Rmar
Member
Interesting interview with Roy Delgado from Klipsch. Part one of a two part interview, Roy talks about designing speakers to that produce sound as if you were at a live show.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Designing Speakers For Music As You Would Experience It Live - Interview with Roy Delgado
- Thread starter Rmar
- Start date
Interesting interview with Roy Delgado from Klipsch. Part one of a two part interview, Roy talks about designing speakers to that produce sound as if you were at a live show.
That would explain a lot.
Keith
Keith
Matt_Holland
Active Member
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2023
- Messages
- 267
- Likes
- 453
Thanks. Will watch later.
On a general note, should we respect a design philosophy that aims to colour the sound in a deliberate way where the benefits of the colouration are subjectively valid and may appeal to a certain group of people?
If the designer uses good measurement tools and methods to back up their design choices, I think this should be respected.
It would be rather boring if all speakers followed Tooles recommendations for predicted in room response. I realise that you can EQ a good speaker to colour it to your taste, but a lot of people don’t have or understand EQ tools. Therefore it makes sense that there are some speakers that offer a certain flavour to suit preference and/or musical taste.
I’m not suggesting that coloured speakers have poor directivity and/or high distortion. Just that a deliberately non-flat in room response is a valid design goal for the intended customer base.
On a general note, should we respect a design philosophy that aims to colour the sound in a deliberate way where the benefits of the colouration are subjectively valid and may appeal to a certain group of people?
If the designer uses good measurement tools and methods to back up their design choices, I think this should be respected.
It would be rather boring if all speakers followed Tooles recommendations for predicted in room response. I realise that you can EQ a good speaker to colour it to your taste, but a lot of people don’t have or understand EQ tools. Therefore it makes sense that there are some speakers that offer a certain flavour to suit preference and/or musical taste.
I’m not suggesting that coloured speakers have poor directivity and/or high distortion. Just that a deliberately non-flat in room response is a valid design goal for the intended customer base.
On the Thursday evening before Axpona 2022 opened I was walking on the ground floor. With me was a musician who played multiple instruments. Down a wide walkway we could hear a saxaphone being played, and there was a door open on that side of the walkway. I looked at him and he looked at me, and we were both bug-eyed. I said, "THAT sounds like a live saxaphone!" and he agreed; saxaphpone is one of the instruments he plays. So we made a beeline for the open doorway. Was there a performance going on? Was somebody using a live-versus-recorded saxaphone to help them set up their room? Nope. Somebody was playing a pair of Klipsch Jubilee speakers in a very large room.
Another designer who mistakes sound reproduction with sound production. A Marshall cab makes a killer guitar sound but you don't play back a recording of a guitar on it.
I don't respect that design philosophy but I can respect good engineering to achieve it. I haven't seen too many examples of that from this particular company.
Quoting @Rmar:
"I for one welcome and support R&D for alternative technologies and designs in the future, just as I do now. I am happy to see Klipsch keeping up its desire and commitment to explore something different than most everyone else."
Amen.
At the risk of oversimplifying, a question which has been investigated fairly thoroughly is this: "Of the speakers which have been evaluated, which are preferred?" And from those results we can infer which loudspeaker characteristics predict preference, and loudspeaker designers have advanced the art accordingly.
But there is another, rather open-ended question which imo has not been definitively answered: "What do we most want a loudspeaker to do?" And a reasonable follow-up question would be, "And what is the best way to do this within a given set of constraints?"
I think there are non-mainstream paradigms (present and future) which may prove to be viable alternatives to the more conventional approaches.
Here is an interview with a retired JBL loudspeaker designer that some might find interesting, as his thinking includes an arguably unexpected combination of the old-school and the modern:
"I for one welcome and support R&D for alternative technologies and designs in the future, just as I do now. I am happy to see Klipsch keeping up its desire and commitment to explore something different than most everyone else."
Amen.
At the risk of oversimplifying, a question which has been investigated fairly thoroughly is this: "Of the speakers which have been evaluated, which are preferred?" And from those results we can infer which loudspeaker characteristics predict preference, and loudspeaker designers have advanced the art accordingly.
But there is another, rather open-ended question which imo has not been definitively answered: "What do we most want a loudspeaker to do?" And a reasonable follow-up question would be, "And what is the best way to do this within a given set of constraints?"
I think there are non-mainstream paradigms (present and future) which may prove to be viable alternatives to the more conventional approaches.
Here is an interview with a retired JBL loudspeaker designer that some might find interesting, as his thinking includes an arguably unexpected combination of the old-school and the modern:
Incorrect baffle step compensation, poor crossover selection/design, poor management of off-axis radiation, uneven frequency response, cheaply built cabinets with resonances galore...
Update: oh, and poor low frequency extension too. Oh, and vastly overstated sensitivity.
Last edited:
It’s apparently in the “Fudge”.
Many people have a misunderstanding of what Fudge is.
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2018
- Messages
- 6,352
- Likes
- 9,516
Fudge factor?It’s apparently in the “Fudge”.
I will never understand statements like this.
I am an objectivist, but being an objectivist does not mean not having personal tastes that may be different from those of others.
I see a lot of criticism of klipsch for its colored speakers, I don't understand why, it's not snake oil, it's a design choice (which you may not like), almost all klipsch have a house sound, if you don't like it you can check the measurements and stay away from them.
In my main listening system I have Kef R3s with 3 subwoofers, all managed by the DSP adjusted based on measurements with umik 1 and rew, it is a high fidelity system and I am fully satisfied with it.
However, when I want to enjoy some rock or electronic music at full volume, I go up to the room where I have two huge Klipsch RP280F towers, never measured the frequency response not even out of curiosity, no sub. I turn up the volume and enjoy them like a child, I really enjoy them, what's wrong with that?
I see a lot of criticism of klipsch for its colored speakers, I don't understand why, it's not snake oil, it's a design choice (which you may not like), almost all klipsch have a house sound, if you don't like it you can check the measurements and stay away from them.
In my main listening system I have Kef R3s with 3 subwoofers, all managed by the DSP adjusted based on measurements with umik 1 and rew, it is a high fidelity system and I am fully satisfied with it.
However, when I want to enjoy some rock or electronic music at full volume, I go up to the room where I have two huge Klipsch RP280F towers, never measured the frequency response not even out of curiosity, no sub. I turn up the volume and enjoy them like a child, I really enjoy them, what's wrong with that?
radix
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2021
- Messages
- 1,431
- Likes
- 1,399
There's nothing magic or fundamental physics about Toole's curve. They are empirical preference measurements. If Klipsch thinks there's a different curve or sound that their customers prefer, good for them. As long as they are basing it on experimentation and engineering, I think that's ok.
On my system, I use a modified Harman curve for my response (a bit more bass, a bit less treble), and my Revel speakers can handle the EQ just great!
On my system, I use a modified Harman curve for my response (a bit more bass, a bit less treble), and my Revel speakers can handle the EQ just great!
It's valid in the sense of having an internally consistent rationale. Whether it's correct or not is another question.
Agree.
Nothing wrong with it IMO. I personally feel most comfortable with capital-F Fidelity, but there's no rule against liking something else. I think the only problem arises when people try to pass off preference or conjecture as fact when it comes to coloration or lack thereof.
Similar threads
