I personally don't see the reason to fuss as much as I have read in the past few about group delay in electronics when you compare that to the average speaker systems inherent GD in each driver and also the poor alignment at the xo frequency the majority of the time. You can of course correct the timing for the impulse response at the xo frequency but unless you are using some kind of dsp correction I don't see how the average speaker with passive network is really going to get much worse with the slight gd that might be on the electronics side of things?
As for the conversation going on about how you can look at imaging and how each system will be different that is true to a point. Generally I would say there is a fairly common angular arrangement of angularity and distance from listener to speakers. The triangle is fairly common in reference to distance and angle. As you move farther away the speaker distance center to center is increased. Of course this does not take into account the room dimensions well but is fairly consistent for first wavelength from the speaker disregarding the reflective nature of the room. The reality of the majority of all popular music using the simple panned mono signal seems to be lost somewhere in this conversation, that is what you will get on 99% of all music recorded in the studio so what gives that we are now trying to find fault with this factor? It seems we are back to trying to reproduce the natural sound field that we have in everyday life, not going to happen with two channel recorded music, just not possible I would have to conclude.
Can't we just enjoy the music without trying to find fault with everything that has been done with two channel music for the last 50 years or so? I still hear people talking about mono recordings so how is that any more realistic? I suggest that some of the people who are looking for room correction and center phantom channel information look at the Twin Towers thread and see what can be done with a line array and dsp control. There is much information about the center phantom imaging in that thread.
Pano,
thought you would be in Hawaii forever, now the Gulf Coast?
As for the conversation going on about how you can look at imaging and how each system will be different that is true to a point. Generally I would say there is a fairly common angular arrangement of angularity and distance from listener to speakers. The triangle is fairly common in reference to distance and angle. As you move farther away the speaker distance center to center is increased. Of course this does not take into account the room dimensions well but is fairly consistent for first wavelength from the speaker disregarding the reflective nature of the room. The reality of the majority of all popular music using the simple panned mono signal seems to be lost somewhere in this conversation, that is what you will get on 99% of all music recorded in the studio so what gives that we are now trying to find fault with this factor? It seems we are back to trying to reproduce the natural sound field that we have in everyday life, not going to happen with two channel recorded music, just not possible I would have to conclude.
Can't we just enjoy the music without trying to find fault with everything that has been done with two channel music for the last 50 years or so? I still hear people talking about mono recordings so how is that any more realistic? I suggest that some of the people who are looking for room correction and center phantom channel information look at the Twin Towers thread and see what can be done with a line array and dsp control. There is much information about the center phantom imaging in that thread.
Pano,
thought you would be in Hawaii forever, now the Gulf Coast?
Yes, of course speakers are a weak link and produces large amounts of many forms of distortion... such as GD.. espec at low freqs. But, this isnt a speaker design forum... it is more about preamps and amps... thus thier contributions. Many years ago I wanted to GD equalize my speakers... but was all but impossible to do with analog delays lines etc. NOW.much more can be done to correct these things.
BTW - I am listening to music now. From another room.
A good system sounds good in any way you want to listen to it.
THx-RNMarsh
BTW - I am listening to music now. From another room.
A good system sounds good in any way you want to listen to it. THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
RNM,
I would have to conclude that this stopped being a thread about preamps and amps a long time ago and is now more of a general audio forum at this point. The speakers as you have just found out is the most important aspect of the chain, why ignore the fact? This is where the thread should spend some time and integrating the two to make the best system functionality.
I would have to conclude that this stopped being a thread about preamps and amps a long time ago and is now more of a general audio forum at this point. The speakers as you have just found out is the most important aspect of the chain, why ignore the fact? This is where the thread should spend some time and integrating the two to make the best system functionality.
While I don't mind anything audio being discussed here, including loudspeakers, wires, etc, I think that many here are not interested in preamp and amp improvements, because you actually have been lead to believe that they are virtually 'perfect' or at least non separable in an ABX test, and that should be 'good enough'. But it isn't, not for people who really care about audio quality. I would like to discuss preamp and amp design more here, but I just can't get a word in edgewise, with all the 'whatever it is' is being discussed.
Not even general audio necessarily. That's why it's in the Lounge instead of any of the audio-related forums.
se
Yes, it was put in the 'Lounge' but it started as a specific subject area. I presume it was put in the Lounge as a compromise from eliminating it completely, like SE wanted so badly, and to dilute its original path, which was to teach audiophiles how to make even better preamps and amps, which to some are controversial topics like: solder quality, amount of negative feedback, fets vs bipolars, extensive power supply buffering, heavy shielding, etc. etc. .
John,
I personally have no problem with you or anyone who actually knows what they are talking about speaking about power amps and preamps and other parts of the audio chain. I say go for it. At the same time you can't keep talking about designing amplifiers with silicon that you can no longer purchase, it isn't going to do anyone any good if you talk about something that you can build because you have kept some NOS parts that nobody can find today, it should be either newer available devices or you have to stay with general design theory. I don't think you are interested in class-d amplifiers even though I do see that seems to be the future of this industry. What are you going to do when you can't get your favorite devices and Parasound wants a new design that they can make thousands of them? I've learned a lot from this thread on many different subjects, some audio related and some not at all. When Jan or George put up a great article you better believe that I save the pdf's or whatever form they are in, I have a long list of documents from them and others such as JN and Scott or whoever puts up something relevant. I do read what you have to say, it is just that some of it is conditioned on older design concepts you developed long ago. I know you can still design newer designs and assume that you do when called for. We can talk about lead solder and all but of course you can't use that commercially anymore so except for us doing diy what is the point of harping on the best lead based solder? I''ve been around the wire game for long enough to know most of it is bs, not all of it but the audiophile stuff is just silly. I can't hear a difference between silver or copper speaker wire and I have built speakers that have been at least as advanced as anything Wilson does, perhaps with something with a specific inductance or weird resistance you could tell the difference but I surely couldn't. I've used some of this exotic wire for CES and Stereophile shows but that was just to make the audiophiles pay attention and not walk out because I was using some cheap zip cord, not that I believed it made a real difference. I have done shows with Sumo amps and others using Cary tube amps combined with Parasound amps. I do understand the audiophile market, it just isn't a game I want to play in anymore except on the speaker side of things for a few specific products.
I personally have no problem with you or anyone who actually knows what they are talking about speaking about power amps and preamps and other parts of the audio chain. I say go for it. At the same time you can't keep talking about designing amplifiers with silicon that you can no longer purchase, it isn't going to do anyone any good if you talk about something that you can build because you have kept some NOS parts that nobody can find today, it should be either newer available devices or you have to stay with general design theory. I don't think you are interested in class-d amplifiers even though I do see that seems to be the future of this industry. What are you going to do when you can't get your favorite devices and Parasound wants a new design that they can make thousands of them? I've learned a lot from this thread on many different subjects, some audio related and some not at all. When Jan or George put up a great article you better believe that I save the pdf's or whatever form they are in, I have a long list of documents from them and others such as JN and Scott or whoever puts up something relevant. I do read what you have to say, it is just that some of it is conditioned on older design concepts you developed long ago. I know you can still design newer designs and assume that you do when called for. We can talk about lead solder and all but of course you can't use that commercially anymore so except for us doing diy what is the point of harping on the best lead based solder? I''ve been around the wire game for long enough to know most of it is bs, not all of it but the audiophile stuff is just silly. I can't hear a difference between silver or copper speaker wire and I have built speakers that have been at least as advanced as anything Wilson does, perhaps with something with a specific inductance or weird resistance you could tell the difference but I surely couldn't. I've used some of this exotic wire for CES and Stereophile shows but that was just to make the audiophiles pay attention and not walk out because I was using some cheap zip cord, not that I believed it made a real difference. I have done shows with Sumo amps and others using Cary tube amps combined with Parasound amps. I do understand the audiophile market, it just isn't a game I want to play in anymore except on the speaker side of things for a few specific products.
Destroyer,
you can have the best electronics you can purchase and if you don't have speakers that have low distortion and great network design what is the point? The speakers are in my eyes the most critical factor in getting great sound, you can't make a great sound with bad speaker designs, no amount of electronics can correct for a bad speaker design, or poor devices.
you can have the best electronics you can purchase and if you don't have speakers that have low distortion and great network design what is the point? The speakers are in my eyes the most critical factor in getting great sound, you can't make a great sound with bad speaker designs, no amount of electronics can correct for a bad speaker design, or poor devices.
I didn't say superb electronics can make utter **** into magic. In the same way that no amount of money or design in speakers can make total **** electronics into magic either. The very notion and argument is offensively oriented towards fighting when you pigeon hole it like that.
I'd rather have superb electronics with decent speakers, than superb speakers with decent electronics. In my opinion what people consider "decent" electronics are not that good. I put an effort towards the electronics that far exceed my efforts toward the speakers.
I work on making electronics I like. For the most part there doesn't seem like much I could spend money on for satisfaction, btw.
I'd rather have superb electronics with decent speakers, than superb speakers with decent electronics. In my opinion what people consider "decent" electronics are not that good. I put an effort towards the electronics that far exceed my efforts toward the speakers.
I work on making electronics I like. For the most part there doesn't seem like much I could spend money on for satisfaction, btw.
Destroyer,
The same thing you say I am doing you are just in reverse and then saying that what people called decent electronics you put in a category of what I suspect are cheap commodity consumer electronics. So we are just on opposite sides of the fence here, no intention to fight. What I see is that since very few people could possibly build a complete speaker device what most say when they are building speakers is building boxes and putting a commodity driver in them whether they are cheap or expensive drivers. It is almost always that situation and most audiophile speakers fall into that category as few speaker companies actually build the devices. I understand that many can build electronics, not necessarily do the design but build something with a schematic and the proper parts.
The same thing you say I am doing you are just in reverse and then saying that what people called decent electronics you put in a category of what I suspect are cheap commodity consumer electronics. So we are just on opposite sides of the fence here, no intention to fight. What I see is that since very few people could possibly build a complete speaker device what most say when they are building speakers is building boxes and putting a commodity driver in them whether they are cheap or expensive drivers. It is almost always that situation and most audiophile speakers fall into that category as few speaker companies actually build the devices. I understand that many can build electronics, not necessarily do the design but build something with a schematic and the proper parts.
It's nice to see the various theoretical positions on speakers verses amps. However, in practice, it remains true that the Bryston 4B and NS-10 combination has been used to make many hit records. I am not aware of any successful combination where the speaker was excellent quality and the amp rather poor. Maybe someone else knows of some combination?
Special mention to Gpapag for digging all sorts of stuff relevant to the discussions.....our informal diyAudio librarian.
Thanks George, don't stop.
Dan.
Thanks Richard, you said it better than me, and Yes George you are The Man.
And yes George, how do you come up with your references so fast ?.
Dan.
Last edited:
In a funny kind of way you are right. As Jon Bocani is finding out in his thread on 'best midrange', usually test subjects cannot differentiate between two different drivers EQ-ed to flat. The same what goes for amps also goes for drivers. If measurements indicate they perform identically, so they do to your ears.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.