"All in good measure" includes measurements too🙂 No one can guarrantee you that a whole system where all units measure well,it will sound well too.A good measure of listening,experimentation,measurements etc....always has better results,more measurements if you are diy'ng,more listening if you are buying.
Last edited:
Good point panikos. glad you brung it up (like me inglish?)
I upset a few recently when I spoke my mind, but this is part of the whole concept I intended.
I was bundled into the 'measurement' camp, as if that is somehow completely divorced from listening. "If the measurement looks good it will sound good''.
Not quite. There ARE differences between drivers (being a speaker guy 'only' I will stick to that realm). So given the limited measurements we typically use two drivers with an 'identical' FR (I use dsp remember so it's trivial for me to do that) there can be a vast difference in the end sound.
BUT equally it has been my experience that given an existing speaker, ie the driver complement has been set, then the maximisation of the sound of that speaker/driver happens when it is made more accurate.
And to bring it back on topic, usually those differences far far exceed those available from cables and such. So as I have said, it's not so much I am anti cables it's more 'meh, why bother'.
But your point was something I wanted to emphasise.
Terry,
I'm not in any way against measurements,and I don't remember saying that cables can transform any system,to a level that a better speaker will.In fact in my system the cost of the cables is about the 4-5% ,and I agree with you that speaker is the most important part of the system.What I know is that listening to music is a strictly personal hobby and one just can't ignore personal preferences.If someone likes the Wavac and he can afford it I will not judge him.If he buys it because some magazines said it is good,then I will have my reservations as I always do.And yes,I know-as we all do-some who buy like this.And that goes for cables too,as it goes for everything in life🙂 Finally,not judging someone,does not necessarily mean that you agree with him.On the other hand,judging someone or his system without knowing him or his system,is not at all a wise act.I know of many who are not good in electronics,and have set up beautifully sounding systems.
I'm not in any way against measurements,and I don't remember saying that cables can transform any system,to a level that a better speaker will.In fact in my system the cost of the cables is about the 4-5% ,and I agree with you that speaker is the most important part of the system.What I know is that listening to music is a strictly personal hobby and one just can't ignore personal preferences.If someone likes the Wavac and he can afford it I will not judge him.If he buys it because some magazines said it is good,then I will have my reservations as I always do.And yes,I know-as we all do-some who buy like this.And that goes for cables too,as it goes for everything in life🙂 Finally,not judging someone,does not necessarily mean that you agree with him.On the other hand,judging someone or his system without knowing him or his system,is not at all a wise act.I know of many who are not good in electronics,and have set up beautifully sounding systems.
Last edited:
Agree Panicos. We should listen for personal pleasure. But when recommending or comparing, we should be objective.
We can be objective only if we know how it sounded in the mastering system.Even there you might think that you wouldn't do it that way if it were you🙂 I'm not sure if what we buy on LP or CD is accurate.Otherwise if all LP's/CD's were accurate,they should sound the same.(I like that:Two competently recorded CD's should sound the same🙂......just jocking).
But they don't sound the same.Even a real unamplified instrument will sound different in different places/theaters etc.......Where is the "reference" to help us be objective?If I like a certain instrument in a certain theater(live & accurate & real)I may use it as a reference,but you may like the same instrument's sound in a different enviroment(again,live,accurate and real).
Our chosen systems will sound different,but we will both feel it was the best we could do🙂
Hello Sy!
I'm just popping in to inform you why we haven't done the DBT as of yet. A couple, approx 2.5 weeks ago I received the Stealth Audio Dream speaker wires that I then needed to get a handle on, after finally feeling comfortable with the Sakra ICs. Well as I listened I heard something that made me ---{like a fool}-- decide attempt to apply a bit more of Mike Rispoli's driver treatment on my FE206ES-Rs unsupervised! What a mistake that was. Now I realize why it isn't sold to DIYers. I ruined my FE206ES-R drivers. All the "magic" was gone and IMO my system went from sounding more like live, unamplified music to sounding like a very good audio system once again.
Was I ever bummed. I started a searching for a new pair of FE206ES-R drivers so I could start all over and have Mike treat them personally once again. Well as luck would have it my search was very fruitful and I located a pair of what are considered by many to be Fostex's best ever attempt at a 'fullrange" driver the whizzerless 8inch FE208ES-R! I've included a pic of the driver and of it's frequency response loaded into a cabinet that's approx 1/2 of my cabinet.
I won't be around again. I only posted this in case the doubters were thinking the DBT is being avoided. If I get the FE208ES-R drivers within the next week and I'm hoping I will. I think May might be a good time to start thinking about doing the DBT!
Oh, one last thing. When the FE206ES-R's lost their magic it was mainly due to losing a vast portion of their upper frequency info. The bass was still very good down to 35Hz. As a goof I ran my Lowther DX3 in parallel with the Fe206ES-R drivers. I had the 15 ohm Lowthers running off the 8 ohm tap and the 8 ohm Fostex running off the 4 ohm tap and damn was it ever good. What I heard SURPRISINGLY enough was the best of both drivers combined into one!!!
Bass was very good highs were delicate and extended and there was that glorious midrange both SETs and fullrange drivers are noted for. On top of that were incredible dynamics, transients and inner resolution. It made my 40W/ch SET sound like a 300W/ch amp. Amazing what happens if you just sometimes try something.
In any event now you know where we stand. Goodbye my friend...
Thetubeguy1954
I'm just popping in to inform you why we haven't done the DBT as of yet. A couple, approx 2.5 weeks ago I received the Stealth Audio Dream speaker wires that I then needed to get a handle on, after finally feeling comfortable with the Sakra ICs. Well as I listened I heard something that made me ---{like a fool}-- decide attempt to apply a bit more of Mike Rispoli's driver treatment on my FE206ES-Rs unsupervised! What a mistake that was. Now I realize why it isn't sold to DIYers. I ruined my FE206ES-R drivers. All the "magic" was gone and IMO my system went from sounding more like live, unamplified music to sounding like a very good audio system once again.
Was I ever bummed. I started a searching for a new pair of FE206ES-R drivers so I could start all over and have Mike treat them personally once again. Well as luck would have it my search was very fruitful and I located a pair of what are considered by many to be Fostex's best ever attempt at a 'fullrange" driver the whizzerless 8inch FE208ES-R! I've included a pic of the driver and of it's frequency response loaded into a cabinet that's approx 1/2 of my cabinet.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I won't be around again. I only posted this in case the doubters were thinking the DBT is being avoided. If I get the FE208ES-R drivers within the next week and I'm hoping I will. I think May might be a good time to start thinking about doing the DBT!
Oh, one last thing. When the FE206ES-R's lost their magic it was mainly due to losing a vast portion of their upper frequency info. The bass was still very good down to 35Hz. As a goof I ran my Lowther DX3 in parallel with the Fe206ES-R drivers. I had the 15 ohm Lowthers running off the 8 ohm tap and the 8 ohm Fostex running off the 4 ohm tap and damn was it ever good. What I heard SURPRISINGLY enough was the best of both drivers combined into one!!!
Bass was very good highs were delicate and extended and there was that glorious midrange both SETs and fullrange drivers are noted for. On top of that were incredible dynamics, transients and inner resolution. It made my 40W/ch SET sound like a 300W/ch amp. Amazing what happens if you just sometimes try something.
In any event now you know where we stand. Goodbye my friend...
Thetubeguy1954
That's what always baffles me too 🙂 Looks like you never heard a really good sounding system. If that Phonic thingy is really flat then your speaker is seriously lacking bass. By the way, what signal type is the Phonic listening to?
Best, Markus
You know doing a DBT does not need training, this isnt the olympics. Its not even like studying for an exam. This isnt a pass or fail type test at all.
To actually believe someone has to prepare themselves before a DBT happens just shows how much confusion there is about it 😱
To actually believe someone has to prepare themselves before a DBT happens just shows how much confusion there is about it 😱
Yeah, I can't believe this thread has gone on for 12000 posts, and it seems to be all talk - I agree with Doug - doing blind testing is not that difficult.
I think this is either a sign of the low stakes involved (cables, and audio in general, matter very little), or indicates current audio is way more about thinking/talking than listening.
- "severed head in a bag smiley", a new low for apathy in audio?
😀
EDIT: I guess I could point out that I wouldn't put the time into testing cables either...
I think this is either a sign of the low stakes involved (cables, and audio in general, matter very little), or indicates current audio is way more about thinking/talking than listening.
- "severed head in a bag smiley", a new low for apathy in audio?😀
EDIT: I guess I could point out that I wouldn't put the time into testing cables either...
Last edited:
Really; so much talk and preparation for something any wife can hear without really even trying. 😀
Except that there is always the "screw with the husbands brain" thing, involved with the WAF.
Bud
"Really; so much talk and preparation for something any wife can hear without really even trying."
I hear you, loud and clear. Females can be absolute nerdwhackers. After a few seconds of listening they tell you "The music sounds boring" and you know you´ve spent time and money to no avail.
I hear you, loud and clear. Females can be absolute nerdwhackers. After a few seconds of listening they tell you "The music sounds boring" and you know you´ve spent time and money to no avail.
Thetubeguy1954
don't know why you responded to my post via PM. After all this is a discussion forum.
You now told me that the Phonic shows not your system but a fullrange driver in a cabinet that is half the size of yours. What you still didn't tell me is what test signal you were using, if the Phonic does averaging and what smoothing is applied.
If you want to show the loudspeaker's frequency response then you have to eliminate ALL room reflections. Otherwise you're just showing the in-room steady state response which is NOT what we hear (above the Schröder frequency).
At lower frequencies looking at the steady state response is what you want to do. So now you made me curious and I'd like to see the frequency response of your "extremely good" system measured in a meaningful way.
Best, Markus
This thread is crazy and I'm not sure why I decided to read it today, but this stood out to me as requiring a response. The closer I get to a smooth frequency response that uniformly collapses off axis, the less I care about all the small things. IOW I've begun to realize how important it is to break the circle. Listening to music has become a joy in a way it never was before--all sorts of stuff too! Even renditions of surprisingly compressed files sound right though more compressed. There's more detail in them then I ever thought possible. Internet radio is now a blessing. It seems almost senseless to me that there are people who still think there's magic in audio equipment, but there was a time where chemistry was considered magic. Education changed that for many and will hopefully change audio one day for sake of its philes. Maybe that's what will become of this thread.🙂
I used to do a lot of experimenting with cable typologies in all the positions of the signal chain, measuring LCR and listening intently for changes. Even heard some "high end" ones and measured/listened, even built a cable cooker and did that whole business. I believe they can sound different (not saying any is "more accurate" which was always my goal and I could never reliably hear a difference in the room--only through headphones did I think I heard a difference), but in the grand scheme of things it's such a small difference in the big picture it's not really worth the effort when compared to getting the loudspeakers right. Hopefully a DBT will come out of this--I haven't read to the end yet so maybe it's happened. I'm getting near the end I believe.
I still build cables, but only to get good ones for a nice price. Meaning I want ones that will last and won't let any extra noise get in.
Dan
Sounds like Dan has seen the light! Welcome aboard Dan. I hope that in some small way I helped with that.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.