[TenTec] COMMUNICATIONS SPEAKERS Article

[Richards]

On 2/27/2013 3:19 AM, Jim Brown wrote:
> On 2/26/2013 10:29 PM, Richards wrote:
>> YES - the author makes a good case for using something tailored to the
>> task.


>    Bullsh&t.



	There is no need to get crude or angry over this.



What is needed for good speech quality is nothing more or
> less than a loudspeaker with flat response AND uniform coverage in the
> speech range.


	Funny... that is just what the author was
	saying.    And he suggested a center channel
	speaker as exactly that sort of thing.

	Otherwise, you have been outvoted by an entire
	industry - which sells center channel speakers
	expressly on the premise they enhance speech
	and dialog intelligibility.  And outvoted by legions
	of movie fans who buy them for that very reason.


		
And, because many (most?) ham rigs don't have high power
> audio output stages, it needs to be fairly efficient. "Tailored to
> speech?"  Horseh*t.  Nothing more or less than a decent small, accurate
> loudspeaker that sounds the same over a fairly wide angle.


	Exactly what WE are saying !   Apparently you
	agree with us, after all.   You have just described
	what we mean by a  "speaker tailored for speech."



> Now, it so happens that Optimus is the "house brand" that Rat Shack used
> in the 70s and 80s. They didn't make anything themselves,


		Nobody does.... it all comes from some
		outfit in China.   Besides that is hardly
		relevant or probative of any point under
		discussion here.




> the small speakers they sold under the Optimus name were pretty decent,
> and we used them a bit for making noise in rooms to do acoustic
> testing.  But "optimized for speech?"  Zebrash&t.


		You have missed the point entirely.

		We are only saying that a small, flat sounding
		speaker that does not have a lot of bass or treble
		is one that is "tailored for speech"  --

		Maybe we should say, instead, that that sort
		of speaker is  "most suitable for speech"
		intelligibility.  But your description fits what
		we are saying exactly.

		FACT -- not all speakers are well "suited for
		speech"  intelligibility -- which is why you
		specified "small" as a design criterion.

		FACT -- there are loads of flat response speakers
		that are not well suited for speech applications.
		Older, JBL studio monitor speakers with 15 inch
		woofers just do not sound as clear as, for example,
		the  5 inch Avantone MixCube speaker - or similar
		size center channel speakers.

		By specifying "decent small, accurate loudspeaker
		that sounds the same over a fairly wide angle"
		YOU HAVE IDENTIFIED EXACTLY WHAT IS
		RIGHT ABOUT THE CENTER CHANNEL SPEAKER
		AND WHAT MAKES IT WELL SUITED FOR VOICE
		APPLICATIONS.

		FACT -- not everybody agrees what sounds
		good.   Not all speakers with a flat
		response will suffice or please everyone.

	
In you effort to tell us how stupid we are, you have now overstated your 
case.   I doubt you will 	convince the throng of ham operators that any 
old speaker with flat response will sound as good as any other speaker 
with flat response.  Fact is, 	each speaker has it own character and not 
everybody will like the character of each speaker you play.   That is 
why there are so many speaker manufacturers with so many different 
speakers to buy - not everybody agrees what sounds best.


			

> The reason that loudspeaker he likes sounds good on speech is that it's
> a decent "flat" (natural) loudspeaker. .


	I disagree -- there is more too it.   It sounds good
	to him because it has less bass and less high end
	and TO HIS EARS that makes it easier to understand
	speech.

	MFJ makes a little product they call the speech
	intelligence enhancer - all built on the principle
	that the most speech intelligence is found in
	the mid-range - not the bass or high treble range -
	and it has equalizer controls to enhance that
	range compared to the extremes.

	My wife and I listen to old time radio programs
	most every night down in the shack.  I use a
	wide band frequency equalizer to reduce both
	the lowest and highest frequencies - because this
	enhances the intelligibility of the speech - dialog.
	
	We listen to these program with some of the
	most expensive high quality FLAT RESPONSE
	headphones made (usually a set by Sennheiser
	but we have others, too...)  - OR - we listen to
	the programs on very high quality FLAT RESPONSE
	powered studio monitor speakers - and we both
	agree this equalization makes it MUCH EASIER
	TO MAKE OUT THE DIALOG - just like Mr. Jue
	at MFJ says about his product.

	There is a reason they make center channel
	speakers with smaller woofer elements - because
	they do not have as much bass response.
	The author is correct - that is what people really
	do - and they do it because it really works.

	Instead, you tell us us to disregard all this and
	to disregard an entire industry and disbelieve
	the legions of movie fans who actually buy and
	use small center channel speakers because they
	actually do enhance speech intelligibility and
	make it easier to understand the dialog.

	In theory any old flat response speaker should
	do - BUT IN FACT, there is more to it and the
	size of the speaker, the size, material, and
	density, displacement and all that other
	jazz  which differentiates one from another
	DO IN FACT MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

	On your theory, we would all be using the highest
	quality studio reference monitors from  Genelec,
	Klein and Hummel, Quested, PMC,  Focal, or Tannoy
	because they fit your definition of "decent,
	accurate... flat response"  etc.   But in fact, many
	hams would not like them, and return to their
	favorite speaker.  For some it will be the cost, but
	for others, like me, it will be because I don't like
	how they sound on my ham radio, while I love the
	way they play music.

	My current fave... a nice BOSS 5.25" dual cone
	auto stereo speaker in a home made cabinet, or
	a $36 pair of Genius computer speakers - and I can
	afford any speaker I want.   I have a similar 4" speaker
	in a home made wood cabinet on my 2m and police
	scanner.  Why?  Because it sounds good to me - it cuts
	right through the ambient noise and makes it is easy
	to understand what people are saying.  A friend of
	mine who designs commercial grade audio products
	helped me dampen the cabinet to avoid resonance.
	


Bottom line - when you describe what works... you ARE describing a 
center channel speaker just like the author recommends.  A small speaker 
with relatively flat response that just so happens to sound good on a 
ham radio.  And the other ham is not foolish for thinking it sounds 
better TO HIM - and only he can say what sounds better to him.   He 
cannot be wrong about that, while you may think it does not sound good 
to you.

Wondering what you recommend and use?

But that is just MY take...

PS -- I don't need an engineering degree to know what sounds good to me.


------------------------  K8JHR  -------------------------