Yes sure, no way completely DSP’ing such a speaker. I heard several complete DSP speaker concepts and they all sounded flat compared to how it could sound.
Maybe I’m too uncompromising regarding bass. I hate peaks. Probably spoiled after first time hearing how it can sound quite flat. But for sure it can more or less also be reached by complete flexibility in a room, especially when also acoustically tuned… having a less high demand would also help 
I’m a bass player, as is Chris.
1 Like
Assumed this means you’d want a bass sound perfect from a non adjustable full range speaker in any normal listening room you place it, my experience so far would tell me, that’s going to be difficult. Even in theory I wouldn’t have an idea how this should work out (except if one accepts at least 2 noticeable resonances).
As Chris says there are lots of DSP products. A fully featured product is by deqx.com, an Australian company. I have a 3-way active implementation whereby digital processing does crossover, time alignment and EQ all in software. I have a heavily damped and bass trapped room (30208 feet approx). My bass is ultra clean. Deqx have literally just brought out a new set of products (mine is about ten years old). I’ve had three respected industry figures say things like “what a great system”, “you should be very proud of what you’ve achieved”, "I was very impressed with your room/system ". They didn’t need to offer their opinions, they could have kept quiet. I know that badbeef is unconvinced about this but I suspect the effort that’s required to get good results has not been put in. It took me a huge amount of time to do the final EQ and the tiniest change of any component or EQ setting is immediately audible. Even the changes as equipment warms up and gets gaussed up is very noticeable (thank goodness for the PSA regenerator ‘clean’ function which I regularly use for several minutes). However, I’m 100% convinced that the sound I get is impossible to achieve by just plonking a few bits of room treatment and passive speakers in a room. My sources are digital and the data remains digital all the way to three Directstream dacs (the Deqx products have an ADC in them so that I can put analogue sources into the unit, which I do for playing records or from my home cinema amp’s left/right pre-outs). There’s a cheaper minidsp product called DDRC-22D that could be worth experimenting with. Even if one doesn’t want to go fully active I suspect Deqx products could greatly improve a lot of systems.
Update: - I should add that most of my source is digital up to 96/24. The system doesn’t handle DOP. I’ve yet to find out what the latest Deqx products can do, they’ve not yet published detailed specs or pricing for the new range of products.
1 Like
I just purchased a used Premate+ which should arrive today.
I intend to initially use it for “just” woofer/subwoofer management.
I might like to pick your brain for some setup/use tips, privately, if you don’t mind.
Cheers.
No problem Scott. I use a HDP-5. The screen on it is a total waste of time. I had Deqx do the speaker calibration (they dialled in), all I’ve done is to play with the parametric EQ (I use about 6 parametric EQs over the entire frequency range and lots of trial and error is involved). I use the three digital coax outs for low,. mid, high frequencies. If I can help then great, but I know nothing about the Premate+ (I have just had a look, I’m sure it’ll be great as a subwoofer EQ facility). Dan.
It is not that I’m unconvinced - I understand what they can do. I’m just not interested in the tradeoffs involved. There is no free lunch. I’m currently using my decade-old HDP-4 to delay and EQ nearfield 18" subs.
I think the type of music I listen to has been so heavily digitally processed before I get it that I may as well do a bit more (or, rather, a lot more!). I loved my vinyl and can enjoy what room resonances do to a lot of music but my intention was to do whatever possible to make the walls disappear, hence lots of absorption and bass trapping (even I feel that walls covered by diffusers aren’t domestically acceptable, where would the windows go, the tv, the CD/DVD racks etc go?).
I thought I remember you said the distance between mid of the woofers to mid of the midrange ribbon is relevant for the possible listening distance…and it looked as if this distance would be bigger with the FR20… but that seems to be wrong.
I have a great pair of REL subs, wondering about FR20 plus subs vs FR30 without subs…general thoughts, I know there is no answer…
Slightly off topic so please indulge me. I have been a huge fan of the Thiel brand of speakers and am now on my fifth and obviously last generation as Jim Thiel is no longer with us. My current pair are the 3.7’s augmented by a pair of REL 812 subs. I have been auditioning a few new speakers (showroom auditions only at this point) and the three I have heard have been the Magico A5, and the Wilson SabrinaX and the Sasha DAW. Only the Sasha ($39,000) made me sit up and really go wow, but they are not realistically in my budget and are a bit too massive for my room. The other two were pretty good but not good enough to make me want to change. My friend Bob M. who also has a pair of the 3.7’s, agrees with me and would not make the move to those speakers. The funny thing is that, with the addition of the new PS DSD DAC, the system is so much better with a more open/spacious sound, and reduced edge or glare (jitter reduction would account for that), that the impetus for new speakers has been reduced. However the new FR20’s would be a great choice price wise and size wise, so i will really be interested in any comments from those lucky enough to have auditioned and/or purchased a set. Any feedback would be most appreciated.
Well, the smaller woofer array and closer effective spacing on the FR20 improves the integration at closer distances.
As I mentioned before, the reason for the midrange being on top and the woofers close to the floor is so that the floor bounce interference notch is put outside the range of each respective driver (it’s below the midrange’s range and above the woofer’s range). This gives significantly smoother in-room response.
Here’s an example to how to calculate this (from Joe D’appolito’s book “testing loudspeakers”:
4 Likes
I’d love to hear your speakers alone because of the knowledge put in each part of the design…and I think I will have the chance hopefully next year!
1 Like
Yep, agree with you there, but for me it was a pretty amazing “Wow, I want that!!”
1 Like
Keep your subs and get the 20’s. I think pretty much any speaker is better with subs. A friend has a pair of Sasha DAWs and adding a pair of 18"s adds that extra foundational bottom octave. Both Wilson and PS did an amazing job on the bass cabs, but in both cases they’re 8’s not 18’s🤘🏼
Not that you have to have 18’s. 12’s or 15’s are good too.
5 Likes
FWIW, Chris told me that the FR30’s (8 8” woofers plus radiators) are “equal” to dual 15” woofers. One could make a case to go with the FR30’s in this scenario. I am not anti sub, and believe they can get you lower for less and have the added bonus of versatile placement to reduce room nodes. Funny thing is that most rooms, and mine in particular, will not reproduce well below 32 cycles, but I still love the visceral impact.
3 Likes
did you hear those as well? the Magico speakers are being shown in a room that i think is too small and does not let them bloom, so i am not sure what they are capable of. they will bring them to my home early in the coming year to audition. The Sabrinas were in a really good room but did not have the sparkle and openness of the Thiel speakers. The Sashas were fantastic but really are just too big and too much money. i have high hopes for the FR20’s
that is probably really good advice. thanks.