Toole found that true years ago for phono cartridges---EQed to pull up the slightly-sagging high end, the MM was preferred to the MCs by listeners who were certain that they couldn't stand MM. Of course they blamed the electronics.
I'm agnostic, as I am enjoying MC playback a lot. However I have to remember that the MC cartridge is playing a slightly different part of the groove and one that is probably less worn.
I dont see this point. If we have the same stylus tip and similar cantilever for MC and MM, they will track the same part of the groove.
Yes, very nicely.
I'm just back from a few beers with my neighbor over the road who saw them....it turns out the two boys were dancing around on my lawn for a couple of tracks before they knocked.
Polite, good kids they said the sound was really good and what was I playing ?.
Definitely Aussie kids.....AC/DC at full tilt, lol.
Dan.
Brad,
I'm not sure how to comment on that last comment about all speakers being equivalent if you get the eq the same on two very different speakers? There is just so much more than on axis response, that seems to discount harmonic distortion, phase response and cabinet diffraction and other factors that it just seems to be a simplistic answer. If that is the case then RNM just wasted a lot of money on those JBL M2 speakers, he should have just gone to Fry's and bought the cheapest JBL tower speakers for $200 and eq'd them to sound like the M2's! I know you didn't mean that but under what conditions were the multiple devices compared by Toole? There is much more to this story I think.
I'm not sure how to comment on that last comment about all speakers being equivalent if you get the eq the same on two very different speakers? There is just so much more than on axis response, that seems to discount harmonic distortion, phase response and cabinet diffraction and other factors that it just seems to be a simplistic answer. If that is the case then RNM just wasted a lot of money on those JBL M2 speakers, he should have just gone to Fry's and bought the cheapest JBL tower speakers for $200 and eq'd them to sound like the M2's! I know you didn't mean that but under what conditions were the multiple devices compared by Toole? There is much more to this story I think.
Kind, you are right when it comes to loudspeakers, but I was talking about individual drivers. You might like the discussion on Jon's thread.
Of course distortion is driver related, as well as energy storage. Those can become audible too. But mainly it is the systems integration which will make or break the final result. The drivers in the M2 by themselves aren't made of gold. Including horn the drivers can probably be had for under 1kUSD. It is the engineering your are paying for.
This is also why really cheap speakers sometimes are remarkably good when played within their specs- they were designed the right way.
Edit: to preempt fact doubting: http://reconingspeakers.com/product/jbl-m2-horn-lens-5025594/
Of course distortion is driver related, as well as energy storage. Those can become audible too. But mainly it is the systems integration which will make or break the final result. The drivers in the M2 by themselves aren't made of gold. Including horn the drivers can probably be had for under 1kUSD. It is the engineering your are paying for.
This is also why really cheap speakers sometimes are remarkably good when played within their specs- they were designed the right way.
Edit: to preempt fact doubting: http://reconingspeakers.com/product/jbl-m2-horn-lens-5025594/
Vacuphile,
Yes I understand that there are more issues than just the EQ comparison of two speaker enclosures and I also understand that though you can take two raw frame drivers and eq them the same that doesn't make them equivalent with all the secondary factors as you mentioned like the harmonic distortion, linearity and many other factors. At the same time I do understand that it is the whole and not just the drivers that make a great speaker.
Anyone in the know will understand that so many audio companies are using the identical drivers from certain commodity trading companies with only the looks changed if even that at times. There are cheap commodity speakers and expensive units some great on both ends of the spectrum. At the same time many raw frame drivers that look different are constructed from the same basic raw components produced by the millions by certain producers and though a speaker from one company may look different than another it may actually have identical components assembled without knowing they have done that. There are many choices that have to be made when designing a device, it isn't as easy as some may think but I gather that you would know that.
I've been working on pushing the envelope in raw frame driver design but that takes going outside the norms in certain respects though you surely can't change the laws of physics. While looking at an industry accepted software solution such as Fine Cone I was so disappointed in the variables that I just don't see the usefulness unless using commodity components and materials, it left a lot to desire, the same with their Fine Motor design software. Sometimes we just have to take a leap and figure things out that are neglected or overlooked.
Good luck on your own speaker development I would love to hear about it sometime.
Steven
Yes I understand that there are more issues than just the EQ comparison of two speaker enclosures and I also understand that though you can take two raw frame drivers and eq them the same that doesn't make them equivalent with all the secondary factors as you mentioned like the harmonic distortion, linearity and many other factors. At the same time I do understand that it is the whole and not just the drivers that make a great speaker.
Anyone in the know will understand that so many audio companies are using the identical drivers from certain commodity trading companies with only the looks changed if even that at times. There are cheap commodity speakers and expensive units some great on both ends of the spectrum. At the same time many raw frame drivers that look different are constructed from the same basic raw components produced by the millions by certain producers and though a speaker from one company may look different than another it may actually have identical components assembled without knowing they have done that. There are many choices that have to be made when designing a device, it isn't as easy as some may think but I gather that you would know that.
I've been working on pushing the envelope in raw frame driver design but that takes going outside the norms in certain respects though you surely can't change the laws of physics. While looking at an industry accepted software solution such as Fine Cone I was so disappointed in the variables that I just don't see the usefulness unless using commodity components and materials, it left a lot to desire, the same with their Fine Motor design software. Sometimes we just have to take a leap and figure things out that are neglected or overlooked.
Good luck on your own speaker development I would love to hear about it sometime.
Steven
Last edited:
No, they are different. Not by intention, just in fact.
I dont see this point. If we have the same stylus tip and similar cantilever for MC and MM, they will track the same part of the groove.
I was talking about cartridges, not loudspeakers. Toole was testing listener preferences in cartridges (long long ago, for a semi-pro audio magazine in Canada).
I think I had better spend my time elsewhere.
Except the electronics I'm referring to are not cheap consumer commodity grade. Until proven otherwise my only example of Parasound has been bad. ModWright doesn't seem very good to me either. Bryston is merely good for home theater as it's like an uncultured buffoon. VAC preamps at least I wouldn't touch, maybe amps too. My list of electronic products I like is short and may have some notation on the ways it sounds good. Price doesn't seem to set the pace for me with quality, but a few rather expensive items are good. But then again I enjoy some less expensive things too.
Where as with speakers my $500 kit including enclosure has been enough for me to do all the work I need to developing electronic things, and get some pleasurable listening. Yes I do want better speakers, but, to compare to purchased electronics of pre-made stuff I'd be happy with I'd be fine with an MSB setup. That would only cost what, like $180k? I'd happily pair it with my speakers over having say Von Schwiekert's VR-11SE MK2 with an Oppo for source and a Modwright KWA 100 amp.
Brad,
I obviously missed your point when I thought you were speaking of dynamic drivers and not cartridges! On that point I have no real knowledge having only read what is oft said in this thread. I don't have any technical knowledge of the factors in the design of moving coil or moving magnet besides the differences of moving mass and a couple other factors so I surely can't make comments about vinyl reproduction from the cartridge out. I've had Shure and Ortofon and Stanton and a few others over the years and couldn't tell you one from another honestly besides the different mounting methods and the way they obviously look.
Don't let me chase you away, your opinions and knowledge are highly valued by me I can tell you that.
I obviously missed your point when I thought you were speaking of dynamic drivers and not cartridges! On that point I have no real knowledge having only read what is oft said in this thread. I don't have any technical knowledge of the factors in the design of moving coil or moving magnet besides the differences of moving mass and a couple other factors so I surely can't make comments about vinyl reproduction from the cartridge out. I've had Shure and Ortofon and Stanton and a few others over the years and couldn't tell you one from another honestly besides the different mounting methods and the way they obviously look.
Don't let me chase you away, your opinions and knowledge are highly valued by me I can tell you that.
Someone asked what each of us had for components to listen music with. My system is always evolving or I am trying out some idea and need something else. But here is mine at this moment in time -->
Sources in order of quality performance is HD downloads played thru Auraliti spdif to a DAC-2 by Benchmark. OPPO 105D CD/DVD and Sony carousal CD player for back ground music.... to the Benchmark Dac2 inputs.
Tuners -- Yamaha T2, Or backup Magnum Dynalab MD102 or Marantz 20.
Speakers were QUAD ESL 989 replaced by JBL M2.
Amps and DSP are Crown iT5000HD. To be replaced with miniDSP and DADod's CFA amps asap.
That all there is to it. Plus power isolation filters,of course.
What are you using??
THx-RNMarsh
Sources in order of quality performance is HD downloads played thru Auraliti spdif to a DAC-2 by Benchmark. OPPO 105D CD/DVD and Sony carousal CD player for back ground music.... to the Benchmark Dac2 inputs.
Tuners -- Yamaha T2, Or backup Magnum Dynalab MD102 or Marantz 20.
Speakers were QUAD ESL 989 replaced by JBL M2.
Amps and DSP are Crown iT5000HD. To be replaced with miniDSP and DADod's CFA amps asap.
That all there is to it. Plus power isolation filters,of course.
What are you using??
THx-RNMarsh
Hee! Was any preference expressed by the kids for either Bon or Brian?
True story: I never cared much for AC/DC until after I quit drinking. I love the hell out of 'em now! I still haven't figured that one out.
- Jim
I spoke with Dick Sequerra today about the MET7 speaker. He admits to the TIME RESPONSE of the MET7 being the PRIMARY advantage of this speaker over many others. It is NOT the frequency response that Sequerra thinks is normally overemphasized. The MET7 frequency response is almost non-existent in either bass or treble. It is essentially a really good midrange speaker with a GREAT TIME RESPONSE. Yet Scott Wurcer and I both think highly of this loudspeaker, even over many speakers with a more even and extended frequency response. Why is this? It is NOT our imaginations. It is based on how we really hear, according to Dick Sequerra. Perhaps we should look into this.
Attachments
- Status
- Not open for further replies.