New Year, new project.
I'm planning to put my old center speaker on pension. It is based on the Seas coax driver P17RE COAX/TVF, a project of mine dating back to 1992!!! ....
It has seved me quite well, and does still sound quite good. But I fint it lacks attack and bite and seem a little too laid back. Also compared with my main speakers.
http://www.sensibleaudio.dk/Gallery/152_5262.JPG
As the title says I'm going for a 2 way. Firstly to keep the complexity down, secondly to keep size down, and thirdly as it will be cut at around 80 Hz.
Also I have recently hear flor standing 2 ways, which have really impressed me. Mainly the Kado 1.2
KaDo 1.2
The clarity of the AMT (think it is the Aurum Cantus AST2560 / Harwood Acoustics AM 25), and the amzing low end of a Seas Excel 6.5 driver.
But what is the best center I have heard? .... well it is got to be the new M&K S300 (with Scan Speak discovery drivers) .... heard a demo of a full S300 system with 3 12" subs ... amazing ... so clear, so loud and forward ... shots really saounded like shots, and you could even feel it ... and yet very little listening fatigue.
Guess horns could also be a way to go .... but simply haven't heard any horn based speakers I really liked ... including the Everest .... haven't heard the Sumas though ...
The dream is ascually to build new main speakers based on line array planar (a bit like the Wisdom M75) and the center should match. But for now it seems to be mostly dreaming, and I would like to do something a bit easier, but still making room for "upgrading" so it would match, sound wise. So a 2 way where I at some point in near future coud swap the tweeter to a DIY planar (not line array) cut realatively low .. like 1-1.5 kHz.
But let's start with the woofer. I'm a bit in love witht he SB Acoustic Satori units. And with the new 7.5 inch I think it will have enough area to really be able to deliver the neede punch in one unit. Sd is like 158 cm2 so not so much different from the SS 6.5". That could be another choise, either the REvelator or the Iluminator. But lookinf at the freq response, I think the Satori will be easier to work with. Both SS drivers would give a better low end, but I think the SB driver will be quite satisfactory. Any thoughts or experience?
For the Tweeter, as said I would have liked to do a DIY unit ... and hopefully will soon, but until then I need something real 😉
A cheap but very good option is the ScanSpeak D2604/83300 ... really hard to beat both performance and price. And it will be a good challenge to make a DIY planar which will sound better. A well behaved driver, which will be easy to do a filter for.
Second choise is the before mentioned Aurum Cantus AMT. Not cheap but also even better. Less distortion, higher power and SPL handling.
Think I would go for a LR2 at 2 kHz for either driver.
What about a waveguide for either of the tweeter? .... Monacor WG300 for the SS or home made for the AC!
Worth the effort???
Though it is a center speaker, it will be made as a floor stander. And though it will be my center, it will of course also be possible to use same as L/R either in a stereo setup or in a surround setup.
Thoughts are welcome 🙂
I'm planning to put my old center speaker on pension. It is based on the Seas coax driver P17RE COAX/TVF, a project of mine dating back to 1992!!! ....
It has seved me quite well, and does still sound quite good. But I fint it lacks attack and bite and seem a little too laid back. Also compared with my main speakers.
http://www.sensibleaudio.dk/Gallery/152_5262.JPG
As the title says I'm going for a 2 way. Firstly to keep the complexity down, secondly to keep size down, and thirdly as it will be cut at around 80 Hz.
Also I have recently hear flor standing 2 ways, which have really impressed me. Mainly the Kado 1.2
KaDo 1.2
The clarity of the AMT (think it is the Aurum Cantus AST2560 / Harwood Acoustics AM 25), and the amzing low end of a Seas Excel 6.5 driver.
But what is the best center I have heard? .... well it is got to be the new M&K S300 (with Scan Speak discovery drivers) .... heard a demo of a full S300 system with 3 12" subs ... amazing ... so clear, so loud and forward ... shots really saounded like shots, and you could even feel it ... and yet very little listening fatigue.
Guess horns could also be a way to go .... but simply haven't heard any horn based speakers I really liked ... including the Everest .... haven't heard the Sumas though ...
The dream is ascually to build new main speakers based on line array planar (a bit like the Wisdom M75) and the center should match. But for now it seems to be mostly dreaming, and I would like to do something a bit easier, but still making room for "upgrading" so it would match, sound wise. So a 2 way where I at some point in near future coud swap the tweeter to a DIY planar (not line array) cut realatively low .. like 1-1.5 kHz.
But let's start with the woofer. I'm a bit in love witht he SB Acoustic Satori units. And with the new 7.5 inch I think it will have enough area to really be able to deliver the neede punch in one unit. Sd is like 158 cm2 so not so much different from the SS 6.5". That could be another choise, either the REvelator or the Iluminator. But lookinf at the freq response, I think the Satori will be easier to work with. Both SS drivers would give a better low end, but I think the SB driver will be quite satisfactory. Any thoughts or experience?
For the Tweeter, as said I would have liked to do a DIY unit ... and hopefully will soon, but until then I need something real 😉
A cheap but very good option is the ScanSpeak D2604/83300 ... really hard to beat both performance and price. And it will be a good challenge to make a DIY planar which will sound better. A well behaved driver, which will be easy to do a filter for.
Second choise is the before mentioned Aurum Cantus AMT. Not cheap but also even better. Less distortion, higher power and SPL handling.
Think I would go for a LR2 at 2 kHz for either driver.
What about a waveguide for either of the tweeter? .... Monacor WG300 for the SS or home made for the AC!
Worth the effort???
Though it is a center speaker, it will be made as a floor stander. And though it will be my center, it will of course also be possible to use same as L/R either in a stereo setup or in a surround setup.
Thoughts are welcome 🙂
If you like the Kado's why not stick with RAAL or Mundorf AMT's, which < cough cough cough > have been extensively analyzed and reviewed here. The M&K's get lots of their clarity from the limited vertical dispersion, so the longer a diaphram you can fit, the better.
I think a 2 way is great. The 6.5" SS revelator is my personal favorite, having not listened to the Satori's. Does well in a sealed, half cubic foot enclosure, but in a ported has phenomenal in-room bass. This lets you do sealed center and floor standing with basically the same parts. My stereo L and R are that way, and I'm still thinking about the center. I May do a 2 way with a 4" to 5.5" woofer for that instead.
Best,
Erik
Last edited:
That is a bit fast conclusion I think. You might be right. Would be good to see / hear some evidense on this from some experiments where it can be tracked thet is actually due to the vertical dispersion, that brings more clarity .... say where an array of 2 - 3 tweeters can be swhitched on and off (and level adjusted accordingly) ...
But the M&K implementation is not as simple as that, as they are using 2 high impedance tweeters flanking the middle with a lower impendance ... thereby reducing loping. They themselves write that they also use the 3 tweeters to obtain better powerhandling and allow for a low crossover point of 1.5 kHz.
The problem of using a small array of tweeters or a longer AMT/Planar/Ribbon is that the vertical radiation pattern need to be matched by the mid/woofer section .. at least around the cross over point ... otherwise you'll have an uneven power response ... guess that is why M&K uses the two woofers ... besides giving again more power/SPL handling.
RAAL ... only the 140 would qualify ... 600USD!! ....
The Mondorf AMTs are for sure some of the best drivers you can get. They have the lowest HD that I have seen, but they are still a bit expensive 😉 ....... and as said the tweeter would hopefully be temporary ... but should also be something which really works.
Found this somewhat interesting read:
http://www.geckohomecinema.co.uk/surround-system-reviews.pdf
Best regards Baldin 🙂
Maybe fast, but it's been their shtick since I owned a pair of the S-1B's, ages ago. Long before they stretched their brand too thin and shipped most of their manufacturing to China. Before they went out of business. Then as I recall they got bought by a Chinese company, possibly the same one that was allegedly making phony MK subwoofers before ending up a Danish company.
Hopefully they are using better crossover components now, and it's not the first design to attempt such a thing, vertically or horizontally. It's a mini-line array. Lots of people in DIY experiment with them, you can too, feel free to ask around.
Best,
Erik
It can be read in the M&K material for S300, that the upper and lower tweeter are higher impedance versions, guess these are used in parallell and then in series with the middel one, to make the mid tweeter play 3 db higher, thereby reducing lobing in the vertical plan. Just like a small Don Keele CBT. Smart enough.
But I think the use of the 2 mid woofers on the side is not so smart, as it will produce lobing in the horizontal plan .....
Could be fun to try out the 3 tweeter layout, but I think there are other and better ways to obtain the dispersion control.
My current thinking is to go for a 2 way with the 7.5 inch Satori ... only see the SS as an alternative .... most othere 6.5 inch drivers have a lot less Sd and as I want more slam in the mid, I think the more here is better. For tweeter, after reading a lot and comparing distortion measurements on especially Zaph's wab pages, I think the SB acoustics SB29RDC will perform better than ScanSpeak D2604/83300.
For both securing a relatively low cross over and to help dispersion control, the tweeter ould be mounted in a waveguide. Best option seem to be Monacor WG 300 ... which will probably need a bit of modification to work. But overall I think it could work out quite well.
Anyone see any good alternative to the bigger Satori unit??
Some Pro units maybe, which could work together with the SB29RDC + Waveguide??
But I think the use of the 2 mid woofers on the side is not so smart, as it will produce lobing in the horizontal plan .....
Could be fun to try out the 3 tweeter layout, but I think there are other and better ways to obtain the dispersion control.
My current thinking is to go for a 2 way with the 7.5 inch Satori ... only see the SS as an alternative .... most othere 6.5 inch drivers have a lot less Sd and as I want more slam in the mid, I think the more here is better. For tweeter, after reading a lot and comparing distortion measurements on especially Zaph's wab pages, I think the SB acoustics SB29RDC will perform better than ScanSpeak D2604/83300.
For both securing a relatively low cross over and to help dispersion control, the tweeter ould be mounted in a waveguide. Best option seem to be Monacor WG 300 ... which will probably need a bit of modification to work. But overall I think it could work out quite well.
Anyone see any good alternative to the bigger Satori unit??
Some Pro units maybe, which could work together with the SB29RDC + Waveguide??
Settled for a 7.5 Satori, SB29 and WG 300.
The build quality of the Satori is simply amazing ... like a juvel 😀
In the process of building a test box. It will just be a regular box of 22l to try the units out and get the first experience also with regards to tuning of the woofer.
The plan is to make a bit more fancy box for the final implementation.
The waveguide needs some work as the mouth is 38 mm and the SB29 is some 44 mm .... also I need to make a mounting plate.
The build quality of the Satori is simply amazing ... like a juvel 😀
In the process of building a test box. It will just be a regular box of 22l to try the units out and get the first experience also with regards to tuning of the woofer.
The plan is to make a bit more fancy box for the final implementation.
The waveguide needs some work as the mouth is 38 mm and the SB29 is some 44 mm .... also I need to make a mounting plate.
Attachments
SB29 + Waveguide
Have worked on fitting the WG 300 waveguide to the SB29 tweeter today.
Must say I'm not the best with precision work, but I think it worked out ok.
Used 4 mm MDF to go between the waveguide and the tweeter.
Was a bit difficult to get the screw holes correct, but got it right a few atempts!
Used a hole saw for the inner hole of 43mm ... had one which was very close to this 😉
And used a router for the outer cut.
Will give the middle plate a little black paint when I get a little further in the process.
Have worked on fitting the WG 300 waveguide to the SB29 tweeter today.
Must say I'm not the best with precision work, but I think it worked out ok.
Used 4 mm MDF to go between the waveguide and the tweeter.
Was a bit difficult to get the screw holes correct, but got it right a few atempts!
Used a hole saw for the inner hole of 43mm ... had one which was very close to this 😉
And used a router for the outer cut.
Will give the middle plate a little black paint when I get a little further in the process.
Attachments
Sound and measurements
The thought was from the begining to crossover pretty low between 1500 and 2000 Hz if possible with the tweeter mounted on the waveguide.
Measurements with the waveguide suggest that this should be no problem.
Targeting a LR2 roll off, would require 1. order filter only. Simple, but given that I want to crossover very low, I have deemed this to be too demanding on the tweeter. So in stead I have opted for a LR4 acoustic roll off, requiring a 3. order electrical filter.
The Tweeter is very easy to filter, and I didn't need a compensation for the waveguide. The waveguide seem to give a 6 db boost at a bit over 1000 Hz.
The woofer is a bit more troublesome. The 21 cm wide box gives a baffle step from ca 600 Hz and there are some breakeup over 3 kHz.
Crossing over at 1500 Hz actually looks like we can get away with a simple 3. order filter only, and no further compensation (only a impedance correction across the driver of 22 uF + 8.2 ohm).
The components are not fully optimized, but adjusted to what I had in my drawer. But I get a pretty good matching to LR4 and to a pretty flat measured response (70 cm).
I would not say the waveguide provides a very high directionality index, but more a boost at 1k which helps capabilities in the low end and lowers the distortion, but on the other hand the directionality is pretty constant from 1kHz to 6kHz. Not bad.
THE SOUND:
And now for the sound. Somewhat disapointing I must admit. Sound i very clear, but it is very up front and drawing your attention to the speaker. Playing loud also makes it sound a bit harsh. At other times it sounds more like something is too low (especially the dialouge on film) .... if that makes any sense ....
As I do not have a twin speaker here, It is actualy rather dificult to test.
Ok, these are some of the best speakers drivers made, so I'm sure they can sound good.
Also good experience that the sound is not just about a flat response 🙂 ..... I also took a look at the distortion, and nothing gave anything away on that account.
1. Is it the low crossover point ... is it in fact too low? .... any experience here with waveguides
2. Does the waveguide just sound in a way that it attracts attention?
Thanks four you thoughts and not least experience with something similar
/Baldin
The thought was from the begining to crossover pretty low between 1500 and 2000 Hz if possible with the tweeter mounted on the waveguide.
Measurements with the waveguide suggest that this should be no problem.
Targeting a LR2 roll off, would require 1. order filter only. Simple, but given that I want to crossover very low, I have deemed this to be too demanding on the tweeter. So in stead I have opted for a LR4 acoustic roll off, requiring a 3. order electrical filter.
The Tweeter is very easy to filter, and I didn't need a compensation for the waveguide. The waveguide seem to give a 6 db boost at a bit over 1000 Hz.
The woofer is a bit more troublesome. The 21 cm wide box gives a baffle step from ca 600 Hz and there are some breakeup over 3 kHz.
Crossing over at 1500 Hz actually looks like we can get away with a simple 3. order filter only, and no further compensation (only a impedance correction across the driver of 22 uF + 8.2 ohm).
The components are not fully optimized, but adjusted to what I had in my drawer. But I get a pretty good matching to LR4 and to a pretty flat measured response (70 cm).
I would not say the waveguide provides a very high directionality index, but more a boost at 1k which helps capabilities in the low end and lowers the distortion, but on the other hand the directionality is pretty constant from 1kHz to 6kHz. Not bad.
THE SOUND:
And now for the sound. Somewhat disapointing I must admit. Sound i very clear, but it is very up front and drawing your attention to the speaker. Playing loud also makes it sound a bit harsh. At other times it sounds more like something is too low (especially the dialouge on film) .... if that makes any sense ....
As I do not have a twin speaker here, It is actualy rather dificult to test.
Ok, these are some of the best speakers drivers made, so I'm sure they can sound good.
Also good experience that the sound is not just about a flat response 🙂 ..... I also took a look at the distortion, and nothing gave anything away on that account.
1. Is it the low crossover point ... is it in fact too low? .... any experience here with waveguides
2. Does the waveguide just sound in a way that it attracts attention?
Thanks four you thoughts and not least experience with something similar
/Baldin
Attachments
I understand the will to try out something new, but you might have
missed a couple of tricks to make the coax perform really satisfying.
Is there a filter schematic available? I am just being curious.
Secondly, have you thought about keeping coax midwoofer and then
adding another separate tweeter solution(waveguide)?
Tweeter output is about 2 dB too loud.
Low crossover frequency can lead to high distortion, try with higher crossover point. Post the measured distortion, please.
Low crossover frequency can lead to high distortion, try with higher crossover point. Post the measured distortion, please.
Hi Lojzek
I'll have to dig rally deep to find the old schematic for the coax ... Will try but it is a bit of side tracking .... The old center is for sure NOT bad at all .... just think my main speakers sind betyder and wanted to try something new.
But Will try to dig it up 😉
Hi Sonce
Hmmmm you might be right ... but with the bump at low freq, it is a bit difficult to determine the right level ..... But it is easy to fix so I'll try it 😉
will post distortio measurements soon. But the initial tdh measurement did not show any raise at the crossover region. Will try to bump up the volume a bit to make it more visible if it is the case.
Yes next step could be crossover at 2-2.5kHz ......
/Baldin
Anyone traied to use SB29 with waveguide?
SB Acoustics with waveguide distortion measuremnts
Ok, here we go with the first rudementory measurements ..... taken with the speaker just resting on the edge of a table, in a small room (my home office) .... need to redo my measurements.
First is the on axix measurement and second is the 40 degree off axis.
On axis, looks very good to me, no hints there.
I did not do any calibration, so I'm not sure of the level. Will do that next time. But for now I think the trends are most important. Also I think my amp is maybe giving some dstortion itself ..... shuld try with a larger and better one.
Off axis ... well ... I don't really recall seeing an off axis distortion measurement before ... so not really sure of what to expect.
If I had seen distortion raise at say 1k I would have said that the tweeter is pushed foo much, but here we see raise from 400 Hz ..... ......
I did detect a leakage from the gab between the woofer and the waveguide .... could maybe play a part ..... but wouldn't it be visible on axis as well??
Ok, here we go with the first rudementory measurements ..... taken with the speaker just resting on the edge of a table, in a small room (my home office) .... need to redo my measurements.
First is the on axix measurement and second is the 40 degree off axis.
On axis, looks very good to me, no hints there.
I did not do any calibration, so I'm not sure of the level. Will do that next time. But for now I think the trends are most important. Also I think my amp is maybe giving some dstortion itself ..... shuld try with a larger and better one.
Off axis ... well ... I don't really recall seeing an off axis distortion measurement before ... so not really sure of what to expect.
If I had seen distortion raise at say 1k I would have said that the tweeter is pushed foo much, but here we see raise from 400 Hz ..... ......
I did detect a leakage from the gab between the woofer and the waveguide .... could maybe play a part ..... but wouldn't it be visible on axis as well??
Attachments
Changed the resistor in series with the tweeter from 2.2 to 3.3 ohm, and sealed the tweeter better so there is no leakage.
It clearly improved the sound, but I will still have to do more experiments.
Also removed the eq that my receiver had added setting up the new center ... better or worse, don't know, but at least I can now better judge the sound.
It clearly improved the sound, but I will still have to do more experiments.
Also removed the eq that my receiver had added setting up the new center ... better or worse, don't know, but at least I can now better judge the sound.
Flat is not (always) best!
Have spend time tweeking the filter.
As I only have one speaker, it was not that easy to really judge the sound. I ended up using the new center instead of my normal left main speaker and listening to different tweaks in stereo (of course after adjusting the level to match the right speaker).
Firstly I changed the XO to LR4 @ 2kHz and with the lower overall tweeter level as describen in the earlier post. It for sure sounded much much better, but the speaker still sounded much too forward and not relaxed enough to my liking. The speaker simply made too much of a precence of itself.
But the response was for sure pretty nice and flat. See first attachment.
Remembering the BBC dip I started adjusting the level between 2 kHz and 6 kHz. This resulted in skipping a big 22 uF capacitor in series with the tweeter making the filter less complex in the process.
I also made further adjustment between 500 and 2k, but I'm still not totally convinced by this change yet. This was done by increasing the mail coil in the woofer filter (actually just by putting a few iron screews in the middle ... fast and easy while playing 😉 ).
See attachment 2. Green no adjustment (dip), Magenta; adjustment to the tweeter section (main coil for woofer = 1uH), and purple, both woofer and tweeter adjusted.
See attachment 3 for filter circuit.
(The raise over 9kHz, is not as pronunced in reality as it seems, as the off axis response will be rolling off there preserving the power response).
Sound and reflection:
Sound is very clear and detailed, but not ear tiring at all. In stereo with my main speaker on the right (Esotec D260, Dayton RS125, 2 x 8 inch peerless), the old main sounded a bit dull and as something was missing.
As center on movie (Transformers 2) everything is now at at a different level. The sound is stunningly bright and shots and explosions are highly realistic. Dialogue is much more leveled and seem a bit lower in level than before, but I think this is just because the dynamics are now so much better ... explosions are explosions and speech is speech!
As for a totally flat response .... does not really seem to be to my ears liking .... in stereo the image became much broader and deeper, with more of the magic 😉
Reflection:
Voicing and tweeking the speaker and filter is of really high importance. Don't just go with what looks good on paper, reality can be so different.
Should I have stayed with the 1.5 kHz? ..... maybe I should give it a try again one of these days, and tweak from there .... on the other hand .... now it sound really good 🙂
Could I do an even more simple filter ... yes haw a 1. order electrical filter on the drawing board .... maybe I should give that a try as well ....... but for sure it will increase the distortion as the brakup from the woofer will not be as suppresed
Have spend time tweeking the filter.
As I only have one speaker, it was not that easy to really judge the sound. I ended up using the new center instead of my normal left main speaker and listening to different tweaks in stereo (of course after adjusting the level to match the right speaker).
Firstly I changed the XO to LR4 @ 2kHz and with the lower overall tweeter level as describen in the earlier post. It for sure sounded much much better, but the speaker still sounded much too forward and not relaxed enough to my liking. The speaker simply made too much of a precence of itself.
But the response was for sure pretty nice and flat. See first attachment.
Remembering the BBC dip I started adjusting the level between 2 kHz and 6 kHz. This resulted in skipping a big 22 uF capacitor in series with the tweeter making the filter less complex in the process.
I also made further adjustment between 500 and 2k, but I'm still not totally convinced by this change yet. This was done by increasing the mail coil in the woofer filter (actually just by putting a few iron screews in the middle ... fast and easy while playing 😉 ).
See attachment 2. Green no adjustment (dip), Magenta; adjustment to the tweeter section (main coil for woofer = 1uH), and purple, both woofer and tweeter adjusted.
See attachment 3 for filter circuit.
(The raise over 9kHz, is not as pronunced in reality as it seems, as the off axis response will be rolling off there preserving the power response).
Sound and reflection:
Sound is very clear and detailed, but not ear tiring at all. In stereo with my main speaker on the right (Esotec D260, Dayton RS125, 2 x 8 inch peerless), the old main sounded a bit dull and as something was missing.
As center on movie (Transformers 2) everything is now at at a different level. The sound is stunningly bright and shots and explosions are highly realistic. Dialogue is much more leveled and seem a bit lower in level than before, but I think this is just because the dynamics are now so much better ... explosions are explosions and speech is speech!
As for a totally flat response .... does not really seem to be to my ears liking .... in stereo the image became much broader and deeper, with more of the magic 😉
Reflection:
Voicing and tweeking the speaker and filter is of really high importance. Don't just go with what looks good on paper, reality can be so different.
Should I have stayed with the 1.5 kHz? ..... maybe I should give it a try again one of these days, and tweak from there .... on the other hand .... now it sound really good 🙂
Could I do an even more simple filter ... yes haw a 1. order electrical filter on the drawing board .... maybe I should give that a try as well ....... but for sure it will increase the distortion as the brakup from the woofer will not be as suppresed
Attachments
Yep, a flat curve is for dummy's. 🙂 Much research has been done saying that. The pain in your ears is proof of it.
Let me share my recent thoughts please. I've been playing around with the tone controls on my stereo. My speakers more or less follow the B&K curve, which is a 5-7db declining response from around 40 Hz to 20 kHz. Anyway, it sounds great for movies, classical and jazz, but for pop and certain vocals is too much of a back of the hall presentation. For those I have to boost the treble much like you have. On the other hand, listening to music on DVD or BluRay is far too bright this way. For instance, Annie Lennox on one of the LotR disks. So clearly there's been a different set of tuning used in each. I need to find the Star Trek NG film that uses Les Trojens again to compare there as well.
For me, I'm happy to use tone controls. I have a tone on/off on my preamp remote and it solves the dichotomy magnificently. It would drive me a little bonkers to try to optimize my speakers for just one set of circumstances. 🙂
My point to this is not to point you one way or the other, but to share my observations with you so perhaps this helps you decide what's best for you, and give you some points to listen to so you can get to perfect for you faster. 🙂
Best,
Erik
Let me share my recent thoughts please. I've been playing around with the tone controls on my stereo. My speakers more or less follow the B&K curve, which is a 5-7db declining response from around 40 Hz to 20 kHz. Anyway, it sounds great for movies, classical and jazz, but for pop and certain vocals is too much of a back of the hall presentation. For those I have to boost the treble much like you have. On the other hand, listening to music on DVD or BluRay is far too bright this way. For instance, Annie Lennox on one of the LotR disks. So clearly there's been a different set of tuning used in each. I need to find the Star Trek NG film that uses Les Trojens again to compare there as well.
For me, I'm happy to use tone controls. I have a tone on/off on my preamp remote and it solves the dichotomy magnificently. It would drive me a little bonkers to try to optimize my speakers for just one set of circumstances. 🙂
My point to this is not to point you one way or the other, but to share my observations with you so perhaps this helps you decide what's best for you, and give you some points to listen to so you can get to perfect for you faster. 🙂
Best,
Erik
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.