The Audiophile Thread

[BobM]

Carlberg is on my ignore list for just this reason. No practical experience, only sticks to the textbook and refuses to try anything new that might debunk his textbook theories.

[Firth]

Nanodrums are the best:

https://www.pddnet.com/news/2016/11/...ype%3dheadline

[Firth]

The "bass is nondirectional" idea was promoted in the 1950s but has been quite thoroughly debunked since then.

Using 2 subs helps DOUBLE standing waves in the room, unless you wire one of them out of phase!

That is an ignorant statement. The concept of the .2 system is to have 2 independently amplified and EQed subwoofers (read EQ as delay, phase and amplitude) for which room measurements are used to provide a smoother bass response in the room. Bass is relatively non-directional and will have reflections from walls which are constructively and destructively self interfering. Just like an FIR filter, the more amplitude and time delay adjusted taps (read subwoofers), the better a response can be idealized.

[Firth]

Carlberg is on my ignore list for just this reason. No practical experience, only sticks to the textbook and refuses to try anything new that might debunk his textbook theories.

It's not the text book theory, it's the inexperience with computer modeling of complex systems with equations that could never have been done with reasonable expense back in the day. Active EQ with enough degrees of freedom is fabulous. Ultimately, the listeners will wear a mike and the system's phased array will produce idealized responses at each position.

[Jubal]

OK, let's get our ducks (or subs) in a row here. The idea that two subs automatically cancel each other out is ludicrous. Depending on overall set up, there CAN be cancellation, but the subs have to be set up a certain way, and the cancellation is usually at very specific frequencies.
Low frequencies in comparison to those above 250Hz, are comparatively non-directional. The point for having TWO subs in a room is as Firth stated- to spread out the bass. It allows a more realistic soundstage across the entire room. The bass is better defined, but not slurry (muddy) or honky (too bright).

[rcarlberg]

Active EQ with enough degrees of freedom is fabulous. Ultimately, the listeners will wear a mike and the system's phased array will produce idealized responses at each position.

So, does the EQ change as the mic-wearing listener walks through the room? Because standing waves are standing waves, and no amount of EQ is going to change the physics.

[rcarlberg]

Carlberg is on my ignore list for just this reason. No practical experience, only sticks to the textbook and refuses to try anything new that might debunk his textbook theories.

Good! He won't hear me say: someone who is afraid to defend his preconceptions against challenge isn't very solid in his reality.

[Firth]

OK, let's get our ducks (or subs) in a row here. The idea that two subs automatically cancel each other out is ludicrous. Depending on overall set up, there CAN be cancellation, but the subs have to be set up a certain way, and the cancellation is usually at very specific frequencies.
Low frequencies in comparison to those above 250Hz, are comparatively non-directional. The point for having TWO subs in a room is as Firth stated- to spread out the bass. It allows a more realistic soundstage across the entire room. The bass is better defined, but not slurry (muddy) or honky (too bright).

Especially with a mic based EQ algorithm which analyzes reverberation response (frequency versus time) for each subwoofer, and comes up with a long enough FIR EQ response for the combined response of both subwoofers.

[Firth]

So, does the EQ change as the mic-wearing listener walks through the room? Because standing waves are standing waves, and no amount of EQ is going to change the physics.

Apparently you don't really understand modern EQ which isn't just frequency based, it is determing what the frequency/time response is for every speaker at a location. In this idea, the phase array system would initially have a small roto aerial vehicle which would sample the full soundfield and every possible listener location, and the mic worn would just receive the ultra high frequency sound to locate the listener, and apply the correct EQ as a function of location. Another mechanism could be proposed for locating the listener in real time. The user can confine the region over which the cal needs to be done at.

[Jubal]

Especially with a mic based EQ algorithm which analyzes reverberation response (frequency versus time) for each subwoofer, and comes up with a long enough FIR EQ response for the combined response of both subwoofers.

Not in my system. I don't use LFO connections.
Why? Because LFO only works for program material sourced to produce the .1 or .2 channels.

If you use your home theater to also listen to CDs, LPs, or any other device that is stereo or not set up to produce a LFO channel, you lose the benefit of having the subs in the first place.
The simple answer (with two subs) is to run your L/R front tower speaker connections through your subs first, adjust your crossover frequency of the subs to minimize overlap, and then set your sub volumes at a reasonable level.

True, you may not be getting the maximum sound quality for 5.1 source material, but you WILL get reasonably sufficient bass for ALL source material, AND the benfit of greater efficiency driving your front towers.

[BobM]

Good! He won't hear me say: someone who is afraid to defend his preconceptions against challenge isn't very solid in his reality.

I will always defend my opinions if I found them to be true based on my experience. As opposed to you, who won't even try something suggested by another to see if you/they are right or wrong. You will defend your inexperienced opinion to the death though, and that is rubbish on a thread like this, where people may be looking for insight based on experience, not textbook theory.

2 subs in a room are better than one. 4 subs are better still. You will find a smoother bass response with multiple bass drivers in multiple locations. Digitally EQ'ing them is the best yet.

You are back on ignore Carlberg.

[Firth]

Not in my system. I don't use LFO connections.
Why? Because LFO only works for program material sourced to produce the .1 or .2 channels.

If you use your home theater to also listen to CDs, LPs, or any other device that is stereo or not set up to produce a LFO channel, you lose the benefit of having the subs in the first place.
The simple answer (with two subs) is to run your L/R front tower speaker connections through your subs first, adjust your crossover frequency of the subs to minimize overlap, and then set your sub volumes at a reasonable level.

True, you may not be getting the maximum sound quality for 5.1 source material, but you WILL get reasonably sufficient bass for ALL source material, AND the benfit of greater efficiency driving your front towers.

The new receivers are X.Y.Z. The Y allocates at least 2 separate receiver channels with DSP to the subwoofers. The best bass response comes from passing all of the bass to both separately calibrated channels. If your L/R are truely full range and you don't have subwoofers, then the receiver will still calibrate lows independently, I guess that works too. I prefer to use the subwoofer amps and not stress my other speakers. Also a good calibration will determine the crossover response for the different speakers. I have 2 subwoofers but they each get the low level preamp out from the subwoofer channel. This is not as ideal as having 2 independent calibrated channels which were calibrated flat over time and add at the listener.

[rcarlberg]

You are back on ignore Carlberg.

Crying my eyes out, Bob.

[Jubal]

The new receivers are X.Y.Z. The Y allocates at least 2 separate receiver channels with DSP to the subwoofers. The best bass response comes from passing all of the bass to both separately calibrated channels. If your L/R are truely full range and you don't have subwoofers, then the receiver will still calibrate lows independently, I guess that works too. I prefer to use the subwoofer amps and not stress my other speakers. Also a good calibration will determine the crossover response for the different speakers. I have 2 subwoofers but they each get the low level preamp out from the subwoofer channel. This is not as ideal as having 2 independent calibrated channels which were calibrated flat over time and add at the listener.

Once again, we are talking analog vs. digital sources. Analog signals will be bypassed for X.Y.Z systems and the output will still be analog. If you have a reasonable receiver that will automatically run LFO out of analog source material, by all mens, please share!

[Firth]

Once again, we are talking analog vs. digital sources. Analog signals will be bypassed for X.Y.Z systems and the output will still be analog. If you have a reasonable receiver that will automatically run LFO out of analog source material, by all mens, please share!

If you have a purely analog system, unless you also have a acoustically designed listening environment, you are not going to achieve an ideal response bass or other wise. My Pioneer elite receiver has multichannel (5.1) analog inputs that can pass thru with minimal digital treatment (signal is converted to 32 bit 192 KHz for modulating the class D amp). I don't know if the new elites which support X.Y.Z have multichannel analog inputs. There is no source material with more than one LFE channel of material. The multichannel subwoofer outs with dedicated channels is receiver only. I have it wrong, Dolby Atmos system are 7.1.2. The middle number is a subwoofer or LFE channel. The .2 refers to the 2 ceiling or vertical channels.

[Rael]

Have any of you guys had any experience with Tannoy speakers? I'm really interested in the GR line but I don't have a dealer anywhere near me to audition them. My experience with horn driven speakers is pretty limited; I've only heard the Klipschorns which I found too bright and shouty. Not to mention they are as big as refrigerators and you pretty much need to stuff them in corners to work their best. Are horns in general on the bright side of the spectrum?

[BobM]

Horns need tubes in front of them to sound their best. Horns are usually mucho efficient, so you don't need much power, usually 5-10 watts will do, and that's where tubes shine.

Tannoy's, in general, have more of a muted, warm, slightly rolled off sound compared to other horns that may sound shouty or shrill. They still retain a horns efficiency and dynamic ability. The best Tannoy's, though, are quite as large as any Klipshorn. You can find good deals on them in the used market. Check here: https://www.audiogon.com/listings?ut...ch_text=tannoy

[Firth]

Horns need tubes in front of them to sound their best. Horns are usually mucho efficient, so you don't need much power, usually 5-10 watts will do, and that's where tubes shine.

Tannoy's, in general, have more of a muted, warm, slightly rolled off sound compared to other horns that may sound shouty or shrill. They still retain a horns efficiency and dynamic ability. The best Tannoy's, though, are quite as large as any Klipshorn. You can find good deals on them in the used market. Check here: https://www.audiogon.com/listings?ut...ch_text=tannoy

I thought Tannoys were often the choice of recording studios. I haven't heard Klipsch speakers in a while, but I think they have improved the material that the horn is composed of so that the horn is only a transmission line for the driver and not a radiator itself due to vibration. Horns have pluses and minuses. Plus side is that the directivity means efficiency and reduced wall reflections. On the other hand the frequency response/radiation pattern does not hold up off axis like B&W time aligned radiators.

[markwoll]

I am just going to leave this little beauty right here, Hipster nirvana.
Compact Stereo Hybrid 15-watt Tube Amp with Bluetooth
http://www.monoprice.com/product?c_i...seq=1&format=2

[markwoll]

Or the 50w version, with speakers for only 300. Audio awesome.

[Jubal]

Or the 50w version, with speakers for only 300. Audio awesome.

If you're going to post audio porn, then by all means show the inputs/outputs on the rear!

[Firth]

If you're going to post audio porn, then by all means show the inputs/outputs on the rear!

http://downloads.monoprice.com/files...s/16152_05.png

[Jerjo]

I'm not ashamed of my audio porn addiction.

[Plasmatopia]

Did you find your first audio porn in the woods?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pr33t]

I am just going to leave this little beauty right here, Hipster nirvana.
Compact Stereo Hybrid 15-watt Tube Amp with Bluetooth
http://www.monoprice.com/product?c_i...seq=1&format=2

Not being snarky, but can someone explain the point of a tube amp that outputs to Bluetooth? Aren't you converting the signal to digital, and in essence making the tubes pointless? Or are you getting some sort of digital facsimile of 'analogue' sound this way?