Taking pot shots at things of which you are not familiar does nothing to improve your credibility.
I'll take your word for it chap. In fact they are still infusing other stuff into polypropylene now to do different things speaker cone wise
Anyway, apologies as it's getting "off topic"
This is about cables & if they sound different 
Hello Dave! Thanks for clearing that up for me. Even with the addition of the FE206eN ---{which, for those who don't know, is an EnABL'ed version of the FE206e driver}--- for the Sachiko/FE206eN to be prefered over the highly regarded and quite expensive ($9,500) Lamhorn 1.8 is no small feat!
It's too bad that some people are so quick to believe those of us who use single fullrange speakers, haven't got a clue of how live, unamplified singers or instruments realistically sound. After living with my Sachiko/FE206es-r for these past 19 months I can honestly say only electrostatics like Quads rival their harmonic & timbre accuracy. In the 40+ years I've been involved in this hobby I've yet to hear ANY multi-driver, speaker that uses a crossover come close to this level of harmonic & timbre accuracy!
Thetubeguy1954
~Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
Dave, sorry but, I forgot to ask you this in my last post. Have you heard of Fostex making "custom" drivers for anyone before? I'm not saying AJ's wrong, I just never heard of anyone ever talking about using or owning a "custom" Fostex driver before other than when someone is talking about one of Fostex's limited editions like the FE206es-r drivers.
Thetubeguy1954
~Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
I'm sure only people that haven't heard live sound of say acoustic instruments could comment & they'd be daft. I can't say i have ever listened to any full range single driver speaker. I know it's advantages & the disadvantages, however i have never actually listened to what you have there. In ways i like the idea though
Try these then chap
Please read the artical.I didn't see them on the list of your previously owned speakers. They'd be good with that valve amp you have there
Gone off subject again, sorry
It's true that this would easily influence the outcome, just like seeing which cables are being used.
However, when I listened to the blind test at RMAF the Lowthers were treated with clear acrylic, so we could not see which was which. Having presumed the test order, I clearly preferred the "untreated" pair. Or what I thought was the untreated pair. I was wrong.
So much for (my) preconceptions.
To my understanding they use 'monocrystal' copper to manufacture the connectors then they are plated.
Why?
Terry I'm neither hurt or wounded by your actions. I'm ticked off!!!! So your ability to read people isn't anywhere near as keen or adept as you believe it is. Now as to how you started this mess I direct you to your post #11595 here: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/mult...ke-difference-any-input-1160.html#post2071472
You fully well realised this post could be viewed by me as offensive however after reading what you refered to as being quite a few of my posts on prophead on Audio Asylum. You came to believe you should have no aversion to 'strong talking' with me because here diyAudio and THAT was your problem! It wasn't so much what was said as it was how you said it.
There's a world of difference between you stating "I've never heard a speaker based on a single fullrange speaker that's ever come close to realism of live, unamplified music." and what you said below. Terry you attacked me (that's uncivil & disrespectful) my choice in speakers and my system!
==========================================================
{{{{{{{This is taken from your post with my comments about what you said in bold}}}}}}}
Anyway, then you post a pic and description of your speakers. And I see that it is a single driver system...... So far so good, although there's a hint of what's coming in your "I see that it is a single driver system" comment.
I no longer have a great desire to listen to audiophile systems, as invariably I end up feeling mighty cheated. The implication is that listening to my speakers and system, which you've never heard, would sound like an audiophile's system and leave feeling mighty cheated. You don't think or didn't care that I'd find these comments offensive?
1) " THAT has been your reference all this time!!???!!" Here the guy is, arguing long and hard on forums about this that and the other, you hear their system and realise they have not got a clue about what they're saying.
I'm afraid a single driver falls fairly and squarely into that category.
2) ESPECIALLY as you continually make noises about 'chasing realism'!
3) I don't care what instrument you choose as an example (live unamplified remember)...from a violin to a cello (let alone a double bass)...there is no way in hell that a single driver comes even close to realism.
4) I have no doubt that you derive a great deal of pleasure from it, that's fantastic. But please you are under some sort of delusion if you think it is real.
5) When any measurements happen at the test, just for kicks let's see the native response of the speakers, and an in room response too.
6) Should be enlightening, bearing in mind the aim is for realism.
7) Cause there ain't any realism to be had from a single driver (lot's of pleasure and enjoyment for sure)
Now that you know what my audio system is you've gone from an indirect implication attack of my system to a direct attack at my speakers, my system and me. My system and speakers for not having any realism and me, as not having a clue about what I'm saying and being deluded for believing my system sounds real.
==========================================================
Now as I explained to you before I prefer to talk civilly and respectfully to others but, I stop once they've been uncivil and/or disrespectul to me! You've deliberately been both uncivil and disrespectul to me Terry. That doesn't hurt or wound me. It does however make me wish to refrain from discussing audio with you.
Thetubeguy1954
~Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
I'm sure only people that haven't heard live sound of say acoustic instruments could comment & they'd be daft. I can't say i have ever listened to any full range single driver speaker. I know it's advantages & the disadvantages, however i have never actually listened to what you have there. In ways i like the idea though
Try these then chap
I didn't see them on the list of your previously owned speakers. They'd be good with that valve amp you have there
Gone off subject again, sorry
Hello Event!
Fact is back in the late 70's early 80's I almost bought the Yamaha NS1000 speakers but, after some careful audtioning, I believed the Infinity Reference Standard 2.5 Speakers I purchased were the better choice to be used with my Infinity FET preamp/HK Citation 16a combo.
What might really surprise you is I actually considered buying the Yamaha NS1000 while I still owned the Aliantes. I've still have never heard a multi-driver speaker that uses crossovers sound as harmonically and timbrelly correct as my present Sachiko/FE206ES-R but, unlike some others I always keep an open mind. So I'd definitely be willing to listen to a pair of the Yamaha NS1000speakers in my system "if" the opportunity ever presented itself for myself to do so!
Thetubeguy1954
~Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
Hello Brett! I'm sure that's your 100% honest opinion of what you heard and no one anywhere can say your opinion is wrong! Who knows "if" I ever heard my speakers in Terry's room and with his electronics I might prefer Terry's myself and Terry might prefer mine. Unlike some others I will not speak about something I haven't heard for myself. All I can tell you about is what I've heard and on my system no multi-driver speaker has been able to touch my Sachiko with its FE206ES-R drivers that have been treated by Mike Rispoli's proprietary, 5-step process. At my home it was the multi-driver speakers that sounded like a Trabant in comparion to the Sachikos. Has this exchange now resolved the issue? I don't think so.
Would something be determined if others begin posting about how nice my speakers sound and disparaged how multi-way designs sound in comparison to them at a GTG here like you just did for Terry's speakers? Would this disagreement somehow be settled or won if either Terry or I have the most posts saying our type of design sounds better than the other's?
When will people learn every speaker design has it's own unique sets of pluses and minuses? If any of the different types of speaker designs be they, multi-driver, electrostatic, single fullrange, planar-magnetic, horn or ribbon, was the best we'd all hear it sounded best and we'd all be using that design. Why do you think there are people who swear electrostatics are best at replicating music, while another will swear only a multi-way all horn system makes music. Still others swear only an all ribbon speaker will sound like real music. Then there's people who swear there's a best type of speaker at every spectrum and only a ribbon/electrostatic/dynamic driver based speaker will really make music. Still others swear by single fullrange drivers as the way to replicate music.
Finally I'll ask the real question that needs to be asked, what was the intended purpose of your post and what the heck does any of this have to do with providing any input on cables and whether or not they make a difference? You know the actual topic of this thread...
Thetubeguy1954
~Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!~
metallurgy
Any comprehension of what "slip" means in metallury? Burgers vectors, Frank-Read sources, screw dislocations, that sort of thing. Try googling deformation in metals, to gain some insight into the physical realities of just what a "monocrystalline copper (or silver)" wires' physical limitations in use might be, if they even existed. What do you think might happen to such a specimen when it is deformed by bending, twisting, etc.?
here's a hint. It wouldn't remain a "monocrystal" for very long.
Any comprehension of what "slip" means in metallury? Burgers vectors, Frank-Read sources, screw dislocations, that sort of thing. Try googling deformation in metals, to gain some insight into the physical realities of just what a "monocrystalline copper (or silver)" wires' physical limitations in use might be, if they even existed. What do you think might happen to such a specimen when it is deformed by bending, twisting, etc.?
here's a hint. It wouldn't remain a "monocrystal" for very long.
Nobody has ever said that you should abuse a 'monocrystal' cable by excessively bending it. In fact, VDH warned me decades ago that I could no longer twist my power supply wires with an electric drill, as I had been taught to do in industry. That puts us about 20-30 years ahead of your research on wires.
Shouldn't do that with ANY wire. What industry taught you to do that?
When twisting is done right (i.e. on a machine using spools or bobbins such that the spools or bobbins turn as the wire is twisted), the wire is only bent. When you use a drill, it twists the wire and the insulation.
se
mindless...
Your "professorial" tone comment has nothing whatsoever to do with "monocrystals" What "research" is you patronization talking about, other than a feeble attempt to discredit my comment? This is common knowledge, taught in any college materials science class.
never did that vacancy calculation, did you?
Your "professorial" tone comment has nothing whatsoever to do with "monocrystals" What "research" is you patronization talking about, other than a feeble attempt to discredit my comment? This is common knowledge, taught in any college materials science class.
never did that vacancy calculation, did you?
Last edited:
Seems to be news, here. But not to real wire designers. You see, we have addressed these problems and have even gone beyond, using isomorphic designs in several cases, for this very reason.
When it comes to vacancy, I am glad that you brought the subject up. While unavoidable completely, it would appear that you get less vacancies, with: material purity, and proper annealing. Lowering resistance proves this.
When it comes to vacancy, I am glad that you brought the subject up. While unavoidable completely, it would appear that you get less vacancies, with: material purity, and proper annealing. Lowering resistance proves this.
Having never heard any of the Infinity speakers with the EMIT & midrange i couldn't comment, i think you probably made a wise choice though considering the amplification you had at the time
The NS's are ruthlessly revealing, you'd definately know you were listening to a class B or AB amp due to the NS's tweeter which is pistonic up to 27Khz. Funny that top manufacturers (Focal JM lab, Paradigm etc) have only cottoned onto Beryllium as a driver material in the last 5 or so years when Yamaha where using it in the late 70s.Yes i'd suggest that given the opportunity you get to listen to a pair on the valve poweramp of yours, i'm sure you'd be pleasantly surprised..
Back to the wires, sorry
Mark.
Get real
Appears you're shooting from the hip as usual... mindless generalizations and dodging the question.
Nominal 10 gauge annealed type 102 copper (wire copper) would yield at a few tens #'s stress, not hard at all to achieve in normal use. pretty limp stuff. Ever here of work hardening?
Can't figure out the calculation, eh? Thought so.
Appears you're shooting from the hip as usual... mindless generalizations and dodging the question.
Nominal 10 gauge annealed type 102 copper (wire copper) would yield at a few tens #'s stress, not hard at all to achieve in normal use. pretty limp stuff. Ever here of work hardening?
Can't figure out the calculation, eh? Thought so.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.