probably better off asking that question over in the DCX2496 thread:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=15943&highlight=
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=15943&highlight=
I don't worry about an additional A/D/A conversion when using the DCX2496 as it introduces no audible degradation of the signal - see JAES, 2007 September, Volume 55 Number 9, "Audibility of a CD-Standard A/D/A Loop Inserted into High-Resolution Audio Playback", E. Brad Meyer and David R. Moran
I asked for the quality of the 4580 op amp and if it produces audible distortion the way it is used in the MX882.
Best, Markus
I asked for the quality of the 4580 op amp and if it produces audible distortion the way it is used in the MX882.
Best, Markus
Markus
In a signal chain the A/D and D/A processes are among the most prone to audible errors (not that this is always the case however). I therefor would much prefer to minimize the potential by minimizing the number of times this task is done.
For example in my system there is only a single D/A in the entire playback chain. I strive to achive this in all my designs. I generally believe that electronics is usually inaudible, but this is perhaps because I do apply some rules to their implimentation (like above and some tests on the power amps) which may account for why I have never found electronics to be an issue in a sound system.
In a signal chain the A/D and D/A processes are among the most prone to audible errors (not that this is always the case however). I therefor would much prefer to minimize the potential by minimizing the number of times this task is done.
For example in my system there is only a single D/A in the entire playback chain. I strive to achive this in all my designs. I generally believe that electronics is usually inaudible, but this is perhaps because I do apply some rules to their implimentation (like above and some tests on the power amps) which may account for why I have never found electronics to be an issue in a sound system.
As said before I don't worry about the DCX being in the signal path of the LF signal. The question still is what the MX882 does to the signal when I split L/R and mix L/R/LFE.
Markus
I completely agree with that and didn't mean to imply otherwise. I think that I did misunderstand your comment now that I look back on it. The splitter is purely analog and so series connections of A/D and D/A are limited to the LFs and this won't be an issue. The schematic of the analog splitter looked fine to me and the only issue that I see might be some crossover distortion in the OP-amps. Check for that and I think it should be fine.
I completely agree with that and didn't mean to imply otherwise. I think that I did misunderstand your comment now that I look back on it. The splitter is purely analog and so series connections of A/D and D/A are limited to the LFs and this won't be an issue. The schematic of the analog splitter looked fine to me and the only issue that I see might be some crossover distortion in the OP-amps. Check for that and I think it should be fine.
I'm looking to gradually replace my system with a Gedlee inspired one and the first step is to turn my ported standmount speakers into sealed ones by blocking the port and then add some compact subwoofers. It seems that two subs is considered quite effective and as size is an issue and very high SPL is not I'm looking at sealed 8" subs.
Have been finding it very hard to find suitable woofers and/or modules at a sensible price (in the UK). In the process I've found a couple of ready built models which look quite appealing:
Any thoughts on these?
http://www.bkelec.com/HiFi/Sub_Woofers/Minotaur.htm
http://www.bkelec.com/HiFi/Sub_Woofers/Gemini.htm
Thanks,
Alex
Have been finding it very hard to find suitable woofers and/or modules at a sensible price (in the UK). In the process I've found a couple of ready built models which look quite appealing:
Any thoughts on these?
http://www.bkelec.com/HiFi/Sub_Woofers/Minotaur.htm
http://www.bkelec.com/HiFi/Sub_Woofers/Gemini.htm
Thanks,
Alex
Alex
Those look like good choices to me - I'd actually buy the cheaper ones. The continuos phase can come in handy if you use a setup based on measurements.
Those look like good choices to me - I'd actually buy the cheaper ones. The continuos phase can come in handy if you use a setup based on measurements.
As space didn't allow me to do a "real" surround setup with 5 speakers, I nonetheless wonder how this could look like with the Nathan. The Nathan is not flat on axis which would be a requirement for using it as a center speaker.
Furthermore, what would be the best location for the Nathans when acting as rear speakers?
Best, Markus
Furthermore, what would be the best location for the Nathans when acting as rear speakers?
Best, Markus
I would use a Nathan as a center channel, but definately not the surrounds. The polar response is wrong for a surround. This is well discussed in other threads and I'd ask you to look there.
The issue of the axial hole that one finds with all my waveguides is indeed a concern for the center channel. I do however use a Summa like this in my setup and whatever problems there might be are not evident. However, I have thought a lot about how I would modifiy the crossover for a "Summa line" speaker when used as a center channel. Clearly I would do the crossover differently. But, to date, only a very small fraction of customers use three channels, so I have not pursued this change.
What would be a disaster would be to use some other speaker for the center channel. I guarantee this wouldn't work well (been there done that). The sound differences across the three front speakers must be as "close as possible" and even a Nathan on axis is closer to the L and R than any other speaker is going to be. So even with the axial response difference, its still going to work better than anything else.
The issue of the axial hole that one finds with all my waveguides is indeed a concern for the center channel. I do however use a Summa like this in my setup and whatever problems there might be are not evident. However, I have thought a lot about how I would modifiy the crossover for a "Summa line" speaker when used as a center channel. Clearly I would do the crossover differently. But, to date, only a very small fraction of customers use three channels, so I have not pursued this change.
What would be a disaster would be to use some other speaker for the center channel. I guarantee this wouldn't work well (been there done that). The sound differences across the three front speakers must be as "close as possible" and even a Nathan on axis is closer to the L and R than any other speaker is going to be. So even with the axial response difference, its still going to work better than anything else.
What would be the "right" polar response pattern and will we see a speaker from you that works that way?
Do you mean for the surrounds? I would use a dipole for the sides, and a small single driver monpole for the rears in 7.1. I have designs on paper, but lack the time to develop them into a product. (This is all discussed in detail elsewhere). Next on my list are some subs, and then the surrounds, but thats a ways off. There is very little time to develop new products when there are orders to fill.
And I have completely remade ALL of the tooling as the old molds weren't working out. In thinking about all the discussions of how easy it would be to make waveguides, I have to chuckle because I'm now on my fifth set of molds - and I have a lot of experince. I'm still waiting for all these other ideas to show some results.
And I have completely remade ALL of the tooling as the old molds weren't working out. In thinking about all the discussions of how easy it would be to make waveguides, I have to chuckle because I'm now on my fifth set of molds - and I have a lot of experince. I'm still waiting for all these other ideas to show some results.
Doesn't sound very multichannel music friendly. For multichannel music reproduction the surrounds should have the same capabilities as the front speakers.
Why dipoles? Or are you referring to a bipole design like this?
http://www.jbl.com/home/products/pr...age=ENG&Country=US&Region=USA&cat=SSS&ser=PER
And why not use Nathans as rears? One design goal is to prevent the effect of propagation loss in order to have a constant level from both sides. Why not cross the speakers axes like you recommend for the fronts? That should yield a more constant level regardless the listeners horizontal position.
Why dipoles? Or are you referring to a bipole design like this?
http://www.jbl.com/home/products/pr...age=ENG&Country=US&Region=USA&cat=SSS&ser=PER
And why not use Nathans as rears? One design goal is to prevent the effect of propagation loss in order to have a constant level from both sides. Why not cross the speakers axes like you recommend for the fronts? That should yield a more constant level regardless the listeners horizontal position.
This is a point debated endlessly. For film, which is my main usage, it is generally acknowledged that the surrounds do not perform the same tasks as the mains and as such should be a different design and approach.
At any rate this has been discussed in detail elsewhere and I suggest you look up those threads. I'm not trying to avoid your questions, I just trying to avoid the repetition of a discussion already done.
At any rate this has been discussed in detail elsewhere and I suggest you look up those threads. I'm not trying to avoid your questions, I just trying to avoid the repetition of a discussion already done.
Would you be so kind to link those threads? A forum is a forum and not an archive where things can be looked up in a reasonable time.
Every single day people die and new people are born. So discussions don't stop at a certain point in time only because you have learned what you wanted or needed to know. In a forum discussions will repeat endlessly as long as new people subscribe. Search isn't an option - it's just a big waste of time.
If you don't want to discuss certain topics anymore then stop responding. If you don't want to repeat yourself then start archiving and linking.
Markus
Its your interest, not mine, but you are right, I'll stop responding.
Look for PJpoes (I think thats his moniker) he talks about this a lot.
Its your interest, not mine, but you are right, I'll stop responding.
Look for PJpoes (I think thats his moniker) he talks about this a lot.
gedlee said:
Yep.. I'm chuckling all the way to the bank... 😉
been making waveguides for 30+ years...
John L.
markus76 said:
Markus
I don't sell surrounds and I'm not sure that I ever will. I asked Matt to come here and post where he had his discussion of surrounds. Maybe he can help.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.