"Too low to start them" is the problem here. Speakers which really behaved like this have no place in a music reproduction system. However, human ears may wrongly give the impression that a speaker is behaving like this.east electronics said:
I think I may be beginning to understand your misconception. You think the change in subjective sound quality when you turn down the volume is caused by the system, when in reality it is caused by your ears.
That's actually your misconception. He is saying that at low levels, some amps sound a bit better than others. If what you say was the cause then all the amps would sound worse at low levels.
Perhaps it is nothing to do with whether the amp has a buffer before the pot, more to do with bias current, crossover behaviour and noise floor.
Last edited:
We are getting somewhere now Richie00boy thanks , But please notice that after noticing this behavior i narrow down the cause to the configuration
IE amplifiers that have the pot behind the gain stage and then the main amplifier perform better at the specific situation than others that don't ....
Bias was a suspect and i have been testing that also with no results
Kind regards
Sakis
IE amplifiers that have the pot behind the gain stage and then the main amplifier perform better at the specific situation than others that don't ....
Bias was a suspect and i have been testing that also with no results
Kind regards
Sakis
Which topics might affect the low level behaviour of an amplifier, but have nothing whatsoever to do with the effect of a volume pot. If I understand him correctly, Sakis is claiming that a volume pot itself behaves badly at low levels but adding buffers and/or gain stages around it prevents this. This is simply untrue. He has brought lots of irrelevant issues into the discussion in order to avoid facing the real issue: a misunderstanding of how potential dividers work.richie00boy said:
Some power amps may sound bad at low levels - poor design, but nothing to do with volume controls. Even some speakers may sound bad at low levels - poor design, but nothing to do with volume controls.
Well he just pointed out his observation and asked for feedback. He didn't claim it was a magic fix.
Even considering the things I mentioned, the pot could still be a factor. Perhaps with a buffer it has allowed the designer to employ a lower impedance pot, which makes a small contribution to lowering distortion. Granted, this would be evident throughout the amplitude range, but perhaps it is more noticeable to him at lower levels. Perhaps the buffer allowed the designer to employ a linear pot and law-fake it, which leads to better channel matching at low settings. There's all kinds of funny things that affect how a person perceives the sound.
I find it interesting that sakis has hundreds of different amps through his rig and can compare them. There's many armchair designers here. Please keep contributing to diyaudio sakis.
Even considering the things I mentioned, the pot could still be a factor. Perhaps with a buffer it has allowed the designer to employ a lower impedance pot, which makes a small contribution to lowering distortion. Granted, this would be evident throughout the amplitude range, but perhaps it is more noticeable to him at lower levels. Perhaps the buffer allowed the designer to employ a linear pot and law-fake it, which leads to better channel matching at low settings. There's all kinds of funny things that affect how a person perceives the sound.
I find it interesting that sakis has hundreds of different amps through his rig and can compare them. There's many armchair designers here. Please keep contributing to diyaudio sakis.
Last edited:
Granted, a buffer may allow a lower impedance pot - but most sources finish with some sort of buffer so a low impedance pot can be used for a passive 'preamp'. Even a high impedance pot has a low output impedance at low volume settings, so if there was a problem it would occur at higher volume.
DF96 what makes this conversation even more difficult is the way you place words in your posts ...
your writing :
Some power amps may sound bad at low levels - poor design, but nothing to do with volume controls. Even some speakers may sound bad at low levels - poor design, but nothing to do with volume controls.
Please define
"some" (Some power amps may sound bad at low levels)
"poor design"
"some speakers"
"poor design" ( again but for speakers this time )
A) For starts you need to explain what is a poor design of an amplifier ..I can't imagine what are you talking about ....
Poor amplifier might be poor bandwidth , plenty of distortion , variety of distortion, under over biased But i cannot understand why this particular poor amplifier will sound different in low or high levels ...Rule of thumb say that even poor amplifiers will sound better in low power where current is enough , bias is enough ,and general demands low ...
From your speaker statement we need to exclude any speaker that has low sensitivity like trusted and world famous B&W that in many of their models clearly state on the back from 25-100W indicating that lower than 25W the speaker doesn't operate properly ...
It s common knowledge between the audio people that B&W in general are "Watt eating " speakers and suck the life out of amplifiers that haven't got the guts to drive them . ( which obviously means that in lower /lowest levels probably sound horrible )
Would you still call B&W poor designed ?
your writing :
Some power amps may sound bad at low levels - poor design, but nothing to do with volume controls. Even some speakers may sound bad at low levels - poor design, but nothing to do with volume controls.
Please define
"some" (Some power amps may sound bad at low levels)
"poor design"
"some speakers"
"poor design" ( again but for speakers this time )
A) For starts you need to explain what is a poor design of an amplifier ..I can't imagine what are you talking about ....
Poor amplifier might be poor bandwidth , plenty of distortion , variety of distortion, under over biased But i cannot understand why this particular poor amplifier will sound different in low or high levels ...Rule of thumb say that even poor amplifiers will sound better in low power where current is enough , bias is enough ,and general demands low ...
From your speaker statement we need to exclude any speaker that has low sensitivity like trusted and world famous B&W that in many of their models clearly state on the back from 25-100W indicating that lower than 25W the speaker doesn't operate properly ...
It s common knowledge between the audio people that B&W in general are "Watt eating " speakers and suck the life out of amplifiers that haven't got the guts to drive them . ( which obviously means that in lower /lowest levels probably sound horrible )
Would you still call B&W poor designed ?
Last edited:
Unless you repair amplifiers merely by swapping all components then you must know what is mean by poor design.est electronics said:
That is interesting, because I seem to recall that it was you that said that some amps sound bad at low levels - this was part of the basis for your claim that amps which lack buffering or gain stages adjacent to volume controls will sound bad at low levels. Are you now retracting this claim, and hence one of the 'pillars' of your argument?east electronics said:
Once again you are conflating two completely different phenomena. Low sensitivity means it plays softly (i.e. low volume). Nothing whatsoever to do with misbehaving at low volume - which is what I thought we were talking about. A speaker which "doesn't operate properly" below 25W would be a faulty speaker in need of repair. I think if you ask B&W they will assure you that their speakers work perfectly well below 25W but they might not be very loud. They might be surprised that someone in the audio industry can so seriously misunderstand their advice.
Which obviously doesn't mean anything of the sort. You really need to throw away all these audio myths and old wive's tales. It is hard to maintain a serious technical discussion with someone who seems to be so confused about how audio systems work.
Yes i clearly know what is a poor amplifier but here DF96 when we say amplifier we mean the final stage and actually i am getting sick and tired to have to explain you everything 10 times ...
Skip the complete device we are talking about the relation between the pot and the main amp regarding low level .
I answered that before but it seems that you like to play with words narrow it down to the configuration and clearly said that this observation in low listening levels is worst when the configuration before the main amp is passive Now if you think that you can call the rest of the amplifier a poor design is your opinion not mine I never said that .This amplifier cannot be called poor because of the specific behavior at a specific level.
Low sensitivity means that it plays softly IE low volume ????? hahahahahhaha nice of you you manage to throw me on the floor with this i am laughing my brains out !!!!
Audio myths ???? PEOPLE ARE SCREAMING about the sensitivity issues of the B&W world wide where do you come from? What is your relation with audio systems?
You cannot be serious with the things you say....
Skip the complete device we are talking about the relation between the pot and the main amp regarding low level .
I answered that before but it seems that you like to play with words narrow it down to the configuration and clearly said that this observation in low listening levels is worst when the configuration before the main amp is passive Now if you think that you can call the rest of the amplifier a poor design is your opinion not mine I never said that .This amplifier cannot be called poor because of the specific behavior at a specific level.
Low sensitivity means that it plays softly IE low volume ????? hahahahahhaha nice of you you manage to throw me on the floor with this i am laughing my brains out !!!!
Audio myths ???? PEOPLE ARE SCREAMING about the sensitivity issues of the B&W world wide where do you come from? What is your relation with audio systems?
You cannot be serious with the things you say....
Last edited:
from Β&W manual
802 50-1000W
Dm 302 25-100W
DM 309 25-120W
DM 560 10-75W
DM 603 25-120W
DM 604 25-200W
It cant be more clear than that ....
802 50-1000W
Dm 302 25-100W
DM 309 25-120W
DM 560 10-75W
DM 603 25-120W
DM 604 25-200W
It cant be more clear than that ....
Picked this conversation on the internet By Ashley James
We think the lack of control is a factor even at lower levels. If the bass is poorly controlled, it will dominate what you hear at the expense of mid band clarity, but as you increase volume, so the energy spreading each side of the crossover will become more obvious and "improve" mid clarity. More volume still and even if the amp isn't clipping, the overlap will produce that congested sound all passives have. Also because of poor control, the mid will hardly being driven compared to bass at low levels, which involves far larger excursion. Hence big passive speakers sounding more balanced at lower levels.
In the reference section Dr CS calculates that an average amp in an active system will have a 200 times better damping factor, AVI a great deal more, so there is quite poor control in passives and right through the range.
When I was at ATC, I used to demonstrate damping factor by dropping a cone coil kit (waiting to be glued in) into a chassis, first open circuit when it fell as fast as it would if you just dropped it and secondly with the connecting braids shorted. It would stop dead as it hit the magnetic field and move through the gap very slowly. There's an enormous difference and designers tend to dismiss it because there isn't obvious bass control difference between valve and transistor amps on passive speakers. However they have not realised what Dr CS has explained. That it isn't just the resistive value of the crossover components that lose control, but also the action of the crossover, which is progressively disconnecting the drivers to stop sound emanating from them! The very action of a passive crossover is to lose connection with and control of drivers.
There are other factors such as resonances. They may look reasonably flat when measured, but if some part of the spectrum lasts longer than others, it is a resonance, which will appear louder and you'll need higher volume to bring the remainder above audibility. This is made worse if little correction EQ circuits are added because they may flatten amplitude response, but they'll have altered phase, which is more obvious (phase is time of arrival). Think of it in amplitude terms, so at low levels some parts of the spectrum are below audibility and so because you're not getting everything, you can't understand what's being said, but if you increase levels so the quiet bits get loud enough to hear, you get clarity.
Drive units vary significantly in performance and most speakers are relatively inexpensive despite dealer discount being typically in excess of 50%. They've also been shipped half way round the world and there's a margin in them for a distributor as well, which is why a lot of active speakers also have soft bass and exaggerated treble too. Cheap, basic, drivers.
I'm not finding it easy to put this down, but I hope it helps to show the problems, especially with low manufactured cost speakers.
We think the lack of control is a factor even at lower levels. If the bass is poorly controlled, it will dominate what you hear at the expense of mid band clarity, but as you increase volume, so the energy spreading each side of the crossover will become more obvious and "improve" mid clarity. More volume still and even if the amp isn't clipping, the overlap will produce that congested sound all passives have. Also because of poor control, the mid will hardly being driven compared to bass at low levels, which involves far larger excursion. Hence big passive speakers sounding more balanced at lower levels.
In the reference section Dr CS calculates that an average amp in an active system will have a 200 times better damping factor, AVI a great deal more, so there is quite poor control in passives and right through the range.
When I was at ATC, I used to demonstrate damping factor by dropping a cone coil kit (waiting to be glued in) into a chassis, first open circuit when it fell as fast as it would if you just dropped it and secondly with the connecting braids shorted. It would stop dead as it hit the magnetic field and move through the gap very slowly. There's an enormous difference and designers tend to dismiss it because there isn't obvious bass control difference between valve and transistor amps on passive speakers. However they have not realised what Dr CS has explained. That it isn't just the resistive value of the crossover components that lose control, but also the action of the crossover, which is progressively disconnecting the drivers to stop sound emanating from them! The very action of a passive crossover is to lose connection with and control of drivers.
There are other factors such as resonances. They may look reasonably flat when measured, but if some part of the spectrum lasts longer than others, it is a resonance, which will appear louder and you'll need higher volume to bring the remainder above audibility. This is made worse if little correction EQ circuits are added because they may flatten amplitude response, but they'll have altered phase, which is more obvious (phase is time of arrival). Think of it in amplitude terms, so at low levels some parts of the spectrum are below audibility and so because you're not getting everything, you can't understand what's being said, but if you increase levels so the quiet bits get loud enough to hear, you get clarity.
Drive units vary significantly in performance and most speakers are relatively inexpensive despite dealer discount being typically in excess of 50%. They've also been shipped half way round the world and there's a margin in them for a distributor as well, which is why a lot of active speakers also have soft bass and exaggerated treble too. Cheap, basic, drivers.
I'm not finding it easy to put this down, but I hope it helps to show the problems, especially with low manufactured cost speakers.
from another forum
Larry Naramore
Bonafied Knucklehead
Location: Sun Valley, Calif.
I have a NAD T743 with B&W DM602 S3 speakers and a small front room. The speakers sound better at higher volumes. Is there something I can do to increase the sound quality at lower levels? A more powerful amp? Speakers that are more efficient?
and more you can find hundreds of them Where do you come from DF96 ?????
DaveN
DaveN
Music Glutton
Location: Apex, NC
It is true that B&W speakers like a nice supply of wattage. However, I am currently running my CDM-7NTs off of the Onix/Melody SP3 tube amp. This little wonder only puts out 35wpc - so power is not the only pre-req for good sound.
My point is that your amp might be to blame. OTOH, your room may have more to do with it. The reason that I say this is that the increased volume also increases audible room interactions. When the volume goes down, you are purely hearing the speakers. Are your speakers optimally placed? Far enough out from the wall?
I do most of my listening at low volumes as I have two small children and a sick wife sleeping at the time. My SQ is very nice and I tend to notice more details at low levels than I do on the rare occasion when I can crank it up.
David
The all conversation here
Listening at low level question. | Steve Hoffman Music Forums
Larry Naramore
Bonafied Knucklehead
Location: Sun Valley, Calif.
I have a NAD T743 with B&W DM602 S3 speakers and a small front room. The speakers sound better at higher volumes. Is there something I can do to increase the sound quality at lower levels? A more powerful amp? Speakers that are more efficient?
and more you can find hundreds of them Where do you come from DF96 ?????
DaveN
DaveN
Music Glutton
Location: Apex, NC
It is true that B&W speakers like a nice supply of wattage. However, I am currently running my CDM-7NTs off of the Onix/Melody SP3 tube amp. This little wonder only puts out 35wpc - so power is not the only pre-req for good sound.
My point is that your amp might be to blame. OTOH, your room may have more to do with it. The reason that I say this is that the increased volume also increases audible room interactions. When the volume goes down, you are purely hearing the speakers. Are your speakers optimally placed? Far enough out from the wall?
I do most of my listening at low volumes as I have two small children and a sick wife sleeping at the time. My SQ is very nice and I tend to notice more details at low levels than I do on the rare occasion when I can crank it up.
David
The all conversation here
Listening at low level question. | Steve Hoffman Music Forums
Last edited:
i can continue all night
Hi guys,
I have a pair of small B&W bookshelf speakers that I love --- great midrange, great for vocals with a guitar or piano, fine for rock when I turn them up (I'm not a basshead).
But these days I listen to a lot of music at night, when I'm tired from work and don't want to crank it up. Naturally, on my small speakers the low end hollows out/disappears at the low volumes.
So I feel like I should buy myself a pair of sensitive floorstanders. It makes sense to me that a higher-sensitivity speaker that supplies more bass at normal listening volumes would supply more bass at low volumes.
Does that strategy strike you all as a sound one?
If so, any recommendations? I make a lot more money now than when I bought my B&Ws 10 years ago, so I can afford $1-3K speakers if they deliver what I want. I was thinking of auditioning Epos Epic 5s or Elan 30s, Monitor Audio Silvers RX6s, Silverline Audio Preludes. I was also thinking of older B&Ws or the JMLab Daline 6.1, which is a transmission line speaker.
Is there a minimum sensitivity I should be looking for?
Thanks for any help.
Hi guys,
I have a pair of small B&W bookshelf speakers that I love --- great midrange, great for vocals with a guitar or piano, fine for rock when I turn them up (I'm not a basshead).
But these days I listen to a lot of music at night, when I'm tired from work and don't want to crank it up. Naturally, on my small speakers the low end hollows out/disappears at the low volumes.
So I feel like I should buy myself a pair of sensitive floorstanders. It makes sense to me that a higher-sensitivity speaker that supplies more bass at normal listening volumes would supply more bass at low volumes.
Does that strategy strike you all as a sound one?
If so, any recommendations? I make a lot more money now than when I bought my B&Ws 10 years ago, so I can afford $1-3K speakers if they deliver what I want. I was thinking of auditioning Epos Epic 5s or Elan 30s, Monitor Audio Silvers RX6s, Silverline Audio Preludes. I was also thinking of older B&Ws or the JMLab Daline 6.1, which is a transmission line speaker.
Is there a minimum sensitivity I should be looking for?
Thanks for any help.
At very low level, a passive pot will cause the input impedance to drop substantially. The result of that is the dynamics is affected.
Hopefully this isn't off-topic, but I would be very interested in the comparing/contrasting of amplifier 'sweet spot' and loudspeaker 'sweet spot'. Including the usual subjective & objective considerations.😱
Hi Michael,
Can you explain the mechanism behind changing dynamics and the input impedance please? Is this the result of a reduced CMRR when the passive pot is operating at a low setting causing imbalanced impedance matching at the amplifier's differential inputs?
This tends to contradict Sakis' experience when the dynamics improve after adding a buffer stage, as the buffer stage itself has a relatively low output impedance.
Last edited:
You have not yet explained anything. You seem to believe that frequently repeating a misconception will somehow make it true. You also seem to believe that assembling enough irrelevant or misunderstood facts will somehow support your beliefs.east electronics said:
I can only assume that you don't understand what is meant by speaker sensitivity.
It is completely clear. In order to get reasonable volume in a domestic environment the amplifier needs to have a maximum power output in the given range. This says nothing at all about the speaker not working or not being properly 'driven' at lower powers. Anyway, all this talk about speakers and amplifiers is irrelevant. The issue is volume controls.
I assume by "low level" you mean low volume settings. Then you make two statements which are both false.Michael Chua said:
A passive pot has much the same input impedance at all volume settings. The input impedance rises slightly at lower settings. This (the opposite of what you said) has no effect on dynamics.
Perhaps you meant to say 'output impedance'? If so, you are right that this reduces signficantly at low settings. It also reduces at the highest setting. As a general rule, low output impedance is good. Can you explain why you consider it to be a bad thing here? The setting of a variable potential divider has no effect whatsoever on dynamics: quiet sounds stay quiet, while loud sounds stay loud, and the ratio between the two remains constant.
I don't think there's much doubt as to what was meant by Michael's post. I took it as meaning: "At very low level settings, a passive pot will cause a substantial drop in the impedance presented across the input to the amplifier".
- Status
- Not open for further replies.