Build the same reference's loudspeaker to listen our GC

[carlosfm]

Stuffing - None.

cabinet - MDF - available everywhere, cheap.

No crossover.

In my experience people try the different materials because of an urge to 'better' the speaker (mdf poor, particle board, better, ply better yet and so on), likewise with the stuffing - and nailing those details, as well as the box shape and external alignment ( affects baffle step point), would give a recipe for a 'known' speaker. If the user wants to build a second set with better box, fancy veneer, a wad of stuffing and so on, they they are free to do so, but it would no longer tie to the original recipe, and should not be used for comparisons...

That again was one of the basics behind the LS3/5... the box design was explicitly stipulated in the license, and for it to be a BBC licensed product, it had to follow those details exactly! If we were to persue this route for a 'mini-reference', this would have to be accepted and understood by the builders.

As always, it's a little controversial, but a project like this will have to be compromised - we just have to ensure that the compromises are the same...

Owen

I see the point, Owen, and it seems reasonable.
Although IMO a good 2-way is (for me) much prefered to a single driver.
I like the speed, dispersion and linearity of a good dome tweeter, something that a fullrange driver can't give.
But that's my personal view, and you will find others too.

Anyway, don't think that you can guarantee a 'universal' speaker that pleases most people.
We are only discussing the end of the chain (power amp and speakers), while everything behind that (pre and source) is very, very important.
Suppose you propose a very well balanced and neutral sounding speaker. The same for the amp.
Someone will go and build it and report bad results, because he/she uses a bad or unnapropriate pre, or he/she uses a cheap 40$ DVD player as a source, and can't bear the sound of the system playing music.
The problem is, without a reference source (and pre) you may improve the rest of the chain and end up with poor sonic results.
Trash in, trash out, or something is not right.
Jan has just scratched this matter, you need a reference source too.
No, you need a reference system where to test the amp(s).
You can not say for sure that the amp has loose bass if the CDP isn't up to the task. The same for the pre.
This is never ending story, unfortunately.
Someone can always say 'Mmmm... loose bass? Put a decent clock on you CDP and listen again'.
'Mmmm... lack of dynamics? Don't tell me. Do you still have those nasty op-amps on the analog stage of your CDP?'.

Etc., etc., etc.

 

[Jay]

Experienced people will know the situation only from a little or biased
information. The more the information, the better they can make conclusions.
That's why it is important to know the whole setup when a reviewer start
to review performances. If you specifify "I use an SRPP pre-amp to drive
the Gainclone" for example, many will get a clue.

The problem is for newbies, where they cannot interpret reviews the way
experienced people do. But I think it is sufficient to know that many
experienced builders still like to use Gainclone. And that they can justify
the use of cheap amp (Gainclone) with other expensive audio stuffs.

Though may be the enjoyment with Gainclone comes mostly from other stuffs
in the audio chain (eg. Carlos' Epos loudspeaker), it is quite surprising
that many gainclone builders satisfied with their amps.

To be honest, when I first built 3886 amp, tho I decided not to use it,
the result was beyond my expectation. It sounded like $$$ solid state amps.
I used single suplly similar to the application example in the pdf. Point
to-point with as short as possible connection.

But my guess is, someone should use "tested" pre-amp (maybe an op-amp!) to
get the benefit others have got with this amp. I have a feeling that
pre-amp is a determining factor here. So my suggestion (to new builders)
is to follow Carlos path in choosing the pre-amp (I used my best sounding
op-amp pre when I tested the Gainclone for the first time. The regulator
uses op-amp LF356H and Black Gates, mostly BGN. The op-amp is OP70? I
don't remember but it outperformed my other hi-en op-amps in that circuit)

My first impression was:
1. Enjoyable bass authority. Very solid-state. very op-amp (I did use opamps)
2. Rather flat soundstage.

 

[JZatopa]

"Same source, same interconnects, same speaker cables and same speakers. Same listieng room characteristics, size, shape, furnishings, temperature and humidity. Same electricity supply."

I have to disagree with you. If these speakers are used in nearfield the room characteristics, size, shape, furnishings, temperature and humidity play a very minor role. The most I would buy as a realistic problem would be room bass nodes. Though source, ICs, and speaker cables may make a difference but they are small when compared to the amp and speaker. If you want to may things even more "standard" then you could say everyone has to use cat 5 for their speaker wires, internal speaker wires and even IC's if you want to be anal about it.

"the speaker should be of such quality that it can render even the most minute vanishingly small differences"

This isn't exactly true. The speaker should be able to show differences but the point of the speaker is so a group of builders can discuss what changes in the amps make a difference. I don't think it is that important to worrie about differences you can only hear on ultra high end speakers...yet.

CarlosFM you are right that if someone is using substandard gear they may have a problem but most people who are building this amp are not using $40 dvd players to test their DIY projects.

I think that a simple single driver speaker using MDF and cat 5 for speaker wire would be perfect. That TB is a good option but I think we need something w/o componants besides the driver. We want a simple cheap to make speaker that you could possibly build anywhere in the world.

 

[carlosfm]

Though source, ICs, and speaker cables may make a difference but they are small when compared to the amp and speaker. If you want to may things even more "standard" then you could say everyone has to use cat 5 for their speaker wires, internal speaker wires and even IC's if you want to be anal about it.

The source make a small difference, compared to the amp and speakers?
I assure you it can make a huge difference, on par with the amp/speakers.

CarlosFM you are right that if someone is using substandard gear they may have a problem but most people who are building this amp are not using $40 dvd players to test their DIY projects.

I've been following this forum for some years and I can tell you there are lots of people out there (and they say so) that use really cheap dvd players as a source.
Not that there's a problem with that, but this kind of source will have a large impact (degradation) on the sound of the whole system.
Evaluating an amp in this case will be useless, because the better the amp, the worse it will sound. It will unveil all the nastiness.

 

[Nuuk]

OK, well if I go with the other side of this debate, how about using something like the JBL Control Ones? I think these are widely available, don't cost too much, and sound pretty good for the money!

 

[jan.didden]

[B[snip]"the speaker should be of such quality that it can render even the most minute vanishingly small differences"

This isn't exactly true. The speaker should be able to show differences but the point of the speaker is so a group of builders can discuss what changes in the amps make a difference. I don't think it is that important to worrie about differences you can only hear on ultra high end speakers...yet.
[snip][/B]

I don't follow you. Why should speakers only allow showing differences 'to a point'? The purpose is to compare amps, and those amp differences normally are smaller than speaker differences, unless you have a REALLY bad amp. So if you are serious, the speaker should be the best you can get to be sure that you catch ALL amp differences, if they are there.

Jan Didden

 

[thomgun_lc]

Hi there!!!
I agree with janneman's idea (using headphone). It is impossible to use the same reference to listen our gainclone and give our gc some objective rating
i know if an audio have a chain. But at least, we have the same final reference that is loudspeaker. We can using headphone or open baffle fullrange.
Many people here especially newbies get a same psycological effect to give a rating in their gainclone.
If u have an expensive amp but ur loudspeaker very cheap, i'm sure your amp's sound become worse,do you agree with me?
I classified an audio chain become 3:
SOurce----->Gainclone Amp----->Loudspeaker.
(forget about listening room,other accessories,loudspeaker cable etc)
If we have the same Gainclone and Loudspeaker we have 2/3's part of the audio's chain


regards
---------
TomZ

 

[carlosfm]

If u have an expensive amp but ur loudspeaker very cheap, i'm sure your amp's sound become worse...

The reverse is also true.
If we want to be precise, it's not the amp that will sound worse, it's your entire system.
The same happens when you change the source for a much inferior one, everything falls apart.

 

[Jay]

Now the problem is, should we go with the reference speaker, or just
go with a reference power cord and cotton bud?

IMO, speaker and source is the most critical.

With amps, it is often about suitable or not suitable, matched or
not matched with the other stuffs in the audio chain (pre or speaker).
For example, there are expensive amps that sound bad with certain
expensive pre, but sound a lot better with certain pre. There is also
amp that cannot drive certain speaker.

With amps, it is often the amp is required to construct the music,
to color the music, to enhance the music. Less often is it is there
simply to pass the music, doesn't improve or degrade the music, only
do the unimportant simple job, which is to amplify the analog signal.

With source, it is required to go to certain higher level of audio
hi-fi. GIGO, Garbage in garbage out, what the source can produce is
the maximum you can get from upgrading the rest of the audio chain.
No matter how expensive your amp and speaker, $300 CDP will never
sound like $10000 CDP. What you can expect from source is high level
details and soundstage, and a sense of analog in digital equipment.

With amps, it is even more critical, especially with passive x-over.
Inferior speaker can be fixed with help of a suitable amp or other
stuff in the audio chain, but wrongly designed speaker cannot be
fixed.

Remember the old days when we were listening to cheap battery radio
or boom-box, we were able to enjoy the music. That's because the
speaker has no passive crossover. You don't need expensive stuffs
with outstanding image to enjoy the music. But badly designed
speaker, at best it can produce "undistorted" (or smooth to be
precise) sound, but the music goes unnoticed.

Most of us have above $1000 audio system I believe. But how many
of us experience the strong needs to listen to our system? We choose
going to work late because we cannot shut the music off. We can stay
awake all night simply because we love to hear the music. From my
experience, this is all speaker related, not amp or source.

 

[jan.didden]

[snip]Remember the old days when we were listening to cheap battery radio or boom-box, we were able to enjoy the music. That's because the speaker has no passive crossover. [snip]

No. It is because we were listening to the MUSIC.

Jan Didden

 

[carlosfm]

Remember the old days when we were listening to cheap battery radio or boom-box, we were able to enjoy the music.

I was born in the end of the 60's and since a kid I always remember having two hi-fi systems, on two rooms.
But I know what you mean, even some of those old valve FM tuners could sound very good.
My father once made a pair of 2-way speakers with drivers scavenged from one of those tuners. And those drivers were very good!

That's because the speaker has no passive crossover.

I don't agree with this.
I don't agree with the common alergic reaction for passive crossovers, when they can be made as simple as a cap on the tweeter. With the right drivers.

No. It is because we were listening to the MUSIC.

Jan Didden

Aha!

 

[Jay]

I was born in the end of the 60's and since a kid I always remember having two hi-fi systems, on two rooms.
But I know what you mean, even some of those old valve FM tuners could sound very good.
My father once made a pair of 2-way speakers with drivers scavenged from one of those tuners. And those drivers were very good!

.....

I don't agree with this.
I don't agree with the common alergic reaction for passive crossovers, when they can be made as simple as a cap on the tweeter. With the right drivers.

That's not an alergic reaction for passive crossovers. I haven't used active actually. If you can make simple cap on tweeter with the right driver, you won't have the common passive crossover problem. But it will cost me at least $1500 of commercial speaker. I haven't heard Jordan, but some Fostex designs are not up for the task. Doesn't mean that cheaper driver are worse than those.

I prefer to go with hard-to-execute task than choosing a simple task with clear limitation. This means that I prefer 3-way parallel crossover than 2-way series or one cap on tweeter approach. Also means that I prefer mosfet to bipolar (and tube to certain degree). Also means that I prefer oversampling than non-os.

I don't know if you have ever experienced frustration with audio DIY. Building expensive stuffs but cannot enjoy what you know you should enjoy.

No. It is because we were listening to the MUSIC.

Do you mean that now we are trying to listen to the cymbals, triangle, or trying to locate the obo? Or worse, now we're trying to listen to depth, soundstage, etc? No! That's not me at least. I don't care if the music doesn't sound as it should be as long as it sounds good to my ears.

The problem is we cannot find MUSIC in every system. Sometimes we go tired with the sound (due to cone breakups for example). Sometimes it is just like no music at all (due to phase problem in crossover maybe, or lack of dynamics).

Wide soundstage and flat soundstage is easy to differentiate by ears. But the exact correlation with listening enjoyment is not clear. OTOH, correct crossover and wrong crossover is difficult to differentiate. Sometimes the wrong one seems to be the better one. That's why I always use enjoyment as a measure.

 

[carlosfm]

That's not an alergic reaction for passive crossovers. I haven't used active actually. If you can make simple cap on tweeter with the right driver, you won't have the common passive crossover problem. But it will cost me at least $1500 of commercial speaker. I haven't heard Jordan, but some Fostex designs are not up for the task. Doesn't mean that cheaper driver are worse than those.

Actually I was not talking about fullranges.
I have a good example of what I said on my main system. The Epos ES11.
But it uses exceptional drivers, made precisely to work this way.

I prefer to go with hard-to-execute task than choosing a simple task with clear limitation. This means that I prefer 3-way parallel crossover than 2-way series or one cap on tweeter approach. Also means that I prefer mosfet to bipolar (and tube to certain degree). Also means that I prefer oversampling than non-os.

There's a common sense for everything, and planning to make before starting a design.
I prefer to spend my money and time researching, buying and listening to several drivers with a goal in mind: use simple crossovers, they sound SO MUCH better. That goes for active or passive.
I'll give you an example of something I would never do: buying a fancy metal come mid/woofer and then use steep crossovers and notch filters to deal with 10db+ peaks at breakup.