Keantoken,
Stay away from any of the newer Klipsch junk, you will be better off looking elsewhere. I don't think they have actually produced a decent product in years, it is only a name now the same as what happened to Altec and so many others. The horns are cheap resonant plastic with cheap dome tweeters attached, forget about a real compression driver. There are so many decent cheap speakers out there by JBL and others in the price range you are looking for. We have Fry's Electronics here that runs advertisements for inexpensive tower speakers every weekend. Just go and listen in one of these types of stores with your own source material and close your eyes, don't purchase based on looks or brand. Find something you could live with at that price range. Best Buy here has Magnolia Electronics here and they also could have something that fits your needs. Otherwise there are some real well worked out systems here on this site with driver selection and crossovers already optimized.
Stay away from any of the newer Klipsch junk, you will be better off looking elsewhere. I don't think they have actually produced a decent product in years, it is only a name now the same as what happened to Altec and so many others. The horns are cheap resonant plastic with cheap dome tweeters attached, forget about a real compression driver. There are so many decent cheap speakers out there by JBL and others in the price range you are looking for. We have Fry's Electronics here that runs advertisements for inexpensive tower speakers every weekend. Just go and listen in one of these types of stores with your own source material and close your eyes, don't purchase based on looks or brand. Find something you could live with at that price range. Best Buy here has Magnolia Electronics here and they also could have something that fits your needs. Otherwise there are some real well worked out systems here on this site with driver selection and crossovers already optimized.
I talked with John C today i predicted you would say that. The facts are many many recorders/mixers/producers of music That We All listen to have Not done it correctly and there are consequences we hear. Sure the theory is good. That is not the problem to address.
In addition to when to apply dither and when not to.... we have various dithers of a fraction of a bit as well as 1 bit and 2 bit -- rms and p-p choices to make as well as various shaped ones. Finding out which is best for what you are doing isnt clear cut to the users of the DAW software. It might be their problem to find out how to do it 'correctly' but we the consumer have to pay for it and listen to the mess. People like Katz make more sense in actual practice of the theory and how to apply it to making accurate music files.
Preparing (pre-mastering) a file(s) for CD is not done the same as files chosen for HD. The files chosen for HD/HiRes download and because of the way HD mastering is done differently (and what is not done) is what makes them so accurate and clean sounding. And, that is why my CD and my HD do not sound the same.
That is the area to understand.... not the theory of this or that..... how to record and mix and make music prepared for HD/HiRes playback to a high degree of accuracy.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Hmmm ... Klipsch Palladium P-39F loudspeaker | Stereophile.com ... obviously a bit o' rubbish ...
If people actually wish to hear what dithering is capable of doing, when ridiculously low numbers of bits are used ... Digital Problems, Practical Solutions | Media
For me, the proof's in the pudding - if the design or final product does the job, irrespective of cost, then that's all that matters, in an absolute sense. And if it does what's 'right' at a good value for money ratio, that's so much better. The article gives that design a tick, and echos what I heard from a far, far less ambitious model in their range.
A speaker should get out of the way - if I'm aware that it's sitting there, being exceedingly "impressive", then it's failed ... Wilson speakers come to mind here ...
.
A speaker should get out of the way - if I'm aware that it's sitting there, being exceedingly "impressive", then it's failed ... Wilson speakers come to mind here ...
.
Frank,
My major problem with what you write is that it is all adjectives with no meaning or context. . I still have no idea what you would really like, very evasive on that, just empty words. I noticed your comment on the power supply thread and the stupid comment about toroidal transformers being junk in your eyes. P;ease tell us the best speaker you have personally owned, that would tell us much more than anything else you have had to say. PC speakers do not quality for that answer.
The one area that I will agree with you on is that there is technically nothing wrong with 16/44.1 CD's. If anything it is just poor technique in the studios and nothing to do with the technical merits of the format.
My major problem with what you write is that it is all adjectives with no meaning or context. . I still have no idea what you would really like, very evasive on that, just empty words. I noticed your comment on the power supply thread and the stupid comment about toroidal transformers being junk in your eyes. P;ease tell us the best speaker you have personally owned, that would tell us much more than anything else you have had to say. PC speakers do not quality for that answer.
The one area that I will agree with you on is that there is technically nothing wrong with 16/44.1 CD's. If anything it is just poor technique in the studios and nothing to do with the technical merits of the format.
Kindhornman, I've said many times what I want, "convincing" sound. Pano knows what I'm talking about - that the speakers completely disappear in an acoustic sense, and only the musical event on the recording is audible. Most systems fail to achieve that, most of the time - and what "I would really like" is to be able to make that happen, any time, with any system.
Sorry you didn't get the joke about toroid transformers, I was actually having a go at EI transformers if you read it more carefully,.
Best speaker personally owned is a bit tricky, the Technics SB-5000 - Hi-Fi Database - Floorstanding Speakers did the job for many years, very reasonably. In the more modern style, have a couple of pairs of decent Oz speakers by Accusound, tower style, multiple mid/bass units type - British style of thing, but built a lot better. Also a couple of B&W bookshelfs, and couple of other Brit boxes.
Probably technically the best is a set of Peerless drivers, proper woofers, etc, to be put into a carcase one day, just waiting for the Round Tuit to arrive ...
Edit: Part of the "I would really like" is that the system is capable of holding it together "perfectly" up to any reasonable volume - the latter is certainly something I don't have at the moment, but would be an endgame type of thing. As Max Headroom has mentioned, to be able to put on, say, AC/DC at any volume that one feels in the mood for, with zero hiccups being audible.
Sorry you didn't get the joke about toroid transformers, I was actually having a go at EI transformers if you read it more carefully,
.Best speaker personally owned is a bit tricky, the Technics SB-5000 - Hi-Fi Database - Floorstanding Speakers did the job for many years, very reasonably. In the more modern style, have a couple of pairs of decent Oz speakers by Accusound, tower style, multiple mid/bass units type - British style of thing, but built a lot better. Also a couple of B&W bookshelfs, and couple of other Brit boxes.
Probably technically the best is a set of Peerless drivers, proper woofers, etc, to be put into a carcase one day, just waiting for the Round Tuit to arrive ...
Edit: Part of the "I would really like" is that the system is capable of holding it together "perfectly" up to any reasonable volume - the latter is certainly something I don't have at the moment, but would be an endgame type of thing. As Max Headroom has mentioned, to be able to put on, say, AC/DC at any volume that one feels in the mood for, with zero hiccups being audible.
Last edited:
I've conversed many times with Pano and I don't see that his style of speakers has any relevance to your style of speakers, he is a large format horn and bass enclosure kind of guy. He and I agree on many design ideas, not all but enough that I understand his thinking.
I don't think I would have liked the high end of those Technics speaker you so loved, just can't get behind a cone driver for the top end and that it is rather large to produce much on the top end besides the beaming that hey would produce.
I have no problem with Peerless, Seas, Polydax and many of the other European raw frame speakers. One of the best dome tweeters I have measured was a very inexpensive Audax 1" soft dome tweeter, much better than many of the more expensive dome tweeters out there. Peerless gets some fairly nice sounds out of their devices especially when you take a close look at how crude some of the parts are made, a real synergy in the end but you wouldn't expect it from a simple inspection of the parts.
I don't think I would have liked the high end of those Technics speaker you so loved, just can't get behind a cone driver for the top end and that it is rather large to produce much on the top end besides the beaming that hey would produce.
I have no problem with Peerless, Seas, Polydax and many of the other European raw frame speakers. One of the best dome tweeters I have measured was a very inexpensive Audax 1" soft dome tweeter, much better than many of the more expensive dome tweeters out there. Peerless gets some fairly nice sounds out of their devices especially when you take a close look at how crude some of the parts are made, a real synergy in the end but you wouldn't expect it from a simple inspection of the parts.
I'm not into "styles of speakers", rather styles of sound - and my personal experience is that the "sound" is a function of the system synergy, - "synergy" is a term that I deplore, because it really just means low distortion from the end product.
My experience is that up to a certain point of overall system quality, one is aware of the speakers, and their "quality" - you can hear "how good the speaker is", your attention is drawn to its functioning. Another way of describing it, is that there are two acoustic events happening in the listening area: the content of the recording; and, the sound of the system, and especially the speakers. The two exist layered on top of each other, and normally they are both fairly easy to hear - you can tune out of the recording, and literally listen to the behaviour of the speakers, as something apart from the music. Or you can switch it over, just "enjoy the music",. What I find happens is that if the overall standard is good enough then the sound of the speakers starts to lose out, it becomes harder to hear them working, "misbehaving" - and the final step is that it is impossible to hear speaker behaviour. The masking - and that truly is what it is - by the acoustic of the recording is total - it completely dominates any "sounds" of the speaker and the system ... you no longer can "hear" the speaker, no matter how hard you try.
- "synergy" is a term that I deplore, because it really just means low distortion from the end product.My experience is that up to a certain point of overall system quality, one is aware of the speakers, and their "quality" - you can hear "how good the speaker is", your attention is drawn to its functioning. Another way of describing it, is that there are two acoustic events happening in the listening area: the content of the recording; and, the sound of the system, and especially the speakers. The two exist layered on top of each other, and normally they are both fairly easy to hear - you can tune out of the recording, and literally listen to the behaviour of the speakers, as something apart from the music. Or you can switch it over, just "enjoy the music",
. What I find happens is that if the overall standard is good enough then the sound of the speakers starts to lose out, it becomes harder to hear them working, "misbehaving" - and the final step is that it is impossible to hear speaker behaviour. The masking - and that truly is what it is - by the acoustic of the recording is total - it completely dominates any "sounds" of the speaker and the system ... you no longer can "hear" the speaker, no matter how hard you try.
Last edited:
Good points - of course, this environment is well known to the designers, they've had decades to come to grips with the subtleties of getting good numbers; a good example of how engineering will always achieve a good result if they can do many iterative rounds, over many versions, to get it as good they see fit.
However, a brand new design, in a purely audio context is something quite different ... I saw the DEQX SMPS, a tiny bareboard thing, like something pulled out of a wallwart - it didn't inspire me,
Conventional noise is not the real problem - the headache with digital sound is that insufficient engineering leads to an "inaudible" layer of grunge which flattens, removes the essential "sparkle" and depth of the sound - one can get quite a shock when this is removed - "bloody hell!!" could be the reaction ...
Engineer bashing again!
No ... it's "insufficient engineering" bashing ...
Edit: To get a handle on the kind of guy I am, marce, I go around and around and around a problem, wearing it down until I find the nub - or until I have exhausted all possibilities, I can't see any other approach to try. That's just the way I am - I'm not interested in a good looking solution, or a fast solution, or one that everyone else raves about ... I want THE solution ...
Edit: To get a handle on the kind of guy I am, marce, I go around and around and around a problem, wearing it down until I find the nub - or until I have exhausted all possibilities, I can't see any other approach to try. That's just the way I am - I'm not interested in a good looking solution, or a fast solution, or one that everyone else raves about ... I want THE solution ...
Last edited:
Try science and engineering sometime, usually a lot quicker than going round in circles with your expectation bias.
I'm extremely keen to solve using science and engineering - unless the current knowledge base doesn't supply sufficient information, and procedures, for a satisfactory outcome. If that's the case, then simple, hands on experimentation is the next best option.
Even if the knowledge is out there, it is often disregarded, by the "engineers". At one stage I became extremely interested in power supplies, and it was very clear that nowhere near enough engineering was being done in typical consumer audio gear - the conventional thinking ruled, vaguely OK was good enough - and lots of dodgy sound could be heard everywhere. Here, "expectation bias" rules with designers - they expect a standard design to be good enough - and if it isn't ... well, then it must be something else's fault ...
I expect a certain standard of performance - that's my bias - and I also expect that if enough effort is put into it then that standard will be achieved. Pretty scary stuff, I realise, but it's been quite effective over the years.
Even if the knowledge is out there, it is often disregarded, by the "engineers". At one stage I became extremely interested in power supplies, and it was very clear that nowhere near enough engineering was being done in typical consumer audio gear - the conventional thinking ruled, vaguely OK was good enough - and lots of dodgy sound could be heard everywhere. Here, "expectation bias" rules with designers - they expect a standard design to be good enough - and if it isn't ... well, then it must be something else's fault ...
I expect a certain standard of performance - that's my bias - and I also expect that if enough effort is put into it then that standard will be achieved. Pretty scary stuff, I realise
, but it's been quite effective over the years.
But suppose I have a signal (digital) that I want to increase say 2dB. That is necessarily a multiplication process, no?
Jan
Frank, the people (consumers in general) DO NOT WANT linear and neutral. The don't like that because they have been poisoned with "refind", "detailed", "analytical" speakers, all of which boils down to various forms of nonlienarity combined in a mix. They want what I'd call a boomy bass, they want exaggerated midrange so they can hear the perofmers breathe very loudly. Give them extremely linera and they say t lacks life, it has no dynamics, etc.
And I do not refer to my speakers only. I believe the original Spendor BC3 to be superbly well voiced loudspeaker, with that too. Say what you will, despite some of its shortcomings (low effective impedance, very complex load) the AR3A Improved was another well voiced speaker, but the much revered Yamaha NS-1000 was, to my mind, a not so well voiced speaker. It actually lacked bass defnition. Yet, people are dazzled by their name and fame and take it to be the standard to strive for, while I feel even modest Infinity Refernce models like 4000 and 5000, were far better voiced and more balanced despite costing quite a bit less.
In its day, te Klipsch Heresy was an odd ball speaker you either loved or hated, no middle ground. I loved it, even if it had its faults I felt it had more going for it than against it. In its day, its nearest competitor would have been JBL's 4312, a similar concept, I dn't remember their cost, so possible for more money, but both had the same thing going for them - something very near to true 8 Ohm impedance, hence relatively easy to drive, and of course efficiency well above the norm of the day, if memory serves 95 dB/2.83V/1m. I'd say the Heresy was perhaps a tad more coloured, but both were bubbling with life and joy of living when many others were deadbeats in comparison.
I haven't heard a Klipsch since, and some months ago, they started to be sold locally, they now have a distributor, so I will try to hear the current crop. And the new crop of Cerwin Vega, also now on regular offer locally.
We can argue about this, but I think most people don't want linearity because it tends to show up the existing system problems. Such speakers hide very little, but in return they do let one hear things one does not normally hear, or at least not so well.
And I do not refer to my speakers only. I believe the original Spendor BC3 to be superbly well voiced loudspeaker, with that too. Say what you will, despite some of its shortcomings (low effective impedance, very complex load) the AR3A Improved was another well voiced speaker, but the much revered Yamaha NS-1000 was, to my mind, a not so well voiced speaker. It actually lacked bass defnition. Yet, people are dazzled by their name and fame and take it to be the standard to strive for, while I feel even modest Infinity Refernce models like 4000 and 5000, were far better voiced and more balanced despite costing quite a bit less.
In its day, te Klipsch Heresy was an odd ball speaker you either loved or hated, no middle ground. I loved it, even if it had its faults I felt it had more going for it than against it. In its day, its nearest competitor would have been JBL's 4312, a similar concept, I dn't remember their cost, so possible for more money, but both had the same thing going for them - something very near to true 8 Ohm impedance, hence relatively easy to drive, and of course efficiency well above the norm of the day, if memory serves 95 dB/2.83V/1m. I'd say the Heresy was perhaps a tad more coloured, but both were bubbling with life and joy of living when many others were deadbeats in comparison.
I haven't heard a Klipsch since, and some months ago, they started to be sold locally, they now have a distributor, so I will try to hear the current crop. And the new crop of Cerwin Vega, also now on regular offer locally.
We can argue about this, but I think most people don't want linearity because it tends to show up the existing system problems. Such speakers hide very little, but in return they do let one hear things one does not normally hear, or at least not so well.
Last edited:
Absolutely, but 6dB of gain only increases your MSB by 1, not by 16, that was my point. The multiply may be 16x16 bits but the output depends on what it happening. Maybe I am just being pedantic in the face of an article that irritated me.
Cop out. If it takes more than one Google and 2 sums you are back to to hand waving and magic fixes. That is not being in the slightest scientific. Power supplies are very well undestood, as is EMC related to them.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.