|
Post by LesC on Apr 15, 2018 16:12:07 GMT -6
One thing I've wondered for a while is why two 5" cones are the equivalent of an 8" cone? 5 squared is 25, times 2 is 50, the square root of which is 7.07. So aren't they the equivalent of a 7" cone? Or is this a marketing thing, let's round 7.07 to 8? If it's just marketing, that's fine, we see worse every day. It really doesn't matter, I'm just curious if there is some physics going on that says two smaller cones are the equivalent of a single larger cone with a larger total surface area? Who cares cone size means nothing ! In fact most speaker specs are frame size not diagram ! Well, I said it doesn't really matter. I was just curious why an apparent incorrect bit of arithmetic keeps getting promulgated. I don't think most neophytes would agree that cone size doesn't matter, so I think the 8" number is just pure marketing.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Apr 15, 2018 16:36:19 GMT -6
Was curious as the bass is distributed across the 2 5 inch speakers the Focal spin is this equates to larger surface area ?
“ While the tweeter is driven by a 50W Class-AB amp, the two woofers use separate 80W channels from a second Class-AB amp. Interestingly, while the lower of the two drivers covers the bottom end, from 40 to 180 Hz, the upper woofer handles the entire low to mid-range, from 40Hz to 2.5kHz. Effectively, this provides a greater surface area to push out the lowest frequencies while retaining the greater control afforded by the smaller five-inch cones. “
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Apr 15, 2018 17:43:44 GMT -6
I don't think most neophytes would agree that cone size doesn't matter, so I think the 8" number is just pure marketing. What does this mean? You frame it as a double negative, so are you say that most neophytes agree that cone size matters? And if so, what is your point? I'm a neophyte so I'm asking, can ten 5" drivers go lower or produce more sound at say 40hz than an 8" driver?
|
|
|
Post by LesC on Apr 15, 2018 17:56:51 GMT -6
I don't think most neophytes would agree that cone size doesn't matter, so I think the 8" number is just pure marketing. What does this mean? You frame it as a double negative, so are you say that most neophytes agree that cone size matters? And if so, what is your point? I'm a neophyte so I'm asking, can ten 5" drivers go lower or produce more sound at say 40hz than an 8" driver? What I'm saying is that I think woofer size is a selling point, the bigger the better is the implication. So I was referring to the marketing of two 5" speakers as if they are the equivalent of an 8" speaker, though they are actually the equivalent of a 7" speaker in surface area. I believe that Focal can competently do simple arithmetic, so I believe it's pure marketing BS. I'm not sure what that has to do with your question.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Apr 15, 2018 19:04:52 GMT -6
LexC not arguing but as they also have 2 passive radiators also pushing air isn’t there more surface area than that of just the 2 5 inch drivers?
|
|
|
Post by drsax on Apr 15, 2018 20:22:36 GMT -6
I’m not gonna even get into the math. Math doesn’t matter much to me. But Sound and translation do matter to me. These are sitting in my studio, set up in a pretty decent acoustically treated room, and they have more bass than my expensive 8” mains that have high grade active amps built in. So... regardless of the math, There’s some real world truth to Focals claims.
|
|
|
Post by LesC on Apr 15, 2018 22:02:29 GMT -6
LexC not arguing but as they also have 2 passive radiators also pushing air isn’t there more surface area than that of just the 2 5 inch drivers? Yes, of course. But in Focal's own introductory video, right at the beginning they specifically state that the 2 five inch drivers have a surface area equivalent to an eight inch driver. Just blatantly incorrect. Again, I don't consider it to be important. My current plan is to get the Shape Twin, but I'm first waiting for more real-world reviews, and especially a comparison between the Shape Twin and the Shape 65. I have a tiny room, 12' x 14' with 8' ceilings, so the 65 is probably more than sufficient. Ideally I would get both sets of speakers and compare them myself. Long & McQuade has a 30-day refund period but the only time I took advantage of it, when I couldn't get the Lynx Hilo to stop BSOD'ing, they were obviously very displeased.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Apr 16, 2018 4:33:10 GMT -6
I have the 6.5 now and think them the best monitor I have had in my smallish but treated room, but I would like to try the twins. !
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,011
|
Post by ericn on Apr 16, 2018 8:34:48 GMT -6
LexC not arguing but as they also have 2 passive radiators also pushing air isn’t there more surface area than that of just the 2 5 inch drivers? Yes, of course. But in Focal's own introductory video, right at the beginning they specifically state that the 2 five inch drivers have a surface area equivalent to an eight inch driver. Just blatantly incorrect. Again, I don't consider it to be important. My current plan is to get the Shape Twin, but I'm first waiting for more real-world reviews, and especially a comparison between the Shape Twin and the Shape 65. I have a tiny room, 12' x 14' with 8' ceilings, so the 65 is probably more than sufficient. Ideally I would get both sets of speakers and compare them myself. Long & McQuade has a 30-day refund period but the only time I took advantage of it, when I couldn't get the Lynx Hilo to stop BSOD'ing, they were obviously very displeased. Well they could be right in that they could be judging the diaphragm of their 2 five in drivers against the diaphragm of a specific 8in frame driver again your comparing frame size not diaphragm!
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,011
|
Post by ericn on Apr 16, 2018 8:36:30 GMT -6
LexC not arguing but as they also have 2 passive radiators also pushing air isn’t there more surface area than that of just the 2 5 inch drivers? Passive radiators are not acting like a driver they are more of a tuneded membrane port so only radiate at a tuned freq.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,011
|
Post by ericn on Apr 16, 2018 8:41:17 GMT -6
My understanding of how the 2-5 woofers are implemented is that one of the 5in is kicked in at a lower freq than the other to double the spl in the low end and keep the mid woofer from breaking up in the mids. Not my favorite technique but Focal has made it work in the past.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Apr 16, 2018 8:49:31 GMT -6
Agreed, but the passive radiators reinforce the freq/waves coming from either 5 inch speaker: right ?
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Apr 16, 2018 8:51:49 GMT -6
LexC not arguing but as they also have 2 passive radiators also pushing air isn’t there more surface area than that of just the 2 5 inch drivers? Passive radiators are not acting like a driver they are more of a tuneded membrane port so only radiate at a tuned freq. I understand that in theory but I found the sound envelope or my sense of the sound coming from my amphions one 18, to seem much more expansive than other similar monitors in speaker size and both front and back ported ?
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,011
|
Post by ericn on Apr 16, 2018 9:07:35 GMT -6
Passive radiators are not acting like a driver they are more of a tuneded membrane port so only radiate at a tuned freq. I understand that in theory but I found the sound envelope or my sense of the sound coming from my amphions one 18, to seem much more expansive than other similar monitors in speaker size and both front and back ported ? While not an Amphion fan, they can sound big a large part of that is the pattern control of the HF, but it’s not even just that it’s the speaker as a system not just one contributing factor.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Apr 16, 2018 10:28:40 GMT -6
Agreed but I think the passive radiator is the commonality amphions/Focal. I find the shape 6.5 similar to the amphions. I hope to demo the twins sometime soon.
|
|
|
Post by LesC on Apr 16, 2018 15:18:08 GMT -6
Agreed but I think the passive radiator is the commonality amphions/Focal. I find the shape 6.5 similar to the amphions. I hope to demo the twins sometime soon. That's the comparison I'm waiting for! How large is your room?
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Apr 16, 2018 16:07:22 GMT -6
Roughly 8’x13x21’
|
|
|
Post by professorplum on Apr 19, 2018 23:23:43 GMT -6
hey drsax, would you recommend these as a sole pair of monitors? maybe complimented by some small garbage speakers, but as your only main monitors......
|
|
|
Post by drsax on Apr 20, 2018 0:27:45 GMT -6
hey drsax, would you recommend these as a sole pair of monitors? maybe complimented by some small garbage speakers, but as your only main monitors...... Based on my usage thus far, I could happily get by using these as my sole mains. Really liking them
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on May 11, 2018 9:13:33 GMT -6
My demo twins arrived, powered up, not broken in and instant chequing account mayday! Remember, I really liked the 6.5:) The twins seem clearer, sharper/quicker and definitely deeper. While the top end seems the same,, it’s the accuracy in the mids on down and that extended bass that is immediately apparent. I have them for a week but I don’t see how they’ll be going back:) Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by drsax on May 14, 2018 11:17:20 GMT -6
My demo twins arrived, powered up, not broken in and instant chequing account mayday! Remember, I really liked the 6.5:) The twins seem clearer, sharper/quicker and definitely deeper. While the top end seems the same,, it’s the accuracy in the mids on down and that extended bass that is immediately apparent. I have them for a week but I don’t see how they’ll be going back:) View Attachment I’m with ya! Diggin my pair too. These are great monitors!
|
|
|
Post by guitfiddler on May 14, 2018 19:08:52 GMT -6
👍🏻
|
|