I have not such an accessory (Does it exist on the wireless ?) but those options are with switches on their back, with I have set on "large", despite this TV room is less than 20m².
There is an other option in the Android application that you can use as a remote: extended basses. That I have set to "on". And I had put them in corners.
Basses are quite impressive, for the size, it is not the main problem. It seems to me a lack of coherency between medium and treble and problems of directivity at their crossover frequency.
Not imaginary at all:
TOUT SAVOIR SUR CHEVERNY, TINTIN ET LE CHATEAU DE MOULINSART - TINTINOMANIA
I just changed the location on Internet because the secret services of Syldavia wanted to stole my ultrasonic weapon ( In fact, a pair of Kef LS50 ;-).
Thanks Dimitri for the measurements. I have a Levinson JC-2 here, but I have not fired it up for years.
My problem with the Levinson JC-2 is not really the line stage. It would up being in the Phono stage (active EQ), Cap coupling, and often, the Volume control pot (distortion at certain settings). Later, I found layout, (poor asymmetrical Xtalk) Cap supply bypasses (Tant) and poor channel separation due to a finite Z active buffer for the phono stage, and finally, the poor RCA connectors (the only ones really available at the time).
Now, the Levinson line stage was NOT designed for 600 ohm loads. My first design that this line stage was copied used 2A T0-5 complementary output devices, rather than the 2n4401-3 TO-92 pair in the Levinson JC-2. We originally ran at +/- 24V and with 50ma on the output pair. Levinson used +/- 15V and perhaps 5-20ma on the output pair. This was OK for 5K or more, but kind of 'iffy' for 600 ohms. I consider this topology one of my very best, and I would use it again today if I needed it. Today, however, I usually design balanced in balanced out topologies that are an extension to this original topology.
My problem with the Levinson JC-2 is not really the line stage. It would up being in the Phono stage (active EQ), Cap coupling, and often, the Volume control pot (distortion at certain settings). Later, I found layout, (poor asymmetrical Xtalk) Cap supply bypasses (Tant) and poor channel separation due to a finite Z active buffer for the phono stage, and finally, the poor RCA connectors (the only ones really available at the time).
Now, the Levinson line stage was NOT designed for 600 ohm loads. My first design that this line stage was copied used 2A T0-5 complementary output devices, rather than the 2n4401-3 TO-92 pair in the Levinson JC-2. We originally ran at +/- 24V and with 50ma on the output pair. Levinson used +/- 15V and perhaps 5-20ma on the output pair. This was OK for 5K or more, but kind of 'iffy' for 600 ohms. I consider this topology one of my very best, and I would use it again today if I needed it. Today, however, I usually design balanced in balanced out topologies that are an extension to this original topology.
Attachments
Last edited:
In my basement, yes. Basically, anything over 150 lbs won't make it around the corner at the bottom of the stairwell. Nor will I be able to lift it onto the workbench.If you are in to small tools....
It is an interesting disjoint, 30 ton indoor cranes at work, wimpy old man at home...5 nanometer accuracies with multi ton objects at work.. losing forever a 4-40 screw dropped to the floor at home..
Oh, btw, that 7mm diameter nylon gear I spent 400 dollars in tooling to fabricate? Called no joy after two months off and on...bought the darn thing.
But, at least I have more tools....
At least the brass gears I need to cut are large enough, that silly nylon gear, 3 mils runout error totally trashed the gearjn
I'm sure there is nothing wrong with this pair, especially as the two speakers sound exactly the same.
The problem is, may-be, my room in my new location needs lot of acoustic improvement (even my big system works not so good than in my previous home). This made worse by the fact that they have, for sure, a lot less directivity than my horns and large diameter cones (38cm & 31) ?
But it is "close listening". I never had this feeling of "thin sound" on Auratones, that were well balanced, as an example.
May-be, too, i'm so used to my big system itself that is one of the more realistic I've heard. Or that I'm too sensible in a sound quality that is kind of opposite to the "hifi" usual ones ?
This said, they work OK with the movies: the size on the sounds of my big system are incompatible with my 48" TV set.
In my basement, yes. Basically, anything over 150 lbs won't make it around the corner at the bottom of the stairwell. Nor will I be able to lift it onto the workbench.
It is an interesting disjoint, 30 ton indoor cranes at work, wimpy old man at home...5 nanometer accuracies with multi ton objects at work.. losing forever a 4-40 screw dropped to the floor at home..
Oh, btw, that 7mm diameter nylon gear I spent 400 dollars in tooling to fabricate? Called no joy after two months off and on...bought the darn thing.
But, at least I have more tools....
jn
With all the old mills around here 30 tons is a bit small. 200 tons outside crane a block away from my shop by the railroad tracks at least looks impressive.
As to your gear, my machinist time expected accuracy of 5 mills when doing all hand work. Of course now that you punted I should mention I have a small 48 stop indexing head. I think I may have another index wheel, but it is one of those tools I actually bought new and have rarely used. I assume you know how to cut gears with a lathe.
Been looking at both a mini mill and a rotary head with an indexing head. The rotary is 1:72 worm drive, and the indexer did 15 and 24 holes I believe.. Quite a few tooth number options.
What I built use gears as the indexer, 40, 32, 96, 60 tooth gears to use as indexing. But I found I needed to drop into the single digit mils to make the teeth consistent enough, the best I could do with the nylon blank was about 3 mils, and that wasn't good enough. Also, the nylon was not so well behaved at the cut, it tended to distort and bend rather than remove cleanly. Brass and aluminum are much easier to cut cleanly.
As to cutting gears with a lathe, well....the jury is still out on that one.
At least for really really tiny nylon ones anywhoo.. doing a brass one (tooth replacement) 1.25 inches diameter, not so bad.jn
JN,
I think I see your problem. Have you ever seen a metal shaper? Generally considered obsolete, replaced by a milling machine. Then I found a fellow who looked at me funny when I learned he specialized in using them and I was surprised. He made gears. Of course that made sense. The bit angle would cleanly cut the tooth angle and combined with an indexing head, he could cut gears to amazing accuracy.
Now emulating a metal shaper for cutting nylon is basically a tool holder and a pair of rails with sliding bearings. You could power it with your remaing fingers. (A distinguishing characteristic of old shop workers.)
As to cutting nylon, I would really use Delrin.
Just remember that Ancient Greek navagational gizmo! All hand made.
I think I see your problem. Have you ever seen a metal shaper? Generally considered obsolete, replaced by a milling machine. Then I found a fellow who looked at me funny when I learned he specialized in using them and I was surprised. He made gears. Of course that made sense. The bit angle would cleanly cut the tooth angle and combined with an indexing head, he could cut gears to amazing accuracy.
Now emulating a metal shaper for cutting nylon is basically a tool holder and a pair of rails with sliding bearings. You could power it with your remaing fingers. (A distinguishing characteristic of old shop workers.)
As to cutting nylon, I would really use Delrin.
Just remember that Ancient Greek navagational gizmo! All hand made.
All people who had tried the both, with serious electronic for the passive version say that the active version is better and that the DACs are top level.
Xover is easily distinguable and I don't feel like it is this kind of signature. No distortion at very low level.
It is just a frog who wants to be bigger than the ox ;-)
What is interesting in this affair is it reveal how much people can be different in their goals and tastes about "Hifi".
Will see with a sub, and if it is not better after some break-in, I will resell them.
For the moment, they are playing Led Zep in loop ;-)
What can be measured is that Fs will decrease when a driver gets broken in.
FYI:
Variance of RF transconductance of audio bipolar transistors from different manufactu
If anyone can make Rb measurements for current production transistors, it would improve not only the noise modeling, but the phase margin accuracy for simulations using these transistors.
Variance of RF transconductance of audio bipolar transistors from different manufactu
If anyone can make Rb measurements for current production transistors, it would improve not only the noise modeling, but the phase margin accuracy for simulations using these transistors.
Indeed. As has been said many times in here, the distortion (FR, phase, delay, etc) of a given speaker in a given room is the biggest variable of all, add that to subjective differences in what we want, and it's no surprise... There's no right and wrong.
That was not the case with the pair of Jordan JX92S I had tested
Speaker's Fr variation with signal level
George
Attachments
- Status
- Not open for further replies.