You are here

My Tannoy Reveals

For everything after the recording stage: hardware/software and how you use it.

Re: My Tannoy Reveals

Postby MOF » Fri Feb 28, 2020 6:22 pm

I'm still intrigued by the noticeable improvement in sound quality between the version you sent them and the one that got broadcast ;)
That will be Optimod just before the transmitter. :lol:
MOF
Frequent Poster
Posts: 889
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2003 1:00 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: My Tannoy Reveals

Postby Hugh Robjohns » Fri Feb 28, 2020 6:45 pm

Yep, it's often remarkable what beneficial effect a well set up multiband compressor can have on a mix! (...and how destructive a badly setup one can be!)
User avatar
Hugh Robjohns
Moderator
Posts: 26990
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Worcestershire, UK
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound

Re: My Tannoy Reveals

Postby Arpangel » Sat Feb 29, 2020 8:37 am

Martin Walker wrote:
Arpangel wrote:I can only judge by what others say, and how my recordings sound in other places. That recording I sent the BBC recently sounded fine on the radio, and they didn’t ask for anything better, so that’s fine.

I'm still intrigued by the noticeable improvement in sound quality between the version you sent them and the one that got broadcast ;)


Martin

It was perfectly fine to start with, the BBC broadcast version was "just different"

:D

The Elf wrote:A case of selective frugality!? :lol:

But would I actually pay that money to own those synths? knowing what I know now after going out and buying things I’ve always lusted after the answer is a resounding no.
It lead me nowhere, and just reduced my musical output to zero.
User avatar
Arpangel
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 3726
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2003 12:00 am
https://anthonyflynn.bandcamp.com/album/toy-town

Re: My Tannoy Reveals

Postby Mike McLoone » Sun Mar 01, 2020 1:38 pm

jimh76 wrote:Hi.

They are about 10cm away from a wall and have the rear bass extension tubes. I've heard about tuning these with socks? I don't have any sound absorb things on the walls or bass traps etc., so should I leave well alone?

Jim

I had the Reveals some years ago. The advice I can give is, get them at least 30cm away from the rear wall, even 50cm if possible. This will prevent any exaggeration of low frequency energy due to wall boundary. If you can't get them away from the wall, then roll up some socks and stuff the bass ports, making as airtight a seal as possible. Yes, as was mentioned this will change the characteristics of the speakers. However, the bass will be much more controlled, and in a small room this can be a great advantage.

I used to hate the Reveals because of the rear ports, and positioning them in my studio/bedroom was almost impossible. But many years later I learned that rear ported speakers can have much lower distortion characteristics. That was of course long after I'd sold the Reveals, unfortunately.

You mention your mixes are bass heavy, which normally would indicate your monitors are not giving enough bass, or the room acoustics or your mix position are cancelling that bass energy out. I would suspect here it is due to the rear bass port and proximity to the wall. Sitting in the middle of the room is generally going to cancel out a lot of the low energy, recommended is therefore 1/3 or 2/3 of the front-back distance for the mix position (where you sit). And monitors and mix position as symmetrical as possible between the left-right walls.

M.
Mike McLoone
Regular
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 12:00 am
"It's all gone quiet." said Rhubarb "Not nearly quiet enough." said John Cage

Re: My Tannoy Reveals

Postby ef37a » Sun Mar 01, 2020 2:54 pm

Thanks Mike.
As I said, I was not concious of any shortage of bass from the 5As, much as I expected really given their size and price.

Mine ARE mounted on the wall and we listen from close to the centre of the room but in a room 12 by 12.5 feet there is not much option! Also, pulling the speakers further into the room would put me even more in the centre of the square.

Stereo imaging is pretty good even though half the left hand wall is window but I do have a 3" panel filled with rockwool about 3x 3 feet covering the window.

We all has to do the best we can with what us has!

Dave.
ef37a
Jedi Poster
Posts: 11490
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 12:00 am
Location: northampton uk

Re: My Tannoy Reveals

Postby The Elf » Sun Mar 01, 2020 6:19 pm

I still use 5As as Lr/Rr in my surround monitoring array (and 55As as my L/R) - and identical config in my home surround system. They do a good enough job for what they are. I've not subscribed to this sock stuffing habit, but I'm a bit of a purist that way! :lol:
User avatar
The Elf
Jedi Poster
Posts: 14244
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2001 12:00 am
Location: Sheffield, UK
An Eagle for an Emperor, A Kestrel for a Knave.

Re: My Tannoy Reveals

Postby ef37a » Sun Mar 01, 2020 6:29 pm

I am not that keen on stuffing ports either Elf. I subscribe to the view that Tannoy know their job!
TBH I cannot see why the proximity of the wall to the port matters? If we take the port tuning to be around 50Hz that gives a 1/2 wavelength of 3.4mtrs and I cannot get them that far away! But then maybe I don't understand the situation?

I have to say I have been listening to (and have built) many ported enclosures for over 50yrs and it has only been in the last year or two that I found out there was anything wrong with them! Ignorance is bliss I suppose.

Dave.
ef37a
Jedi Poster
Posts: 11490
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 12:00 am
Location: northampton uk

Re: My Tannoy Reveals

Postby Arpangel » Mon Mar 02, 2020 8:05 am

All of the speakers that I’ve really liked have been sealed box designs. The one exception were my RCL "Small Loudspeakers"
I’m was a big fan of Acoustic Research, and the Yamaha NS10, both used sealed box designs, they seem to have tighter bass, and are more room tolerant.
User avatar
Arpangel
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 3726
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2003 12:00 am
https://anthonyflynn.bandcamp.com/album/toy-town

Re: My Tannoy Reveals

Postby Hugh Robjohns » Mon Mar 02, 2020 11:25 am

ef37a wrote:I have to say I have been listening to (and have built) many ported enclosures for over 50yrs and it has only been in the last year or two that I found out there was anything wrong with them!

There isn't anything wrong with them -- given that a speaker is a hugely imperfect device anyway.. The whole thing is a compromised technology... but it is the most practical solution we currently have. And pretty much all of the high-end, high quality hi-fi and monitor speakers are ported designs. So ported enclosures can be done well and sound good.

The problems only occur if the port isn't designed well... but the same applies to every single aspect of a loudspeaker -- or anything else, for that matter. If the designer chooses (or is forced) to compromise the design, whether for reasons of cost, or size, or unrealistic marketing specs, or whatever, problems will inevitably result!

Badly designed ported cabinets can suffer a range of serious problems. One of them is uncontrolled resonances resulting in time-smearing of low frequencies. Another is turbulence, resulted in noise modulation effects. Another is significant low frequency distortion... and so on...

But badly designed cabinets are generally the province of the cheap end of things. A speaker purporting to be a 'full range monitor' that costs £150 is much more likely to have a compromised port design than something that costs £1500...
User avatar
Hugh Robjohns
Moderator
Posts: 26990
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Worcestershire, UK
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound

Re: My Tannoy Reveals

Postby SecretSam » Sun Mar 08, 2020 7:42 am

Given that pretty much any shape can be mass produced cheaply out of a mould, why does a cheap speaker have to have a poorly sized or shaped port ?

Beats me.
SecretSam
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 1:00 am
Location: Officially, I do not exist.
Instant gratification is actually pretty good. It's fast as well.

Re: My Tannoy Reveals

Postby Sam Spoons » Sun Mar 08, 2020 10:43 am

I'd guess that it's because plastic mouldings are only cheap if produced in sufficiently large quantities and the monitor speaker market is too small to support the volume production required. Maybe that will change with 3D printing.
User avatar
Sam Spoons
Jedi Poster
Posts: 12151
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2003 1:00 am
Location: Manchester UK
Finally taking this recording lark seriously (and recording my Gypsy Jazz CD)........

Re: My Tannoy Reveals

Postby Hugh Robjohns » Sun Mar 08, 2020 11:19 am

SecretSam wrote:Given that pretty much any shape can be mass produced cheaply out of a mould, why does a cheap speaker have to have a poorly sized or shaped port ?

Possibly because the required cabinet and drivers sizes are such that there isn't enough space left for an idealised port... or perhaps because the designers don't really know what they are doing or don't have the resources to test their designs adequately...
User avatar
Hugh Robjohns
Moderator
Posts: 26990
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Worcestershire, UK
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound

Re: My Tannoy Reveals

Postby ef37a » Sun Mar 08, 2020 11:22 am

Sam Spoons wrote:I'd guess that it's because plastic mouldings are only cheap if produced in sufficiently large quantities and the monitor speaker market is too small to support the volume production required. Maybe that will change with 3D printing.

Quite. A chunk of a standard plastic tube is always going to be cheaper and some designs use a tunnel formed from the base of the cabinet itself and shelf. Cost next to nothing to make a 'nothing'!

Just remembered. Geez long time ago. One reason ports are put at the back is because cabinet colourations a more evident firing achyer from the front . This was in G.A.Briggs book of GAKs how long ago. Wharfedale produced at least one, rear ported design I recall. Was it the Airdale?

https://www.google.com/search?q=vintage ... Q7KpLpIPiM

Dave.
ef37a
Jedi Poster
Posts: 11490
Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 12:00 am
Location: northampton uk

Re: My Tannoy Reveals

Postby Arpangel » Mon Mar 09, 2020 9:18 am

Hugh Robjohns wrote:
SecretSam wrote:Given that pretty much any shape can be mass produced cheaply out of a mould, why does a cheap speaker have to have a poorly sized or shaped port ?

Possibly because the required cabinet and drivers sizes are such that there isn't enough space left for an idealised port... or perhaps because the designers don't really know what they are doing or don't have the resources to test their designs adequately...

I’d say they know exactly what they’re doing, they know they don’t have enough money to allocate to decent R&D and as you say, resources to test things, they are building down to a price.
I guess that’s what you pay for in a more expensive monitor.
User avatar
Arpangel
Frequent Poster (Level2)
Posts: 3726
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2003 12:00 am
https://anthonyflynn.bandcamp.com/album/toy-town

Re: My Tannoy Reveals

Postby John Willett » Mon Mar 09, 2020 10:24 am

Arpangel wrote:
Hugh Robjohns wrote:
SecretSam wrote:Given that pretty much any shape can be mass produced cheaply out of a mould, why does a cheap speaker have to have a poorly sized or shaped port ?

Possibly because the required cabinet and drivers sizes are such that there isn't enough space left for an idealised port... or perhaps because the designers don't really know what they are doing or don't have the resources to test their designs adequately...

I’d say they know exactly what they’re doing, they know they don’t have enough money to allocate to decent R&D and as you say, resources to test things, they are building down to a price.
I guess that’s what you pay for in a more expensive monitor.

:thumbup: :(
User avatar
John Willett
Jedi Poster
Posts: 7073
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2000 1:00 am
Location: Oxfordshire UK
John
Sound-Link ProAudio
Circle Sound Services
Sound-Link are UK Distributors for: Microtech Gefell, ME-Geithain, AETA, HUM, Håkan, Meyer Turtle

Previous