Joshua, the trouble is the whole system has to be balanced from the phonocartridge through to the sound in the reproduction location. There are good components out there that will never be allowed to give of their best (or worst). A trebly peaky interconnect may just balance up right, in another system. When you add the listeners ears it becomes so personal. I like it the wife says whats happened to the sound.
The other day guy I know from a local church said can I build him some speakers. He had some Harlech speakers I never heard run from some unnamed amp and SACD. He remarked about the peculiar sense of 3D depth to the sound instead of the flat stereo he knew and liked. He decided to stay with his old setup. Another guy marvelled at the DHT. He really loved valves, it seemed any valves, keen on old Marshall guitar amps. He recoiled at solid state class A. My wife said to me, the sound was like the violins in the room. You have probably been here yourself.
There are far more variables in this game than you could imagine. You can tweek things as we all do, and you have to. Sometimes, just retightening the speaker terminals works by cleaning the contacting areas on the plugs/sockets
There is whole bunch of things that may have improved that phono comparison of yours. But it often means hours or days of patient adjustments and changes.
Last edited:
Trouble is, 'good' recordings can make it "too easy",
. 'Poor' recordings test the mettle of the system more, a couple of goodies I use are Odetta at Carnegie Hall, there's a quality in her voice which if not 'perfectly' rendered makes her sound like a caricature; and a collection of Rosemary Clooney radio recordings, with solid orchestral backing - the quality of the recording means that the big brass crescendos can be hard work for some systems to sort out ...
Basically we agree.
The said phono stage sounded so thin (on my system, not on his) that I wouldn't try any tweaks upon it.
I know my system and I know what can be improved and what doesn't worth the trouble.
After the third, fourth, or fifth try, I give up and tell them what I really think. And don't get invited back.
LOL.
Just give them the modified military line of:
"..don't ask: won't tell."
Well gosh, this is a DIY forum ... it's part of the name! So where you gonna hear a DIY project that only exists in a few parts of the world?
There aren't going to be any reviews in Stereophile, Absolute Sound, or Six Moons, nor are any of these projects going to be shown at the RMAF ($3500 exhibition cost) or the CES ($25,000 exhibition cost). You won't hear DIY projects at a hifi dealer, either.
The last thing any dealer wants is competition from cheapskate builders with an attitude about the expensive products that they sell at a 40% to 50% profit margin. We are not the same demographic as the customer base that buys high-end audio.
The only way you can hear any diyAudio project is wangle an invitation from somebody that's built one ... and then it's part of their system, aimed at their tastes. You want to hear DIY, make nice with the forum members.
P.S. Not that I follow my own advice. I've had several remarkably uncomfortable encounters at dealers and manufacturers when they kept pressing, over and over, for my real opinion, not the evasive BS that I pawn off on people that I like in the industry. After the third, fourth, or fifth try, I give up and tell them what I really think. And don't get invited back.
??????
i must have misread the post. if i offended you, please forgive.
but i NEVER assume that because someone else might like a particular sound that i will likewise. i don't like horn speakers, but the jbl CV theater speakers i have do sound good outside, although a bit bass thin without some type of acoustic shell to direct the bass frequencies. inside, no not unless in a really large auditorium.
of course it is a 'systemic approach'. everything really is.
this was noted by a german engineer in the 1940's who developed a comprehensive set of parameters for establishing just this (before the thiele/small work). i found the papers in the JAES, i believe it was, while having some personal 'fun' in the library. don't recall his name.
Hi Joshua,
The real problem is do you need anything else but a big sono to listen to Mahler and Pavarotti ?
Maybe For Gihgli or Björling with Verdi, a better system is needed !
joke, it's late !
I'm pleased to see that you are having good time. Humor is very good to health, highly recommended.
And the listening room, including the voicing and the acoustic treatment, or lack off, is an inseparable part of the sound system.
Unlike, it seems, most people I don't find that a consideration - I concentrate on having the sound at the point when it emerges from the speaker drivers as pristine as possible - and I find this takes care of room issues, if there are any. Yes, it is extremely difficult, takes great fussiness, to do everything which is necessary for that cleanness of sound to be achieved - however, the benefits are so dramatically positive that I could never use any other approach once I understood what was possible ...
The source of our demise
Well, I have a bachelor in biomedicine, and I am completing another bachelor in bioengineering this spring. It is important to have respect for carcinogens, period.
Advances in Identifying Beryllium Sensitization and Disease
"The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Permissible Exposure Limit for beryllium in air is 2.0 micrograms per cubic meter averaged over an eight-hour work day. This exposure limit is widely recognized as failing to protect exposed workers from sensitization and chronic beryllium disease [12]. "
Okay, lets consider my own beryllium situation:
My listening room iS about 60 m^3. I would need 120 micrograms of beryllium free in the air before I am officially putting myself at risk according to poorly set limits for factory workers in the US. I wonder how many micrograms is released in the air by a material that is vibrating in 20kHz under great strain, in a very confined space where the listener probably spends most of their days. Truextent diaphragms are around 25-50 micrometers in thickness, and I am not sure about their weight. The diaphragms seem very fragile, and everything will probably not stay on diaphragm during its lifetime.
The Yamaha JA6681B's suspension fingers uses what you would call "safety beryllium", as it looks more like copper containing traces of beryllium.
Nothing can be said conclusive, unless a beryllium dust collecting hifi enthusiast is willing to donate a blood sample to check for beryllium levels.
Well, I have a bachelor in biomedicine, and I am completing another bachelor in bioengineering this spring. It is important to have respect for carcinogens, period.
Advances in Identifying Beryllium Sensitization and Disease
"The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Permissible Exposure Limit for beryllium in air is 2.0 micrograms per cubic meter averaged over an eight-hour work day. This exposure limit is widely recognized as failing to protect exposed workers from sensitization and chronic beryllium disease [12]. "
Okay, lets consider my own beryllium situation:
My listening room iS about 60 m^3. I would need 120 micrograms of beryllium free in the air before I am officially putting myself at risk according to poorly set limits for factory workers in the US. I wonder how many micrograms is released in the air by a material that is vibrating in 20kHz under great strain, in a very confined space where the listener probably spends most of their days. Truextent diaphragms are around 25-50 micrometers in thickness, and I am not sure about their weight. The diaphragms seem very fragile, and everything will probably not stay on diaphragm during its lifetime.
The Yamaha JA6681B's suspension fingers uses what you would call "safety beryllium", as it looks more like copper containing traces of beryllium.
Nothing can be said conclusive, unless a beryllium dust collecting hifi enthusiast is willing to donate a blood sample to check for beryllium levels.
As an example, I was thinking my 'miserable' PC setup was in reasonable shape from warm-up, so I tried the Clooney CD, having just mentioned it. No ... not good enough yet - the voice, and backing had a scratchy edge to it, a still more thorough tweaking will be necessary to bring this one into the fold ...
Rewind,
I agree with you I would not want to be in a manufacturing environment where beryllium is being processed. That being the case I am not convinced that a Be foil will lose any atoms just from playing music. The foil is a consolidation unlike the vapor deposited Be which is a very loosely formed structure with no real consolidation except for a fairly weak bond between atoms. The foils are not nearly as brittle as you may think, they are closer to an aluminum type film than they are to what is almost a consolidation as in a powdered metal composite material in the TAD case.
The beryllium you mentioned is a beryllium copper alloy with more than 90% copper most of the time. That material has its place in electrical connectors and such but is just a marketing pitch when it is used in an audio speaker application. Brush Wellman even has an alloy that they call Albamet. It is mostly aluminum with some Be added and they do not recommend it for audio applications, but some of their customers use it just to use the term Be in the description.
My idea for a safety Be would entail a thin plastic coating that would hold the Be particles together if there ever was a failure.
I have had my exposure to way to many industrial chemicals and composite materials. The one that caught me early was an employer who was using asbestos as a filler in a composite part and not telling anyone about that use. I also wonder about the carbon fiber that I have been exposed to, I don't think the weighted/time averaged exposure limits are worth much except for extreme conditions, to me at least it seems that the cumulative exposure is all that really matters.
I agree with you I would not want to be in a manufacturing environment where beryllium is being processed. That being the case I am not convinced that a Be foil will lose any atoms just from playing music. The foil is a consolidation unlike the vapor deposited Be which is a very loosely formed structure with no real consolidation except for a fairly weak bond between atoms. The foils are not nearly as brittle as you may think, they are closer to an aluminum type film than they are to what is almost a consolidation as in a powdered metal composite material in the TAD case.
The beryllium you mentioned is a beryllium copper alloy with more than 90% copper most of the time. That material has its place in electrical connectors and such but is just a marketing pitch when it is used in an audio speaker application. Brush Wellman even has an alloy that they call Albamet. It is mostly aluminum with some Be added and they do not recommend it for audio applications, but some of their customers use it just to use the term Be in the description.
My idea for a safety Be would entail a thin plastic coating that would hold the Be particles together if there ever was a failure.
I have had my exposure to way to many industrial chemicals and composite materials. The one that caught me early was an employer who was using asbestos as a filler in a composite part and not telling anyone about that use. I also wonder about the carbon fiber that I have been exposed to, I don't think the weighted/time averaged exposure limits are worth much except for extreme conditions, to me at least it seems that the cumulative exposure is all that really matters.
i guess i missed the 'updated' statement. basically it is true, if the engineers make little effort to produce a quality product.
on the other hand, if they do, your statement is incorrect. so, more often than not, you will be correct, which is no big deal since many live concerts offer poor acoustics.
have you ever recorded live music?
Hello Rewind
You obviously have no first hand experience with the Be foils used to make the diaphrams. They are very robust and cannot be easilly damaged by any normal handling, such as changing a diaphram. They will not shatter like the original Tad diaphrams.
I am not trying to down play Be toxicity just that if you use common sense and do not try to grind them or put your bare fingers on the Be the risk of exposure is low. With any luck you never even have to even open up a driver.
Be more worried about second hand smoke.
Rob
My statement relates to the present state of affairs, not to a hypothetical future one.
Yes, I have, both classical and rock.
