Dejan, I'm blessed with having a wife who gets as much a buzz from hearing "big sound" as I do - if anything, she wants me to turn it up more ... I have to disappoint her at times by saying it's running at maximum right now, it's got no more to give,.
Generally, classical material is run flat out, or close to it - gives the concert hall feel to the experience, one fully enjoys the dynamics ... especially, well played violin, and opera.
I am usually asked to turn it down, not up. By down, I don't mean down to ridiculously low levels, just down in respect to what I'd like it to be.
Those are the moments I thank Big Boss Above for inspiring Luxman to use such a well judged loudness switch, or Marantz for providing a loudness control from 0 (off) to 9. Thankfully, ex-mine and now her Harman/Kardom 680 integrated amp sports their "phase coherent loudness", a 6 transistor circuit which does indeed work much better than the usual on/off switch because it increases the bass "body" level without introducing any boom and fizz.
Last edited:
I used to run four stacked large cabinet 12'' 3 ways powered by a well sorted and dead clean 500W/4R PA amp....that's 1.3 arc welding real horsepowers in my listening space.
Input sensitivity was such that with directly connected CDP and input volumes at max, momentary indicated clipping occurred intermittently and inaudibly.
IOW AC/DC and others were playing live in my lounge room, the carpets squares were lifting as was the ceiling, not to mention the walls vibrating/shuddereing and the couch massaging in a oh so nice way.
Even at this acoustic SPL, the ears were saying 'give it some more', but there was no more without a preamp to provide more gain, and probably added distortions.
Music at this power, level, liveness and CORRECTNESS/BIGNESS/HUGENESS was like some kind of incredible drug/incredible sex...after 30 or 40 minutes the soul was satisfied and normal background music levels were fine for the next week or so.
Yes, my current system (much modded Behringer 8'' actives) cause me to turn the level up to the comfortable limits of these speakers...the result is nice, dead clean, dead clear, pretty loud but not quite the extreme like the above.
The SPL is pretty loud, but due to the nature of the sound they sound BIG without getting shouty.
Running at these levels allows revealing of the finest details in the mix, and thus makes well recorded/mixed/mastered tracks interesting and fun.
Less well/suboptimal recordings have much to offer also, and don't demand the 'turn it down' reaction.
Perhaps females have a greater midrange/vocals sensitivity....genetic adaptation ?.Let's not forget that our ears, just like our speakers, also have a sensitivity which varies with the person. For example, my wife's hearing is 2-3 dB more sensitive than mine, so what's comfortable for me is a bit loud for her. OTOH, I hear things, nuances, that she doesn't, even if I jokingly say that she can hear the grass grow.
Dan.
You bet they have generics we can only dream of. Like for example knowing what you meant when you spoke, right down the what you didn't actually say but wanted to.
Denial will only increase their persistence.
Add to that incredible memory...like 10 years later exactly what clothing you were wearing at the time .You bet they have generics we can only dream of. Like for example knowing what you meant when you spoke, right down the what you didn't actually say but wanted to.
Also the ability to monitor multiple conversations in a noisy crowded room.
Strange cattle.
Dan.
And sometimes vision. I disbelieved my wife when she once claimed two paints were a shade apart. We chechekd on the computer controlled mixing machine and it was indeed so, I missed a step there, she didn't.
I think they were created with DNK from somewhere in the Orion constelleation. They are not of this Earth,
I think they were created with DNK from somewhere in the Orion constelleation.
They are not of this Earth,
Yes, Dan ... you're pointing out a key aspect of why the exercise of chasing convincing sound is so worthwhile - the hearing of music replayed in this fashion is immensely satisfying, gives one "a reason for living",
...As a superb counterexample, on today's TV morning show the latest, instantly disposable "pop sensation" effort - so, so tiny, limp, feeble, a gutless wonder - I wanted to change the channel within 10 seconds of the song starting - so much for "professional" production
.Frank your just an old cynic my old man hated the music i liked as a lad (and still does). I cant stand his music either so it's mutual.
Actually i know what you mean, i heard some noise recently by an 'artist' called Drake, reviews rave about his latest offering so i checked it out on spotify. I did that so others here don't have to, you have been warned
There are some decent acts knocking about though like The Black Keys, Roo Panes and that bloke Hozier. It's a personal taste thang of course but i also quite like an outfit called The Cat Empire and a guy from your neck of the woods called Xavier Rudd.
Bit of a broad mix there but some of it might be to your liking
my old man hated the music i liked as a lad (and still does). I cant stand his music either so it's mutual.Actually i know what you mean, i heard some noise recently by an 'artist' called Drake, reviews rave about his latest offering so i checked it out on spotify. I did that so others here don't have to, you have been warned
There are some decent acts knocking about though like The Black Keys, Roo Panes and that bloke Hozier. It's a personal taste thang of course but i also quite like an outfit called The Cat Empire and a guy from your neck of the woods called Xavier Rudd.
Bit of a broad mix there but some of it might be to your liking
Davy, the music in itself was OK, but it was one of those cute, single teenager females, where the voice was buried under tons of studio production, with zero dynamic punch - the pop princess thing.
Yes, plenty of very interesting music is around - but you'll never hear it on morning TV ...
Yes, plenty of very interesting music is around - but you'll never hear it on morning TV ...
I hear ya Frank, morning TV here is preferable to piles, but only just. I rarely watch the dam thing at any time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hD9pJzZ1XGI
I agree that for music to sound realistic, it needs many things to come together - timing, rhythm, low noise, flat frequency response and of course a certain amount of power, both used and in reserve for possible transients.
Power more to be felt rather than actually heard. But a symphony orchestra hitting a crescendo will demand good, clean power at hand or te music will sound washed out.
And all that only AFTER one has put one's system in top gear.
Power more to be felt rather than actually heard. But a symphony orchestra hitting a crescendo will demand good, clean power at hand or te music will sound washed out.
And all that only AFTER one has put one's system in top gear.
Reminds me, many, many years ago someone who was a 100% devoted classical fan had a listen to a symphonic piece on what we had running at the time - and said, a bit on edge, isn't that too high a level? She was used to normal system behaviour, and as the big ending loomed up she was starting to squirm, preparing to wince as the sound fell apart from the "too great a volume". Of course, this doesn't happen, the thunderous climax just gracefully rolled over the top of us, just like in the "real thing" - she was quite taken aback by this "correct behaviour", .
.I think most people misunderstand the power issue. They associate power output with loudness only, and wonder why should they buy power when they are not going to play it loud. What they fail to understand is that one needs oodles of power in the sub 400 Hz range, where a lot of action is going on and where speakers often drop below the nominal 8 Ohm rating. When they drop down to 3 Ohms, often with a nice phase shift of -60 degrees, the nominal power output of just 20 Vrms, or 3.54 A, will require a capability of 9.43 A. and that's not counting transients. The point beng that unless we have a capable amp, the SAME VOLUME of sound across the band will not be maintained. There may be suckouts where the sound will not be played at the same required volume.
I say that if both THD and IM at their PEAK value are below 60 dB, or 0.1% worst case, it's ačč right, assuming only that the harmonic decay has a decreasing rate from 2nd onwards.
This goes for any power level from 1 mW to rated power output into the lowest declared load mpedance, which should in my view be 3 Ohms with -60 degree phase shift.
This goes for any power level from 1 mW to rated power output into the lowest declared load mpedance, which should in my view be 3 Ohms with -60 degree phase shift.
Last edited:
As you say I would conclude the same about the 15 inch, Seems it is not as guilty as you or I might think. What an excellent idea to split the frame. I think I can see an even better idea. My idea might allow me a way back if it goes wrong.
A bit jetlagged. A 787 this time. Not a bad design. I went on a 707 in 1966. Mostly it was a better plane than most since. Inside of the cabin mosly as now. A 707 with some LCD panels in the seats would make it for the passenger seem totally modern. If I am not wrong 707 was faster than most today? 787 flew at 41 000 feet and did the 6200 miles in about 12 hours. 777 A380 787. I sort of like 777 the most. It's engines are very special for what it seems to be. An A380 with four of those I suspect could top 650 MPH. I guess 787 is mostly a 777 updated. Sadly it's near supersonic concept wasn't realised. The old A340 did the same flight in 14 hours in the past, 12 almost seems a local flight. I was level with Austrailia and saw the stars I never see at home again.
I did a fact finding study. 707 was nearly OK to do the flight I just took. 189 passengers max and 607 MPH ( 787 about 330 ) . Fuel range just possible. As you say Frank and why I like 777 so much. 787 is just doing the best for the least fuel.
Funny thing is A380 might get a new model with new engines. It's opperators feel it's engines are not ideal. Given 30 % more thrust it could be a dream come true. Some say it already does what it should. I thought it most unspectacular. It might even be scrapped.
Lockheed Tri-Star and MD DC10 I liked. The fastest I ever flew without tail wind assist was a Tri-Star. It was also the most comfortable. My boss joked to me it looked like a Tri-Star, I said yes it was. He then went very pale and said about cargo doors. Panels were a bit loose and cables visible. The crew said it was possibly it's last flight. The best flight I ever had. Quiet, comfortable and it seemed vast inside. 777 is a bit the same. I suspect the lightly loaded Tri-Star was being given a see what it can do last flight. The 787 was almost new. It looked a bit loose in places. Flew in a very old 747 once with very posh seats. It was not the company we were supposed to have and a vast plane for Cyprus to UK. Suddenly I realised a Russian crew. This was just after the Soviet state broke apart. I suspect this was a new venture with a very old aircraft. All was OK and the staff very smart and good English. Not sure if 747 is still made ? There might be some old orders being made. I suspect with some new engines it might deserve some more to be made?
I was surprised to see 707 was only just over 1000 built. 1952/4 design which was only possible because there were other applications. For it's modest engine thrust it was a very fast aircraft. As someone said if rebuilt the money saved on the aircraft would pay for a lot of fuel. Many 707's were bought to use as spare parts, e.g. RAAF bought 250 I think ? If true that is greedy. How could they need that many ? Must be a typo ? 25 perhaps ?
Dejan said about HS Tridents. I only flew in one once. I think it was better than the 707 if honest. Never been in a Comet nor DC3. Should have had a go in a F1-11 and even fly it ( me in the front seat as it was a trainer ). Long story and sort of glad I didn't. The guy was a real Top Gun married to a friend. I doubt I should say his name if asking. I only asked as a dare at his wedding. Even his boss said OK. She almost instantly became unhappy with his life and ran away. I lost my chance.
Funny thing is A380 might get a new model with new engines. It's opperators feel it's engines are not ideal. Given 30 % more thrust it could be a dream come true. Some say it already does what it should. I thought it most unspectacular. It might even be scrapped.
Lockheed Tri-Star and MD DC10 I liked. The fastest I ever flew without tail wind assist was a Tri-Star. It was also the most comfortable. My boss joked to me it looked like a Tri-Star, I said yes it was. He then went very pale and said about cargo doors. Panels were a bit loose and cables visible. The crew said it was possibly it's last flight. The best flight I ever had. Quiet, comfortable and it seemed vast inside. 777 is a bit the same. I suspect the lightly loaded Tri-Star was being given a see what it can do last flight. The 787 was almost new. It looked a bit loose in places. Flew in a very old 747 once with very posh seats. It was not the company we were supposed to have and a vast plane for Cyprus to UK. Suddenly I realised a Russian crew. This was just after the Soviet state broke apart. I suspect this was a new venture with a very old aircraft. All was OK and the staff very smart and good English. Not sure if 747 is still made ? There might be some old orders being made. I suspect with some new engines it might deserve some more to be made?
I was surprised to see 707 was only just over 1000 built. 1952/4 design which was only possible because there were other applications. For it's modest engine thrust it was a very fast aircraft. As someone said if rebuilt the money saved on the aircraft would pay for a lot of fuel. Many 707's were bought to use as spare parts, e.g. RAAF bought 250 I think ? If true that is greedy. How could they need that many ? Must be a typo ? 25 perhaps ?
Dejan said about HS Tridents. I only flew in one once. I think it was better than the 707 if honest. Never been in a Comet nor DC3. Should have had a go in a F1-11 and even fly it ( me in the front seat as it was a trainer ). Long story and sort of glad I didn't. The guy was a real Top Gun married to a friend. I doubt I should say his name if asking. I only asked as a dare at his wedding. Even his boss said OK. She almost instantly became unhappy with his life and ran away. I lost my chance.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.