The MET7 loudspeakers are a great bargain, and an all around good sounding speaker. They are forgiving on top, and do OK bass, but I do add a subwoofer.
Any speaker that costs less than $1000 is pretty much in the 'kiddie' range.
Any speaker that costs less than $1000 is pretty much in the 'kiddie' range.
Full range connected bass driver and paper cone tweeter, all the hallmarks of a mid-fi shelf system speaker......there were/are Sony and other speakers with the bass driver extension ring/time alignment ring and cone tweeters.
I have experimented with this arrangement and found that Zobels across the drivers greatly increased bass AND treble extension, and improved intelligibility/perceived distortion.
The tweeter series cap is also of great importance/audibility....polystyrenes across PP series caps help.
BTW, what is that blue thingy....looks suspiciously like a tweak product I have seen somewhere......has DS gone over to the dark side, lol ?
Dan.
Not sure how you define 'kiddie.' NS-10s cost less than that and many of the records that people like to listen to were mixed on those speakers, and for good reason. But, best not to use them with a 'kiddie' amplifier.
Edit: It also helps a lot to use these things: http://www.primacoustic.com/recoil-specs.htm Although, they are a fairly recent innovation compared to how long NS-10s were in production.
Last edited:
Not certain, and in this context I mean subjectively, not measured.
I think it is at least product of cleaner/clearer mids out of the woofer and reduction in 'masking', allowing better perceived bass.
Further reason could be to do with 'ideal' electrical load on the amp and consequent better amp behaviour.
Another factor could be absorption/thermal dissipation of induced RF noise on the speaker lines.
Got an old, half decent shelf system speaker ?.....it's worth the effort if only for the experiment.
Dan.
Isn't some esr in an electrolytic for psu decoupling not a Good Thing?
Still get email from regulator builders that make the mistake of using a high quality (boutique) cap at the reg output and ended up with an oscillator. Lossy electrolytics are ideal here.
Just saying.
Jan
'Kiddie' in this sense does not mean that the speakers cannot sound pretty good. If I were to compare and specify a 'kiddie' sports car, it might be the Austin Healey Sprite, of yesteryear. I had one, and it was a lot of fun. I now drive a medium grade Porsche, and there is a difference.
Jan, ESR is not DF. One is a series resistor, the other is a parallel array resistors in series with smaller capacitors. They do different things. The best approach would probably be a small series resistor in series with an ideal capacitor.
Now, somewhat higher ESR might be OK for power supply decoupling caps, but I know people who want low ESR for their electrolytic caps for their loudspeaker Xovers.
Now, somewhat higher ESR might be OK for power supply decoupling caps, but I know people who want low ESR for their electrolytic caps for their loudspeaker Xovers.
Geeeez. This is becoming scary. Many here say they dont hear any difference between this and that and yet we find out they have speakers with really gross distortion in many important ways.
-RM
-RM
NS-10's were/are used because they will rudely show up any 'nasties' in the mix....if the mids/vocals sound good, the mixdown will sound decent on just about anything.
That said they are useless for judging stuff 'down low'.....larger mixdown monitors are required for this.
Nah, far too expensive...just put three car engine valve springs under each cabinet. 😎 .
Dan.
Yes, I have noted the same.....and the arguing from those running inadequate systems.
You have enjoyed a revelation recently with the M2's, now you are understanding 😉 .
Within the limits of 9" bass driver, I guarantee that none here are enjoying the sound quality/clarity/enjoyment/groove factor that I have on hand.
One interesting observation during the evolution of my system is that exposure to 'marginal/problematic' sound causes the ears to 'shut down' such that one is incapable of fine differentiation.
When the system is stepped up a level, the ears step up a level also, which then allows better discrimination of the system signature/problems.
This is an chicken/egg evolutionary process, and eventually arrives at performance that is perfectly enjoyable on any recordings/genres etc.....neighbours, GF's in the kitchen included.
As it stands now, I am able to dictate the signature sound of any system, instantly and consistently across replay systems of any type/size/quality.
This scope of this control ranges from 'dead clean', and then I can 'bend' the system sound to dull, bright, musical, relaxing, energising, draining, happy, sad, dirty etc etc.....take your pick.
Foremost in my experimenting is that I have not modified any system electronics in any way, and most deliberately.
I am finding that standard distortion etc specs don't really matter, certainly not so much as is held dear throughout the audio world.
What does matter is system noise, and critically the spectral/dynamic behaviour of system noise.
Change system noise behaviours and you change everything.
Dan.
You are most definitely on the top of such list.
You have much to say about audio systems and yet you do not have a system that has any chance of being 'in the race'.
Stick with pcb layout and give audio a miss.
Dan.
ok - thanks.
Talking about Zobels', a few years ago I had about 3 or 4 meters of speaker cable coiled up and looked at the waveforms at the speaker end (B&W 703's). ~ 10 kHz square waves were ringing like hell on the speaker end. I've been meaning to make up a switch box with adjustable R and C for damping at the speaker end - something I'll pick up in the next few months hopefully
Obviously true....
Isn´t that one of the basic logical falacies - to conclude from a specific mechanism to the general?
Btw, following the same route of reasoning you have to conclude that the "gorilla" is indeed invisible (up to ~49% didn´t recognize it; inattentional blindness and inattentional deafness).
Furthermore, if you couldn´t remember auditory events via long term storage any practical relevance is per se extremely questionable.
Secondly, as you can´t most often present audio sources at the same time, you have to rely on memory in controlled listening tests. Which memory model would like to follow?
The more traditional one, where auditory memory (in the strictest sense) just last for a few hundred milliseconds - a few seconds?
Or the more modern one where items will be transferred to the socalled working memory, which means memory content can be processed (especially compared to content from long term storage)?
The former was the basis for Precoda/Meng´s proposal to restrict the length of music sample in tests to ~5s to (hopefully) ensure that participants could not use their categorical memory for evaluation but had to use the specific auditory memory. (they obvisously didn´t know of any publication that examined the relationship between the degree of a difference and transfer process to long term storage either)
You have me confused with someone else. I don't do PCB layout. If you are going to try and belittle someone a teensy bit of research works wonders, otherwise you come across a little foolish.
Not absolutely useless, but not what anybody would want either. Bob Clearmountain said he felt the speaker cones vibrating with his fingers to judge the correct amount of bass in his mixes. Some people add a sub, or two if they prefer bass in stereo.
Anyway, the point I was trying to make is that there are only a fairly small percentage of speakers, cheap or expensive, that have a good reputation for translation, the ability to make a mix that will sound good on most systems. And, many people seem to like that the enclosure is not ported and what little bass they do produce is at least tight and well defined. That helps with mixing as well.
NS-10s are also good for judging other people's mixes. You can tell if a mix is a little off, and have a pretty good idea what could have been done to make it a little better, something not always so obvious with other speakers, even much more expensive ones. They may sound great, but some information still seems to be missing.
IIRC we're still waiting for various bits of evidence from Max on such as his different sounding files?
And isn't this "DIY Audio" not "Fashion Audio" at heart -- ie about doing it yourself....? Rather than a race ('in the race' - whatever that means) to an unspecified point?
And isn't this "DIY Audio" not "Fashion Audio" at heart -- ie about doing it yourself....? Rather than a race ('in the race' - whatever that means) to an unspecified point?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.