My perception is an artificial 'signature' associated with the audio passing through an audio stage, especially my own. When I first make a design, I usually find little wrong, in fact it can sound almost perfect. This started with the Levinson JC-2, 45 years ago. I really thought that I had done enough (and I had done far more than anyone else in solid state at the time) to make the perfect preamp, and I even resisted input from others, when they found some sort of fault with it. However, even my first JC-2 was flawed, almost embarrassingly, thinking back, but then so was the first Porsche 911, etc. Yet my original JC-2 would be sonically better today than most here use for their hi fi, it is just a matter of whether you find audio quality that important to you that you will try for the best quality, rather than good enough.
Again, I work in the audio industry, and I am biased, so they say!
Again, I work in the audio industry, and I am biased, so they say!
I think it's more efficient to change or add that to your signature. Then you don't have to retype. Just a thought...
After little time listening to various sources with my new Kef LS50 wireless, and after the first surprises to hear what came out of such small speakers, I'm disappointed.
No "body" anywhere, it lacks a base in the low medium, the treble is aggressive, there is a bump in high treble, it sounds distorted, I always want to lower the level, yet far from to be high. But it does not help.
I do not understand the so much praise comments that can be read everywhere.
It may be due to the class D amp, if they are very analytical, they often give the feeling that it lacks "material", the amp class AB in the treble that sounds aggressive (I'm used to current feedback amps)?
Finally, it is expensive for a bar of sound that I just feel good enough to listen to the TV.
No miracle, at the end !
No "body" anywhere, it lacks a base in the low medium, the treble is aggressive, there is a bump in high treble, it sounds distorted, I always want to lower the level, yet far from to be high. But it does not help.
I do not understand the so much praise comments that can be read everywhere.
It may be due to the class D amp, if they are very analytical, they often give the feeling that it lacks "material", the amp class AB in the treble that sounds aggressive (I'm used to current feedback amps)?
Finally, it is expensive for a bar of sound that I just feel good enough to listen to the TV.
No miracle, at the end !
Last edited:
Talking of miracles... more flat panel magic speakers...
Mini Dragon Satellites | dragonfire
Eat your hat, JN!
Mini Dragon Satellites | dragonfire
Eat your hat, JN!
Talking of miracles... more flat panel magic speakers...
Mini Dragon Satellites | dragonfire
Eat your hat, JN!
Man, they went crazy with the buzz words. The only thing missing is superconductors.
Five grand, i could buy a mill with 3 dro's, a 3d metal printer, and a wire edm setup for that change.
Jn
My view is, who has the time/circumstance/inclination to sit in the sweet spot chair all day and all night ?.
Not me, so my first criterion is that whichever system I am using at the time has to sound good anywhere and everywhere in the house, and outside too from the back fence to across the street.
I find some defects in sound are more obvious from afar or at least away from the focus 'sweet spot', so a system that is sounding good/very good anywhere throughout the house and grounds will generally sound pretty dammed good in the listening chair but this is not automatic, ie there can be near field errors that are not evident in the far field, just as there can be far field errors that are not so evident in the near field.
The fact that a system is sounding good everywhere is also saying that speaker placement is good, ie the speakers and room are working well together as per the placement methods 'discussed' recently....it's all about tuning which means tweaking comb filtering and reverbs and resonances....ie dynamic behaviours.
Agreed that sound that 'isn't quite right' draws attention to itself when listening in the far field and doing other activities and over time.
Can you describe these signatures, and what are some you have liked and what are ones you have not liked ?.
Perhaps you could link some of those findings to items that some of us have heard ?.
Agreed, 'no signature' is the signature we are all looking for.
That said, 'no signature' stands out as signature of it's own, BQP attempts this and although going close does not quite deliver ime/imho, JB might understand what I mean by this.
Dan.
T, I'm sorry to hear about your new purchase not delivering as per the glowing advertising and glowing reviews, such is life, however nowadays we have online purchase consumer protection return policies !.
Class D amplifier without exception ime incorporates ferrite series filtering in final output stage and is the culprit to sound that is dynamically 'wrong' and in this case not character 'matching' the highs that in this case are evidently also very wrong.
If you are to keep these speakers I venture that RC networks across the driver terminals will help...especially if incorporating Polystyrenes.
IME expect all kinds of 'junior engineer' fundamental errors in design like earth plane dependencies causing looping and intermodulations.
Dan.
Morality: never listen to the "reviews" of so-called experts in magasines or Internet. And never buy a speaker that you have not listened: trust YOUR ears.
That was impossible for me in the place where I'm living in this time.
In matter of speakers, and whatever the ladies say at the TV microphones, size matters.
It is a closed self powered system, that I wanted to use as-it. I prefer concentrating on my own big system if I'm about put my hands in the grease.
The voices are the worse. While, with my big system, the singer stay just in front of you, with an animal presence on his feet, close to you in front of the speakers, here, the voices seems to come from somewhere in the far away space, somewhere vaguely between the two speakers, "Honey, I Shrunk the Kids" style. While, on my big system, the cymbals are huge and you can feel the violent hit of a strong stick on an heavy piece of copper, here, they sound microscopic and thin as cigarette paper and like hit with a little stick made of cristal. The worse is I prefer my 150$ PC speakers. They are not detailed at all, but more balanced and agreeable to listen to: no tweeter helps ;-)
I precise that I listened to them at less than 2m.
(thank to your nice words
.
Last edited:
These speakers must be broken in for at least a month, by playing them at
a moderate volume with normal program material, before they will sound
as they should. Until then they will sound very bright and thin.
Input mono out of phase signals, and place the speakers face to face
to cancel most of the audible sound during the break in.
Last edited:
I try and learn who are consistent reviewers, and how my subjective view compares to them. There are music reviewers, that if they slate it I know I'll like it, for instance!
T, I'm hearin ya.
My housemate has his video/audio system in the front room set up as per modern normal situation, ie horizontal wide cabinet with flat screen tv on top with floor standers each side.
The amp is 100W p/ch or so rated multi-channel AV amplifier (class D and weighs nothing but by common standards should sound fine) and I have the same problem......voices/central sounds are wrongly behind the screen (spkr polarity swap does not fix this issue) and have really rotten intelligibility such that I find that I have to turn the volume up unnaturally.......this modern consumer level/affordable/normal sound is shite, I mean seriously shite but the specs say it's fine !.
I agree, there is not correct sense of power and correct sense of dynamics.....the sound is clean, clear, flat, full range etc but it still sucks, big time.
I have permission to tweak this system but by purpose I leave it as standard and as reference.....we can choose either system for music but there is no question discussion or argument between us, mine is the one that gets used for playing tunes.
Dan.
(thanks for the thanks ).
My housemate has his video/audio system in the front room set up as per modern normal situation, ie horizontal wide cabinet with flat screen tv on top with floor standers each side.
The amp is 100W p/ch or so rated multi-channel AV amplifier (class D and weighs nothing but by common standards should sound fine) and I have the same problem......voices/central sounds are wrongly behind the screen (spkr polarity swap does not fix this issue) and have really rotten intelligibility such that I find that I have to turn the volume up unnaturally.......this modern consumer level/affordable/normal sound is shite, I mean seriously shite but the specs say it's fine !.
I agree, there is not correct sense of power and correct sense of dynamics.....the sound is clean, clear, flat, full range etc but it still sucks, big time.
I have permission to tweak this system but by purpose I leave it as standard and as reference.....we can choose either system for music but there is no question discussion or argument between us, mine is the one that gets used for playing tunes.
Dan.
(thanks for the thanks
).
I bought them used and aged of 14 month. So I supposed they were "broken-in".
Went on my equalizer. Got a better balance, but now they seem to miss of definition. Will try to build an other amp (class D) for my big 38cm JBL sub. May-be it will help to balance their lack of guts.
When I was young, there were a law called "400 000". That was: to get a balanced system, when you multiply the bass cut frequency with the high cut one , you try to have 400 000 as the result. Nowadays, they just offer ultrasonic performances with no basses ?
Last edited:
Just long enough for the 30 day return policy to run out. You guys are really funny sometimes, like everyone does this.
This phono cartridge does not sound right until you play 2000 of your favorite LP's on it, oh well now it's time to replace the stylus.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.