The comment about big woofers may have some merit.
Also I agree with your minimalist approach.
I have always tended to lean out my systems to improve detail. First starting way back with KEF drivers.
Then trying transmission lines and so forth, then biamping from the woofers to mid...all to keep the low midrange clean.
So it would seem that the woofers clouded the midrange in my past 3 way systems.
Anyway, eventually I built a Fried C-3 kit. Had similar problems with warmth and weight.
To me image weight, fullness, etc, relates to the term "warmth". When correct, there is mass and shape and weight to the image, and still clarity.
My tube amp can also cause problems, probably when the interaction with a particular speaker causes the response to peak and dip in the low range, and cause the same problem of masking.
Eventually I built 21w54 woofer boxes and bi-amped with tube on top and and mosfet for the woofers.
I mention this as maybe something like the 21w54 size, with just a little more low end reach, yet close enough to
the 1.3 woofer to have a similar sound character for good blend - not a subwoofer, but small woofer.
Used then in a stereo pair, bi-amped in with just a passive cap on the HP and a very adjustable (Pass) electronic on
the LP would let you play with fill and warmth and Q and slope adjustments, only for the LP, to fill in yet not change the
overall sound character of the 1.3's you like.
I looked at the Stereophile measurements and the 1.3 shows a small bump centered about 90 and a small dip in the 300 region.
And you mentioned a single cap in the signal path so maybe the value of it could be tweeked to slightly roll of the HP and flatten the small bump.
So then maybe the bi-amp woofer could fill in, allowing fuller sound without the 90Hz bump to mask detail. Sort of like EQ for the bottom end without
any actual EQ box and minimal signal altering of the feed to the 1.3's. Lots of maybe's here.
Also I agree with your minimalist approach.
I have always tended to lean out my systems to improve detail. First starting way back with KEF drivers.
Then trying transmission lines and so forth, then biamping from the woofers to mid...all to keep the low midrange clean.
So it would seem that the woofers clouded the midrange in my past 3 way systems.
Anyway, eventually I built a Fried C-3 kit. Had similar problems with warmth and weight.
To me image weight, fullness, etc, relates to the term "warmth". When correct, there is mass and shape and weight to the image, and still clarity.
My tube amp can also cause problems, probably when the interaction with a particular speaker causes the response to peak and dip in the low range, and cause the same problem of masking.
Eventually I built 21w54 woofer boxes and bi-amped with tube on top and and mosfet for the woofers.
I mention this as maybe something like the 21w54 size, with just a little more low end reach, yet close enough to
the 1.3 woofer to have a similar sound character for good blend - not a subwoofer, but small woofer.
Used then in a stereo pair, bi-amped in with just a passive cap on the HP and a very adjustable (Pass) electronic on
the LP would let you play with fill and warmth and Q and slope adjustments, only for the LP, to fill in yet not change the
overall sound character of the 1.3's you like.
I looked at the Stereophile measurements and the 1.3 shows a small bump centered about 90 and a small dip in the 300 region.
And you mentioned a single cap in the signal path so maybe the value of it could be tweeked to slightly roll of the HP and flatten the small bump.
So then maybe the bi-amp woofer could fill in, allowing fuller sound without the 90Hz bump to mask detail. Sort of like EQ for the bottom end without
any actual EQ box and minimal signal altering of the feed to the 1.3's. Lots of maybe's here.
Yes, this sounds very familar, this is a step on the way to getting what I call the "good stuff" -- thoroughly convincing sound. When you've got the system to the point where the slightest fiddling alters the sound, then this is where the efforts to trouble shoot the last problem areas have to be redoubled. It may be a hard, frustrating road at times, but the end results are worth it ...
OK, to me from that description it sounds like you're having digital playback problems: something is causing enough disturbance to the electronics in that area to give you those type of symptoms: poor rendition of the harmonics and the decay of, say, a single note -- the sound of such should decay completely smoothly into the "blackness" of the acoustic.
If you're interested, I would be happy to go through a bit of Q and A to try and track this down a bit more ...
Frank
In my experience, detail and warmth can't be had - they're polar opposites. That's if by 'detail' you mean a lift in the 2k-8k region. That's a mild form of sibilance - IMD in other words. 'Warmth' OTOH is what you get when there's very little or no IMD.
Not everyone has this meaning for 'detail' though - some use it to mean lower noise floor so they can hear more lower level aspects of the recording - like the pages turning on the music stand. This form of 'detail' can most certainly co-exist with warmth.
Not everyone has this meaning for 'detail' though - some use it to mean lower noise floor so they can hear more lower level aspects of the recording - like the pages turning on the music stand. This form of 'detail' can most certainly co-exist with warmth.
Frank, I would be pleased to go thru some Q&A with you. Sent email. Good morning by the way or is it G'day.....
Concerning the change in the value of the single coupling cap in the amps, I was thinking that lowering or raising the value would effect the low freq roll off point, not the high freq roll off. The speaker particulars is one area I have never delved into. Not sure what you had in mind. Again, my understanding is that this model speaker was quite respected for it's accuracy and midrange transparency. Giving a warm electronic signal, it would produce just that and giving a harsh signal etc..
Concerning the change in the value of the single coupling cap in the amps, I was thinking that lowering or raising the value would effect the low freq roll off point, not the high freq roll off. The speaker particulars is one area I have never delved into. Not sure what you had in mind. Again, my understanding is that this model speaker was quite respected for it's accuracy and midrange transparency. Giving a warm electronic signal, it would produce just that and giving a harsh signal etc..
abraxalito, I was afraid someone would say that. Can't have it both ways. IMD may be a problem, but all aspects of the sound are so clear and crisp, it seems that that would be a minor issue at best, not sure. Something like digities on a less than good recording or cd player, but to a lesser degree. I have many "class" recorded cds and have played them on many players, bad to very good. You can tell the difference in digities, and my player has all but eliminated that issue.
IMD arises from opamps IME - especially in conjunction with digital stuff because that's putting out RF which opamps hate with a vengeance. I got a substantial lowering of my noise floor when I put a passive filter behind the I/V resistor of my NOS DAC. Only then did I learn first-hand what 'warmth' really means - it has led to a substantial improvement of tonality, especially on piano sustained notes.
if the cap portion is directed at me...
yes, the cap would effect the low roll off. but in my above comments it would be the HP portion of a 2 way electronic crossover, the LP feeding the new yet to be tried woofers.
As far as accuracy and warmth and such - if it is assumed that speakers have a major contribution to the final sound, then even small frequency changes may have far more impact on weight and detail than anything feeding them. CD players are flat, response wise, many times more so than speakers, and the same can be said of the tube amp excluding any interaction on the bottom end.
Please do not take offense from my comments. They are well respected and Dynaudio drivers are superb. I have some
. Even so, 6 1/2 is a smallish driver for making bass, and tuning for a small box sometimes causes some uneven response.
Is it possible those bumps, subtle as they are, are what you are hearing, or not hearing.
yes, the cap would effect the low roll off. but in my above comments it would be the HP portion of a 2 way electronic crossover, the LP feeding the new yet to be tried woofers.
As far as accuracy and warmth and such - if it is assumed that speakers have a major contribution to the final sound, then even small frequency changes may have far more impact on weight and detail than anything feeding them. CD players are flat, response wise, many times more so than speakers, and the same can be said of the tube amp excluding any interaction on the bottom end.
Please do not take offense from my comments. They are well respected and Dynaudio drivers are superb. I have some
. Even so, 6 1/2 is a smallish driver for making bass, and tuning for a small box sometimes causes some uneven response. Is it possible those bumps, subtle as they are, are what you are hearing, or not hearing.
Some people will be offended by this, but my experience is that the cleaner a system is, that is, the less low level audible distortion it has - what many people, like abraxalito, call the noise floor - the less important subjectively the FR is. In fact, on a super clean system it can have huge peaks and valleys, and they will not register in a meaningful way when listening ...
Frank
Frank
DaveG, please no offense was taken at all. I do appreciate all input. Didn't read into what you were referring to, that is crossover components. Dyna used Solens in their filtering, by some accounts impart an edge on the sound. What I read into what you say is that small deviation in a speaker response, will have a bigger impact than the same deviation in the signal. Right? With minimal systems, ever thing has an impact. I have what I consider very good bass response above 35hz in the "tuned" small room. I am just not up on speaker characteristics. Not sure about the comment concerning 90 and 300hz variations affecting the warmth of a speaker in the mids. Maybe it is like you said, weight and fullness missing from the system presentation.
abraxalito, I have no doubt about the filtering after a NOS dac system. I worked with several TDA1541 players using both NOS and the SAA7220 filtered outputs. Lots of noise on both of them. I have gone to PCM1704/filtered outputs which I consider much quieter in the processing of digital signals and the sound that comes with much less work. I just didn't get the warmth I wanted. I agree with the hash going thru opamps. I even used passive I/V with tube outputs with those units. Didn't get where I wanted to go.
fas42, I don't think my system has huge peak and valleys. We are learning what is important to us and our wants in a system. Not looking of a measurable or technically perfect system. Never existed. Just want a little more warmth without sacrificing detail and spacial quality.
abraxalito, I have no doubt about the filtering after a NOS dac system. I worked with several TDA1541 players using both NOS and the SAA7220 filtered outputs. Lots of noise on both of them. I have gone to PCM1704/filtered outputs which I consider much quieter in the processing of digital signals and the sound that comes with much less work. I just didn't get the warmth I wanted. I agree with the hash going thru opamps. I even used passive I/V with tube outputs with those units. Didn't get where I wanted to go.
fas42, I don't think my system has huge peak and valleys. We are learning what is important to us and our wants in a system. Not looking of a measurable or technically perfect system. Never existed. Just want a little more warmth without sacrificing detail and spacial quality.
The power supply noise of the SAA7220 is legendary, one of the reasons why people find NOS (with this chip extracted) sounds better in CD players. I've not heard it myself but I reckon that PCM1704 has too much glitching to give real warmth, though this could be improved with steep filtering of the above-audio freq glitch energy. My current DAC is TDA1387 (an array) but it only gives the warmth when there's a steep analog filter after it. I reckon DAC architecture is important - R2R just doesn't cut it, segmented current sources are where its at
Never suggested you did,
... the measurably "perfect" system should never be the goal, but the one that 'sounds' the goods is the one we're after. Would it be fair to say you've heard a system that "had it all", and you're trying to recreate that experience ...?Frank
as mentioned earlier, so much depends on ones interpretation of what "warmth" is.
Once past harsh digital input, amp distortion, speaker distortion and frequency errors - what is left?
So very subtle differences of the same things?
"You can hear the piano hammer strike, but the string soundslike a hard pure tone without harmonics. For the lack of a better word, clinical or hifi...."
To me again, this could indicate not enough upper bass/lower mid energy or possibly some response variation from impedance reaction with the tube amp as mentioned previously. Same thing in the end. Have you the ability to borrow a different amp? Maybe something by PASS. They are tube smooth. Could see if it changes the bass.
The best piano I've ever heard was a small single driver with a back loaded horn and a flea power tube amp. Better than what I am currently listening to. The whole system just seemed to resonate just right. It was the lower registers that caught my attention. Heard a high priced Feastrex that may have done just as good too, but did not have as much time to listen.
Once past harsh digital input, amp distortion, speaker distortion and frequency errors - what is left?
So very subtle differences of the same things?
"You can hear the piano hammer strike, but the string soundslike a hard pure tone without harmonics. For the lack of a better word, clinical or hifi...."
To me again, this could indicate not enough upper bass/lower mid energy or possibly some response variation from impedance reaction with the tube amp as mentioned previously. Same thing in the end. Have you the ability to borrow a different amp? Maybe something by PASS. They are tube smooth. Could see if it changes the bass.
The best piano I've ever heard was a small single driver with a back loaded horn and a flea power tube amp. Better than what I am currently listening to. The whole system just seemed to resonate just right. It was the lower registers that caught my attention. Heard a high priced Feastrex that may have done just as good too, but did not have as much time to listen.
Would it be fair to say you've heard a system that "had it all"
No. I think my system is about as good as I have heard. Now I have only heard a few "audiophile" systems in homes. One, a monster set up with the biggest KEF speaker, Pass amps, and the works. Potentially good, but the set up was poor and about blew me out of the room(speaking of upper bass energy). I do remember the mids being very nice however. Never heard a shop system that sounded great. Mostly setup issues I'd guess. One that had tube system, a (custom house in San Francisco) shop modded cd player and some magnepans sounded nice with acoustic music.
DaveG, you describe what would have been were I was going to go before I got the amps. I think the massiveness seduced me and off I went. Full mullard tubes and all for free. I am a minimalist at heart but I have invested a great deal of time getting almost where I want to go. The intimacy and immediacy of a small system can impress.
No. I think my system is about as good as I have heard. Now I have only heard a few "audiophile" systems in homes. One, a monster set up with the biggest KEF speaker, Pass amps, and the works. Potentially good, but the set up was poor and about blew me out of the room(speaking of upper bass energy). I do remember the mids being very nice however. Never heard a shop system that sounded great. Mostly setup issues I'd guess. One that had tube system, a (custom house in San Francisco) shop modded cd player and some magnepans sounded nice with acoustic music.
DaveG, you describe what would have been were I was going to go before I got the amps. I think the massiveness seduced me and off I went. Full mullard tubes and all for free. I am a minimalist at heart but I have invested a great deal of time getting almost where I want to go. The intimacy and immediacy of a small system can impress.
Yes, a simple system can get it right ... and once you do that there is no real reason why it can't be scaled up to produce any level of sound, in terms of volume, that you want. The key thing is to never ignore the factors that allowed the minimalist setup to get the key things correct ...
Frank
Frank
It seems to me that you haven't known yet the importance of speakers. It is almost always the bottleneck in many systems. No matter how good you think your amp or source is, your Dynaudio is not an audiophile speaker. Just because it is expensive doesn't make it one. You simply cannot achieve what you can achieve with better speaker. Period.
I guess instrumentation amps have different objective than audio amps. I don't know about this, just a guess. But one thing that I'm sure is that the most critical with amplifiers at high class level is the linearity of the distortion with everything.
I don't know what do you mean with SMALL system. A well implemented system with chip amp for example may outperform a discrete system, but if you want a better system, why limit yourself with the chip amp.
My point is... well, I hope you know. Why not just borrow other people speaker or amp and compare side by side. That might open your eyes more than just reading advices.
The most common situation is...
You have heard system A with good x
You have heard system B with good y
You have heard system C with good z
Now you want a system with good x,y,z.
I believe a lot of the warmth/detail balance has to do with the voicing of the speaker and the ability to go low (30Hz).
I don't like speakers that have a completely flat frequency response,
neither does Troels, just take a look at the frequency response of his designs.
This declining frequency response counteracts the additional high frequency reflections that you get from the walls, floor and ceiling.
During development of my speakers I experimented a lot with the voicing(frequency response) until I got a slope that sounded natural and very good in my room, now it sounds very transparent/detailed without being aggressive, warm and detailed at the same time
You too can adjust the voicing of your speakers: add more bass by adding a resistor of 1-2ohm before the mid/highs (very easy to do if the speakers have separate binding posts for bass and mid/highs).
Regards,
Danny
I don't like speakers that have a completely flat frequency response,
neither does Troels, just take a look at the frequency response of his designs.
This declining frequency response counteracts the additional high frequency reflections that you get from the walls, floor and ceiling.
During development of my speakers I experimented a lot with the voicing(frequency response) until I got a slope that sounded natural and very good in my room, now it sounds very transparent/detailed without being aggressive, warm and detailed at the same time
You too can adjust the voicing of your speakers: add more bass by adding a resistor of 1-2ohm before the mid/highs (very easy to do if the speakers have separate binding posts for bass and mid/highs).
Regards,
Danny
I'm making experiments 
in my room
and now I'm playing with the usual junk
so - to break some doubts it's totally non-hifi for too many reasons
So I set a 15", a mid, an Audax PR 17 MO Which is known to be good
then a compression driver with an L-pad to set the openess of the scene
and a 94 dB tweeter to be sure not to miss anything above 10 KHz ( You think ?)
So ( phase and other objectable issues excluded
)
it's also completely open baffle- grill framed with some back absorbers ( fluffy)
And what it lacks is obviously....
but it also depends upon power response, which may be dictated by each speaker's behaviour from transitiong from pistonic driving to radiance coupling... the room is little..
Guess
in my roomand now I'm playing with the usual junk
so - to break some doubts it's totally non-hifi for too many reasons
So I set a 15", a mid, an Audax PR 17 MO Which is known to be good
then a compression driver with an L-pad to set the openess of the scene
and a 94 dB tweeter to be sure not to miss anything above 10 KHz ( You think ?)
So ( phase and other objectable issues excluded
)it's also completely open baffle- grill framed with some back absorbers ( fluffy)
And what it lacks is obviously....
but it also depends upon power response, which may be dictated by each speaker's behaviour from transitiong from pistonic driving to radiance coupling... the room is little..
Guess
Sorry, I thought your original post listed a large turnover of equipment so far, and still not quite there. How do you know it will now only be a resistor or other cost-free option that delivers the perceived lack of warmth? Could it be, as someone mentioned earlier, that the addition of some subtle, deep bass will balance the detail that is there but somehow not quite right at the moment? A review of your speakers says this:
So are they a good starting point in your quest? Can a cool-sounding speaker be made to sound warm without some EQ? Are you basically trying to apply EQ via indirect methods? Is it feasible to change an existing resistor value to add warmth without upsetting other things in the process? (I certainly wouldn't like to meddle with the innards of commercial amps in this way, if that is the suggestion).
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.