pjpoes said:
I don't disagree at all. Some things are detectable, some easily, and then some not at all, but thats not the issue as much as "what's next?"
Detecting a difference does not automatically mean that its better and ABX only tells you that its reliably different audibly. The next question is, if the detection is not easy, is this a change that's worth the cost? Everything has a cost. In fact, the most common listenting tests done at any manufacturer is to determine if a cost reduction is audible, not a test of an improvement. Cost reductions are done two or three times more often than improvements.
"Stop and Smell the Roses"
The weather this week has been somewhat uncooperrative for us DIY 'ers that dont have a heated/insulated shop so I like many others across the country was unable to work on getting my various(and numerous) audio projects completed. Instead I took the opportunity to bandage my partially completed "Nathan's" together for a lesson...oops i meant listen. Or did I ?
I placed my order when Markus was wading through the first diyAudio posted build back in the summer. While waiting patiently I decided that since I was going to be building multiple subs too, I was really going to take my time with the build and work on 'em a little bit at a time.
Earl warned me more than once but i decided to build them myself anyway. I guess I am a firm believer in the sense of pride and accomplishment gained when building something with your own two hands. I have used everything from a chisel to a router table, with a jigsaw and a table saw in between. I will post pictures and give a more detailed description in a different thread when I'm finished of the various modifications and descisions I made along the way. I am still preping the boxes for the paint process to be done by someone else more skilled in that department than I.
Now to the point of my thread, as I sit hear listening to the unpainted cabinets...Its been a PITA so far but totally worth it.
I used to think that my high-ish effeciency single driver speakers were detailed. The Nathans are all about layers.
Thank you to EG for putting up with our banter and to Markus and Matt who have taken the time to document their own blood,sweat and tears to help us all.
Regards, Daniel.
The weather this week has been somewhat uncooperrative for us DIY 'ers that dont have a heated/insulated shop so I like many others across the country was unable to work on getting my various(and numerous) audio projects completed. Instead I took the opportunity to bandage my partially completed "Nathan's" together for a lesson...oops i meant listen. Or did I ?
I placed my order when Markus was wading through the first diyAudio posted build back in the summer. While waiting patiently I decided that since I was going to be building multiple subs too, I was really going to take my time with the build and work on 'em a little bit at a time.
Earl warned me more than once but i decided to build them myself anyway. I guess I am a firm believer in the sense of pride and accomplishment gained when building something with your own two hands. I have used everything from a chisel to a router table, with a jigsaw and a table saw in between. I will post pictures and give a more detailed description in a different thread when I'm finished of the various modifications and descisions I made along the way. I am still preping the boxes for the paint process to be done by someone else more skilled in that department than I.
Now to the point of my thread, as I sit hear listening to the unpainted cabinets...Its been a PITA so far but totally worth it.
I used to think that my high-ish effeciency single driver speakers were detailed. The Nathans are all about layers.
Thank you to EG for putting up with our banter and to Markus and Matt who have taken the time to document their own blood,sweat and tears to help us all.
Regards, Daniel.
Cost benefits is a tough one for me, I can't make a strong correlation between my field and yours, they are different, and cost benefits will be dealt with differently. In my field, if we create a new way of reading to kids, and we show no difference in children's language and literacy right after words, but we do show a difference, even one of only 5% by the time they get to highschool, it's often considered worth while.
Another related issue, that I have had trouble even getting fully clear with regard to audio, especially with regard to cost/time/benefit, is difficult to detect differences. Developmental disabilities and psychological disorders are a good example, in my field, of things that are notoriously difficult to detect. We develop measures for detecting these, screening tools if you will. We gather a representative sample for which to test the screening tool, create an experimental condition to test this tool, and are lucky if we manage to catch even 50% of the cases. The problem isn't the really bad ones, people with blatant disorders are easy to detect with screening tools, it's those ones that either hover around the threshold, or whose symptoms are manifested in non-normal or unexpected ways. Does it mean they aren't sick or don't deserve treatment, no, it means the measure is imperfect. Namely, that is makes type II errors, false negatives.
When I try to correlate this issue to a sensory one more clearly, I think of color gradation. Two very similar colors can not be reliably differentiated in abx comparisons, but alternative testing methods do allow us to reliably detect the difference, such as side by side.
None of this really has any bearing on the cost benefit per say. I am acknowledging the idea that the problem is that the differences are, by my own admission, very small, so small as to be nearly imperceptible. However, to relate it to the idea of latent response, I do keep reading articles indicating that certain sensory stimuli are showing responses by the body, such as with brain imaging, in unexpected ways. Ultrasonic tones that we knew for sure the human ear couldn't pick up (and it can't) do show a latent resposne in the body. What this means is unknown, but again, some of this is starting to indicate emotional responses to seemingly miniscule stimuli. What I wonder then, is do some of these very small gradation in stimuli create small latent responses in the person, say emotionally, impacting how they perceive and enjoy what it is they are listening to.
Another related issue, that I have had trouble even getting fully clear with regard to audio, especially with regard to cost/time/benefit, is difficult to detect differences. Developmental disabilities and psychological disorders are a good example, in my field, of things that are notoriously difficult to detect. We develop measures for detecting these, screening tools if you will. We gather a representative sample for which to test the screening tool, create an experimental condition to test this tool, and are lucky if we manage to catch even 50% of the cases. The problem isn't the really bad ones, people with blatant disorders are easy to detect with screening tools, it's those ones that either hover around the threshold, or whose symptoms are manifested in non-normal or unexpected ways. Does it mean they aren't sick or don't deserve treatment, no, it means the measure is imperfect. Namely, that is makes type II errors, false negatives.
When I try to correlate this issue to a sensory one more clearly, I think of color gradation. Two very similar colors can not be reliably differentiated in abx comparisons, but alternative testing methods do allow us to reliably detect the difference, such as side by side.
None of this really has any bearing on the cost benefit per say. I am acknowledging the idea that the problem is that the differences are, by my own admission, very small, so small as to be nearly imperceptible. However, to relate it to the idea of latent response, I do keep reading articles indicating that certain sensory stimuli are showing responses by the body, such as with brain imaging, in unexpected ways. Ultrasonic tones that we knew for sure the human ear couldn't pick up (and it can't) do show a latent resposne in the body. What this means is unknown, but again, some of this is starting to indicate emotional responses to seemingly miniscule stimuli. What I wonder then, is do some of these very small gradation in stimuli create small latent responses in the person, say emotionally, impacting how they perceive and enjoy what it is they are listening to.
Matt
At the margins of perception there are undoubtedly many factors to consider. But one has to get some kind of scale that is meaningful about what to go after. You've got to get the basics right befor you can seriously consider going after the details.
For example, it is widely held that constant directivity is a requirement for loudspeakers and yet, in the marketplace, companies obsess over issue that are insignificant by comparison while ignoring the directivity issue altogether. I can look at a loudspeaker and tell what its directivity will be like, but when you talk to the designer or the salesman they go on and on about this or that miniscule problem and how they solved it. They are completely missing the bigger picture. Only Floyd Toole and the guys at Harman talk about directivity. And while I don't agree with all their positions, I do agree with the fact that they measure it, show it and admit that it's very important. The average loudspeaker company either doesn't look at directivity, does so in only a small way by looking at, for example, a 30 degree off axis curve, or if they do look at it they certainly aren't doing anything about it. But they'll tell you all about the minor trivial little problems that they have solved.
At the margins of perception there are undoubtedly many factors to consider. But one has to get some kind of scale that is meaningful about what to go after. You've got to get the basics right befor you can seriously consider going after the details.
For example, it is widely held that constant directivity is a requirement for loudspeakers and yet, in the marketplace, companies obsess over issue that are insignificant by comparison while ignoring the directivity issue altogether. I can look at a loudspeaker and tell what its directivity will be like, but when you talk to the designer or the salesman they go on and on about this or that miniscule problem and how they solved it. They are completely missing the bigger picture. Only Floyd Toole and the guys at Harman talk about directivity. And while I don't agree with all their positions, I do agree with the fact that they measure it, show it and admit that it's very important. The average loudspeaker company either doesn't look at directivity, does so in only a small way by looking at, for example, a 30 degree off axis curve, or if they do look at it they certainly aren't doing anything about it. But they'll tell you all about the minor trivial little problems that they have solved.
I don't disagree with anything you have said, and hope it's been clear in my comments that what I am referring to is small, and not of equal or greater importance to other issues.
Even I have bigger picture issues I need to be dealing with. I still need to work on the room acoustics. I have 4 acoustic treatments, which have done little. I feel that adding some diffusion devices in the rear of my room will help with some imaging problems I have. Some room specific bass traps such as a tuned bass absorber would go a lot longer way than a 6" piece of fiberglass on my wall has. An acoustically transparent screen with a center mounted behind it will probably fix some issues with theater staging. A third subwoofer will help improve the bass response further. More movies and music to enjoy on the system. A more comfortable couch. Etc. etc.
Even I have bigger picture issues I need to be dealing with. I still need to work on the room acoustics. I have 4 acoustic treatments, which have done little. I feel that adding some diffusion devices in the rear of my room will help with some imaging problems I have. Some room specific bass traps such as a tuned bass absorber would go a lot longer way than a 6" piece of fiberglass on my wall has. An acoustically transparent screen with a center mounted behind it will probably fix some issues with theater staging. A third subwoofer will help improve the bass response further. More movies and music to enjoy on the system. A more comfortable couch. Etc. etc.
Matt
Your comments are clear. Sometimes I respond to you, but its more other readers that I am talking too. I thinkyou understand the situation far better than most.
Your comments are clear. Sometimes I respond to you, but its more other readers that I am talking too. I thinkyou understand the situation far better than most.
Thanks Dr. Geddes, I'm glad to hear that.
I just wanted to give a quick update. The resistors came today, as well as some mills 20 ohm 12 watt wirewounds. For now, I'm going to put a pair of these inplace of the 10 ohm 25 watt and see if I measure or hear anything different. Eventually I may change the left and right ones too. I was curious, so sue me. More important, I have the 2.7 ohm resistors. Also, I began assembling the crossover for the center last night, and I built it per your modified recommendation for the smoothest axial response.
I also thought I would let you all know that my paint situation is, apparently, a bit less of a situation than I thought. It really was more weather than anything else. The paint has finally dried to a very hard cured state. I don't know how it will compare with the industrial finish, but I had some pieces I had peeled off before that were sitting inside. Hard as can be, maybe not a rock, but not very flexible. I compared it with some latex that was stuck to the bottom of my paint rolling pan, which was far softer and more delicate. This paint may not have been too bad, I'm thinking that the majority of the issue was weather and time related.
I also had forgotten about the modeling clay. I picked some roseart modeling clay from the local walmart, so lets see how that changes things.
Hey Dr. Geddes, as for the spray glue recommendation for the foam, have you ever tried an acoustic foam or regular foam specific spray glue which doesn't dry, but stays tacky instead? I'm wondering if this would be better to allow removal and reinsertion of the foam, without buildup. Maybe it would hold better too.
I just wanted to give a quick update. The resistors came today, as well as some mills 20 ohm 12 watt wirewounds. For now, I'm going to put a pair of these inplace of the 10 ohm 25 watt and see if I measure or hear anything different. Eventually I may change the left and right ones too. I was curious, so sue me. More important, I have the 2.7 ohm resistors. Also, I began assembling the crossover for the center last night, and I built it per your modified recommendation for the smoothest axial response.
I also thought I would let you all know that my paint situation is, apparently, a bit less of a situation than I thought. It really was more weather than anything else. The paint has finally dried to a very hard cured state. I don't know how it will compare with the industrial finish, but I had some pieces I had peeled off before that were sitting inside. Hard as can be, maybe not a rock, but not very flexible. I compared it with some latex that was stuck to the bottom of my paint rolling pan, which was far softer and more delicate. This paint may not have been too bad, I'm thinking that the majority of the issue was weather and time related.
I also had forgotten about the modeling clay. I picked some roseart modeling clay from the local walmart, so lets see how that changes things.
Hey Dr. Geddes, as for the spray glue recommendation for the foam, have you ever tried an acoustic foam or regular foam specific spray glue which doesn't dry, but stays tacky instead? I'm wondering if this would be better to allow removal and reinsertion of the foam, without buildup. Maybe it would hold better too.
salas said:
I am sorry Salas but I grew up in a good old Soviet Union. I understand that “Soviet Military” sounds cool and the first association is probably with “Tank” or “Build like a soviet tank” This capacitors as well as most soviet made electronic parts are garbage and were considered garbage by Soviet DIYs (yes people use to DIY speakers and electronics even under the rule of Communist party) at the time.
No, they are great capacitors. I am using them in phono stages where the signal is most sensitive, and in amplifiers in very critical positions. Very highly esteemed for value by expert members. See links here in DIY audio com:
1
2
3
And also one in Russian, about an evaluation of Russian audiophiles:
Link
I guess that defective ones can be found on Ebay, badly aged or rejected against standards originally. I haven't got a dodgy one yet personally.
''Hi guys. I just swapped the 100nF cap from a Mundorf Supreme, to a Russian Paper in Oil 47nF and got quite an improvement! Treble is definitely better and mids seem more open. The soundstage also seems more 3d.
I am really surprised by this, as the Supreme's are really great caps.''
Post's Link
The above member who said that is a vendor for Mundorf. Has a DIY supply online store.
What make people think that I would advise something just for fun, I don't know...Too much audio BS have made people suspicious and negative I guess. But plain vanilla engineering isn't the whole story either, has its limits. First things first off course. I am talking about the icing. Is there any cake without it?
One of my MC phono thread builds, made by another member, Mikvous.
1
2
3
And also one in Russian, about an evaluation of Russian audiophiles:
Link
I guess that defective ones can be found on Ebay, badly aged or rejected against standards originally. I haven't got a dodgy one yet personally.
''Hi guys. I just swapped the 100nF cap from a Mundorf Supreme, to a Russian Paper in Oil 47nF and got quite an improvement! Treble is definitely better and mids seem more open. The soundstage also seems more 3d.
I am really surprised by this, as the Supreme's are really great caps.''
Post's Link
The above member who said that is a vendor for Mundorf. Has a DIY supply online store.
What make people think that I would advise something just for fun, I don't know...Too much audio BS have made people suspicious and negative I guess. But plain vanilla engineering isn't the whole story either, has its limits. First things first off course. I am talking about the icing. Is there any cake without it?
One of my MC phono thread builds, made by another member, Mikvous.
Dear Salas, all this tests are purely subjective and none of it is double blind.
The article in Russian evaluates this cap ( 630V rated) as beautifully sounding, soft but slightly muddy. And it is actually an article about using different capacitors as shunts in the amplifiers, not speaker crossovers. Anyway, if you think it's a great capacitor, ok fine. It's just that I grew up around this staff and it was always considered last resort. Now, before Dr. Geddle will kick us out of here, we should either stop or take it in to another thread.
Best, Roman.
The article in Russian evaluates this cap ( 630V rated) as beautifully sounding, soft but slightly muddy. And it is actually an article about using different capacitors as shunts in the amplifiers, not speaker crossovers. Anyway, if you think it's a great capacitor, ok fine. It's just that I grew up around this staff and it was always considered last resort. Now, before Dr. Geddle will kick us out of here, we should either stop or take it in to another thread.
Best, Roman.
Did they say they are garbage? ''Beautiful'' is not ''garbage''.
Slightly soft? OK a trait. All capacitors have traits. That is why you see them Soviet Teflon bypassed on the above pic. To take out the soft muddy part. But over Solen they take away the flat gray Solen signature and slight edge. They collaborate nicely. Anyway, all those links show that Soviet capacitors aren't pure garbage, at least to many people's ears across several countries. And off course not expensive at all.
As you saw, I have used those parts in many things. I had no intention to come back on this, you posted that they are considered junk, so I had to say a few things. Its no argument, its the experience of enough people. We stop it. Nothing more to add.
Slightly soft? OK a trait. All capacitors have traits. That is why you see them Soviet Teflon bypassed on the above pic. To take out the soft muddy part. But over Solen they take away the flat gray Solen signature and slight edge. They collaborate nicely. Anyway, all those links show that Soviet capacitors aren't pure garbage, at least to many people's ears across several countries. And off course not expensive at all.
As you saw, I have used those parts in many things. I had no intention to come back on this, you posted that they are considered junk, so I had to say a few things. Its no argument, its the experience of enough people. We stop it. Nothing more to add.
All the speakers are done and setup. I need to take measurements of the center, but I think something is wrong. It sound's considerably brighter than the left and right speaker. I don't have identical amplifiers for the left, center, and right, and the gains are different, so it's possible all I heard was the difference in gain when test tones were being sent around, but the speaker sounds characteristcly different from the others.
Dr. Geddes, I incorporated the changes you suggested, hopefully I didn't miss some important one.
Setup is really bad at the moment, but there is nothing I can do for the moment. With the screen where it is, and not being acousticly transparent, I have to place the speaker below the screen. The height of the speakers is roughly the exact height between the screen bottom and floor. This means the center has to sit almost directly on the floor (I did manage to put together a small spiked platform for it). A pretty major additional problem is that the subwoofer sit's almost directly to the right of the speaker, obstructing a portion of it's horizontal dispersion, and my low rack is directly to the left of the speaker. I've tried to figure out how to reposition what I have in a way that will fix this, but at the moment, there is no simple solution. Since the front three channels act as low frequency sources, I can probably improve bass by moving that sub to another room location, but it's size makes that a difficult task. I think the only solution for the rack is to get rid of it and use something else, such as a tall rack or wall mount rack.
Having said all that, my initial impressions of a complete front stage of Abbey's is that they stage much better than my Focal speakers did. Obviouslly I'm feeling that the center sounds a bit different right now, and want to continue checking it, but the front stage height is consistent, well more consistent, than with my last speakers.
Oh I also found that I had inserted a second order passive low level (F-stop) crossover at 50 hz high pass on the amp. I removed that and so my measurements of the speakers should now show better response. Thos crossovers were rated at 50hz but crossed over starting much higher, I believed they were closer to 80-100hz, and worked more like a first order.
Dr. Geddes, I incorporated the changes you suggested, hopefully I didn't miss some important one.
Setup is really bad at the moment, but there is nothing I can do for the moment. With the screen where it is, and not being acousticly transparent, I have to place the speaker below the screen. The height of the speakers is roughly the exact height between the screen bottom and floor. This means the center has to sit almost directly on the floor (I did manage to put together a small spiked platform for it). A pretty major additional problem is that the subwoofer sit's almost directly to the right of the speaker, obstructing a portion of it's horizontal dispersion, and my low rack is directly to the left of the speaker. I've tried to figure out how to reposition what I have in a way that will fix this, but at the moment, there is no simple solution. Since the front three channels act as low frequency sources, I can probably improve bass by moving that sub to another room location, but it's size makes that a difficult task. I think the only solution for the rack is to get rid of it and use something else, such as a tall rack or wall mount rack.
Having said all that, my initial impressions of a complete front stage of Abbey's is that they stage much better than my Focal speakers did. Obviouslly I'm feeling that the center sounds a bit different right now, and want to continue checking it, but the front stage height is consistent, well more consistent, than with my last speakers.
Oh I also found that I had inserted a second order passive low level (F-stop) crossover at 50 hz high pass on the amp. I removed that and so my measurements of the speakers should now show better response. Thos crossovers were rated at 50hz but crossed over starting much higher, I believed they were closer to 80-100hz, and worked more like a first order.
pjpoes said:
Matt
I'm pretty sure that I said the crossover changes would be on the bright side, but does give the flattest axial response. You can tone down the HFs with a smaller bypass cap.
my measurements are still showing a dip in the response around 800-1000hz. I thought originally it was the modifications I did per your suggestion, thinking I did something wrong, I undid them, but still am getting a puzzling response. I haven't removed the .47uf bypass cap, I will try that next. If you want I can post my results and see if you can makes sense of them.
here is the response, as you can see, it doesn't match my others, and this is with the correct 2.7 ohm resistor, the one LCR deleted, and the 3uf cap. I'm trying now to figure out what may have gone wrong. If you see something telling, let me know.
Matt,
Have you switching the center with one of the others to see if it's position dependent?
From what you said, just listening would tell.
Have you switching the center with one of the others to see if it's position dependent?
From what you said, just listening would tell.
Thanks, but I figured it out. I knew it wasn't position dependant because this speaker was sitting in the middle of the room. I tried moving it around to different places and got the same thing. Turned out to be a bad series resistor causing only 2 ohms of resistance. I was using my 150 watt iron for the binding posts and decided to go after the cap and resistor with it too, probably over heated it or something.
I'm starting to wonder if that small dip I"m noticing in the response is the combination of the dip in the woofer's response at 800hz and the inductor being slightly too high. It's 3.2mh, so I"m going to remove it and unwind a few until I get it down.
I'm starting to wonder if that small dip I"m noticing in the response is the combination of the dip in the woofer's response at 800hz and the inductor being slightly too high. It's 3.2mh, so I"m going to remove it and unwind a few until I get it down.