Hi. I have started to read the Elliot page on the impedance flattening. I might be able to do this, with the right equipment (which I want to get anyhow, such as a scope).
I have been told that a zobel has been tried on this, by someone who didn't like the way it sounded. From what I'm reading, it takes a bunch of hand measuring. But this speaker looks to be off to a possible start, anyways. The resonant frequency is 650 Hz and the x/o point is 1 1/2 octaves above that (2 KHz). I haven't read all the way through - what is going to happen to the overall impedance of the speaker? I am told it is between 4.5 and 5.5 ohms across the audible range to begin with (but I'll have to get actuals). I also have to find the F3 for the tweeter. Not here. Garsh, these things are $70 at speakerbits. Used to be much less.
Btw: Thanks to everyone for all their assistance.
- Mark
I have been told that a zobel has been tried on this, by someone who didn't like the way it sounded. From what I'm reading, it takes a bunch of hand measuring. But this speaker looks to be off to a possible start, anyways. The resonant frequency is 650 Hz and the x/o point is 1 1/2 octaves above that (2 KHz). I haven't read all the way through - what is going to happen to the overall impedance of the speaker? I am told it is between 4.5 and 5.5 ohms across the audible range to begin with (but I'll have to get actuals). I also have to find the F3 for the tweeter. Not here. Garsh, these things are $70 at speakerbits. Used to be much less.
Btw: Thanks to everyone for all their assistance.
- Mark
This is a follow-up with a few points...
I previously said I was not getting sibilance with vinyl - I spoke too early. With the new TT (party) I started with some favorites, and not looking for this. After more records... I don't hear a difference between the two (vinyl, digital) on this.
What an interesting thing an overall presentation is. Speakers are the most illusory to my ears. I can see quite a bump from 5-10 KHz, I just double-checked. It is clearly there, but...
I spent at least 12 hours with an EQ setting, and jumped back and forth between the two. Admittedly, the new gear (amp, DAC) has also been breaking in. It does not sound now the way it did prior to break-in.
Each setting seems more like taste. One with EQ and one without. These are fairly slight differences. But the thing that strikes me is the way either one works for me. There is a slight loss with the EQ. Here's the new EQ and the setting I have been playing with. I made this setting based upon the frequency response for the speaker, and it seems to provide a reasonable compromise between flattening and EQ losses...
I figured out how to get system-wide EQ on Windows 7. I bought a copy of a piece of software called Virtual Audio Cable (VAC) for $30. It has to be tried first too see if it works. It works for me. I created a VAC and made that the default playback device. I then used a VST Host with plugins to put whatever plugins I wanted between the VAC and the actual playback device. I do not know of any other way to do this on Windows 7.
The creative drivers can really suck. I like the sound of the card, though. The problem is ticks, pops, wow, flutter, call it what you will, but it can be pretty bad. Recently, I removed them completely and reinstalled them and they seem to be doing much better. If you haven't read the daniel_k story, I think its worth looking up. He was an engineer there, and saw that they were sabotaging drivers at lower prices, trying to make them sound worse. (thanx, Creative) That is also why they pulled the EQ out of the package - that is for people who spend more.
In the end... I really like the sound at this point. It seems that when you have an elevated output in some part of the range, distortion there can just sound so much worse.
What else... 5-10 KHz: The tambourine is up there in frequency. Violins and guitars can have harsh harmonics up there. Clearly vocals, mostly, female and kids, and symbols. Also background crowd sound.
Cheers,
Mark
I previously said I was not getting sibilance with vinyl - I spoke too early. With the new TT (party) I started with some favorites, and not looking for this. After more records... I don't hear a difference between the two (vinyl, digital) on this.
What an interesting thing an overall presentation is. Speakers are the most illusory to my ears. I can see quite a bump from 5-10 KHz, I just double-checked. It is clearly there, but...
I spent at least 12 hours with an EQ setting, and jumped back and forth between the two. Admittedly, the new gear (amp, DAC) has also been breaking in. It does not sound now the way it did prior to break-in.
Each setting seems more like taste. One with EQ and one without. These are fairly slight differences. But the thing that strikes me is the way either one works for me. There is a slight loss with the EQ. Here's the new EQ and the setting I have been playing with. I made this setting based upon the frequency response for the speaker, and it seems to provide a reasonable compromise between flattening and EQ losses...
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I figured out how to get system-wide EQ on Windows 7. I bought a copy of a piece of software called Virtual Audio Cable (VAC) for $30. It has to be tried first too see if it works. It works for me. I created a VAC and made that the default playback device. I then used a VST Host with plugins to put whatever plugins I wanted between the VAC and the actual playback device. I do not know of any other way to do this on Windows 7.
The creative drivers can really suck. I like the sound of the card, though. The problem is ticks, pops, wow, flutter, call it what you will, but it can be pretty bad. Recently, I removed them completely and reinstalled them and they seem to be doing much better. If you haven't read the daniel_k story, I think its worth looking up. He was an engineer there, and saw that they were sabotaging drivers at lower prices, trying to make them sound worse. (thanx, Creative) That is also why they pulled the EQ out of the package - that is for people who spend more.
In the end... I really like the sound at this point. It seems that when you have an elevated output in some part of the range, distortion there can just sound so much worse.
What else... 5-10 KHz: The tambourine is up there in frequency. Violins and guitars can have harsh harmonics up there. Clearly vocals, mostly, female and kids, and symbols. Also background crowd sound.
Cheers,
Mark
Last edited:
Put them in series and the combination directly across your tweeter. Set the pot 1/2 way and flip the capacitor values from .47 to say 10 uf. When it sounds better play a bit with the pot and then try a bit more with the capacitors.
Simon, thank you. That sounds like a great idea.. I'll definitely have to try that first.
Bringing back the topic...
I think it is safe to say that the speaker lends itself to more HF and more sibilance as it is. Here is the personal experience that makes me wonder... I used to own a Denon PMA-2000R integrated amp. It was a nice, 52-pound unit that would double down into 4 ohms (80 wpc at 8 ohms). I used it for a few years. It was a very musical beast, and I didn't have this excess sibilance. If anything, it sounded right on there - same speaker. That was what made me wonder... How is that possible? With the speaker as it is, does that indicate a problem with the amp?
I believe that's the same amp as the other 2000 models now. They have a signature series they now charge $2500 for in the US, and in Europe the 2000AE for around $3500. I think they're the same thing.
I don't know how much this does or could stand for, but that amp did have a forward sound, which I believe indicates rolling off on the frequency extremes? Could that do it? i.e. - a bandwidth problem? Could a nice-sounding $1200 amp roll off at these frequencies?
On resolution... If an amp is less resolving, would that tend to decrease such sibilance? I also used a 1980s Sony receiver with it (the $350 variety), and that was unoffensive like the Denon. I would not say that it sounded like any excess silveryness or sibilance. Would that naturally happen with lower resolution?
When I moved to an Odyssey Stratos, it got silvery and with some excess sibilance. This amp with a Norh ACA preamp had twice the resolution of the Denon. Is a sufficient degree of resolution needed to hear (my) elevated 5-10 KHz response? For frequency response, I got the same numbers in 2003 with both the denon and the odyssey as I am getting today with the tk2050, using test tones and a Radio Shack meter. I also have a copy of nicely made adjustment amounts for that meter (which are not more than +/- 2 db at any point).
All evidence seems to point to the upstream electronics having to be good enough to hear this high frequency bump. And not too shabby. Having +13 dB at 5.5 KHz, I'm surprised.
Cheers,
Mark
I think it is safe to say that the speaker lends itself to more HF and more sibilance as it is. Here is the personal experience that makes me wonder... I used to own a Denon PMA-2000R integrated amp. It was a nice, 52-pound unit that would double down into 4 ohms (80 wpc at 8 ohms). I used it for a few years. It was a very musical beast, and I didn't have this excess sibilance. If anything, it sounded right on there - same speaker. That was what made me wonder... How is that possible? With the speaker as it is, does that indicate a problem with the amp?
I believe that's the same amp as the other 2000 models now. They have a signature series they now charge $2500 for in the US, and in Europe the 2000AE for around $3500. I think they're the same thing.
I don't know how much this does or could stand for, but that amp did have a forward sound, which I believe indicates rolling off on the frequency extremes? Could that do it? i.e. - a bandwidth problem? Could a nice-sounding $1200 amp roll off at these frequencies?
On resolution... If an amp is less resolving, would that tend to decrease such sibilance? I also used a 1980s Sony receiver with it (the $350 variety), and that was unoffensive like the Denon. I would not say that it sounded like any excess silveryness or sibilance. Would that naturally happen with lower resolution?
When I moved to an Odyssey Stratos, it got silvery and with some excess sibilance. This amp with a Norh ACA preamp had twice the resolution of the Denon. Is a sufficient degree of resolution needed to hear (my) elevated 5-10 KHz response? For frequency response, I got the same numbers in 2003 with both the denon and the odyssey as I am getting today with the tk2050, using test tones and a Radio Shack meter. I also have a copy of nicely made adjustment amounts for that meter (which are not more than +/- 2 db at any point).
All evidence seems to point to the upstream electronics having to be good enough to hear this high frequency bump. And not too shabby. Having +13 dB at 5.5 KHz, I'm surprised.
Cheers,
Mark
Ahhhhh.. Ok. My readings show this as a spikey part of the range. So, the amp needs to be fast to hear this? Or are you saying "that part of the range" is where fast transients may have rolled off?
As far as my perspective goes, this also sounds like "musical", with less information, happens, such as with these amplifiers... While the resolution/information was less, the response was in effect flatter. At least the transient one.
no, the exact opposite.
transients get amplified more than continuous signals.
inject a filtered squarewave.
look at the amplifier's attempt at reproducing that filtered squarewave.
Is it identical? or is the output more rounded? or does it contain overshoot artefacts? or is there ripple after the overshoot?
I believe that the overshoot is heard as extra treble detail that should not be present in a correctly amplified signal.
Further, the filtered squarewave should not "change" when reactive loads are applied to the amplifier.
I suspect sibilance is closely related to this amplifier stability issue.
transients get amplified more than continuous signals.
inject a filtered squarewave.
look at the amplifier's attempt at reproducing that filtered squarewave.
Is it identical? or is the output more rounded? or does it contain overshoot artefacts? or is there ripple after the overshoot?
I believe that the overshoot is heard as extra treble detail that should not be present in a correctly amplified signal.
Further, the filtered squarewave should not "change" when reactive loads are applied to the amplifier.
I suspect sibilance is closely related to this amplifier stability issue.
I have heard that the distortion with a square wave is pretty intense with all manner of HF.
About 8 years ago, I did A/B this speaker with watt puppies using Levinson monos. I didn't have much time with it, but as I recall, I did not have a sibilance issue. One of the recordings I had with me was that Jon Anderson one.
Perhaps this is "pie in the sky" to ask, but what could I do to gain a reference? Such as an amp that is known to be stable and to audition with.
About 8 years ago, I did A/B this speaker with watt puppies using Levinson monos. I didn't have much time with it, but as I recall, I did not have a sibilance issue. One of the recordings I had with me was that Jon Anderson one.
Maybe you have a great starting test bed, with one amp that sounds sibilant and others that do not. Maybe you can make it so that the one that sounds nice can become one that sounds bad, or vice versa?
I will try it. I will change the compensation a bit or reduce open loop gain (add more local feedback), etc.
But I want advise from the experts first, so i have guidance, not just trial and error.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.