yeah I'm the one who was confused, sorry about it. Wouldn't that still be the better compromise since horizontal directivity would be perfect?
-
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!
Emotiva Airmotiv C2+ Center Channel Speaker (review by Erin)
- Thread starter sweetchaos
- Start date
-
- Tags
- airmotiv c2+ emotiva review
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2020
- Messages
- 6,939
- Likes
- 17,110
Possibly.
It is pretty shocking that they managed to build a 3-way with such design mistakes. Multiple midrange drivers working in parallel? WTF? Haven't they grasped how the 2.5 way designs work? How difficult or cost effecting it is to add a couple more components to the crossover to avoid the sharp FR step at around 1500Hz. Haven't they measured their design at all?
I designed this speaker almost 30 years ago. The vertically aligned drivers work as standard. The left driver is fed through a LP filter and hence avoid the loping you see in this Emotiva speaker. Just add two woofer on each side and here is your full-range centre speaker! Or leave it as is and use a subwoofer and bass management.
If I had the means I will sack the person who designed this speaker immediately and circulate his incompetence within the industry!
I designed this speaker almost 30 years ago. The vertically aligned drivers work as standard. The left driver is fed through a LP filter and hence avoid the loping you see in this Emotiva speaker. Just add two woofer on each side and here is your full-range centre speaker! Or leave it as is and use a subwoofer and bass management.
If I had the means I will sack the person who designed this speaker immediately and circulate his incompetence within the industry!
Last edited:
That's petty.
Biblob
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2018
- Messages
- 637
- Likes
- 607
Why not send one over to Amir or Erin?
because the speaker is not manufactured or sold anymore anywhere, no point in testing it.
Petty means trivial. What the designer did was gross misconduct. Do please try the use the language properly.
A company relies on their designers to manufacture a decent product. If this has not been the fault of a designer than I am vindicated either way.
Bear123
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2019
- Messages
- 796
- Likes
- 1,370
Seems like even if Emotiva *REALLY* wanted to use two mids, they could eliminate the *enormous* trim rings around the drivers and push the mids much closer together. Same with the woofers….seems like they could easily be placed 6"+ closer together. Seems like an easy way to get a much better result from this speaker while still using the same driver configuration.
That won't work either. It will simply shift the frequency of the error.
If there are two emitters working at the same time at frequency that correspond to the distance between emitters there will be phasing errors. That is why you can only use multiple woofers, which work lower than 500Hz where the wavelength is longer than the distances between the drive units. D'Appolito is a special case where the said phase shift is cancelled with the layout. However, you still have to obey the geometry pretty exactly.
Ignoring the obvious colloquial use of "petty" and demanding a strict dictionary definition is also petty.
The same designers made a 3-way center without dual midrange drivers in the same line of speakers. Chill.
How do you know the two were the same person/group? Think!
So your most likely scenario is that a small company like Emotiva hired independent designers for each speaker in the Airmotiv+ line and stipulated that they must not collaborate with one another? Think!
Ha! As if that is not the norm these days? If you knew how the industry works you will freak out. Other than big names almost all major brands outsource or buy-in their designs. A company like Emotive can be large in terms of turn-over but for all we know they may have a miniscule if any in-house design team. Read their AVR reviews and @amirm's comments on how they buy-in modules that they have no control in the design. They couldn't correct the demonstrated and reported bugs. Why? Because they haven't designed the unit completely.
It's an obvious oversimplification but also not a stretch to consider the possibillity that it went something like this..."Hey, we need to make the C1 bigger. Okay, let's just throw in some bigger woofers but we'll need to do something with that little midrange. Eh, let's just double it up. We have other stuff to do and we'll save on costs. It'll look cool, too."
It's a shame, because subjectively, in its price range it's a pretty impressive sounding center that gets loud and stays clean with stronge dialogue intelligibility (despite the mess measured in the midrange). Hopefully the next version gets this sorted out.
It's a shame, because subjectively, in its price range it's a pretty impressive sounding center that gets loud and stays clean with stronge dialogue intelligibility (despite the mess measured in the midrange). Hopefully the next version gets this sorted out.
There is nothing wrong with the concept you stipulate. It is their implementation that was wrong. Any professional speaker designer should know how to solve the phasing issue caused by parallel drivers and the cost involved is negligible within the over all cost of the speaker. Even an EE will know that multiple wide-range antennae wouldn't work.
Last edited:
OP
- Thread Starter
- #36
Erin’s video review is up:
I've got this speaker mounted on monitor stands above TV, slightly tilted down to face main listening position directly, to minimize off axes issues.
Anything else could be done to compensate for imperfections?
Also, given the FR data, at what frequency it should be crossed to sub? I currently have it crossed at 60Hz, as SVS Tool recommends for C2.
Last edited:
sucramhabib
Member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2021
- Messages
- 15
- Likes
- 13
If you're an "absolute noob", why would you think you have the answer that their team of engineers don't. It sounds like the college grad who get's his first job and thinks he can fix the company's issues...
Did you really just attack me so you can bootlick a company with a broken design?
More Dynamics Please
Addicted to Fun and Learning
It certainly seems fair to question why Emotiva felt the need to introduce twin 3" mids with the twin 6" woofers and folded tweeter in the C2+ center when they already had a 5.25" mid that works well with twin 6" woofers and folded tweeter in the T1+ tower (as well as with twin 8" woofers and folded tweeter in the T2+ tower). Why would a single 5.25" mid not work as well in the C2+ as in the T1+ and T2+ when the C2+ is supposed to be a matching center?
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
