Oltos, if your favorite program material is audibly distorted digital, I'm not sure what technical fix would apply. Lots of 2nd-harmonic distortion might make things sound nicer, but that's not what loudspeakers produce ... 3rd harmonic (which is dissonant) tends to dominate. High 2nd-harmonic distortion in a loudspeaker usually indicates a decentered voice coil, which I can assure you does not sound good.
The most pleasant way to get an abundance of well-proportioned 2nd (and 4th and 6th) harmonic distortion is a single-ended triode amplifier (with real direct-heated tubes, like the 45, 2A3, or 300B). Single-ended pentode amps (with EL84, EL34, KT88, 6550, etc.) have a greater proportion of odd-order distortion, and are not suitable for what you might want to do.
Even-order distortion (2nd, 4th, 6th, etc.) is surprisingly difficult to hear ... even 3% is on the threshold of audibility for most listeners ... and has a gratifying "sweetening" quality to it, and can rescue even really grim-sounding digital.
If your recordings are really rough-sounding, the selection of a DAC is also important. I'd start with DACs that use the Philips 154x series chipsets, and stay away from the more common delta-sigma converters.
The most pleasant way to get an abundance of well-proportioned 2nd (and 4th and 6th) harmonic distortion is a single-ended triode amplifier (with real direct-heated tubes, like the 45, 2A3, or 300B). Single-ended pentode amps (with EL84, EL34, KT88, 6550, etc.) have a greater proportion of odd-order distortion, and are not suitable for what you might want to do.
Even-order distortion (2nd, 4th, 6th, etc.) is surprisingly difficult to hear ... even 3% is on the threshold of audibility for most listeners ... and has a gratifying "sweetening" quality to it, and can rescue even really grim-sounding digital.
If your recordings are really rough-sounding, the selection of a DAC is also important. I'd start with DACs that use the Philips 154x series chipsets, and stay away from the more common delta-sigma converters.
Last edited:
I have a feeling that the bad sound they are heating is because they are pushing their mid drivers to high. I don't like ro play the JA6681B above 9khz. But it rolls off at 11-12kHz so it is cut befor anything too bad happens. With Be diaphragms I bet they like to push it as high as possible which might in some recordings introduce some harshness I think. But not all the time.
Thank you for this info, including the valuable tip on DAC design. I’ll add it to my DAC design criteria list when I finally go DAC shopping-after I finish building my speakers.
If the WAV files of CD track rips of mine that Gary played were overloaded during A/D conversion by the mastering engineers (however unlikely), the DeClipper in my Samplitude Pro X Suite DAW might clean that up quite well. Unfortunately, the distortion is more likely overloading from the original analog recording session (i.e. one or more mic preamps and/or the tape machine's record gain up too high). In that case DeClipper may also help though it will quite possibly create some artifacts. The only restoration alternative dedicated for the latter problem that I am currently aware of are software from Cedar Audio. At >$3500., their DeClip must be one very powerful algorithm.
http://www.cedaraudio.com/products/cambridge/camdeclip.shtml Their Phase Corrector can also likely work wonders with recordings with poor FR and other issues.
http://www.cedaraudio.com/products/cambridge/camphase.shtml That however only comes bundled in Cedar's Cambridge DAW platform, starting at $18K. Not surprisingly, many of Cedar's clients are in government and forensic science. I'll check for more affordable alternatives, but not hopeful. I thought maybe Sonnox, but no.
http://www.sonnoxplugins.com/pub/plugins/products/products.htm Again, I doubt there's any bug(s) in Gary's system that distorted the recordings of mine that he found so fatiguing, but I'm sure he will check on this when he has more time. Indeed, as a test, I did find re-mastered versions of two of the recording distorted recordings that I sent Gary, so it may be easier to learn the truth.
Lynn and Klaus, how exactly do the design, purpose and performance of waveguides differ from those most horns, the Azurahorns, for example?
http://www.diysoundgroup.com/plastic-seos-12.html
Reading the above link, I can only conclude that the SEOS 12 or 15 might have a wider horizontal sweet spot than say the Azura 425 horn, although perhaps at the cost of reduced vertical coverage (?)
But would “horn honk” reduction be about the same in both?
Any other up and down sides of these horns versus SEOS waveguides?
Otherwise, would there be any reason why the SEOS 12 or SEOS 15 waveguide wouldn’t work with sealed Altec 416 midwoofers any less well than the Azura 425, where the Altecs start playing at 700Hz?
As for drivers, the Radian 475pb is 1” but has an aluminum diaphragm.
I’m checking on is availability of it with a beryllium. Would you have any driver recommendations for 1” SEOS waveguides?
Oltos,
If you got the means to consider a Beryllium Diaphragm 475PB then
I would not even think twice about purchasing two sets of horns for them.
You can compare the two concepts and stick with what works best for you.
If however you are on a certain budget for the whole system, you got to be careful
on your priority list.
If you have a very big room dedicated for audio with a one chair sweet spot by all
means get a LeCleach profile horn.
For any one or a combination of the following go with a Seos 12" horn.
1. You enjoy company while listening to "good" music.
2. You want good sound watching movies with company.
3. Your room is not bigger than the average living room
I care less what advantage a certain horn has on paper.
The solution that works best for my room and listening habits is what I choose
no matter how far "beyond the Ariel" it might be or what came out on top of a
shootout at someones "barn".
The cheap Seos sounds better in 90% of the real life listening scenarios, that's
why my drivers are bold on to them and not to my StereoLab horns.
Regarding the Radian 475PB with aluminum diaphragms, John Hasquin once said:
You get 98% of what a TAD2001 can give you.
Klaus
If you got the means to consider a Beryllium Diaphragm 475PB then
I would not even think twice about purchasing two sets of horns for them.
You can compare the two concepts and stick with what works best for you.
If however you are on a certain budget for the whole system, you got to be careful
on your priority list.
If you have a very big room dedicated for audio with a one chair sweet spot by all
means get a LeCleach profile horn.
For any one or a combination of the following go with a Seos 12" horn.
1. You enjoy company while listening to "good" music.
2. You want good sound watching movies with company.
3. Your room is not bigger than the average living room
I care less what advantage a certain horn has on paper.
The solution that works best for my room and listening habits is what I choose
no matter how far "beyond the Ariel" it might be or what came out on top of a
shootout at someones "barn".
The cheap Seos sounds better in 90% of the real life listening scenarios, that's
why my drivers are bold on to them and not to my StereoLab horns.
Regarding the Radian 475PB with aluminum diaphragms, John Hasquin once said:
You get 98% of what a TAD2001 can give you.
Klaus
Last edited:
Naah, I don't like the phaseplug in the Atlas driver, and will probably not like the WE555 either as they have similar phase plugs. Much prefer the JA6681B. Does Goto even have something that is designed for 300 Hz upwards? I think their 100Hz driver will be too crude for midrange, but I have no idea since I never tried it.
There is nothing to dislike about the phase plug of the WE555.
I am convinced that this phase plug design plays a major role
in the superior sonics of this driver.
JMLC and many others rate the WE555 way over the JA6681b.
Btw, the phase plug in the Atlas/Klipsch K55 drivers is not only similar,
it is identical to the WE555 and that is exactly the reason why I
would stick the WE555 diaphragm in it.
Klaus
I am convinced that this phase plug design plays a major role
in the superior sonics of this driver.
JMLC and many others rate the WE555 way over the JA6681b.
Btw, the phase plug in the Atlas/Klipsch K55 drivers is not only similar,
it is identical to the WE555 and that is exactly the reason why I
would stick the WE555 diaphragm in it.
Klaus
Time for a recap: I have tested with a using the Federal/Atlas driver with its original phenolic driver and compared it with the JA6681B using both the aluminum and the phenolic diaphragm. The JA6681B sounded better with both types of diaphragm, but I prefer the aluminum for its clarity. The phenolic diaphragms all exhibited some kind of annoying nasal sound that I did not like. Same with the Klipsch K55-V, which also has a phenolic diaphragm, and it sounds a little better than the federal sound driver but not as good as alu/phenolic Yamaha. The Klipsch is a good driver for a delightful vintage 60's sound and helps to dull low quality music. I never tried with aluminum for the Federal sound/Atlas or the Klipsch but since the phenolic version of the JA6681B was still superior against even the Klipsch I guess it has something to do with the design of the whole driver. The rather small ceramic magnet does not do the JA6681B any favors but it still sounds better. What is left that could be of a superior design? Phase plug.
I will have to wait to comment on the Federal Sound/Atlas driver and alu WE 555 diaphragm combo until I have tried it. Not sure I will bother, because the magnetic gap in the Federal Sound is ginormous compared to the JA6681B, and does not seem to be made with great care.
I will have to wait to comment on the Federal Sound/Atlas driver and alu WE 555 diaphragm combo until I have tried it. Not sure I will bother, because the magnetic gap in the Federal Sound is ginormous compared to the JA6681B, and does not seem to be made with great care.
Last edited:
Back again...
I was hot to find a WE555 clone diaphragm and put it into one of the Atlas (or similar) motors, with other suitable mods to mimic the 555, this was back about 5 years ago.
But since I could not find a reliable source that was affordable for 555 diaphragms, and I would have had to buy a bunch of Atlas drivers to dissect in order to find out which of them had the proper dimensions, or could be remachined appropriately, the idea got put in one of the many hermetically sealed cans around here (keeps the ideas fresh, you know?).
But it seems to me that unless you put a 555 type diaphragm into an Atlas motor that is dimensioned to mimic the 555 chassis, you've not compared anything to anything.
Fwiw, as a long time user of the Yamaha (probably one of the first...) I am now listening to Quad 57s... and thinking the Quads are better (minus the extreme "jump factor", the max SPL and the efficiency - the efficiency does open up potentials that the Quads do not have) because they seem to be even more discerning and clear in terms of "peeling away layers" than the Yamahas are on my system. But it's clearly NOT the same sort of presentation, and I still have the horns as well...
...guess nothing is perfect.
_-_-
I was hot to find a WE555 clone diaphragm and put it into one of the Atlas (or similar) motors, with other suitable mods to mimic the 555, this was back about 5 years ago.
But since I could not find a reliable source that was affordable for 555 diaphragms, and I would have had to buy a bunch of Atlas drivers to dissect in order to find out which of them had the proper dimensions, or could be remachined appropriately, the idea got put in one of the many hermetically sealed cans around here (keeps the ideas fresh, you know?).
But it seems to me that unless you put a 555 type diaphragm into an Atlas motor that is dimensioned to mimic the 555 chassis, you've not compared anything to anything.
Fwiw, as a long time user of the Yamaha (probably one of the first...) I am now listening to Quad 57s... and thinking the Quads are better (minus the extreme "jump factor", the max SPL and the efficiency - the efficiency does open up potentials that the Quads do not have) because they seem to be even more discerning and clear in terms of "peeling away layers" than the Yamahas are on my system. But it's clearly NOT the same sort of presentation, and I still have the horns as well...
...guess nothing is perfect.
_-_-
Hi everybody! Great thread you make!
I have yamaha 6681b drivers that i am using with jmlc 340 horns (crossed 800hz) and klipish jubilee bass bins. (all diy)
Nice horn but comparing to tractrix it is too narrow and lacks imaging and stage. Not that it so important but makes me experiment further. I like how Yamahas on jmlc render the texture of the voices which is more important to me. And the voices have to be as live as possible. So I decided to build sato horn to go low and pair it with my bass horn.
You guys spent lots of time with this toys. So i would really appreciate some advices before i start.
1 May be i miss something and there is a better use for yamaha ( i don’t take into account cost, difficulty and size factors)
2 Can you hear coloration, isn’t it big «fat» sound?
3 And most important how high i can go with yamahas on sato? I would like to use them from 250-300 to as high as possible. 8000?
The tweeters i use for now are EV 350st b they are not the best but match very well with yamahas.
4 What do you prefer to top the yamahas?
5 What would you say if you need to compare sato to jmlc profile like azura ah-160?
I have yamaha 6681b drivers that i am using with jmlc 340 horns (crossed 800hz) and klipish jubilee bass bins. (all diy)
Nice horn but comparing to tractrix it is too narrow and lacks imaging and stage. Not that it so important but makes me experiment further. I like how Yamahas on jmlc render the texture of the voices which is more important to me. And the voices have to be as live as possible. So I decided to build sato horn to go low and pair it with my bass horn.
You guys spent lots of time with this toys. So i would really appreciate some advices before i start.
1 May be i miss something and there is a better use for yamaha ( i don’t take into account cost, difficulty and size factors)
2 Can you hear coloration, isn’t it big «fat» sound?
3 And most important how high i can go with yamahas on sato? I would like to use them from 250-300 to as high as possible. 8000?
The tweeters i use for now are EV 350st b they are not the best but match very well with yamahas.
4 What do you prefer to top the yamahas?
5 What would you say if you need to compare sato to jmlc profile like azura ah-160?
Yes, I saw it, thanks. It looks very impressive to my eyes. Actualy i build the jmlc horn after the imposibility to ship it from Australia. But it seems to me there is a preference for sato horn. The goal is to combine the clarity of jmlc profile with larger sweet spot, if i understand correctly