Really loving the miniDSP! It still had two spare RCA outputs which could be used for subs. I has a pair of Realistic Mach 2's that I was using with the line arrays as rear speakers before I got the miniDSP ...greatest rear speakers ever by the way 
I decided to run them as very low powered subs to augment the line arrays deep bottom end. I created a sub eq for them in REW to taste. I have them barely doing anything but the line arrays are doing everything I wanted them to. Its along the idea of having multiple subs. Its sounding good so far!
I decided to run them as very low powered subs to augment the line arrays deep bottom end. I created a sub eq for them in REW to taste. I have them barely doing anything but the line arrays are doing everything I wanted them to. Its along the idea of having multiple subs. Its sounding good so far!
Attachments
Two changes made recently that made dramatic improvements to their sound (they already sounded fantastic):
1. Set a steep high pass filter at 25hz.
I had read about Ohm Walsh's "sub bass actuator" that cuts the deepest frequencies that are too low a db to be fully heard and instead applies that same power towards EQ'ing up the 25-35hz range while still reducing excursion.
Technology | Ohm Speakers | Custom Audiophile Speakers for Music & Home Theater
I feel that it has relieved the drivers of addition work, adding some additional clarity.
2. Extreme toe in
I had gotten new speakers in my family rooms surround sound setup that were imaging better than my line arrays. I had originally setup the line arrays to cross behind my listening position.It sounded good so I never touched it.
To get the line arrays to image as well as the other speakers I tried taking them to the extreme of the in to the point that the imaging started to flatten on itself and then brought it back a hair. I was adjusting the rotation by 1/32 of an inch. Surprisingly, I ended with them being slightly asymmetrical. The depth, dynamics, bass, and clarity are all much improved. I think much of the improvement is by having less side wall first reflections. The line arrays are now crossing 4 1/2 feet in front of my listening position. They are almost at 45°
1. Set a steep high pass filter at 25hz.
I had read about Ohm Walsh's "sub bass actuator" that cuts the deepest frequencies that are too low a db to be fully heard and instead applies that same power towards EQ'ing up the 25-35hz range while still reducing excursion.
Technology | Ohm Speakers | Custom Audiophile Speakers for Music & Home Theater
I feel that it has relieved the drivers of addition work, adding some additional clarity.
2. Extreme toe in
I had gotten new speakers in my family rooms surround sound setup that were imaging better than my line arrays. I had originally setup the line arrays to cross behind my listening position.It sounded good so I never touched it.
To get the line arrays to image as well as the other speakers I tried taking them to the extreme of the in to the point that the imaging started to flatten on itself and then brought it back a hair. I was adjusting the rotation by 1/32 of an inch. Surprisingly, I ended with them being slightly asymmetrical. The depth, dynamics, bass, and clarity are all much improved. I think much of the improvement is by having less side wall first reflections. The line arrays are now crossing 4 1/2 feet in front of my listening position. They are almost at 45°
I have tested my own line arrays ("IDS-20" & "IDS-24") with similar toe-in and it works very well for the ears, not so much for the eyes
IIRC wesayso also had a similar experience with his.I got the miniDSP2x4HD for Christmas so hope to integrate it into my system shortly, there is a learning curve
Very nice build. Congratulations. I do not have any experience with line arrays (outside of venues) but I have had electrostats which I toed in at around 45° in order to get pin-point accuracy (long story). Perhaps this is one more thing the corner-arrays I have seen around the forums are doing right?
But I had a question regarding the your current bass roll off; are you still using the miniDSP as a crossover to bass units? Or are you using the 25hZ SBA with regards to the line arrays as such?
But I had a question regarding the your current bass roll off; are you still using the miniDSP as a crossover to bass units? Or are you using the 25hZ SBA with regards to the line arrays as such?
Yes, I'm using the miniDSP 2x4 HD (with Dirac) as a "crossover." Normally you would use the hi pass filter with a tweeter. I am using it unconventionally to save my drivers of unnecessary excursion at low frequencies. I had content before going down well below 17hz. I did notice it's absence after I set the 25hz hi pass filter, but the slightly improved dynamics was worth it.
I have a question for you all. I just picked up a little 60 wpc Adcom GFA-535 for the other room (not the line arrays) and was very impressed with how it sounded. The overall sound is much clearer and better controlled. The highs are more airy, the soundstage is wider, and the woofers are very controlled.
The line arrays are driven with an MCS 3125 at 125 wpc. That receiver has a bit of a cult following as being one of the better sounding receivers of that era. With the line arrays, I am currently running them down to 25hz and they sound good, they just don't have that micro detail and tight woofer control that I just experienced from the Adcom in the other room. I feel that the receiver may just be running out of steam in the deep notes. I created an additional preset in my Minidsp crossing it over at 40hz and it does seem a little clearer but not as noticable as the Adcom.
My question is this: If I drive the arrays down to 25-20hz, would a separate power amplifier with more power and headroom give me that added clarity and control or am I driving the TC9's into distortion, limiting their clarity?
I was able to buy a Yamaha M-85 power amplifier at 260 wpc. It's currently at a local repair tech for servicing (the new speaker terminals are shipping from Great Britain and are stuck in customs for 1-2 months due to Coronavirus). The Yamaha doesn't "double down" into 4ohms like some seem to recommend in an amplifier. I'm guessing that applies more to speakers that dip down to 4 or 2 ohms as they hit deeper notes. Am I right on this? As I understand, the TC9 line arrays; even though they have large amounts of eq to get them down to 20hz, they shouldn't be varying in impedance as drastically as some speaker designs (like the big Infinity's). Does that mean that this amplifiers doesn't have as much "grunt" or will it be a perfect fit?
The line arrays are driven with an MCS 3125 at 125 wpc. That receiver has a bit of a cult following as being one of the better sounding receivers of that era. With the line arrays, I am currently running them down to 25hz and they sound good, they just don't have that micro detail and tight woofer control that I just experienced from the Adcom in the other room. I feel that the receiver may just be running out of steam in the deep notes. I created an additional preset in my Minidsp crossing it over at 40hz and it does seem a little clearer but not as noticable as the Adcom.
My question is this: If I drive the arrays down to 25-20hz, would a separate power amplifier with more power and headroom give me that added clarity and control or am I driving the TC9's into distortion, limiting their clarity?
I was able to buy a Yamaha M-85 power amplifier at 260 wpc. It's currently at a local repair tech for servicing (the new speaker terminals are shipping from Great Britain and are stuck in customs for 1-2 months due to Coronavirus). The Yamaha doesn't "double down" into 4ohms like some seem to recommend in an amplifier. I'm guessing that applies more to speakers that dip down to 4 or 2 ohms as they hit deeper notes. Am I right on this? As I understand, the TC9 line arrays; even though they have large amounts of eq to get them down to 20hz, they shouldn't be varying in impedance as drastically as some speaker designs (like the big Infinity's). Does that mean that this amplifiers doesn't have as much "grunt" or will it be a perfect fit?
Last edited:
Why not try that Adcom amp on the line arrays? Just as a test.
It takes a lot of power to upset the TC9 arrays but it can be done. I went from a 100 watt into 8 ohm Pioneer amplifier to a Goldmund Telos 400 dual mono clone with 350 watt into 8 ohm. However only when I used lower levels in my digital chain and made up for that with a pré-amp did I really unlock the potential of the Goldmund clone.
I'd say just try the Adcom on them, maybe with a relaxed bottom end. The difference between my Pioneer and that Goldmund clone wasn't subtle. The Goldmund clone has way more detail, even at low volume but is a madman at bass frequencies. It really seems to grab the cones and control them. Right now I do run subwoofers for my bottom end but the Goldmund showed me that the extra power does help!
Not all amps are created equal, while for a long time I didn't want to believe the differences could be large between amplifiers, an afternoon swapping amps made me a believer that the differences do matter. In my normal world I would never get to hear something like that Goldmund power, it's way out of my league (or price range).
I got lucky that two fellow DIY members (koldby and BYRTT) came out to play with a trunk full of amplifiers.
The arrays should be a relative easy load for just about any amplifier, never dipping below 6 ohm. I have a conjugation network on both of my arrays to make them an even easier load.
Impedance and electrical phase of one of the arrays with conjugation network.
However even without the impedance compensation the load is an easy one compared to most multi-way speakers.
Another large factor in how it sounds it the overall frequency balance, that's not easy to get right, but with a lot of time you can grow into a good balance. Lower notes can be overshadowing. Play extensively with overall room curves. little tweaks can go a long way.
Let us know how that Adcom sounds on the arrays, it's worth it to find out!
It takes a lot of power to upset the TC9 arrays but it can be done. I went from a 100 watt into 8 ohm Pioneer amplifier to a Goldmund Telos 400 dual mono clone with 350 watt into 8 ohm. However only when I used lower levels in my digital chain and made up for that with a pré-amp did I really unlock the potential of the Goldmund clone.
I'd say just try the Adcom on them, maybe with a relaxed bottom end. The difference between my Pioneer and that Goldmund clone wasn't subtle. The Goldmund clone has way more detail, even at low volume but is a madman at bass frequencies. It really seems to grab the cones and control them. Right now I do run subwoofers for my bottom end but the Goldmund showed me that the extra power does help!
Not all amps are created equal, while for a long time I didn't want to believe the differences could be large between amplifiers, an afternoon swapping amps made me a believer that the differences do matter. In my normal world I would never get to hear something like that Goldmund power, it's way out of my league (or price range).
I got lucky that two fellow DIY members (koldby and BYRTT) came out to play with a trunk full of amplifiers
. The arrays should be a relative easy load for just about any amplifier, never dipping below 6 ohm. I have a conjugation network on both of my arrays to make them an even easier load.
Impedance and electrical phase of one of the arrays with conjugation network.
However even without the impedance compensation the load is an easy one compared to most multi-way speakers.
Another large factor in how it sounds it the overall frequency balance, that's not easy to get right, but with a lot of time you can grow into a good balance. Lower notes can be overshadowing. Play extensively with overall room curves. little tweaks can go a long way.
Let us know how that Adcom sounds on the arrays, it's worth it to find out!
Just curious, did you try the Adcom on the arrays?
Thank you for asking, but no I haven't. Family comes first sometimes
Ok, I'm listening to the Adcom now.
...warning, lots of adjectives
It is definitely more detailed and transparent. A little drier sounding. The soundstage is wider and more forward. The bass might be a little more controlled at low volumes but definitely loses steam (as we'd all expect). It honestly did very well for a 60 wpc. Frankly, as much as I love the Adcom in the other system, I really wasn't liking it with the line arrays. Too thin and dry sounding. ...It is really growing on me though, mostly that forward soundstage and light thin details.
The MCS is much more lively. It is a much thicker, liquidy sound. Soundstage is much tighter. Vocals have a perfect tone, not dry at all. The bass is much more potent. Dynamics are also much more potent. Background subtleties are much more muted and compressed. The details are there if I focus more. The MCS is definitely the more musically enjoyable of the two. I can't classified it as warm or cold. It's more thick and sweet.
My biggest complaint with line arrays has been that the sound is very noticeably is coming straight from the two speakers. With the more forward soundstage of the Adcom, it made the whole presentation feel more cohesive and I didn't seem as drawn to the two speakers.
... my 4 yrs old daughter is physically dragging me off to supper.
...warning, lots of adjectives
It is definitely more detailed and transparent. A little drier sounding. The soundstage is wider and more forward. The bass might be a little more controlled at low volumes but definitely loses steam (as we'd all expect). It honestly did very well for a 60 wpc. Frankly, as much as I love the Adcom in the other system, I really wasn't liking it with the line arrays. Too thin and dry sounding. ...It is really growing on me though, mostly that forward soundstage and light thin details.
The MCS is much more lively. It is a much thicker, liquidy sound. Soundstage is much tighter. Vocals have a perfect tone, not dry at all. The bass is much more potent. Dynamics are also much more potent. Background subtleties are much more muted and compressed. The details are there if I focus more. The MCS is definitely the more musically enjoyable of the two. I can't classified it as warm or cold. It's more thick and sweet.
My biggest complaint with line arrays has been that the sound is very noticeably is coming straight from the two speakers. With the more forward soundstage of the Adcom, it made the whole presentation feel more cohesive and I didn't seem as drawn to the two speakers.
... my 4 yrs old daughter is physically dragging me off to supper.
Thanks for playing! So you've noticed there are differences in presentation between the amplifiers.
Ideally we'd find something in between those two amplifiers. Maybe the Yamaha will do a better job, but it is hard to predict before trying. Some combinations simply gell real good, better than others. I even tried finding clues in measurements but failed at that.
You were on MiniDSP right? To gain more focus in the phantom center you could try a bit harder to make the left and right speaker act similar in frequency and phase at the exact sweet spot. Covering the side walls with damping panels should help a lot to reach that goal.
If you weren't on MiniDSP I'd suggest some mid/side EQ. But I wouldn't know how to incorporate that with MiniDSP.
Taking down the levels of the first reflections should help to get the sound free from the speakers. Don't damp the second half of the room just yet (wall behind listening position) as that would take away from the "live sound" feel. (which is why I have ambience speakers)
I do miss being able to 'seduce' you with mid/side EQ. But if I had to guess, I do think early reflections give away the speaker position. My focus of sound improved with each damping panel I put up. But it also takes some of that excitement away if you go too far. Taking away the first say 6-7 ms of reflections should free the sound while keeping the room lively enough.
Ideally we'd find something in between those two amplifiers. Maybe the Yamaha will do a better job, but it is hard to predict before trying. Some combinations simply gell real good, better than others. I even tried finding clues in measurements but failed at that.
You were on MiniDSP right? To gain more focus in the phantom center you could try a bit harder to make the left and right speaker act similar in frequency and phase at the exact sweet spot. Covering the side walls with damping panels should help a lot to reach that goal.
If you weren't on MiniDSP I'd suggest some mid/side EQ. But I wouldn't know how to incorporate that with MiniDSP.
Taking down the levels of the first reflections should help to get the sound free from the speakers. Don't damp the second half of the room just yet (wall behind listening position) as that would take away from the "live sound" feel. (which is why I have ambience speakers)
I do miss being able to 'seduce' you with mid/side EQ. But if I had to guess, I do think early reflections give away the speaker position. My focus of sound improved with each damping panel I put up. But it also takes some of that excitement away if you go too far. Taking away the first say 6-7 ms of reflections should free the sound while keeping the room lively enough.
When I took my initial measurements I measured the sweet spot and then went down the couch and averaged them together. Do I need additional center sweet spot measurements to bias the average towards the sweet spot. For example, I often stand in front of the sweet spot more often than even sitting in it. I assume I would have to adjust the the time alignment to match the other measurements.
What is mid/side eq?
Certainly worth a shot. I keep my multiple measurements within half a meter on either side of the sweet spot.
Mid/side EQ is a way of converting the stereo signal into a sides stream and a mid stream, where you can EQ those streams separately (only within reason). It can enhance the 3D stage when used with care. I've written a lot about it on my thread.
I use it to enhance tonal balance across the stage but it also gives me improved intelligibility for phantom vocals etc.
Some of it is discussed in this thread: Fixing the Stereo Phantom Center
I've tried the phase tricks mentioned in that thread, experimented with cross talk cancelation and the mentioned mid/side EQ. That last bit worked best for Stereo reproduction. I still use some of the techniques mentioned in that thread for Home Theatre. (I don't have a real center channel)
Mid/side EQ is a way of converting the stereo signal into a sides stream and a mid stream, where you can EQ those streams separately (only within reason). It can enhance the 3D stage when used with care. I've written a lot about it on my thread.
I use it to enhance tonal balance across the stage but it also gives me improved intelligibility for phantom vocals etc.
Some of it is discussed in this thread: Fixing the Stereo Phantom Center
I've tried the phase tricks mentioned in that thread, experimented with cross talk cancelation and the mentioned mid/side EQ. That last bit worked best for Stereo reproduction. I still use some of the techniques mentioned in that thread for Home Theatre. (I don't have a real center channel)
I tried this out today, but not in the same method as normal. I made the measurements in just the space of the center couch cushion, but instead of using REW I tried using just Dirac. I took the measurements in Dirac and used it's in house optimizer to set the peq's and fir filters based on the house filter I set. There are some things I'd still like to try in the future, but it definitely accomplished the good of this experiment, to get the left and right speakers to have identical house curves.
Definitely a solid improvement. Instrument separation is the biggest improvement, followed by overall balance. Center imaging has locked in place where it used to be more vague.
Looking back at my original REW measurements, I can see mistakes I had made in the past.
Glad to read that did improve things. DRC-FIR can be challenging with all of it's options but it could get you even better results than Dirac.
However if you're happy you're happy.
Not everyone needs to be a nutcase like me after all...
In the end the rewards are the most important, enjoying your music library...
However if you're happy you're happy.
Not everyone needs to be a nutcase like me after all...
In the end the rewards are the most important, enjoying your music library...