More a case of experience usually counts for more than perfect hearing. My friend Ed (Vitalstates) = a good example. I'm younger, so my HF hearing is notionally better, but as a musician and engineer etc., he can easily identify things, positive and negative, in a mix or piece of music that would never even consiously occur to me. That's not to denigrate good hearing of course -looking after your ears is vital, and I thank my lucky stars mine is still so good.
I'm younger, so my HF hearing is notionally better,
I am envious, but after years in industry (and age)my hearing in HF is very reduced. I was sitting in my lab the other day and hooked up the signal generator, i could only hear to 10.7 Khz.
As you get older the eardrums get hard (along with the arteries and lesser with other body parts) and just quit flexing with HF signals.
If i start stating that a B20 sounds great on the high end , then yall please disregard my input.
ron
I am envious, but after years in industry (and age)my hearing in HF is very reduced. I was sitting in my lab the other day and hooked up the signal generator, i could only hear to 10.7 Khz.
As you get older the eardrums get hard (along with the arteries and lesser with other body parts) and just quit flexing with HF signals.
If i start stating that a B20 sounds great on the high end , then yall please disregard my input.
ron
Scottmoose said:
Experience Does help a great deal. As I stated, I can easily differentiate many things within the music material that many with great hearing would not. The subtle things, with training as Dave states, are trainable. but that does not help the ability to hear details that only accumulated cilia within the inner ear are able to highlight through their vibration.
Over time, and because of trauma, the total number of cilia wither and die. And there are many different sizes, lengths and thickness. Naturally the most fragile are the ones that transmit the highest frequencies. The purpose of a digital hearing aide is to highlight those remaining cilia that are still alive and functioning.
Replacing them at this time is impossible, but there is future hope through gene manipulation.
Dave,
I bought the base MacBook for myself as a birthday present to replace my aging 1Ghz iMac (17 inch widescreen G4 "lamp" style). Before you go and buy a macbook pro, consider the base macbook. I paid less than 1K for the macbook on the day after thanksgiving, then bought 4GB of third party memory and a 7200 rpm 200GB hard drive, installing them myself. Add a system builders version of XP for less than a hundred bucks and you have a dual booting system that SCREAMS for less than a grand and a half.
lousymusician said:
Maybe a bit of confusion caused by my use of the term compressed... perhaps i should say lossy instead... i consider Flac and Apple Lossless etc as non-compressed. Probably from the familiarity with Meridian Lossless packing.
Apple Lossless certainlt stores tags... most of the time it fetches the most important ones from the GraceNote database.
dave
BHD said:
You can be sure a MacBook was considered. My wife has one. Working part time at a Mac store (i have customers that will never let me quit) i get a chance to try them all.
I do a lot of CAD and graphics & the laptop needs to drive a 24" monitor... one session with a MacBook, a 24" and SketchUp was all i needed to know i needed to get the MacBook Pro with its dedicated graphics card and RAM. Besides the lighted keyboard will save a ton of miles on the hinges.
I already have a copy of XP that has been gifted on me... just need to pay for Parallels.
My current dual 867 G4 will get a home as a work terminal downstairs (5 years old and lots of life in it yet -- the longevity of a Mac making them WAY cheaper than a Windows PC)
dave
Fast1one said:Funny signature
**Regarding the BSC: I'm beginning to think that a BSC circuit is not something I want, instead I want to add a supra baffle, which I considered from the beginning. I don't have a lathe, so a truncated pyramid is the next best option...
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
With an 8 inch driver, what would you guys recommend for size? I was thinking around 20+ inches in width, as the total width of the baffle pictured appears to be 6-8 inches larger than the driver itself from the edge of the speaker to the edge of the baffle ...
I can whip up a baffle fairly quickly, much more convenient for me personally...Its pretty big, but I can live with it
The edge detail on the walnut round supra-baffles was actually done (very slowly) with a hand-held 3HP router and handrail profile bit . As the driver rebate was already CNC machined, the workpiece was screwed through the driver mounting holes to a second disc and the workbench.
All told, even with the final hand sanding, it took less time than gluing up, sanding and veneering of the truncated pyramid SB's, and on the right box, I think it looks far more elegant.
Fast1one said:Ok, one more time
Since y'all hijacked my thread, it would be nice if I can get a straight answer for the above
Assuming you're bi-amping, yes, but then you're better off adding the BSC between the preamp and woofer power amp. Ditto the tweeter's shelving ckt. if the amp doesn't have gain controls. If single amp passive, then parallel the tweeter's XO at the inputs.
GM
Fast1one said:
May have, I've been ~delirious with a painful infection/fever for a number of days and it finally apparently 'broke' in the wee hours, so haven't been following threads per se recently, only responding by rote to a few posts that 'caught my eye' to distract me and don't have time/energy to catch up on all the details I may have missed.
Anyway, I assume that the tweeter has at least a 1st order XO (by-pass cap) not shown to protect it, but again, for a parallel XO, this 'system' should be wired ahead of the BSC (with no HF by-pass cap) if you want max tuning flexibility, otherwise wire it in parallel with the woofer at the speaker terminals and put the BSC filter (with by-pass cap) in series with the amp/speaker. In either case you'll use either an adjustable or fixed L-pad after the tweeter's XO to shelve it down (attenuate) as required.
Anyway, isn't all this 'spelled out' in plenty of detail in MJK's various tutorials on the subject?
GM
No worries! I understand you don't have the time to be following all these threadsGM said:
Anyway, yes the tweeter currently has a cap. I have read MJKs articles as well as the articles over at t-line speakers and AFAIK there is nothing mentioned about a parallel tweeter...
So as far as I understand it it is about the same as my crude drawing, except the cap will be up where the tweeter is, both speakers paralleled at the terminals, and an L-pad after the cap and before the tweeter to attenuate it to match the BSC circuit on the woofer...
------------CAP----LPAD----------Tweeter +
--------------------------------------Tweeter -
Paralleled
-----------------------BSC----------Woofer+
--------------------------------------Woofer-
I am sorry for the lack of understanding lately lol, I guess having no school has affected my thought process, need to sharpen up my brain before I get back
Regards,
Sergio
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.