UREI Speaker discussions

[Mr. Widget]

It's probably me but you are losing me here. I wouldn't have put the UREIs in the good controlled directivity category like say the 708 monitors. Can't imagine the polar of a UREI would be as good as the 708. I'm not convinced it isn't the point source (and time alignment) that gives UREIs that coherence? I'd like to do a side by side between the 708 and the KEF LS50. I'm sure they'd sound different, but I'd imagine the KEF would be more coherent (focused). Maybe not though.

Again we are using words to describe a psychoacoustic phenomenon and that is tricky at best.

When I think of good imaging I am describing the disappearing act that a speaker can perform when creating a holographic sonic image in a stereo configuration.

Using that definition, I do not know how the UREIs compare to the 708s or LS50s... they will all perform differently and will all be affected by the rooms they are in and the placement within the room, but a well controlled room and fairly narrow dispersion characteristics to reduce secondary reflected sounds go a long way to creating a coherent and stable image.

In my experience the best imaging speakers I have yet heard are the MTM speakers I deployed in my HT. A stereo signal to the left and right speakers is simply startling. https://www.audioheritage.org/vbulle...l=1#post442266

I have heard a lot of speakers in numerous rooms over the years that were really excellent at imaging, but these little buggers are shockingly good at creating a holographic image. Perviously one of the best imaging systems I had heard was a DIY tractrix horn system in an extremely dead (almost fully anechoic) dedicated listening room.


Widget

[rusty jefferson]

Again we are using words to describe a psychoacoustic phenomenon and that is tricky at best.

When I think of good imaging I am describing the disappearing act that a speaker can perform when creating a holographic sonic image in a stereo configuration....
Widget

Okay, we are using slightly different definitions of imaging. With these older speakers I refer to the image as what's captured between the 2 stereo loudspeakers. Your description of the disappearing act I would refer to as transparency, and then depending on where the image is, ideally behind and beyond the width of the speakers, soundstaging. UREIs and Altec 604s don't disappear. There will always be information audible from the loudspeakers themselves. They are not transparent for the reasons you've outlined, but they still image really well, listened to on axis. In my experience, speakers that have low diffraction cabinets, wide and matched dispersion at crossover in well treated rooms, have the best transparency and soundstage characteristics.

...In my experience the best imaging speakers I have yet heard are the MTM speakers I deployed in my HT. A stereo signal to the left and right speakers is simply startling. https://www.audioheritage.org/vbulle...l=1#post442266...
Widget

I remember those speakers. Come on, they're modern UREIs! :-D I'm sure they image beautifully. Here's my quote from that thread.

Barry, I just looked at the data sheet and it appears (but doesn't say) that the crossover point to the horn is pretty low, perhaps as low as 600hz. Down to 1khz even, diffraction isn't going to be an issue. Those 2 woofers are acting as one, and with the horn are acting as a concentric point source like the Altec 604 or UREI 801. There will be a little rippling of interference from the horn but it's low enough in frequency not to be a big deal. The drivers also appear to be physically time aligned and the advantages of that can't understated. If it was an MTM design that crossed over at a more typical 2khz-3khz range, the interference would be problematic.