Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 10/07/22 in all areas

  1. Thanks to 'Dirtmudd', I am spinning up, WAY UP on the UTurn 'Orbit Custom' TT. And what it looks like here in Longfellow Music Hall.......NEW speaker setting. Martin Logan's are now at 14' center to center apart, the new Forte' 4's just to the inside, 30" from the front wall makes the most low end response in the listening space. I will return Saturday 15th, and will be happy to spin more vinyl with you all. I WILL have my laptop in the hotel room, so I can at least stop by and give some likes 🍷
    5 points
  2. Good evening my friends. Getting a last minute spin before heading off to a convention in Philly. This was a very special gift that appeared at my door step TODAY! Enjoying this right now as I type. Rear photo from inside the Albert Hall...
    5 points
  3. Get Better Dave and Micro- Happy Halloween to All
    4 points
  4. ^^another DEluxe Edition for sure!
    4 points
  5. Here we have the interior of the gatefold. Here we have 3 heavy weight, high quality LP discs and an additional 2 CD's for those that want to listen in digital mode.
    4 points
  6. I can't tell if I posted in this thread, or not. It's grown too long. I was both surprised and disappointed at the lean/bright sound of my new H IVs when I got them. Not at all what I remembered from hearing them in Hope. So I set about "exercising" the woofers with Dub-step while the Loudness was on and the bass at max for this old receiver. That way I could pump the woofers and not be annoyed with the door shut. At 48 hours, there was a marked difference (more bass,more natural sound). After 4 days, they didn't seem to change much. Now I don't use a subwoofer with them at all. Just looked. It's unplugged. I must admit to their break-in and with chagrin that I have stated many times break-in was a myth. I don't remember my old Marantz and Boston A150 speakers changing that way. That was so long ago, maybe they were floor demos.
    4 points
  7. 4 points
  8. SILLY, from the former east of Berlin:
    3 points
  9. Most of us here will ONLY use Heritage speakers as L/R for AV. Some tonal differences between the RF7 and Chorus II, but either will be GREAT As @billybob stated, other (future?) speakers will determine best selection.
    3 points
  10. would not play in the link from above, memories!
    3 points
  11. Birth, School, Work, Death
    3 points
  12. Two weeks ago, I bought a sec.hand KG 3.5 here in Germany I link this thread from General Klipsch Info into the new one , because here you can read how the story starts
    2 points
  13. Includes xilica crossover. All components work perfectly. Last price drop before the bay.
    2 points
  14. Very nice! I had a set I used as surround speakers for a long time.
    2 points
  15. Two weeks later I made a lot of progress on this project . These´re the restauration work done till today The previous owner had put the KG 3.5 probably with the base plate directly on his living room floor, so the corners from the veneer were affected and quite frayed, at least on the sides and the backfront veeneer. This could not remain so of course. So I treated these edges first with 240-, then with 400- and finally with 600- sandpaper. Subsequently brushed with black wood varnish. The repainted veneer edges are dry, there is no longer any sign of the frayed veneer, the edges are smooth as an eel
    2 points
  16. Vultures around here ran him off shame since he seemed like an alright guy and avid Klipsch fan par for the course I suppose these days. I spend a lot less time here myself since the Belle mod thread was deleted, not a very good way to treat someone who just threw down $40k and waited over a year for a pair of the flagship speakers IMO.
    2 points
  17. 2 points
  18. We’ve just got to save the Internet, without it ,how on earth would we be able to communicate our fringe beliefs and conspiracy theories ?🤓
    2 points
  19. I'm not really sure, I'm really new to good sounding audio. I posted my tale in the 2 channel section but long story short I stumbled into some used khorns and I'm hooked on great sound now. The movie room doesn't have the corners for them so they are staying in the living room I currently have a probably 10 year old Yamaha rx-v375 receiver, a entry level Polk package 5.1 setup and a 70 inch QLED Samsung that we stream to using a Chromecast. My plans were to probably stick with 5.1 for the time being and start to pick away at the components individually. I'd like to go for broke (broke in my case being under $2000) center channel speaker because I'm tired of voices getting lost in the mix. Then find some nice floor standing front channels, then get a much nicer receiver. It just so happens that a set of chorus's and RF7s have come up on marketplace near me this week for less than I see either for on eBay and much much less than new. The sub goes woof and the rear channels don't seem to contribute a lot so they are of lesser importance to me right now. Edit: for clarity
    2 points
  20. One of the best Rod Stewart LP's:
    2 points
  21. I preferred the original RF7s for HT. It just has a punchier more "modern" sound to me, so much that I got rid of (3) LS across the front, cornwall sides and Heresy rears in favor of RF/RC 7 front, RF7 sides and RC or RS 7 rears (change those up occasionally). Heritage all day for 2 channel though.
    2 points
  22. The Mavericks Band are great I have a lot of their music. I saw them at Stubs in Austin TX.
    2 points
  23. Nice sound to it Paul... How these kids come up with the videos I'll never know. lol They always seem to work though.
    2 points
  24. Great new addition to the collection a double album Artist - The Black Angels Title - Wilderness of Mirrors Album ID https://www.discogs.com/release/24582176-The-Black-Angels-Wilderness-Of-Mirrors
    2 points
  25. 2 points
  26. The old internal wiring ( AWG 26 ? ) made me wonder, reminds me of simply tinned wire I had to drill out the in-outputs fromthe X-Over for the chassis with a 3 mm diameter drill bit to be able to solder in the AWG 14 inner wires Using now monocrystalline Alpha Copper , it´s the same as I used in my RF7 EvoTec´s
    1 point
  27. Temporary I used origin RF7 MK II spikes , they were screwed into unc threaded sockets but this solution wasn´t as stabil as I thought it would be , so I replaced them with M 6 metric threades sockets and stabil spikes
    1 point
  28. I doubt we have control of whether the net stays or not, eventually. For my part, I can go back to 1975,even 85 protocol and be Super Duper HAPPY ! Nothing modern would be an easy trade off considering the damage done by constant interaction of insanity promoted......But..not happening so eventually adults and people with functioning brains will retake the environment. That may be a while, and I always feel like (just thinking) this has all happened before at some long past era.....We went nuts, stopped it and it all started over, then takes a long time to re ruin everything again....
    1 point
  29. Finished The Jungle the other day. I am glad that I didn't known about Upton's grind and what the book was really about. I was totally disappointed.
    1 point
  30. I would think about adding a layer of plywood on inside of panel 1/2 smaller so uses same sealing area. I did this to my pair of Heresy's and panel is definitely stiffer than before. But it is a sealed speaker so probably more needed. But im sure Cornwalls rear panel flexes even with a port on it. Thats a pretty large panel without any kind of support. Or you could add X bracing to back panel to stiffen it. You could also make an extra one for experimenting with that way you could A-B them without ruining the original one.
    1 point
  31. The TV itself cannot run passive speakers like the Quartet. You will need a receiver to power the speakers. To get the TV sound to the receiver, there are a few options depending on the features of the TV and receiver. Most modern TVs and receivers will support an HDMI connection with Audio Return Channel (ARC) support. If the receiver is older but still has optical digital inputs, many TVs still have an optical digital output that can be hooked up that way. For very old receivers with only analog RCA inputs (like the one my parents have), I used one of these digital to analog converter boxes (https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B005K2TXMO/). It worked well for what it is.
    1 point
  32. "Life is what happens when we're busy making other plans"...some guy named John Lennon... but I agree the polite thing would be to say TY.
    1 point
  33. No. But it should be no worse than motor oil. You wouldn't lick that off your fingers.
    1 point
  34. Thanks for the vibes Chuck. Thanks to everyone for their thoughts.
    1 point
  35. I can read the story now ”Youth about to turn his life around, brutally murdered”……. The liberal media has no shame.
    1 point
  36. Now that some time has passed since I started this thread, I'm now in a position to report back a bit more quantitatively on the effects of paying attention to phase flattening of loudspeakers which in my case includes all channels in a 5.1 array: left-right Jubilees w/TAD TD-4002 drivers, center K-402-MEH with BMS 4592ND dual diaphragm driver, and surround ESS AMT-1s on top of Belle bass bins. All of these loudspeakers have been carefully bi-amped/tri-amped, and crossovers reworked to yield zero phase shifts through the crossover interference bands. Note that all of these loudspeakers have matching timbre due to their full-range directivity (100 Hz--20 kHz) and dialed-in frequency responses. All of the above comments about "smoothness", "listener engagement", and "enhanced transparency" apply. What's missing from the above discussion is how flat the measured phase and group delay now is across the entire 5.1 array to achieve the above subjective listening levels. That performance to achieve that is shown below: 180 degrees or less phase growth from 20 kHz down to 200 Hz: less than 1 ms of group delay above 500 Hz and less than 2 ms GD from 200 to 500 Hz: outstanding step response, rivaling the best studio monitors: In order to do this, time and attention to detail is required, as well as a little practice paying attention to the elements that can affect in-room measurement and getting the settings correct. Using relatively good DSP crossovers is also required. (No FIR filters were used to achieve the above results.) The latest piece of the phase flattening effort came with the compensation of the high frequency diaphragm in the BMS 4592ND in the center channel K-402-MEH. The addition of 0.145 ms (145 microseconds) of delay on the HF diaphragm channel produced not only an amazingly flat loudspeaker phase response (the blue trace, above), it also produced the last bit of "magic": apparent depth and seamless soundstage with multichannel music sources (5.1) without any hint of harshness. In fact, it opened up some orchestral (classical) recordings to critical listening in that some 5.1 recordings the violins sound very subdued, while other recordings, the violins still sound very sharp (and these recordings have some level of mastering EQ applied, which also shifts their inherent phase responses). Additionally, before I managed to get the center loudspeaker phase flattened to the level it is now, I listened to a lot of stereo recordings, namely the ripped music library of my CDs and DVD-As. I initially found (a few months ago) that the flattened phase response of the Jubilees (purple trace, above) completely changed the sound of the demastered albums to the point that I have been systematically re-doing the demastering of these albums from the original discs off the shelf. So, bottom line...the changes have been pretty dramatic when taken as a whole. The effect of flat phase and group delay response, when coupled with full-range directivity of fully horn-loaded loudspeakers, yields significant changes in the sound of the recordings. And the better the recordings (in terms of fidelity), the more dramatic change in the resulting sound. This is probably the most important and surprising personal discovery of the effects of hi-fi setup/dial-in that I've written about on this forum. ...But I expect little reaction to this news because so many people already "know" that phase/group delay doesn't matter... Chris
    1 point
  37. Once you see how it works...and do it a couple of times...it's like riding a bicycle. 🚲 You'll never go back to using canned crossover filters either once you hear the difference. The sound quality difference isn't close. This little process works fairly fast if you're in-room and can make observations on measurements and make immediate adjustments, then rerun the sweep. You'll have to check that you've got the driver polarity right ( ). Make sure that there's plenty of absorption on the floor and nearby walls before you start the process--at least a couple inches thick and several feet wide, all the way to the microphone from the loudspeaker under test/adjustment. Chris
    1 point
  38. IIR filters only--no "named" crossover filters, i.e., Danley-style. Look at the raw response of your drivers/horns. Without FIR filtering, you can't improve on the response that you see there after they've been EQed flat (individually). So you need to select drivers and horns that have good phase response characteristics. It just so happens that the Jub bass bins and TAD 4002/K-402 horns have really good phase response taken individually--after they've been EQed flat by themselves. So all you have to do is put the HF and LF drivers together without phase shifts: Don't use the "crossover filters" that come with DSP crossovers--clear any crossover filters if they're set. Set the HF or LF channel delay to get perfect impulse response in the time domain--as seen in the spectrogram view. Flatten each driver's SPL response within their pass bands. Match the channel gains between flattened phase drivers. Use output channel PEQs to trim off response on each end of the bass and high frequency drivers until you've got overall flat SPL across the crossover interference band and smooth handover of SPL vs. frequency. The drivers themselves will tell you where that transition/crossover should occur. [If you're using MEHs, you'll have to use multiple PEQs to attenuate the bass bin peaks in response above the first notch frequency.] Use the input channel PEQs to further flatten the overall response within the interference band to correct any dips or peaks in response within that band. Voila! Flat phase. It's really that easy. Chris
    1 point
  39. Only the first two measurements, after which I turned off FDW within REW. The REW default value for those first two measurements (only). FDW was inadvertently on due to a re-install of REW last fall after having to use a much earlier version of REW to open a measurement sent to me from another user not using the latest version of REW. All FDW does is smooth the raw measurements to ~1/48th octave. I didn't need FDW to be on, so I turned it off (there is a really interesting discussion in the Home Theater Shack forum between Bob Katz--the noted mastering engineer who requested the capability so REW could mimic Acourate...and John Mulcahy on why FDW was implemented within REW. It's a good discussion that I recommend highly. The much more interesting measurements however are found on page 3 of this thread. Those measurements didn't have FDW turned on. Pretty much like the smoothed measurements. I'm not sure why you're worried about smoothing. If it were me, I think that I'd be asking questions about where the microphone was (1 m in front of the loudspeaker) and how much absorption was used to capture such good phase information in-room (several inches thickness of fuzzy blankets and comforters the long axis is the width from side-to-side, and 1 m depth to the loudspeaker), not really the smoothing used on the data after acquisition. My listening room photo and reverberation time plots can be found in my profile under the "About Me" tab. Chris
    1 point
  40. Well, I learned a lot over the past two days. Here is the new step response of the same Jubilee as posted above compared to a Danley SH-50. The Jubilee is in yellow trace and the SH-50 in cyan trace: I guess we can legitimately call Klipsch Jubilees by the moniker "studio monitors" since their step response beats anything that I've seen posted from other studio monitors. Additionally, the phase and group delay plot shows the same sort of amazing flatness: Chris
    1 point
  41. All I'm really talking about is the time-based behavior of loudspeakers/rooms and how well they respond to impulse input signal--all the way from the source of sound in the loudspeakers, to your ears. Most performance data published on loudspeakers is in the frequency domain--SPL vs. frequency. Phase can be plotted on the same SPL vs. frequency curve (but is rarely done by manufacturers) to give you an idea of the loudspeakers' time-based response in addition to their steady state frequency response (shown in the figure below: the top trace is SPL vs. frequency, the bottom trace is phase vs. frequency): If certain frequencies produced by the loudspeaker itself arrive before others, then the loudspeaker has phase distortion. If you mathematically take the first derivative of the resulting phase vs. frequency curve from the loudspeaker, then you have the loudspeaker's group delay curve--a curve of rate of change of the phase vs. frequency: It turns out that humans can directly hear group delay distortion (above a certain threshold--with a different threshold value at different frequencies), but only if nearby early reflections in the room don't significantly interfere with the direct-arrival acoustic energy from the loudspeakers. Additionally, the loudspeakers themselves need to be able to control reflections vs. frequency off of the room's walls and nearby acoustically reflective objects. It does this through "directivity" vs. frequency. You can see this directivity in the following polar directivity chart of the K-402-MEH, which has consistent directivity down to slightly below 100 Hz: So to hear this effect that I'm talking about means you need three things: Control of early reflections in-room from right around the loudspeakers (within a yard or metre of the loudspeaker itself), which are usually controlled by use of absorption that can equally control mid-bass, midrange, and higher frequency reflections (i.e., broad-band absorption). [Diffusion panel approaches usually can't handle the "broad band" requirement very well.] Loudspeakers having good/consistent polar directivity control vs. frequency for all frequencies down to ~100-200 Hz and all the way up to 20 kHz (which basically rules out loudspeakers having direct radiating drivers--especially woofers.) A way to reduce or increase the phase distortion and its linked group delay distortion of the loudspeaker. This is pretty easy to do using a DSP crossover, but almost impossible using a passive crossover network, unless you're substituting complete crossover networks out in A-B fashion. Most people haven't gone to the trouble to do all three areas simultaneously (and effectively). Until you do all three, you probably won't hear the effect that I've been talking about. The "full-range" loudspeaker crowd, planar dipole loudspeaker crowd, and headphone crowd are usually chasing this effect using loudspeakers having many limitations in their output capabilities. I've found that there are too many compromises using any of these alternative loudspeaker types to be viable for my home hi-fi listening use. YMMV. Chris
    1 point
  42. Klipsch was using first order filters in most of their loudspeakers until PWK took partial retirement in the 1980s. I believe this is a significant part of the "Klipsch sound" that has been talked about so much. When you look at the Danley SH-50 crossovers, you have no apparent 6 dB/octave high-pass slope on the midrange, and no apparent filters at all on the midrange low pass, plus there is attenuation. The woofer looks to have only notch filtering at ~160 Hz and a low pass of first order above 250 Hz. The tweeter has a really deep-and-wide notch filter centered at 2.68 kHz [EDIT: actually three big notch filters: one each at 1.4, 2.8 and 6.1 kHz with attenuating gains of -15.75 dB, -10.25 dB, and -8.25 dB, respectively...and bandwidths of about 0.5 octave] but no apparent high pass filter evident in the frequency response. All three channels have fusing on board their extensive crossover boards. The combined response of the three channels is basically "a work of art" (i.e., not a clean monotonically decreasing downward slope between driver channels). I'm not really sure why Danley did it that way--but I suspect that arrayability of loudspeakers played a disproportionate role, as well as a requirement for extremely flat phase response and super high SPL output capability. Those are not home hi-fi requirements-except for the phase flatness one...in retrospect. The SH-50 is clearly designed around a "phase link" concept, i.e., a "bridging midrange" between tweeter and woofer in order to linearize the resulting loudspeaker phase response. See the following link for a definition of "phase link" design (warning: there's some math here): http://www.tonmeister.ca/wordpress/2015/10/29/bo-tech-uni-phase-loudspeakers/ It's actually fairly shocking how little frequency response that the four midranges provide in the SH-50...about one octave only, and the resulting frequency response contribution of the midranges is decidedly not flat within that octave. Chris
    1 point
  43. I've found that first order crossover filters actually smooth or broaden the irregular responses in the crossover interference bands. The tradeoff of course is wider interference bands--as has been tacitly assumed to be more important to minimize in the past. Conversely, I've found that the width of the interference bands is actually at a much lower precedence than minimizing phase growth through the crossover regions. That is the subject of this thread--subconscious or subjective listening differences via minimization of crossover filter-induced phase growth/irregularities (phase distortion). By the way, the notion of using first order crossover filters came from John Atkinson's interview with John Dunlavy on Stereophile's web site. I gave his approach a try, and the results were startling--probably even more so than in Dunlavy's listening room, because the Jubs have better lower midrange and low midbass directivity, and by extension, presents a cleaner direct-vs.-reflected energy balance in which to hear the effects of phase flattening. It's also interesting to note that most of PWK's crossovers used first order filters, and that he said that they "sounded better to him". That was actually the cause of doing my experiments, which I've chosen to share in this thread with others having K-402-based loudspeakers so that they might try it for themselves. With DSP crossovers, all it takes is a little time--as it costs nothing to try it. Besides switching the crossover filters to first order (and raising the crossover frequency about 100 Hz to partially compensate for the shallower slope on the bottom end of the compression driver frequency response), one must reduce the delay on the HF channel to account for the lower phase growth (90 degrees) of the first order filters relative to higher order filters. I also found this same effect as I was measuring the response and crossover networks on a Danley SH-50. Danley mentioned that they didn't use "named" crossover filters (i.e., Butterworth, Bessel, Linkwitz-Riley, Chebyshev, etc.) in their Synergy series. He was absolutely right. And the results spoke for themselves. Chris
    1 point
  44. My aim is to begin to generalize the approach mentioned above and that was used in the Jubilee crossover filters and delays, which was originally developed for setting the K-402-MEH prototype serving as my center loudspeaker. I have since applied this approach to setting crossover filter values for the AMT-1/Cornwall bass bin, and then the present AMT-1/Belle bass bin configuration that I'm currently using for surrounds in my 5.1 array (two DIY SPUD horn-loaded subs in the front corners of the room). The use of first order crossover filters was first recognized while examining the black box response of a Danley SH-50, whose phase response using passive crossovers has been noted for producing the most outstanding stereo reproduction heard by many reviewers in their home hi-fi setups. After some tinkering, I found that a DSP crossover using IIR filters can replicate and slightly beat the phase and group delay response of an SH-50 using different loudspeaker configurations--including Jubs. Since December, I've been applying the same techniques to dialing in other Jubs and other types of loudspeakers for those seeking help via email and forum PMs. I've lost count how many people that I've helped this far, and sometimes I find myself helping to dial in as many as three setups per week. I'm currently having trouble keeping all the setups straight from one another. Chris
    1 point
  45. The aim of the thread is about one subject: audio reproduction changes having large subjective effect on listeners, but that the listeners and the people working in the technical music production chain cannot really describe the end effect accurately (...as some might try to verbalize anyway...) The linked article above was provided as a reference only to the existence of this effect--a subject that is apparently not very widely discussed to date. I would guess that most people are listening to audio reproduction systems that completely cover (hide) these effects--that have all manner of defects in their reproduction characteristics. It's been relatively recently that very high fidelity sound reproduction, including but not limited to near-minimum-phase loudspeakers having little or no reproduction artifacts, have appeared and that are economically feasible for your average hi-fi aficionado. These setups are enabled via DSP crossovers that have become powerful and inexpensive, as well as in-room acoustic measurement tools (applications, computers, calibrated microphones). And all that for less than $1K or less. It's democratized audio reproduction--just like full motion pictures being shot by amateurs and film students using Canon 1Ds and other full-frame DSLRs having 1080i resolution or better. While the democratization of near-perfect audio reproduction (relatively speaking to what we've had in the past) is an interesting subject in itself, that isn't the subject of this thread. Large subjective changes in audio reproduction perception is the subject.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...