conventional CRT active speaker elements.
The concept is much different than traditional flat speakers, and an issue with these speakers is the loss of the 'sweet spot' traditionally seen in directional speakers. These flat speakers project sound in a flat plane, and the interaction of the two speakers will not produce a cone of good sound quality, but rather a uniform zone of sound that should not change as one moves around in it. This doesn't bar reflective or destructive interference and interaction between the sound source, walls, and other obstructions, of course.
Succinctly, these speakers work by setting up vibrational modes across the surface of a sheet of plastic material, forcing the entire sheet to act as a speaker. They have effectively enabled each atom and molecule on the surface of a sheet to act as a driver unit, as opposed to a coil behind a cone. This design also removes the frequency limitations that were traditionaly dealt with by having a tweeter, midrange, and bass, though a bass unit is provided for more volume and kick, I believe.
There's more information at their site
flat panel technology
Because there is no directionality or frequency distributed speakers, I almost think that the technology is inherently incompatible with 3d sound algorithms, though it is still possible to create 3d sound by being surrounded by these speakers and sending different signals to each speaker. It would be equivalent to trying to create a true 3d image out of a 2d surface like a CRT of LCD.
AS
-AS
*Pikachu*
If people are interested in flat panel multimedia speakers, they should check out Monsoon Power's MM-1000. More pricey (around $200) but great reviews.
http://www.colorcase.com/products/speaker/DA9000.h tml Are still the best, cheap for what you get, awesome if you have the space, best computer speakers I've seen. Matt
I bought a pair of these from PcMall. They aren't worth $100.. perhaps $40 (which is what I paid for my ACS-40's, which sound just as good).
Well, to be more accurate, the panels sound fine.. clear, untroubled highs with a large sweet spot. Tight high end response. For a vibrating quarter stuck to a piece of silvery styrofoam, they sound pretty decent. However, in the case of the Benewin models, they are mated with a small combo sub-midrange speaker, that has all the controls on it. Which means you can't put it on the floor like a conventional sub. You wouldn't want to -- it produces nothing close to sub-like wavelengths.. mostly muddy midrange, which is very bright. Apparently Benewin thought the mids were not being represented well, or perhaps they bought the world's cheapest crossover, but the sub, IMHO, bites.
The panels would sound good if they were a bit bigger, (to handle more of the midrange), with more power and a decent floor-sitting sub.
As for the technology of the flat panels, it's COOL.. you can make a speaker out of a ceiling tile, a picture, mouse pad, wrist rest or whatever.. but the price you pay for versatility is a clean smooth ramp from high end to mid.
Keep an eye out for several other manufacturers coming out with NXT's technology -- I believe the URL for them is http://www.nxtsound.com (may be slashdotted right now).
But recycling of audio trends is nothing new. Remember Quadraphonic? (4-channels instead of 2 as in stereo). It's now "Theatre sound system" or some such, and is used mainly with video.
Bruce
Bruce Perens.
Anyone given to the idea of a single strip speaker, using NXT flat panel technology, one foot high, 1/2 inch think, and surrounding an entire room?
Or a theatre placing large flat panels as the projector screen and along the walls for even sround sound?
AS
-AS
*Pikachu*
I think I forgot to explain something...
I was wondering if one speaker using NXT's flat panel technology was capable of 3d sound =)
If one could encode phase variation to be played by the speakers, perhaps the speakers could produce truly directional sound, like the way phase array radar works; a grid/array of radar units can actually scan directionally despite being immobile and stationary, by some sort of differential phase calculations.
Likewise NXT panels, since they may be thought as an array of millions of speakers, can you encode delay into the sound and play directionally delayed sound from one panel?
The left edge producing a different direction than the right edge? The middle?
Because it's a panel, you can conceivably create a flat 1 foot tall curved speaker wrapping around an entire room!
AS
-AS
*Pikachu*
These speakers use a different vibrational technique than that of magneplanars or electrostatic speakers. The goal is still to produce massless driverless speakers, and towards that goal the NXT technology has shrunked the speaker elements towards the size of molecular clumps.
Magneplanars and electrostatics use smaller distributed drivers, and in this sense are similar to NXT's speakers, but they still use larger elements with more mass and more frequency distortion issues. However, since the technique has been done previously by Magenplanars and electrostatics, they can be drawn from...
One thing I can see as a disadvantage is that NXT speakers might not be able to deal with 3d sound other than multiple speakers arranged in an enclosing formation. Perhaps with more computational power and advanced encoding of sound, a single sheet speaker can produce phase varying sound, and multiple speakers can produce delay varying sound, for a better 3d sound experience.
Can a magneplanar speaker be used in this sense, since it is an array of many small speakers? Has anyone tried to create a simple/single 3d sound solution out of a magneplanar speaker?
AS
-AS
*Pikachu*