danielwritesbac
Basically the difference between what you hear with a good dome tweeter (Seas comes to mind) and a superb bare ribbon tweeter(RAAL comes to mind). Except that this applies across the full spectrum of frequencies.
Bruce Meyer is the genius behind Meyer Sound, one of, and maybe the best, pro sound speaker company available. This was a comment relayed to me by Rene' Jaeger, one of the truly gifted electrical design engineers involved in audio over the last 50 years and a close personal friend of Bruce.
You can find the speakers I am listening to with such delight here.
planet_10 hifi Quite inexpensive for the quality they provide.
Bud
Basically the difference between what you hear with a good dome tweeter (Seas comes to mind) and a superb bare ribbon tweeter(RAAL comes to mind). Except that this applies across the full spectrum of frequencies.
Bruce Meyer is the genius behind Meyer Sound, one of, and maybe the best, pro sound speaker company available. This was a comment relayed to me by Rene' Jaeger, one of the truly gifted electrical design engineers involved in audio over the last 50 years and a close personal friend of Bruce.
You can find the speakers I am listening to with such delight here.
planet_10 hifi Quite inexpensive for the quality they provide.
Bud
Start with a band search on this page. As you might imagine The Grateful (mostly) Dead and Phish return a flood of hits. Here's a good typical example using a search for 'Charlie Hunter': Live at Narrows Center For The Arts on 2009-09-18. As expected the recording quality varies by venue and creator. Results can be narrowed by including '24 bit' or '96' in the search parameters.
Edit: Subwoofer torture here. I triple-dog dare anyone to set the opening audience noise to natural levels and let this one roll through.
Edit: Subwoofer torture here. I triple-dog dare anyone to set the opening audience noise to natural levels and let this one roll through.
Last edited:
Speaking of Meyers; some more food for thought
I worked in front of his HD-1s (and larger) for 15 years. There great monitors, very acurate. My audiophile cousin came for a tour of the studio and was not impressed. It wasnt till I went to his place and heard his Dynaudios that I began to realze what was going on. The Dyns sounded fantastic on every song (if I had to be picky maybe a little too present, too in your face (but thats just me)).
The pros (me at work) and audiophiles (me at home) have different demands. Pros want accuracy philes want everything to sound great. I couldnt mix on speakers that make poor mixes sound good. So HD-1s at work Dynes at home. I would love to hear from other recording engineers about there experience.
I worked in front of his HD-1s (and larger) for 15 years. There great monitors, very acurate. My audiophile cousin came for a tour of the studio and was not impressed. It wasnt till I went to his place and heard his Dynaudios that I began to realze what was going on. The Dyns sounded fantastic on every song (if I had to be picky maybe a little too present, too in your face (but thats just me)).
The pros (me at work) and audiophiles (me at home) have different demands. Pros want accuracy philes want everything to sound great. I couldnt mix on speakers that make poor mixes sound good. So HD-1s at work Dynes at home. I would love to hear from other recording engineers about there experience.
Key,
Not entirely certain. Last I heard a pair of finished but unmounted 127's was less than $270 US. The Fonken cabinets, with drivers were $1200 to $1600 per pair. That's with either multiply birch, with cherry laminate or solid Bamboo respectively. I haven't asked lately, so these prices may be low.
Bud
Not entirely certain. Last I heard a pair of finished but unmounted 127's was less than $270 US. The Fonken cabinets, with drivers were $1200 to $1600 per pair. That's with either multiply birch, with cherry laminate or solid Bamboo respectively. I haven't asked lately, so these prices may be low.
Bud
FE127eN are $240 USD/pr at the moment, i will be rejiggering things a bit soon, so a full on set will be a bit more, but a version with one less mod (the most labour/$$ intense one, and the one that affords the least benefit) to allow people to get in for $200/pr with almost no loss in performance.
Basic plans for FonkenPrime (the original Fonken) are available free (a much more comprehensive set will become available for a fee), one can build an unfinished set with full zoot drivers for <$400. If you want us to build you a pair $1000 for standatd veneers, $1400 in bamboo ply and 6-8 week lead time.
Custom options can be discussed.
http://www.planet10-hifi.com/fonken.html
dave
Basic plans for FonkenPrime (the original Fonken) are available free (a much more comprehensive set will become available for a fee), one can build an unfinished set with full zoot drivers for <$400. If you want us to build you a pair $1000 for standatd veneers, $1400 in bamboo ply and 6-8 week lead time.
Custom options can be discussed.
http://www.planet10-hifi.com/fonken.html
dave
Dave is not allowed to build boxes... i design them, Chris builds them. I do the drivers.
dave
Start with a band search on this page. As you might imagine The Grateful (mostly) Dead and Phish return a flood of hits. Here's a good typical example using a search for 'Charlie Hunter': Live at Narrows Center For The Arts on 2009-09-18. As expected the recording quality varies by venue and creator. Results can be narrowed by including '24 bit' or '96' in the search parameters.
Edit: Subwoofer torture here. I triple-dog dare anyone to set the opening audience noise to natural levels and let this one roll through.
This is great but the quality is all over the map.
The Charlie Hunter stuff sounds great (mics put on stage by a pro), you can tell by how far away the audience sounds, a lot of the other stuff sounds awful; muddy, boomy roomy, just like being there (recorded by Joe amatuer sitting in the audience).
Last edited:
@CBDB!
Great to encounter someone a little experienced through out recording technics.
I´ve not been much of a recorder myself, but I´ve studied the technics thouroghly, because ultimately your system is to reveal ecxactly that, if it is a simple 2 mike recording.
Also listening through various types and makes of microphones is a very educatining practise.
I will sugest a few recordings exposing different recording technologies.
If you have any Denon recordings of classical music from mid 80´s to late 90´s, they are almost always done with 2 omni mikes 3 feet or so above the conductors head - give or take a bit. They also always used Brüel & Kjaer 4003 omni mikes.
Tacet records made these:
TACET-Website - english
TACET-Website - english
And they even challenge you in hearing the difference between instruments.
TACET-Website - english
Chesky made these:
Welcome to Chesky Records: The Premiere Audiophile Record Label
Welcome to Chesky Records: The Premiere Audiophile Record Label
Welcome to Chesky Records: The Premiere Audiophile Record Label
Welcome to Chesky Records: The Premiere Audiophile Record Label
And the ultimate piano recording is found here:
http://www.dpamicrophones.com/en/Download/~/media/PDF/Download/grandpiano.pdf
I do not know if this recording is still available, I´ve got mine a few years ago directly from DPA as a marketing gimmick.
Most of these recordings are made by using 2 mikes and no mixing , compression or limiting of any kind. You´ll experience various recording set ups, such as AB stereo, XY stereo, ORTF, Blumlein, close miking.
The mikes on the TACET records are almost averything you can imagine, from old birdcaves to Shoeps, B&K, Neumann and in cinfigurations fram AB, XY over Blumlein.
Also proximity effect can be studied, and Chesky also made tracks to reveal depth and hight reproduction.
Have fun with this.
Great to encounter someone a little experienced through out recording technics.
I´ve not been much of a recorder myself, but I´ve studied the technics thouroghly, because ultimately your system is to reveal ecxactly that, if it is a simple 2 mike recording.
Also listening through various types and makes of microphones is a very educatining practise.
I will sugest a few recordings exposing different recording technologies.
If you have any Denon recordings of classical music from mid 80´s to late 90´s, they are almost always done with 2 omni mikes 3 feet or so above the conductors head - give or take a bit. They also always used Brüel & Kjaer 4003 omni mikes.
Tacet records made these:
TACET-Website - english
TACET-Website - english
And they even challenge you in hearing the difference between instruments.
TACET-Website - english
Chesky made these:
Welcome to Chesky Records: The Premiere Audiophile Record Label
Welcome to Chesky Records: The Premiere Audiophile Record Label
Welcome to Chesky Records: The Premiere Audiophile Record Label
Welcome to Chesky Records: The Premiere Audiophile Record Label
And the ultimate piano recording is found here:
http://www.dpamicrophones.com/en/Download/~/media/PDF/Download/grandpiano.pdf
I do not know if this recording is still available, I´ve got mine a few years ago directly from DPA as a marketing gimmick.
Most of these recordings are made by using 2 mikes and no mixing , compression or limiting of any kind. You´ll experience various recording set ups, such as AB stereo, XY stereo, ORTF, Blumlein, close miking.
The mikes on the TACET records are almost averything you can imagine, from old birdcaves to Shoeps, B&K, Neumann and in cinfigurations fram AB, XY over Blumlein.
Also proximity effect can be studied, and Chesky also made tracks to reveal depth and hight reproduction.
Have fun with this.
Back to cables.
In my system I cannot neglect the influence from powercords either, I know this might seem very controversal to many because, why should 5 feet of zipcord influence the sound of an amp, as it is connected in series with miles of aluminium cable coming from the powerplant.
This point of view I will try to challenge.
Some guy were growing pretty mad about this thing about powercords. He could hear the difference, but he could not understand why. Then as he already was rebuilding his house, and also renewing the wall outlets and cabling, he made this experiment.
He took some of the cables he preferred to use, and placed them at the power intake of the house, instead of plugging them into the amps.
So the power chord was located in the other end of the normal in wall cable.
No bettering or worsening of the sound was detectable. When placed in the normal end and plugged into the amp, it was suddenly detectable again.
So this leads to some kind of conclusion or at least suspecion, that the amps/CDs/DACs are influencing each other more or less through the power chords.
This also could explain why some gear need thicker powerchords and some does not.
In my system I cannot neglect the influence from powercords either, I know this might seem very controversal to many because, why should 5 feet of zipcord influence the sound of an amp, as it is connected in series with miles of aluminium cable coming from the powerplant.
This point of view I will try to challenge.
Some guy were growing pretty mad about this thing about powercords. He could hear the difference, but he could not understand why. Then as he already was rebuilding his house, and also renewing the wall outlets and cabling, he made this experiment.
He took some of the cables he preferred to use, and placed them at the power intake of the house, instead of plugging them into the amps.
So the power chord was located in the other end of the normal in wall cable.
No bettering or worsening of the sound was detectable. When placed in the normal end and plugged into the amp, it was suddenly detectable again.
So this leads to some kind of conclusion or at least suspecion, that the amps/CDs/DACs are influencing each other more or less through the power chords.
This also could explain why some gear need thicker powerchords and some does not.
Thick solid core copper wires are subject to skineffect within the audio range.
You can se the skindepth here:
frequency depth
60 Hz 8.47 mm
10 kHz 0.66 mm
100 kHz 0.21 mm
1 MHz 66 µm
10 MHz 21 µm
@10KHz cores thicker than 1,37 mm2 will tend to have increasing impedance vs frequency, and it will rize as much as 34% @ 20 KHz for 12 AWG compared to low frequencies. Thicker SC copper cables will be even worse on that matter, and if not tied close together induction will worsen it further on.
But it is surely right that both DC resistance and induction are the 2 most important factors for speaker cables.
I have done the same thing,installed a dedicated powerline from the house electricity counter to the power distribution block in my listening roon.I was also lucky to need only 4.5m of cable to reach my room.From the distribution block each equipment gets its power through its own cable.I have used 12awg shielded solid core cable.I have had noticeable improvements to the sound of my system.I don't know what would happen if the cable I used was thinner or thicker.Compared to the original one this brought worthwhile improvements.As to why the last 1-1.5 m will make a difference,I think that if/since cables can make a difference,I see no reason why not make this difference at the last 1-1.5m.On the contrary,I find this most possible to happen.The same for interconnects and speaker cables.
Thanks again. Your analogy got my attention. I find most dome tweeters unbearable. Perhaps it is my house non-compatible with extra-wide dispersion. But, the dome tweeters tend to have a lot wider dispersion than the next lowest frequency driver and this bit that "escapes" sounds just awful. It is at least distracting.
Other than a few examples (which are mostly "super-tweet" or a wideband paper driver) I don't like tweeters because there are other options that can be more fun. . .
A smallish full range, a fast woofer, and a first order series crossover, tends to be the hot ticket for the easy way to an enjoyable speaker--a bit of care with speaker driver selections and then the crossover takes only minutes. Its quite inexpensive.
Without crossover, I suppose I'd like a smallish full range and a voight half wave (one of quarter wave box feeds into another that is directly behind the first, output is at top, trying blow hole in ceiling with the bass of a tiny speaker driver).
But, without crossover, then dampening of all types would come into play, whether it is mechanical, with a little damar drawing onto the cone; or electrical, including the static charge of the hookup cable itself.
My amplifiers aren't harsh, they are class A-B solid state and they have only the necessary "amount" of output RC, with the capacitor a small polyester, about 10x smaller value than retail models. The intent there was to increase power efficiency (decrease heatsink expense too), and allow audio harmonics to pass unhindered. As is typical of hifi amplifiers, the output RC cannot fully compensate for varieties of hookup cable. I had assumed that the speaker crossover would be more than sufficient for this task. But, that was an error because speakers don't always have crossovers.
In the case of the single driver full range speaker, the only speaker side capacitor available seems to be the cable.
Last edited:
That's not the most likely conclusion, however. Before exploring ill-defined "interactions" between power cords, it might be useful to test to see if the visual aspect has anything to do with the listener reaction. If that turns out null, case closed. If the effect persists, it's more likely then that one or more of the components is blowing hash back into the powerline, and that's easy to fix, too.
In the U.S. the return line and ground are together at the circuit breaker box, however. . . While operating electronics, there is always voltage on the return line, otherwise there would be no circuit (off). The thicker/shorter the cable, the closer-to-zero the voltage will be on the return line (in this example).
Let's make an example at the kitchen, perhaps with a long run of 14ga wire (typical), running a freezer, a refrigerator, your computer, a microwave oven and your audio system (accidentally on the kitchen circuit because that outlet is ganged through the adjoining wall, also typical).
In this case, the computer will experience nonstop breakdown and there will be a higher noise floor on the audio system. Since that is AC noise, it will convolute the signal. The sudden big surge from the microwave will degrade other electronics that are on the same circuit. The nearby clothes washer and clothes dryer will get a temporary differential that's enough for a nasty shock, as will the metal blender versus the kitchen sink, the ceiling fan pull chain versus the kitchen sink, etc. . . So, in the U.S. don't microwave your tea while also hanging onto both the faucet and ceiling fan speed control chain.
Generally, high fidelity class equipment has extreme overkill at the power supply (many capacitors, several regulators, capacitive multipler circuit, tuned filters, are some examples), exactly for reasons of clarity.
Even so, its best to avoid joining it into noisy circuits.
Most high fidelity class equipment has no requirement of cleaners and specialist power cables; however, you'll have to try and judge the extent of that one for yourself because it remains true that one of the most effective equipment upgrades is the power supply.
These shared return line examples may be applicable in the case of a speaker with a crossover joined to an amplifier with negative feedback, when the super-powerful and now-distorted signal returns into the amplifier at the spot where there is potential for unlimited gain. Does anyone else out there think that the typical and customary arrangement looks like a whopping big blunder?
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.