Some of technology is great,
However I think it has made work / life balance into work/work balance..
The amount of paper work you have to do now is incredible
Who invented the Excel spread sheet<<they need horse whipping..
HIFI is not dead in our house since I connected the DAC to the IPOD...
Regards
M. Gregg
However I think it has made work / life balance into work/work balance..
The amount of paper work you have to do now is incredible
Who invented the Excel spread sheet<<they need horse whipping..
HIFI is not dead in our house since I connected the DAC to the IPOD...
Regards
M. Gregg
I don't see much interest from the "younger" generation..
To them HIFI is Good computer speakers...mono tone bass...THUMP THUMP...cringe
I went to an old local HIFI shop to find it was just a few selected MID FI components...no tube gear...I asked why...they said there is no call for it..Oh he said we have an Itube...
Regards
M. Gregg
To them HIFI is Good computer speakers...mono tone bass...THUMP THUMP...cringe
I went to an old local HIFI shop to find it was just a few selected MID FI components...no tube gear...I asked why...they said there is no call for it..Oh he said we have an Itube...
Regards
M. Gregg
Same here.
I'm convinced that most users are absolutely addicted to their smart phones and tablets, So, they constantly try to to justify it., They are no different than heroin addict etc in their addiction. Try taking the smart phone and tablets away from a web tech junkie if you think I'm wrong
I'm yet to have someone tell me why they need to be connected to the web and everyone they know 24/7 .
BTW I have 3 computers at home . One is a new i7 sys I just put together.
I also have a cell phone but it only functions as a telephone with no web access..... just a phone and most of the time I have it turned off!
Last edited:
LOL! You're not a teenager, are you? Only an ancient relic would ask a question like that.
Same here.
I'm convinced that most users are absolutely addicted to their smart phones and tablets, So, they constantly try to to justify it., They are no different than heroin addict etc in their addiction. Try taking the smart phone and tablets away from a web tech junkie if you think I'm wrong
I'm yet to have someone tell me why they need to be connected to the web and everyone they know 24/7 .
BTW I have 3 computers at home . One is a new i7 sys I just put together.
I also have a cell phone but it only functions as a telephone with no web access..... just a phone and most of the time I have it turned off!
Constant re-assurance that they're not alone in the void.
I'm 19 and have a dumb-phone. I use it to make calls and texts. The deal I'm on at the moment gives me unlimited texts for a relatively small fee per month, direct debit from my phone's balance. Useful for when a lot of texts need to be sent back and forth, so I suspect it comes out cheaper than a normal pay-as-you-go rate.
These days, don't have to sacrifice a single thing. DSP power is cheap enough to make the mangiest speaker have close to ideal FR, and produce convincing bass as well. B&W have done the latter with "coke can" speakers, which boost the bass at low levels, and intelligently roll it off as the volume increases so the driver is never stressed. Apparently very convincing, and quite unnerving to listen to by people who expect only humungous carcases to be able to do this ...
The answer's in other areas ...
You're right. Actually, flat response SHOULD and WILL make music better (for example, there should be no sibilance with flat response). It is what you do to make it flat (at all cost, or without thorough knowledge) that ruin the music, makes it lifeless and boring.
No difference. By using a DSP you may have sacrificed something. You just change the location of the problem and accept different issues. The answer is exactly there.
IME sibilance is not to do with FR, this is distortion, pure and simple. In the playback.
The DSP will give you as flat as a FR, which is what you were referring to, as you want to pay for - so what may have been sacrificed, apart from adding a device which possibly injects HF interference,
.Sibilance can be created in many places. Female voices may have sibilance (we're not even talking about amplified voice here). Recording, playback and of course speaker design. Non-flat response at top frequencies for example, is a common source of "sibilance".
Speakers designed by amateurs will usually have sibilance
Well, may be you have never heard one without?The DSP will give you as flat as a FR, which is what you were referring to, as you want to pay for - so what may have been sacrificed, apart from adding a device which possibly injects HF interference,
Flat FR is not difficult to achieve, whether in digital domain or in analogue. What you need is an accurate measurement tools, nothing else, and of course some kind of equalizers (many of it
)
Last edited:
Sibilance is a natural aspect of the human voice, every person you listen to speaking normally has a degree of it in their voice. Concentrate carefully next time you listen to someone live speaking to you, and you'll hear lots and lots of sibilance, but once you switch off strongly focusing on that aspect of the sound of their voice the "characteristic" will disappear. There is a natural, or correct harmonic structure to that sound which the ear/brain interprets as the real thing, and when it's reproduced correctly in likewise manner the signature "irritation" will vanish ...Speakers designed by amateurs will usually have sibilance
I have heard terrible, distorted sibilance from some systems, but I don't hear it from mine ...
I have heard terrible, distorted sibilance from some systems, but I don't hear it from mine ...
Speaker sibilance occurs at very high frequency (around 8kHz). If the response is rolled-off too fast, there will be less possibility for sibilance. I have mentioned that I like my tweeters to have flat response up to at least 40kHz. I guess that even tweeter with natural peak at 20kHz (which should be almost inaudible) will be prone to have sibilance. Attached is a "high end" Audax tweeter response.
Sibilance is normally found in any system, with varying degree of severity. May be planar tweeters have less possibility for sibilance. Bad crossover design may introduce sibilance. And many tweeters are not sibilance free, no matter how good the crossover. That's why I love Esotar and all other tweeters from Dynaudio.
Attachments
Interesting you should say that, about Dynaudio. There was an exercise, many months ago, when I did a grand tour to listen to every near field studio monitor I could find in the pro shops in Sydney. And one thing that stood out - apart from the fact the majority were pretty hopeless - was the deadness of the sound from the Dynaudio models; they had no life at all, very flat, completely lacking in sparkle. At the recent hifi show the major display of Dynaudio gear showed uniformly very bad sound, completely lacking in any appeal, on a number of visits -- the major exception was a serious, separate demo with the Dynaudio Confidence C3 driven by 1000W Brystons, in fact this was the best sound of the show ...
You're right. Most Dynaudio speakers require amplifiers with very good damping capability to sound alive. I don't like Dynaudio speakers myself. I have owned only one Dynaudio midwoofer, and I think the sound of Dynaudio speakers are the sound of the woofer. Their tweeters are the opposite. Very airy and sweet. They have been used in many high end speakers. Completely different than Dynaudio speakers.
ADD:
There is a tradition in Dynaudio speakers to use 6dB/octave filter. And to match the phase between woofer and tweeter, there is that "band pass" passive filter to delay the tweeter as used in John Krutke's ZD5. Terrible.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.