Duane:
Any time you modify an existing plan, bought the parts from a supplier other than the designer and it still sounds presentable, take the credit ! (I know that I've done that
)
Might still be worth trying some light treatment on the tweeter domes.
The next questions to ask are what are the associated equipment / stands/ cabling etc, and what are your listening tastes? If it's not for HT then you've already got very musical midrange and bass response, and kudos for mentioning room gain. The real world is different from any computer model.
as for the smilies - moderation in all things
oops, got carried away
Any time you modify an existing plan, bought the parts from a supplier other than the designer and it still sounds presentable, take the credit ! (I know that I've done that
)Might still be worth trying some light treatment on the tweeter domes.
The next questions to ask are what are the associated equipment / stands/ cabling etc, and what are your listening tastes? If it's not for HT then you've already got very musical midrange and bass response, and kudos for mentioning room gain. The real world is different from any computer model.
as for the smilies - moderation in all things
oops, got carried away
Re: Re: Re: Duane's 2-ways
There is a button you can check that leaves you logged in all-the-time... i think i've been asked my password once (i just use the same passwords all the time so i only have to remember a couple.
Well, so much for my notes
dave
And welcome to the Forum Duane... hope you hang around some.
dp said:
There is a button you can check that leaves you logged in all-the-time... i think i've been asked my password once (i just use the same passwords all the time so i only have to remember a couple.
Well, so much for my notes
dave
And welcome to the Forum Duane... hope you hang around some.
Clarification?
Chris,
I just have to ask, what do you mean by the following statement:
"...If it's not for HT then you've already got very musical midrange and bass response, and kudos for mentioning room gain..."
Surely you're not implying that a system designed for HT should not or would not have musical midrange and bass response?
And hey, I mentioned room gain, where are my kudos? Oh wait you already gave them to me a couple pages ago, just not for mentioning room gain..
Aaron Gilbert
Chris,
I just have to ask, what do you mean by the following statement:
"...If it's not for HT then you've already got very musical midrange and bass response, and kudos for mentioning room gain..."
Surely you're not implying that a system designed for HT should not or would not have musical midrange and bass response?
And hey, I mentioned room gain, where are my kudos? Oh wait you already gave them to me a couple pages ago, just not for mentioning room gain..
Aaron Gilbert
Re: Clarification?
I'm not implying anything, I'll venture out on this limb and opine that HT requirements are different from "music only" audio.
Period.
In a nutshell, the illusion of space and depth is an function of multiple channels of highly engineered (read unnatural) "audio" tracks, rather than the quality of the speakers/electronics.
Way too many systems for both applications are designed using software to optimize for smoothest FR, power handling, off axis dispersion, impedance compensation - all the "objective" stuff. And along the way, the intimacy and emotion of the music get left inside the box or the XO.
About 2 years ago I built my first DIY speaker in over 20 years, and took advantage of a new found friend's expertise in designing the crossover. The enclosure was a variation on the Orca Daline design, with a single Vifa P13 mid bass, and in the original version a recycled OEM hard dome tweeter from Linn Keilidh. LMS and LEAP and all that stuff, and we have a 2nd and 3rd order XO with zobel for the tweeter, the whole package.
Well, the tweeter was not a good match for the Vifa, and I finally subsituted a Vifa DT25 series tweeter. Same routine with XO - lots of parts, Solen Hepta-Litz inductors, and Fast Caps. Still sounded a bit "constipated".
So after reviewing the published and LMS measured raw FR for the P13 in the enclosure, I took a leap of faith, and pulled all the components out of the XO except a single cap on the tweeter.
Holy smokes, kids - opened things up enormously in terms of depth, speed, air, etc - all the subjective tweakie audiophile stuff.
BTW these now reside in my own very limited A/V (not HT) system downstairs.
Since then, I've played with even more minimalist designs, including 2 that were played in the "tube room" at Al's.
Notwithstanding their limitations at the extremes of SPL and frequency extension, and with the horns, some definite colorations, there is a "life" to these systems that can be very engaging. And with decent front end (even a 25 yr old NAD receiver ) hours of non fatiguing escape can be achieved.
Remember, there is no "absolute sound" except for the real thing. For me the entire act of listening to audio or watching HT is predicated on a voluntary act of faith - I temporarily suspend my disbelief that it's not real.
Now, if the program material lets me down, then it's not hard to see the emperor indeed has no clothes.
aaroncgi said:
I'm not implying anything, I'll venture out on this limb and opine that HT requirements are different from "music only" audio.
Period.
In a nutshell, the illusion of space and depth is an function of multiple channels of highly engineered (read unnatural) "audio" tracks, rather than the quality of the speakers/electronics.
Way too many systems for both applications are designed using software to optimize for smoothest FR, power handling, off axis dispersion, impedance compensation - all the "objective" stuff. And along the way, the intimacy and emotion of the music get left inside the box or the XO.
About 2 years ago I built my first DIY speaker in over 20 years, and took advantage of a new found friend's expertise in designing the crossover. The enclosure was a variation on the Orca Daline design, with a single Vifa P13 mid bass, and in the original version a recycled OEM hard dome tweeter from Linn Keilidh. LMS and LEAP and all that stuff, and we have a 2nd and 3rd order XO with zobel for the tweeter, the whole package.
Well, the tweeter was not a good match for the Vifa, and I finally subsituted a Vifa DT25 series tweeter. Same routine with XO - lots of parts, Solen Hepta-Litz inductors, and Fast Caps. Still sounded a bit "constipated".
So after reviewing the published and LMS measured raw FR for the P13 in the enclosure, I took a leap of faith, and pulled all the components out of the XO except a single cap on the tweeter.
Holy smokes, kids - opened things up enormously in terms of depth, speed, air, etc - all the subjective tweakie audiophile stuff.
BTW these now reside in my own very limited A/V (not HT) system downstairs.
Since then, I've played with even more minimalist designs, including 2 that were played in the "tube room" at Al's.
Notwithstanding their limitations at the extremes of SPL and frequency extension, and with the horns, some definite colorations, there is a "life" to these systems that can be very engaging. And with decent front end (even a 25 yr old NAD receiver
) hours of non fatiguing escape can be achieved.Remember, there is no "absolute sound" except for the real thing. For me the entire act of listening to audio or watching HT is predicated on a voluntary act of faith - I temporarily suspend my disbelief that it's not real.
Now, if the program material lets me down, then it's not hard to see the emperor indeed has no clothes.
I'm not implying anything, I'll venture out on this limb and opine that HT requirements are different from "music only" audio.
Period.
In a nutshell, the illusion of space and depth is an function of multiple channels of highly engineered (read unnatural) "audio" tracks, rather than the quality of the speakers/electronics.
Way too many systems for both applications are designed using software to optimize for smoothest FR, power handling, off axis dispersion, impedance compensation - all the "objective" stuff. And along the way, the intimacy and emotion of the music get left inside the box or the XO.
I've always been of the impression that any speaker, regardless of it's intended use, should be as faithful as possible to the original signal, whether it comes from naturally occuring sounds, or manufactured. Stereo soundstaging is still very much a part of movie sound, given that just about every movie I've seen has a soundtrack, and the good ones have really good soundtracks (just ask John Willams, James Horner, et al). Also, though the total soundfield may indeed be largely a product of the engineering and encoding/decoding of the five+ channels, a better sounding speaker is still a better sounding speaker. You will get a far more engaging home theater experience if you use high quality 'music only' speakers in all five channels, vs a home theater in the box BOSE lookalike setup. That's an extreme example, of course. I certainly can't think of a reason why you would specifically want a HT speaker to be inaccurate, unless trying to complement a specific room, and in that case the same would apply to a music only speaker.
As for emotional involvement with the music, for myself, that really is not dependent upon the speaker, it's dependent upon me. I'll tell you that my car system, in comparison to my home stereo, really sounds like crap in many ways. Yet I get every bit as involved in the music and emotionally moved - well with the exception of classical which doesn't lend itself well to the high background noise of a moving car.
I've yet to hear a system that was designed as you say, with all the objective stuff in mind, that caused me to loose my appreciation and enjoyment of the music. Maybe I'm weird that way, I'm weird in a lot of ways. Your experience sounds completely the opposite, and that's cool.
Aaron Gilbert
Re: Re: Clarification?
More info on Chris' Dalines.
dave
chrisb said:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
More info on Chris' Dalines.
dave
"reel" sound
"Stereo" soundstaging means rather a different thing when you're talking about the current 6.1, soon to be 12.2 or whatever for the enhanced home/ cinema experience, versus 2 channels.
Yes, in theory an "accurate" loudspeaker would sound correct regardless of the program material. That's if all program material was recorded and engineered with the same technique and criteria.
Lucas, Imax, HDTV et al may be honestly endeavoring to create more powerful tools for simulating (sur)realistic A/V environments, but notwithstanding the phenominal technological advances (?), once a soundtrack engineer gets his hands on those 57bazillion channels of edited digital audio perfection, all bets are off on how "real" it will be.
Mostly they are still masturbating with the power and whiz-bang of what the tools can do, and are forgetting the emotional intimacy of what the story or music should be about. Along with the MTV generation fast visual edit we are blessed with processed dynamics, subterannean bass, overdamped and artificially reverbed and compressed vocal and sound tracks abound. How many of the "natural" sounds that you hear on any TV or movie are actually recorded at the same take as the visual. I'd bet it's not more than 20%
What we really need is high definition visual and audio reproduction of live musical performances, recorded in real time (warts and all) with simple miking and mixing. Then we'll separate the wheat from the chaff.
Aaron, you'll have to excuse the exasperation some of us older guys have in some of the conversations. We've been involved in this hobby for almost 40 years, and associated with the retail side of the business off and on for over 20. That's a lot of sewage that has flowed under the footpath.
"Stereo" soundstaging means rather a different thing when you're talking about the current 6.1, soon to be 12.2 or whatever for the enhanced home/ cinema experience, versus 2 channels.
Yes, in theory an "accurate" loudspeaker would sound correct regardless of the program material. That's if all program material was recorded and engineered with the same technique and criteria.
Lucas, Imax, HDTV et al may be honestly endeavoring to create more powerful tools for simulating (sur)realistic A/V environments, but notwithstanding the phenominal technological advances (?), once a soundtrack engineer gets his hands on those 57bazillion channels of edited digital audio perfection, all bets are off on how "real" it will be.
Mostly they are still masturbating with the power and whiz-bang of what the tools can do, and are forgetting the emotional intimacy of what the story or music should be about. Along with the MTV generation fast visual edit we are blessed with processed dynamics, subterannean bass, overdamped and artificially reverbed and compressed vocal and sound tracks abound. How many of the "natural" sounds that you hear on any TV or movie are actually recorded at the same take as the visual. I'd bet it's not more than 20%
What we really need is high definition visual and audio reproduction of live musical performances, recorded in real time (warts and all) with simple miking and mixing. Then we'll separate the wheat from the chaff.
Aaron, you'll have to excuse the exasperation some of us older guys have in some of the conversations. We've been involved in this hobby for almost 40 years, and associated with the retail side of the business off and on for over 20. That's a lot of sewage that has flowed under the footpath.
As for emotional involvement with the music, for myself, that really is not dependent upon the speaker, it's dependent upon me. I'll tell you that my car system, in comparison to my home stereo, really sounds like crap in many ways. Yet I get every bit as involved in the music and emotionally moved - well with the exception of classical which doesn't lend itself well to the high background noise of a moving car.
I missed this the first read through, - you're quite right about the emotional connection being two way. I'll reiterate my comment re "voluntary suspension of disbelief"
It's not exactly that one loses the appreciation for the music, but enough years of mainstream manufacturers demos, the occassional CES trade show and high end dealers displays, and you too will have the opportunity to hear $100,00 plus systems that just aren't believable, and some that are downright painful
no names
system update
Paul, BTW the speakers in the photo are still hanging around, but several of the other pieces in the system have been replaced
Most notably:
LP12/akito/K9 has morphed into a Rega P3/RB250/AudioNote IQ2
this was NOT a step backwards.
Rotel RB970 phono=>DIY tubed (Handmade Audio's RCA manual circuit board with severely over-engineered power supply)
Nak CD Musicbank => Jolida 603 (telefunken 12AX7 output)
Linn K400 biwire cable with braided CAT5 plenum (12 pair)- vastly superior transients and space - and dirt cheap
Paul, BTW the speakers in the photo are still hanging around, but several of the other pieces in the system have been replaced
Most notably:
LP12/akito/K9 has morphed into a Rega P3/RB250/AudioNote IQ2
this was NOT a step backwards.
Rotel RB970 phono=>DIY tubed (Handmade Audio's RCA manual circuit board with severely over-engineered power supply)
Nak CD Musicbank => Jolida 603 (telefunken 12AX7 output)
Linn K400 biwire cable with braided CAT5 plenum (12 pair)- vastly superior transients and space - and dirt cheap
Oops, nice socks Chris.
BTW I have my glasses on now. (Just so that I won't be recognised, of course.)
Curious about the speaker cable (price, sound, availability).
I haven't heard the Rega decks in along time, 10 years plus at least, how do you feel it compares to the Linn?
Dave, I take it you're a man of many cats, or just one very furry one?
Paul
BTW I have my glasses on now. (Just so that I won't be recognised, of course.)
Curious about the speaker cable (price, sound, availability).
I haven't heard the Rega decks in along time, 10 years plus at least, how do you feel it compares to the Linn?
Dave, I take it you're a man of many cats, or just one very furry one?
Paul
Sorry to offend those about the Cat 5 cables.
It was all a Joke.
As it was a statement on what some people will pay for the Cat 5 cables.
I have not made a pair in about 6 months and had my fun with them.
More important things to do.
Sorry I was out of line.
The joke was ment as a joke not trying to sell them.
I made the statment as Chris when he was at my place I showed him how in 10 minutes you can make them any length you want.
Just need a jig.And well I will stop there if you want the info ask Chris.
Al
It was all a Joke.
As it was a statement on what some people will pay for the Cat 5 cables.
I have not made a pair in about 6 months and had my fun with them.
More important things to do.
Sorry I was out of line.
The joke was ment as a joke not trying to sell them.
I made the statment as Chris when he was at my place I showed him how in 10 minutes you can make them any length you want.
Just need a jig.And well I will stop there if you want the info ask Chris.
Al
I'm with ya.
Chrisb,
I'm with you on the soundtrack (not to mention video) guys still going crazy with the new tools at their disposal. It seems rare these days that I see a movie which doesn't have some unnatural effect. My pet peeve is sped up motion. jerky or otherwise, I instinctively reach for the remote, thinking I somehow bumped the x2 play button, only to realize it's playing normally!
I guess my point is, we as consumers have no control over what the folks do in the studio, and I myself don't wish to have two separate systems for stereo/home theater. So, I feel a speaker that's as accurate as possible will have the best chance of sounding at least like what the recording engineer intended. Whether or not what he/she intended is actually accurate to the real sound is a whole other kettle of fish.
I had no idea there were actually $100,000 speaker systems out there which sound bad, that's truly appalling! Well actually that price seems appalling regardless of sound quality... I'm in the market for a HOUSE and that's about how much I'm looking at ! I think my 'point of diminshing returns' is well below most folks around here.. I wouldn't spend more than maybe $1,000 on a pair of speakers. I actually built all five of my Emerald Towers for less than that, even including the recent Peerless upgrade.
Aaron Gilbert
Chrisb,
I'm with you on the soundtrack (not to mention video) guys still going crazy with the new tools at their disposal. It seems rare these days that I see a movie which doesn't have some unnatural effect. My pet peeve is sped up motion. jerky or otherwise, I instinctively reach for the remote, thinking I somehow bumped the x2 play button, only to realize it's playing normally!
I guess my point is, we as consumers have no control over what the folks do in the studio, and I myself don't wish to have two separate systems for stereo/home theater. So, I feel a speaker that's as accurate as possible will have the best chance of sounding at least like what the recording engineer intended. Whether or not what he/she intended is actually accurate to the real sound is a whole other kettle of fish.
I had no idea there were actually $100,000 speaker systems out there which sound bad, that's truly appalling! Well actually that price seems appalling regardless of sound quality... I'm in the market for a HOUSE and that's about how much I'm looking at !
I think my 'point of diminshing returns' is well below most folks around here.. I wouldn't spend more than maybe $1,000 on a pair of speakers. I actually built all five of my Emerald Towers for less than that, even including the recent Peerless upgrade. Aaron Gilbert
SuppersReady
Using cat 5 wire and 2 6.5" driver cut outs I made a spinning jig to twist Cat 5 wires with out even breaking a sweet.
The cable can be made as thick as you want up tp 140 wires is the most I have done.Realy there is a point were big and bold just gets no were faster.
And that was it.
Spinning them is very easy.
I will load a few pics of the jig if that is ok with all.
It will be in the AM as I have to get some wire to make a dumby pair.
Takes about 2 minutes for a 20 ft cable and yes.
Much more vibrant over all.
I have used many cables up to $7.50 CND ft and the cat 5 center cable I have is still in use.
Nothing has replaced it yet.
Al
Using cat 5 wire and 2 6.5" driver cut outs I made a spinning jig to twist Cat 5 wires with out even breaking a sweet.
The cable can be made as thick as you want up tp 140 wires is the most I have done.Realy there is a point were big and bold just gets no were faster.
And that was it.
Spinning them is very easy.
I will load a few pics of the jig if that is ok with all.
It will be in the AM as I have to get some wire to make a dumby pair.
Takes about 2 minutes for a 20 ft cable and yes.
Much more vibrant over all.
I have used many cables up to $7.50 CND ft and the cat 5 center cable I have is still in use.
Nothing has replaced it yet.
Al
Well said Aaron!
The latest James Bond is also guilty of this annoying trend. It just distracts rather than excites. It was a novelty when they did it in The Matrix, but now its a teenager (metaphorically) and it's a pain in the ..... (IMHO)
RAW & Dave,
CAT5 sounds more and more interesting.
Paul
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.