Is this also true of your pushing Lambda and PHL drivers?
Here's the skinny, there's nothing to hide. After doing electronics
and audio for decades, I took a break from all this for many years
and when I came back into audio, my new plan was to make
a big system that gives me the ultimate SQL sound that I desire
sorta like combining concert level SPL with audiophile quality.
This goal is hard to accomplish when you want superior sound
quality because the drivers that you need don't exist or are
very few that can meet the goal.
The good news is, I found the drivers and I have two designs,
the big one and the hybrid. The big one doesn't fit in the house
unless I abandon my video plans. Either I kill the audio demon
that haunts me and build the smaller 22 driver system or just find
a way to fit the 36-40 driver design.
This quest has been in the works for almost 5 years now as I've
been collecting the drivers and tweaking cabinet design.
I like those drivers you mentioned.
Here's the skinny, there's nothing to hide. After doing electronics
and audio for decades, I took a break from all this for many years
and when I came back into audio, my new plan was to make
a big system that gives me the ultimate SQL sound that I desire
sorta like combining concert level SPL with audiophile quality.
This goal is hard to accomplish when you want superior sound
quality because the drivers that you need don't exist or are
very few that can meet the goal.
The good news is, I found the drivers and I have two designs,
the big one and the hybrid. The big one doesn't fit in the house
unless I abandon my video plans. Either I kill the audio demon
that haunts me and build the smaller 22 driver system or just find
a way to fit the 36-40 driver design.
This quest has been in the works for almost 5 years now as I've
been collecting the drivers and tweaking cabinet design.
I like those drivers you mentioned.
thylantyr said:
Why not get a sorted design and lift it to next level with decent electronics?
Its clear to me that you haven't heard this stuff I'm using nor really can grasp the possibilities. Stick with the tried and tested stuff, rather than anything out of the norm. What I use just doesn't exist for most folks. Even noob thought it wasn't possible.
Why do you put so much faith in your drivers? Better to have a rounded system IMO. The room is 50% of the battle. I've got minimal treatments and DRC take these away and the speakers still sound great but add them into the equation and it the best I've heard.
Why spend all that money on drivers and not have a sorted XO that gets the best out of them? That's just daft and you talk about wasting money on electronics!
He;d have use for DRC, FIR filters and phase compenstation right? Well that's exactly what I have in place right now.
The play factor of the system is high though and you can tweak and tweak until you've got the very best from the whole thing. Its all so easy to do. Some of that cost is in the ease of use factor. The DRC measures your room acoustics and creates a suitable curve.
Like I said, I don't use all the DCX features to make the sound
system great, why then would I need something with more complex features that will never get used? This is akin to someone who like to buy a 200 band EQ to install in their
system because it's has all those bands, but they only need to
adjust a few of them.
Lets ignore the flexibility for now, just know that it can be bent to virtually any desire. What you do need to know is I couldn't go back to a DCX after knowing what I've heard here.
Your argument isn't valid since you've never heard the system at all. You've probably never even heard the DEQX which is inferior on all but ease of use.
Ultimate SQ doesn't go hand in hand with high eff. drivers.
Compare the G1 to your SA, or the R3 for example.
Like everything you've had to compromise. So 'ultimate', meaning the greatest, SQ isn't achievable. Though I have no doubt it will sound very good. If you aim was ultimate SQ your design would have clearly took a different turn but because you required other traits you'll miss this goal.
The drivers you listed and bought are ideal for YOU. Not me, just like I feel the drivers I have are ideal for me - well at least the mid and treble anyway
The jury is still out on the Sea's despite any claims by others. When you listen to drivers its the first few moments that make the difference between suitable and perfect for you.The same doesn't go for the XO though, any system that is pure digital audio that implemented a similar system would see similar revelations either to a lesser or greater degree, multichannel especially. I've tried passive, analogue active, DCX and arrived where I am now. A lengthy evolution but undeniable from reality checks along the way ie. like for like comparisons within my own room.
Audio is all about compromises and choices, anyone who claims they have the best of all worlds is fooling themselves and worst, others.
The room size is also a big thing, cramming huge speakers into a relatively small space only means your going to have more trouble later on. Another reason why the size and scope of my project is realistic for my conditions, indeed its optimised and was a conscious effort to integrate room and speaker, even then room treatments still brought improvements and DRC is essential for any room IMO, regardless of any designers pride that they think they have tackled the room issue though some amazing feat of speaker engineering - all that means is the scope of the improvements could be vast or minimal, there'd still be an improvment. The improvements it brings are undeniable even in the face of already great sound. Of course if you play music in a field then forget the DRC
Like I said you can't actually acheive 'ultimate' because you've already compromised and vice versa.
We build speakers for our own needs, nothing to do with what we think others will like, or at least I hope not otherwise that would be the biggest compromise of all just like most commercial designs.
Audiophilenoob said:
I'd rather not go into details now after all the trouble so far.
No doubt Thy would feel the need to have his say and I just don't have the energy to argue every point. Its almost like showing somebody your baby and then them telling you its ugly
Like Thy has already said, the DCX etc. will have all the features you need.
I have my design methology and so does everyone else. Ask 100
designers, you get 100 different answers. I consider my methods
'Black Sheep' much like your system where your front end is
outside the normal. My 'Black Sheep' ideas are more in loudspeaker integration and tuning and using electronics that
audiophiles hate.
I've been doing digital experiments recently to verify the
claims made by others and I find these claims highly over-rated.
It could be ruled as a placebo effect.
I just hope that if noob invests big dollars into high end
electronics that he will really hear the vast improvements that
you claimed. But how will he know that there is a vast
improvement unless he tries the inferior method first ?
You need a comparison variable.
BTW, drivers rank #1 in my book.
designers, you get 100 different answers. I consider my methods
'Black Sheep' much like your system where your front end is
outside the normal. My 'Black Sheep' ideas are more in loudspeaker integration and tuning and using electronics that
audiophiles hate.
I've been doing digital experiments recently to verify the
claims made by others and I find these claims highly over-rated.
It could be ruled as a placebo effect.
I just hope that if noob invests big dollars into high end
electronics that he will really hear the vast improvements that
you claimed. But how will he know that there is a vast
improvement unless he tries the inferior method first ?
You need a comparison variable.
BTW, drivers rank #1 in my book.
Ultimate SQ doesn't go hand in hand with high eff. drivers.
I said ultimate SQL, not ultimate SQ. SQL is a different design
methodology, a combination of SPL + SQ, a common term
used in car audio and less used in home audio. Unfortunetly,
your long reply was based on SQ and is out of scope with
my project so I won't comment much.
Compare the G1 to your SA, or the R3 for example.
SA is the best SQL driver. There is another if you can afford $3k.
For SQ, I'd still choose the SA over pure ribbons, but it's a
subjective debate which yields no winners.
The drivers you listed and bought are ideal for YOU.
I encourage people to focus alot on driver auditions. It's
important. I told noob to buy samples to find the right choice.
I have a closet of samples that will never get used in order to find
my SQL drivers. Not many people waste money like that.
Audio is all about compromises
One of my common sayings. .. ie, my hybrid is a compromise
of the big design.
The room size is also a big thing, cramming huge speakers into a relatively small space only means your going to have more trouble later on.
Room acoustics is important. Cramming huge speakers will meet
my SQL goals.
I said ultimate SQL, not ultimate SQ. SQL is a different design
methodology, a combination of SPL + SQ, a common term
used in car audio and less used in home audio. Unfortunetly,
your long reply was based on SQ and is out of scope with
my project so I won't comment much.
Compare the G1 to your SA, or the R3 for example.
SA is the best SQL driver. There is another if you can afford $3k.
For SQ, I'd still choose the SA over pure ribbons, but it's a
subjective debate which yields no winners.
The drivers you listed and bought are ideal for YOU.
I encourage people to focus alot on driver auditions. It's
important. I told noob to buy samples to find the right choice.
I have a closet of samples that will never get used in order to find
my SQL drivers. Not many people waste money like that.
Audio is all about compromises
One of my common sayings.
.. ie, my hybrid is a compromiseof the big design.
The room size is also a big thing, cramming huge speakers into a relatively small space only means your going to have more trouble later on.
Room acoustics is important. Cramming huge speakers will meet
my SQL goals.
ShinOBIWAN said:
I'd rather not go into details now after all the trouble so far.
No doubt Thy would feel the need to have his say and I just don't have the energy to argue every point. Its almost like showing somebody your baby and then them telling you its ugly
Like Thy has already said, the DCX etc. will have all the features you need.
Don't use me as an excuse to why you can talk to noob
via email to help his design. I'm just playing the devil's
advocate so he can hear both sides of the story before
making a decision. This is nothing new, people debate
about issues all the time and the person interested has to
digest all the data and form their own conclusions.
thylantyr said:I have my design methology and so does everyone else. Ask 100
designers, you get 100 different answers. I consider my methods
'Black Sheep' much like your system where your front end is
outside the normal. My 'Black Sheep' ideas are more in loudspeaker integration and tuning and using electronics that
audiophiles hate.
I've been doing digital experiments recently to verify the
claims made by others and I find these claims highly over-rated.
It could be ruled as a placebo effect.
I just hope that if noob invests big dollars into high end
electronics that he will really hear the vast improvements that
you claimed. But how will he know that there is a vast
improvement unless he tries the inferior method first ?
You need a comparison variable.
BTW, drivers rank #1 in my book.
Sure drivers and cabinet design are important but don't put the cart before the horse in a blinkered fashion.
I'm curious as to what these electronics experiments are?
My whole point for superior sound on my XO is DRC. You've never even heard a system with DRC. Its only been possible to a full extent in the last year or so on the home PC. So you can't imagine the improvements it bring.
Turn DRC off and then turn it back on, watch the soundstage grow and become more realistic, ckeaner.
The bass suddenly becomes even more defined and quicker. Details move to the fore that required concentration before. The whole sound is very effortless and very believable.
I don't hype anything I haven't heard or compared, my throughness and willingness to expriment will tell you that. I've swapped and changed more than most folks will in their lives all in the pursuit of better.
I know I've got my front end is on the pinnacle so I can be confident any speaker I attach is running at full capacity. I say start from the top and work your way down. $15,000 worth of drivers deserves better than what your cooking up.
Similarly the XO I have has almost limitless potential regarding speakers.
And wreak havok on acoustics
All the more need for treatments and DRC!
I'd expect you to be gain quite big from such things and still your SQ(L) goals with greater clarity,
I think its pointless to argue this any further. This is Noobs construction thread, we've both been rude in hijacking this for our own person argument.
I say show us more pics noob and get this thread back to what its actually about - speakers!
I'm curious as to what these electronics experiments are?
My newest experiment is to see how extra conversions affect
the sound system vs. a purer digital pathway. I'm also checking
the audibility of digital attenuation and upsampling sonics. People
on this forum have their hair raised when these issues come up
so I have to try this out myself to really see what the skinny
is. So far, I haven't been able to distinguish the pure path
from the contaminated path using CD audio. If the results
don't slap me in the face right away, then it's too subjective
to call a winner hands down.
Later I will try to do some of these tests using SACD and DVD-A
but my player only outputs analog. I really don't think you can
milk old CD technology anymore and it seem moot to even try.
My newest experiment is to see how extra conversions affect
the sound system vs. a purer digital pathway. I'm also checking
the audibility of digital attenuation and upsampling sonics. People
on this forum have their hair raised when these issues come up
so I have to try this out myself to really see what the skinny
is. So far, I haven't been able to distinguish the pure path
from the contaminated path using CD audio. If the results
don't slap me in the face right away, then it's too subjective
to call a winner hands down.
Later I will try to do some of these tests using SACD and DVD-A
but my player only outputs analog. I really don't think you can
milk old CD technology anymore and it seem moot to even try.
Another advantage of my system is native sampling from source through the XO and into the amps.
The RME and antelope even provides detailed information on clocking and sampling in software so you know exactly what going on.
Play CD's and its 44.1Khz play SACD or DVD-A and its 96khz or 192Khz.
There's no upsampling/downsampling etc.
You need one hell of a PC though to run this for a 3-way and the surrounds, since you're looking at a minimum of 10 channels to calculate, I've got 14 to allow for expansion though. The Antelope is good for 192Khz 24bit as are the DAC's.
Digital attenuation or loss of bits can be avoided by using decent software/hardware with a very high bit resolution. The RME offers 40bit precision on all digital volumes.
You'll find most use 16bit or 32bit.
To save on confusion I run all the rest of the system at 0dB or no attenuation and do the level matching via Totalmix on the RME for higher precision. You can then link these indivdual volumes in software to provide a single volume control for the entire system.
Sure the things you talk of are small differences. Stuff like the DRC that you avoid talking about isn't. Its night and day stuff that.
When you add a lot of tiny improvements together though and have a system that's finely tuned then its hard to go back to something inferior. The thing with my system is that it does so much more than just an XO. Its an entire entertainment center in a two box's. It plays DVD's, DVD-A, SACD, CD, MP3/APE/lossless, any digital video format in existance, games and radio. I can store 1000's of albums, 100's of DVD's, 10's of thousands of mp3's etc. Its hard to argue with such a thing compared to the more traditional methods.
To simplify things:
I've use a dedicated PC housing the RME HDSP 9632 soundcard, DAC expansion boards and wordclock module. The Antelope is also connected via wordclock to this and serves as master clock. The sole purpose of this is to the duties of DRC and XO. Also analogue outputs are balanced.
This is then connected to my main PC via a 1ft dgital ADAT pipe. The soundcard in the main PC is an RME HDSP 9652 which is a pure digital card with no analogue capability The antelope also connects to this PC and serves as masterclock to provide a stable clocking environment between the two PC's.
The two PC's are also connected via a 1Gbit network to allow me to use remote assistance to actually configure the dedicated PC running the XO. This saves on two monitors.
There's very nearly a 1Tb of storage space on the main PC and I always copy DVD's, CD's etc. to the hard drives for instant access. I've also got a windows install partition on 2 x 74Gb Western Digital Raptors in RAID 0 configuration which means everything runs very smoothly.
Finally everything can be controlled via the Pronto remote. I can launch players and then access the transport controls for each all from my arm chair. I've also got a wireless link between a Palm PC and the main PC that allows me to surf the web, view DVD's and Albums via Xlobby and control the whole thing with that from any room in the house. Wireless keyboard and mouse are they icing on this couch potato setup.
For the display I use a Sony HS51 projector and a 19" TFT.
Everything about it is cutting edge technology integration.
This stuff is just as dear to my heart as any speakers I may build and clearly much more than just a superior XO.
ShinOBIWAN said:
I'd rather not go into details now after all the trouble so far.
No doubt Thy would feel the need to have his say and I just don't have the energy to argue every point. Its almost like showing somebody your baby and then them telling you its ugly
Like Thy has already said, the DCX etc. will have all the features you need.
The base program looks to be this product, which appears to route the audio through various plugins, then to the outputs:
http://www.console.jp/eng/index.html
Using VST plugins such as Voxengo CurveEQ to do the actual processing:
http://www.voxengo.com/product/curveeq/
Hopefully ShinOBIWAN will go into more detail on how he utilizes this setup, but if not these two links seem to be a good starting point.
thylantyr said:
Hmm well its not cheap but then again I've heard of folks who spend more on a single cd player.
The dedicated XO PC costs:
£700 to import the Antelope from US
£1000 on the RME 9632 & 9652 + expansion boards
£1200 worth of dedicated software for the XO
£650 for the PC hardware
or around £3500 to you, I didn't buy the software though so it cost me around £2500.
The main PC cost is less than this and probably would cost you £1500 in part now. But I'm a gamer so I spend silly amounts like £400 just on a Geforce 7800 GTX graphics card. I've also got 3 x 250Gb hard drives in there along with 2 x 74Gb's. Then daft things like 1Gb of PC4400 memory which a non gamer would have no use for whatsoever.
Another thing I spent big on was silencing for both PC's, the PSU's don't have any fans and everything else is low RPM. To all extents the XO PC is silent but the main PC isn't I'm thinking of water cooling for that. Its not as loud as your average PC but its NOT silent.
The frontend alone with all the luxuries like the Palm PC and Pronto would come to around £4500 or £5500 if you don't know someone with the XO software.
The TFT and projector add another £2000 to the price.
You can of course save a load of money by going without certain bits or downgrading.
I've never added it up like that before but these purchases were spead over a period of time. I know that I've spent more on these than the speaker project though.
Construct said:
You've missed out the Waves Stuff:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
http://www.waves.com/content.asp?id=127
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
http://www.waves.com/content.asp?id=138
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
http://www.waves.com/content.asp?id=137
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
http://www.waves.com/content.asp?id=135
will put one under the -> 
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.