About this GR mod, I think that I've watched the video once and now I don't want to add "hits" on it any more!
Orion is an outdated design in many ways - waste of time to mod it. Real improvement comes only with LX521, preferably LX521.4 Reference loudspeaker
"The LX521.4 eliminates the passive L&C crossover in the LX521 top baffle and brings the speaker to its logical completion."
Orion is an outdated design in many ways - waste of time to mod it. Real improvement comes only with LX521, preferably LX521.4 Reference loudspeaker
"The LX521.4 eliminates the passive L&C crossover in the LX521 top baffle and brings the speaker to its logical completion."
Incorrect from start to finish.
I suggest to audition a pair of 708p's in a home environment and you might change your mind.
Dave.
Code:
Oh, and none of my projects use tube connectors....@Edgar007 (to answer in Bond style 😉): if you want to build only once, then you have to understand your requirements very well first (room, placement, amp, listening levels, music material, etc.); the hard part is to understand one's expectations because they tend to change over time as you get a chance to experience more speakers and as you develop better critical listening skills. To build once you need to settle for a good allarounder design and then accept everything that comes with it because no system will be the pinnacle of performance all the time.
For designs which are more off the beaten path a big hurdle later becomes the recording quality (to get the best performance one would have to reEQ a lot of recordings). For me at a minimum I have to bi-amp so at least the bass levels can be adjusted for the recording and for the listening level. As far as the type of the speaker you should probably try to stick with the conventional: for example I have not been listening to Elsinores for a while (they are collecting dust) but I am honest with myself when I say that they were the best return on investment of all my builds. However, all the other designs are a different experience (again akin to an experience gained from another trip to a different place).
Last edited:
Be careful with reviews. The measurements are usually OK subject to some interpretation but the words...
Being familiar with a reference speaker of high technical performance is a solid and long standing way of estimating value when it comes to sound quality. Unfortunately the JBL 708p has a roughly +/- 5dB on axis response where a reference speaker these days would be expected to be +/- 1dB. In addition it appears to have even more serious than normal 2 way port issues. It may perform well in some respects but it is not a reference speaker. The Neumann KH 420 is a significantly better reference speaker at around the same price point with less than +/- 1dB on axis variation, well controlled horizontal directivity, 3 way so no 2 way port issues, sufficient clean SPL to maintain a clean direct sound at standard levels for low frequency transients in a non-booming room (subs required for lowest octave). One could make a case for one or two other models to be a reference but this is an obvious one.
So can we DIY better performing speakers for a similar price? Yes. We can adapt the beamwidth with frequency to better suit our room and better suit our tastes w.r.t. to the imaging-spaciousness tradeoff for stereo. We can introduce a narrower beamwidth or a cardioid radiation pattern from 80 Hz or so upto the controlled directivity of the midrange to reduce the excitation of room modes and front wall interaction issues. Plus no doubt one or two other things. And we can of course have fun and grow our knowledge and experience while doing so.
Everybody has to place their trust in something in order to make decisions about what to do. It is not optional if you want to get speakers designed and built.
By far the most reliable entity to trust is established scientific and engineering knowledge. Unfortunately very few DIY folk have the depth of relevant knowledge to apply it to speaker design and instead have to look to people for guidance. To make matters worse after the end of the stereo boom in the 70s the more accessible home audio publications dropped evidence based on scientific/engineering reasoning and instead promoted magical thinking in order to distinguish hardware.
So how does one get a handle on whether a person under consideration is an idiot, a rogue or someone competent? Perhaps the most reliable method is to look at the because... that follows a statement. Technically knowledgeable people will reason based on simpler established laws/knowledge which will be given after the because... (note scientific and engineering knowledge is about using established laws/knowledge to predict the outcome of experiments not measurements). If (in order of severity) this is missing, an appeal made to a person, an appeal made to experience, an appeal made to measurements be wary. This isn't how technically informed people tend to communicate but is the only option for the uninformed or those wishing to mislead to better serve their own interests.
PS I will leave it as an exercise to apply to DR and to some extent SL in his later years.
Last edited:
Andy19191 in Post #84 seems to concur with my reservations about the JBL 708P being the best choice for Edgar77.
This whole thing got started from a very unfortunate comment by bradleypnw in Post #52 where he single handedly declared with his supreme knowledge of everything audio that Edgar should:
“Buy a pair of JBL 305/8Ps, unless you can afford JBL 705/8Ps. Those speakers will teach you what good speakers sound like and that will keep you from chasing your tail in the future. You'll also have a reference if you choose to DIY.
You'll never be able to DIY speakers better than those but you might be able to match them.”
In other words, for $238, the current price for a pair of JBL 305/8Ps at Crutchfield, you can buy speakers that are as so good that you can't build anything better as a DIY at any price. I can already hear people who read this forum choking over their coffee from laughing so hard when they read that statement.
But of course, if you just want to be safe and are willing plop down $3,600 you can get something even better.
So it was from this unfortunate comment that Edgar77, being a new member and wanting to get going without having to really learn about the differences between various speaker designs and how each is suited for this listening room and tastes, seemed about ready to make the move.
I think my warning was the right thing to do and necessary to counter bradleypnw’s very misleading post. Now it might turn out that the JBL 708/P is a good choice for Edgar77, but he would be wise to do a lot more research and analysis before spending almost $4,000 for something that might or might not be a good fit.
Dan and Chuck would have been in the list had I not referenced the age bracket.
DanP (DanP)and Kerry Arnes (Navyguy) own CSS. Both have talent.
Ben Cooper (1100xxben) has been working for a company that makes higher-output designs for the military and such, and has come up with some novel measurement techniques. He's recently started writing white papers on things he has done. Trust me- he'll be known in the future.
johnnyrichards has been contributing about as long as I have, and has a list of designs under his belt. He also helps manage MAC-DIY webpages, forum, and event archives.
CJD (divine audio designs) has been designing for a good long while too, he just doesn't contribute much on forums. Ansonica, Nebbiollo, Percorino, and his famous MTMWW around the time of release of the reference series Dayton drivers was considered highly.
Nick is newer to the forums, but a force to be reckoned with. Gorgeous painted finishes and veneered ones, and has shared a bunch of jigs and measurement tools or plans for improving your measurements over on the MAC and PE forums. He's made coaxes of his own and machined aluminum waveguides as well.
I feel like Javad is still newer in the 'design' area, but his skills have improved immensely in the last few years. Not that he hasn't had any help...
And yes- improvements could be made to many of their and my projects. Sometimes the cost isn't worth it. Sometimes the goals are different for different people, and diminishing returns always come into play.
Later,
Wolf
It's tough to beat even a miniDSP solution. Really, the only significant limitation is the DAC's and their power supply (for the very best quality), and of course spending a LOT more on multiple *excellent amplifiers.
(..excellent as in subjective, not necessarily its objective measured result.)
I've heard several *ANALOG active crossovers over the years, and never really heard something overall better (than a good passive implementation), different yes, but not better. 😱
*both Tube and Solid State.
Last edited:
🙂
Speaking of Dave, this is the page on ameliorating diffraction with felt (..for others that haven't already seen this page):
David Ralph's Speaker Pages - Felt Effects on Baffle Diffraction
It would be nice if we could each decide from reading reports, reviews, and comments on forums like this one exactly what type of speaker design we really want to have, and even further the specific model within that design category.
Unfortunately that’s really not possible. You are going to have to experiment with different designs. Build them and listen to them extensively in your own room with your own music in order to find an answer. No one here can magically give the answer to you regardless of how wonderful their post sounds.
So like most people here you are probably going to have to build and test a wide variety of speakers to really know what you like the best.
And unfortunately here is what can happen if you keep building and have more and more speakers:
Round 1:
Wife: Why do you need all those speakers?
Your answer: Well, I still haven’t decided which ones I like the best.
Round 2. One month later when you still haven’t done anything:
Wife: Well, can’t you just get rid of some of them? The ones you don’t want anymore.
Your answer: Not yet. I’m still evaluating them. I’m working on it.
Round 3: Two months later. You still haven’t done anything, but your wife is loosing her patience:
Wife: You still haven’t done anything about all those speakers. You’ve got 30 days to make up your mind to keep one pair and get rid of the rest.
Your answer: OK. I’ll try to decide soon.
Round 4: Two more months later when you still have kept all of the speakers that you worked so hard in building and don’t want to part with:
Wife: That’s it. Either the speakers go or I go. Make up your mind already.
Your answer: OK. Let me think about it!
Last edited:
There was context to my post: trust as in faith, or complete trust - and in a single individual on all matters (within a certain area of interest).
Basically the viewer built-up this level of trust, and then was disappointed when that level of trust was eroded. They never should have given/developed that amount of trust in the first place.
People tend to do this for professions in general, with the obvious being Doctors and Lawyers. (..and these two examples have a higher standard as fiduciaries.) It's a horrible idea. 😱
You should always (if possible, and it's *not always possible), have a reasonably informed idea (including alternatives) of what you are paying for and in the skill-level of the person performing that work. Additionally, when something goes wrong (..and it often does to some extent), you should know what means of recourse you have.
*as in an Emergency situation (particularly if unconscious).
Last edited:
..freak'n algorithm! 😀 ..it's dug-in for me like an Alabama tick. 😱
(I could always flush my cache, but I don't want to.) 😱
I don't care about Danny's products one way or the other but if these issues are such a bother why not just do the due diligence, order some, try them out or have a group listening session and *then* share your ire with the world. This is DIY, right? It's 2021, guys. Don't these arguments get old? Everybody's got a return policy. It'll cost all of a few dollars to plop them back in the mail.
and I thought I was alone
If we start ordering tube connectors here we will have to rename the forum to audiocircle. I can crimp half with my left and the other half with my right hand and see how many listeners in a proper jury study can guess which one is my dominant hand. I would propose that we follow the standard procedure from my industry (automotive S&V):
View attachment AudioJuryAnalysis_SANDV_0104otto.pdf
I think it should meet the 2021 standards for due diligence.
p.s. and then we can post a video for Danny.
Last edited:
I don't own Danny speakers binding post tubing and never heard any sound comparison between speakers with std binding post and those from Danny's.
Danny has been Hi-Fi business for many years I see the positive aspects of every person, ie he is not out there purposely to deceive his customers in order to get some extra money. He has MANY years of experience in listening to high-quality sound equipment particular speakers. Danny can hear the difference between the two types of binding posts. You should give him a shadow of the doubt. In many instances, sound differences are mainly due to individual sound perception which can be explained technically and on some occasions cannot.
My explanations why they do sound different
--------------------------------------------------
If you compare Danny's binding post tubing with that of the ordinary/standard binding post you will find there are FAR more number of contact points from Danny's tubing. This will enable a better flow of electrons between the tubing and binding post.
Furthermore, there are on the market many types of tubing and binding posts which possesses a better number of contact points than those from std binding post and tubing combo, maybe someone should compare them cos they are cheap. I bought some and used them but never made a 1-2 comparison.
Fellows,
If you disagree with my explanation I can understand and would like to hear your explanations or arguments. I may or may not respond to your arguments. You can explain your disagreements but please don't be rude. We are all civilised beings here.
You have it entirely backwards. You’ve got the due diligence in the wrong place.
It is the specific responsibility of the seller to conduct reasonable tests that confirm the quality and performance claims of his products. It is not the responsibility of the consumer to prove or disprove the seller’s claims.
And when the seller makes claims that are in obvious and direct contradiction of the science behind that product, it becomes even more imperative that he provide objective and unbiased testing.
What’s even worse in this case is that we have a seller who not only refuses to submit his products to any kind of reasonable tests, but also mocks the well established industry standards for double blind testing with an impartial jury. He in fact, even refutes the value of single blind testing, much less double blind.
Instead all we get is his repeated mantra of ‘take my word for it’.
I’m sorry, but the onus in on the seller, not the customer, and to suggest it is the other way around is ridiculous.
Last edited:
So you never tried to differentiate them in a blind listening study but you rationalized it all by imagining a better flow of electrons which translated all the way to audible differences in sound pressure level variations? This is a definition of make believe.
I love watching space movies with friends who find nothing wrong when there is a loud explosion outside a space ship, after all it does all look very believable (like the early trailers for the "Gravity" movie), except there is no air medium to make for sound pressure waves (oh darn).
You know people who make amplifier circuits can get a whole host of measurable electron flow effects with active components (unlike a passive connector) which may or may not be audible.
Is your purpose in life to lead poor souls down the path of despair?
Finding a good set of main channels today is as easy as deciding how loud you want to play your material then choosing between several good companies with products in that category range.
I believe what you are trying to say in non-engineering terms is that there is less resistance with tube connectors than with conventional binding posts.
But if that is it, you are wrong.
The difference in resistance would be so small, if any, that if you could even measure it there would be no affect at all on the overall performance of the circuit.
If fact, there is some concern regarding the use of tube connectors that over time they can loosen up since there is no physical way to secure them, thereby increasing the contact resistance, and degrading the performance.