Rivendell61

Gary, Nice post! Didn't put on the 7th--but I've been listening to Ireland, Butterworth, etc., settings of Housman for the last two hours..... Mark

RAD, I came across some comments last month (re titanium and phenolic) here: http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?p=1794531&highlight=titanium#post1794531 Note posts #40 by 'Flatlander' and posts #41 and #48 by 'Ethos' (with some images of diaphram break-up) I have NO idea if these guys remarks are accurate or applicable to the usage in Klipsch. Mark

Here are the measurements on that $350,000 amp: http://www.stereophile.com/tubepoweramps/704wavac/index5.html Mark

SRA page: http://www.qscaudio.com/products/amps/sra/sra.htm Mark

This fellow comes fairly close: http://www.royaldevice.com/custom.htm A sub-floor horn sub-woofer built of bricks......quite amazing. Mark

Checkpoint Audio (Netherlands/Eelco Grimm) has an interesting 2 CD set. A bit different from the many test CDs more readily available. Just waiting for the English version..... http://www.checkpointaudio.nl/uk/applications/index.htm Mark

Tom, AES is typically 5V, 110 Ohms, vs SPDIF at .5V, 75 Ohms. That said, the AES should read the S/PDIF with no problem. If the cable is over 2m you might need an active converter (to convert to AES at the SPDIF end). For a shorter cable you might want one of the in/line XLR/BNC--110/75 Ohm transformers--$30 for the Canare version from Benchmark: http://www.benchmarkmedia.com/photos/500-06800-000.jpg Mark

Not real anything....it's just really bad science. Mark

If you want to hear what compressors sound like (for 'good' compression--not the peak limiting Jeff was asking about)--here is a link: http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=70766 9 different analog compressors (LA-3A, Tube Tech, EMI TG1, etc) running Bill Haley's Rock Around The Clock-and an 'uncompressed' version. Mark

The Cornwall III specs, etc., are listed on the Klipsch Products page. Is it 'in production'? Would Klipsch consider posting a list of dealers who will have it on the floor? Mark

Rick, I was responding to your (or Max's) question about the ability/ease of encoding phase information on a CD--yes, no problem. But it generally is not thought desirable to add what is not heard in the 'hall'--so it is not often done. [The CDs I mentioned (Waters, etc) are still interesting for the amazingly wide sound stage--sound coming from 90 degrees to left and right of the listening position.] Regarding capturing the 'ambience' information that is naturally present.....a CD will capture everything that was audible in the recording venue--and picked up by the mics. No lost harmonics, etc. And DSD will not catch it better. It is already caught. Mark

Rick, A couple of examples of CDs using phase information for spatial/ambient cues would be the Roger Waters 'Amused to Death' CD (Q sound) and the Orb's live album ('Orb 93', using Roland RSS10s). Mark.

What is meant is that there is no 'distortion' or error in the waveform that is above the noise floor. The 'error' is below that 96db (or lower in 16 bit with dither) floor. It is the noise. Above that floor the digitized form is identical to the incoming signal. So you see how very small the error ('lack of resolution') is in modern digital. Mark

Ben, You are essentially correct. But the error in digital is defined by the noise floor. It is a myth to think that digital captures some 'less resolved' more 'broken' or estimated wave form than analog--it captures it exactly--within the bandwidth prescribed by the sample rate. And to the resolution of the noise floor of the system. Mark

Max, Lots of confusion in that post. Maybe you are trying too hard to make a case? There is a guy in NYC who specializes in vinyl mastering/laquer cutting, etc He says: "I think the reason vinyl sounds good has to do with elegantly lousy specs. Looking for some superior spec to explain it is misguided" I suspect most of us can agree that vinyl can (and does) sound very good--with or without a SOTA rig. And many will prefer the sound to other sources. Why not leave it at that and not undercut the positive with arguments that try to make it all perfect. Why not accept the "elegantly lousy specs"--it sounds good! Mark

The Benchmark also will serve as a very good pre-amp (and headphone amp). And can drive long lines if wanted.... Mark

On Audiogon--selling the remainder of the US stock. Jupiters are $995 and Planets are $695. http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?dgtlplay&1142307891 Mark

Leo, I have not heard the 180. I do have the CIAudio amps which use the 400. If you get interested in making your own they sell the modules direct to individuals. In fact there are several massive threads at diyaudio ('UcD 180 questions' being full of info). Modules can be bought with a choice of opamps. Some modifications are possible (caps can be upgraded, etc). There are a fair number of very positive subjective listening evaluations out there. Re THD, etc. If I remember correctly the designer of the UcD would agree with you: below .05% is probably not an audible issue. Lower is not always better: I have an AP2 plot of a non-production UcD with .0005 (3 zeros) THD through most of the audible range but in listening tests....not quite as good. Lowering THD that far brings other compromises. More important to neutrality is that THD be flat (the UcD does this very well), and not climb with frequency (like some Tripath, LM2876, and many other amps). Mark

There have been several threads recently with discussion of hearing responses, Fletcher-Munson, etc. This site has a hearing tester that deals with some of these things--in a somewhat simplified way. Note that there are many intervening variables (computer, headphones, room noise) which mediate the accuracy of the results.....but it gives a good general impression. http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/~jw/hearing.html You need headphones and a quiet room (blanket over the computer fan....) Mark

Compression follow-up..... Here is a short page which tries to discriminate between good compression and bad--using some examples like Pet Sounds, Beatles mono vs stereo (using Fairchild 670 tube limiter), Byrds, etc. Pre loudness wars stuff. http://www.netassoc.net/dougspage/HoffLesson3.htm Mark

Jeff, I don't know the Dave Matthews tune.... But here is a 'classic' article on "compression" by Rip Rowan which might help: http://www.prorec.com/prorec/articles.nsf/files/8A133F52D0FD71AB86256C2E005DAF1C Do you know the band 'Rush'? If you scroll about half way down he shows graphically the progressive "compression" of Rush albums from the 1984 'Grace Under Pressure' (good mastering) to the heavily limited 1992 'Vapor Trails'. He also shows the effects on specific transients (drum). If you have any of those albums you could listen and compare....and get some idea of the sonic consequences. Brief rant: this is what is (IMHO) better called 'peak limiting' or 'brick wall limiting'--now generically termed 'compression' which confuses it with the 'good' compression. Note that Rowan never uses the term compression. Mark

Hi Leo, Keep in mind that you do not have to run the UcD at the advertised Max rating. Mine are the 400 (I.E. 400 watts) but set-up to run at 100 watts max at 8 ohm. Some advantages of the UcD are less distortion than Tripath at low power. And they do not have the other anomolies/colorations of the Tripath. The UcD only takes feedback at the speaker outs. If you run across one give it a listen. Mark Edit: Forgot to attach.....here is a link to a data sheet: http://www.hypex.nl/docs/UcD400_datasheet.pdf About 2/3rds down the page are some AP2 plots.

Leo, Have you looked at the UcD Class D modules? They are discrete not chips. Very low sub watt distortion. If you have any interest I can put up some links to data sheets and general info. Mark

My 2nd post re noise floors was badly worded--I was in a hurry and trying to point Ben back to read the first one.... The point being: there is not a home 'noise floor' as it is often used (and was being used) to imply a diminuation of the dynamic range. Noise floor issues are frequency dependant--so it gets a bit complicated... But in the average home listening room it is not more than 10 dB above the hearing threshold--and we can hear down through that. Listeners in home environments can hear information down to a level (average) of 4 dB SPL. In the frequencies of our highest hearing acuity some measured home listening areas even have sub zero dB SPL noise floors. As do some recording venues. Mark

Ben, See my post above: there really is no 'noise floor' in a room. Mark