Just for fun I ran these tracks through the Spectrum analyzer from Audacity, it's only the first 109 seconds, and the last track being 44100 deviates from the other two.
Here's the upload from Ro808 :
Here's the High Res:
And finally the SHM-CD:
( I really should convert it to 24/96 to make it fair)
Differences in spectrum can be seen, a little rumble on the vinyl version but also more HF extension on the High Res and SHM-CD version.
It looks like the balance is quite different between the High Res and SHM-CD, though the general shape seems to indicate its using the same master.
The balance between the vinyl and the High Res is more alike on first glance.
Glad to see you join in ra7! It is a lot of fun to find that excellent version that really rocks! It doesn't matter which version one prefers, as long as you like it. Frequency balance can do a lot, even in imaging. It is a fine line...
Just as I happen to like Steve Hoffman's mixes, I'm sure there are others that dislike it. He tends to keep the details right while making it a little warm. Just like my preferred taste! Probably from having had a warm sounding setup over most of my life. Bought like that in the store (somewhere in '92 I believe) armed with a Bob Marley track that should sound like a warm blanket to me
. Listening to the Altec setup from my next door neighbor didn't help either. A warm and lush sound that had, lovely! But it's easy to overshadow details if it's overly warm.
Here's the upload from Ro808 :
Here's the High Res:
And finally the SHM-CD:
( I really should convert it to 24/96 to make it fair)
Differences in spectrum can be seen, a little rumble on the vinyl version but also more HF extension on the High Res and SHM-CD version.
It looks like the balance is quite different between the High Res and SHM-CD, though the general shape seems to indicate its using the same master.
The balance between the vinyl and the High Res is more alike on first glance.
Glad to see you join in ra7! It is a lot of fun to find that excellent version that really rocks! It doesn't matter which version one prefers, as long as you like it. Frequency balance can do a lot, even in imaging. It is a fine line...
Just as I happen to like Steve Hoffman's mixes, I'm sure there are others that dislike it. He tends to keep the details right while making it a little warm. Just like my preferred taste! Probably from having had a warm sounding setup over most of my life. Bought like that in the store (somewhere in '92 I believe) armed with a Bob Marley track that should sound like a warm blanket to me
. Listening to the Altec setup from my next door neighbor didn't help either. A warm and lush sound that had, lovely! But it's easy to overshadow details if it's overly warm.Attachments
Last edited:
Any of these that you don't have?
Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin III - 1970 (Atlantic 32XD-566, Japan), 1987, 1st issue
Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin III - 1970 (Atlantic SD 19128-2, USA), 1987
Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin III - 1970 (Atlantic 250 002, Germany), 1987+
Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin III - 1970 (Atlantic 7567-81527-2, Germany), 1990
Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin III - 1970 (Atlantic 7567-82678-2, Germany), 1994+, Remastered
Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin III - 1970 (Atlantic 82678-2, USA), 1994+, Remastered
Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin III - 1970 (Atlantic WPCR-14845, Japan), 2012, Remastered
Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin III - 1970 (Atlantic 8122796449, EU), Deluxe Edition, 2 CD, 2014, Remastered
Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin III - 1970 (Atlantic 32XD-566, Japan), 1987, 1st issue
Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin III - 1970 (Atlantic SD 19128-2, USA), 1987
Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin III - 1970 (Atlantic 250 002, Germany), 1987+
Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin III - 1970 (Atlantic 7567-81527-2, Germany), 1990
Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin III - 1970 (Atlantic 7567-82678-2, Germany), 1994+, Remastered
Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin III - 1970 (Atlantic 82678-2, USA), 1994+, Remastered
Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin III - 1970 (Atlantic WPCR-14845, Japan), 2012, Remastered
Led Zeppelin - Led Zeppelin III - 1970 (Atlantic 8122796449, EU), Deluxe Edition, 2 CD, 2014, Remastered
Interesting discussion on the line array versus the Synergy concept.
Like Rob, I came away underwhelmed by the Synergy implementation that I heard (just once), but others swear by them so they could be made to sound good.
As you know, I've been on a horn kick lately with the 2380 horn. I compared it with the arrays recently, listening to them one after the other. Here is what I found:
- The arrays are more sensitive than the JBL system. The woofer is about 97 db/2.83V, with some baffle step around 95 db/2.83V. The arrays are much louder at the same settings.
- The midrange is definitely comparable with the horn system.
- The tops are clean but fuzzier than the horn system. There is a lot of headroom with the arrays, and with the horns too. It is just so amazing that the arrays can totally keep up. It is loud and clean.
- Below 80 Hz, I have to run the sub with the arrays, whereas the horn system runs down to 40 Hz, which is plenty; they actually sound more extended than that. Integrating the subs with the arrays is an extra challenge. I used to run distributed subs and that is the optimum solution.
- The imaging of the arrays is fuzzier than the horn system. It's all there but the instrument locations are more fuzzy and not as clearly defined.
I believe an expanding array, like the one you are trying, could improve things. I had been simulating a version of the expanding array as well (6-3-2-1, with the 1 being a real tweeter), but it got put on the back burner for now. Would be interesting to find out how your experiment goes. Would you be able to change the middle group to a single element? Something tells me that five or six elements producing the highs is worse than 25 elements producing the highs, i.e., you want to transition to just one element above say 2 or 3 kHz.
Like Rob, I came away underwhelmed by the Synergy implementation that I heard (just once), but others swear by them so they could be made to sound good.
As you know, I've been on a horn kick lately with the 2380 horn. I compared it with the arrays recently, listening to them one after the other. Here is what I found:
- The arrays are more sensitive than the JBL system. The woofer is about 97 db/2.83V, with some baffle step around 95 db/2.83V. The arrays are much louder at the same settings.
- The midrange is definitely comparable with the horn system.
- The tops are clean but fuzzier than the horn system. There is a lot of headroom with the arrays, and with the horns too. It is just so amazing that the arrays can totally keep up. It is loud and clean.
- Below 80 Hz, I have to run the sub with the arrays, whereas the horn system runs down to 40 Hz, which is plenty; they actually sound more extended than that. Integrating the subs with the arrays is an extra challenge. I used to run distributed subs and that is the optimum solution.
- The imaging of the arrays is fuzzier than the horn system. It's all there but the instrument locations are more fuzzy and not as clearly defined.
I believe an expanding array, like the one you are trying, could improve things. I had been simulating a version of the expanding array as well (6-3-2-1, with the 1 being a real tweeter), but it got put on the back burner for now. Would be interesting to find out how your experiment goes. Would you be able to change the middle group to a single element? Something tells me that five or six elements producing the highs is worse than 25 elements producing the highs, i.e., you want to transition to just one element above say 2 or 3 kHz.
To be a drag, I would say that to upload a whole song, which is what some stores sell is questionable. Both from commercial aspects as well as copyright - an excerpt would suffice and probably get you out of trouble. Just sayin...
//
You're right. I'll take them down and replace them with snippets, enough for this slight experiment.
I must have spend a fortune on Led Zeppelin already, having their catalog many times over and on several different media (usually more than once). But I agree that this probably wasn't a smart idea.
Here's the first part of the High Res song. No longer featuring the complete song.
And here is the Japanese SHM-CD version, also a snippet.
Still long enough to form an opinion, but it isn't half the song yet. Better?
I feel like I'm happy most of the time listening to what has been created. Maybe we need a separate Led Zeppelin appreciation thread
ah if only this was a pervasive phenomenon things would be zen...
may my last living wish would be to be in the presence of the Two Towers....
Last edited:
I'm sure I don't have all of them, but I do recognize a few
. I don't have my CD's handy though, as they've been boxed up for our living room renovation. My Japanese SHM-CD is Atlantic WPCR-13132. The High Res Audio is this one. In my opinion well worth the asking price, even the Japanese versions (if you can find them) are more expensive second hand. I have the FLAC 96 version. Cannot remember seeing the MQA before. I mentioned 2015, the first albums were released in 2014.The second half of the catalog came one year later. The added bonus tracks are fun too!
Attachments
Last edited:
Bill Waslo's synergies are an example.
In other threads I have shared my experiences with Danley products. Fwiw, I too believe that Synergies can sound good, i.e. without a horn signature ("tunnel effect", in the case of the SH50s), but that the coverage angles related to the depth of the horn makes a difference.
Despite the many rough edges and the combiner throat, the J1-94 (Jericho Horn) is probaly the one I like most. These sound like gigantic studio monitors, not like horn loudspeakers.
In light of Bateman's experiences, particularly dispersion in the midrange affects the "spatial experience".
A single horn that is used from about 600Hz (± 200Hz) may exhibit a rising DI in the top octave, as long as there is a fairly wide and constant coverage throughout the midrange, it's less likely to be experienced as a "typical horn".
Last edited:
I think it is telling that Tom himself has always shied away from the hi-fi market despite the compelling concept he has invented. In home environments, smoothness is most important and I don't know if the synergy can provide that with the holes near the throat. The great benefit is that it is a point source and with the conical horns you get really uniform polars, but if there are little bumps and wiggles that cannot be corrected because they are not uniform on all axes, then it will not sound as good. Again, I'm just hypothesizing here. I have never built one of them.
The 2380 horn is used from 750 Hz up. So, it meets what you suggested above. Below that, pattern control is hard anyway because the size becomes too big. Here again, the arrays solve the main problem that is reflections of the floor and ceiling, which are the most detrimental to sound.
I'm sure I don't have all of them, but I do recognize a few
About 16 years ago I bought my last CD, after years of addiction. One of the best decisions ever. Still, about 4000-4500 CDs means quite lot of boxes, if you have to move.
35 different releases of Zeppelin III are available + the boxset editions, like the one I posted before.
The holes near the throat are a undoubtedly a source of interferences.
To my knowledge there's only one manufacturer that uses the Synergy principle in a slightly different way (slits across the side walls instead of in the corners) for his top of the line loudspeaker system.
The brand is quite populair in Asia, but I have yet to find a review of this extremely expensive system (around €350.000).
Last edited:
I've been following Tom closely for about 20 years, ever since he put up the Labhorn sub design. He's such a nice guy, with a heart rooted in DIY.
But i don't think he has shied away from the home market, for any other reason than his business partners who see the value in applying his genius to much bigger markets.
I mean, DSL has over a 50% share in mega US stadiums.
How much home audio do you have to sell, to equal $$$$$$ from putting in the house system at the Mercedes-Benz stadium in Atlanta?
You'd be absolutely nuts to focus on home audio, from a business perspective, huh?
Re the synergies bumps and wiggles, and holes near the throat, and polars....
Well, my experience is yeah....those things are there..
But what is crazy, despite much better sets of measurements from bunches of my other non-synergy builds.....there is simply something about the sound of drivers with acoustic co-location that a synergy provides, that goes past measurements.
Dunno why...just know what i hear. It's like what a full-range electrostat does, but with increased SPL, bass, and dynamics.
Also, the holes in the throat stuff causing problems seems way overblown, over thought ime. Mouth termination issues seem greater.
The sound of my synergy's is so different from my straight-line and CBT arrays. I LIKE THEM ALL. Horses for courses forever!
As always, what do we want......
Indeed Mark, the Synergies are a special breed and the point source nature + controlled directivity facilitate a special listening experience. The SH50's somehow reminded me of giant headphones, but in a good way. There's a certain intimacy involved and Bateman's description of a holographic soundstage is striking.
Like Bateman, I also think the SH50's excell with certain types of music. With rock, punk, new wave and similar music - I fear, including Led Zeppelin, something seems off. A band still sounds like a band, but somehow it seems as if the members are playing inside a tunnel, or in my case, several tunnels. You are listening from outside the tunnel.
Like Bateman, I also think the SH50's excell with certain types of music. With rock, punk, new wave and similar music - I fear, including Led Zeppelin, something seems off. A band still sounds like a band, but somehow it seems as if the members are playing inside a tunnel, or in my case, several tunnels. You are listening from outside the tunnel.
Last edited: