mikebse2a3
-
Posts
4826 -
Joined
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by mikebse2a3
-
-
For what it’s worth I personally find it helpful to step back from the keyboard and let some time pass by and then reread post from a calmer perspective.
I truly believe most here have good intentions 🙂
-
2
-
-
5 hours ago, KT88 said:
The display shows a significant difference, impressive. Just as a trial could you adjust it afterwards so that it is a little less flat/linear in the range between 100 and 160Hz? But with a very slight curvature upwards? Then the "warmth" would come back to the sound. It is precisely the frequency range that pretends the full bass in an LS3/5a and is indispensable there.
@KT88 yes I believe he could add a PEQ: 148Hz / Q:8 / Level: (+2 to +5db range) as a trial to compensate for some of what the Auto-Room Compensation adjusted it to. If it proves to be a move in the right direction for @Flevoman then it could be fine tuned if needed to reach his listening goal. NOTE: This is Roy’s PEQ setting except we are now using +db levels to compensate some for the Auto-Room Compensation and find the balance Flevoman desires. Other PEQ; filters can be added to fine tune the region more if desired.
It’s important to understand that when you compensate for room modes the bass/mid-bass can at first be perceived as light versus before the compensation. Because the problem room modes are adding a false boost which also mask clarity/detail then by the room compensation removing this false boosting the “perception” can be of a much improved clarity/detail in bass and also in the midrange and hi frequency but also of this perceived lighter bass/mid-bass and some listeners will find it desirable to increase the level in the corrected region. The DSpeaker can perform this in several ways like the PEQ I’m suggesting above. It might take some time with trial and error to find the balance someone desires but it should be achievable.
I do understand not everyone is comfortable with the process or desire to spend the time to become familiar enough with what a DSP EQ offers and that’s understandable.
miketn🙂
-
5
-
-
20 minutes ago, Stephen Buck said:
Sometimes bullies need to be told to stick to the topic and leave others alone.
@KT88 is a valued member who has always contributed in positive ways for many years on this forum.
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Stephen Buck said:
What's with Germans and their need to control others? Let me break it down for you....
1) User complains of cabinet resonance, references specific songs and offsets
2) How many participants tried it?
3) If other users report no cabinet resonance as cause of phenomena, what else could it be?
4) In my experiment: The Isaac Warble is in the mid bass region, disappears when one channel played.
5) This points to the mix, and how it resolves on AL5 with a given setup, does not occur on NS-5000s but different location offset.
6) Arguments ensue about bass mixing, two videos of pro-stereo bass presented, showing biggest most modern artists are using it.
7) Isaac mix is old, waiting for mix engineer to respond to email. Probably heard it a million times. New Isaac video has different EQ of his voice. Problem solved.
😎 Problem goes away in my experiment if PEQ and tone controls set flat, tried PEQ of 148Hz, Q:8, -7db with no audible difference at :37.
😎 Fascists continue to point and shoot and not do anything useful.
@Stephen Buck Your Germans and Fascists comments are totally inappropriate and among the most foolish I’ve seen on this forum in 20 years here.
-
7
-
-
@Stephen Buck if you have the ability to use Roy’s PEQ of FREQ:148Hz / Q:8 / Gain: -7db then you will hear the excess “emphasis” on the Chris Isaak “Blue Spanish Sky” is gone.
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, henry4841 said:
It is in high end audio where they are emitted. Nelson Pass in his designs will take out a single resistor if he can and certainly will not install an unnecessary bunch of parts to put in tone controls. Just more components to degrade the sound. But most will or cannot hear the difference. His products are for those that can. I am in his camp.
I’m in his camp also and I can hear the difference and I also own the First Watt F3 and when using it with my La Scala AL5 it’s great and maybe(its very close) my favorite even over my Cary CAD 2A3 amps with the La Scala but it doesn’t solve less than ideal recordings or other issues that Tone Controls and DSP all when properly used can compensate for. Combine them both and my music sounds even more natural and realistic. 🙂
No point in continuing down this road since it’s like trying to change someone’s religion where you believe what you want and I’ll do the same but I just don’t care for how easily some people want to judge what is right or wrong and basically say those who use Tone Controls and DSP aren’t discerning listeners. ( ie: BS)
miketn🙂
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, henry4841 said:
Tone controls and EQ is for the masses and not audiophiles serious about sound reproduction.
In the real world the “Circle Of Confusion - Floyd Toole” is rampant and to use tools (ie: EQ and Tone Controls) to compensate (ie: even correct in some circumstances) doesn’t make you a “non-audiophile” and a member of the masses as you describe.
The better your system and the more revealing the system the more obvious the differences are in recordings and proper use of Tone Controls and EQ is a valid choice.
Do all recordings sound perfect to you?
If not then what do you do when they don’t? Do you not listen to them and only listen to “perfect recordings” ?
Well designed equipment like my McIntosh C50 pre-amp has 8-band Tone Controls that can be bypassed on really good recordings and engaged when less than ideal recordings are played and this allow me to enjoy a wider range of recordings that otherwise I couldn’t.
miketn
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, KT88 said:
@mikebse2a3, thanks for the review from a real user. I only found Amir's review and he was somewhat critical, at least of his measurements. At the end of the day, the decisive factor is whether such a device helps the user in his environment, and that is very credibly the case with you.
@KT88 keep in mind Amir would probably never recommend any of our “beloved” Tube Amplifiers based on their measurements.
Measurements are definitely important but they hardly tell the complete story at the stage we are currently living in and it all ultimately has to pass the “Listening Experience of a Human” in the real world.
miketn🙂
-
3
-
-
This was my experiences of the DSpeaker in 2013.
-
For whatever it’s worth it seems both the Absolute Sound and Stereophile were pretty impressed back in their 2013 reviews.
https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/dspeaker-anti-mode-20-dualcore-digital-signal-processor/
https://www.stereophile.com/content/music-round-57-page-2
Stereophile had it rated Class A of their 2013 recommended components.
https://www.stereophile.com/content/2013-recommended-components-signal-processors
I personally take all reviews with a grain of salt and ultimately if I find it interesting enough I explore it for myself and make up my own mind/experiences. 🙂
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Flevoman said:
The device doesn't really feel as audiophile; do you notice any adverse effects in the sound due to adding this device? (considering the idea of introducing more obstacles in the audio path)
Please don’t let this or anything you might read interfere/influence you.
Please try it with an open mind 🙂
-
1 hour ago, KT88 said:
I suspect that you @Flevoman want to explore the fundamental difference that this DSPeaker device makes regarding the modes and the 150 Hz peak. I'm always curious what a device should NOT add, and I found it at Amir...even if it's a predecessor of your new device, the DSPeaker doesn't seem to be on par with my 16 year old Yamaha SP2060 (which I use for my UJ) when it comes to ADC and DAC quality only. Your question to Shakeydeal could therefore be legitimate.
Here is what Amir from ASR measured regarding the converter qualities (of the predecessor model of the DSPeaker).@KT88 I first used a EV DC-ONE with Roy’s PEQ’s for the La Scala and it solved the issues with the “emphasis” noted by @Flevoman in the recordings he reported about. It was a clear improvement with no negatives noted in other areas like vocals or imaging for example and was actually was an noticeable improvement in them because the “emphasis” was masking details in both vocals and imaging.
I also have this DSpeaker Anti-Mode 2.0 Dual Core unit and decided to try it in place of the EV DC-ONE for comparison and since it has potential to do an even better compensation for a variety of issues in the real world of room issues as well.
Currently using the DSpeaker with my La Scala AL5 and it is working extremely well and has significantly improved the issue @Flevoman has noted with the recordings. The DSpeaker in my experience so far offers improvements even more so as described above with the EV DC-ONE and is a clear improvement over the EV DC-ONE’s simpler compensation that is available from it.
IMHO based on my experiences the DSpeaker Anti-Mode 2.0 Dual Core is all positive when implemented properly in my system. IMHO any audible negatives that it might have are swamped by the significant to me improvements it makes with my La Scala AL5 in my room/system.
miketn
-
1
-
-
First no one should be feeling defensive about this subject with the La Scala because we all know there is no perfect loudspeaker.
By discussing this aspect of the La Scala design everyone can benefit from how to minimize or compensate for the “emphasis” in the 120Hz-180Hz region of the La Scala to achieve the best sound possible in their system.
I really don’t see any need to debate the “emphasis” in the 120Hz-180Hz region (peak centered at 148Hz) if for no other reason than the fact that Roy provided the PEQ values to compensate for it.
It is clearly audible on some recordings as the examples that @Flevoman has given us and I can hear it maybe to a greater or lesser extent than he is experiencing but it is obviously there and if anyone who has the capability to implement the (PEQ of 148Hz, Q:8, -7db) they can prove it to themselves.
The recordings that @Flevoman provided as examples in this thread are really enjoyable when the “emphasis” is removed from the La Scala but borderline enjoyable for me if I don’t apply the correction (PEQ: 148Hz).
miketn
-
5
-
-
Merry Christmas everyone..!!!
-
5
-
-
4 hours ago, Flevoman said:
However, apparently, this effect is less strong for you than for me (at least, that's the impression I'm getting). I'm starting to think it's not the speakers themselves but more a combination of recording, speakers, and my acoustics.
@Flevoman Yes the mix of the recording is the predominate issue IMO and any issues with room acoustic and speaker setup could make it a worse experience.
I will say if you are using any amplifiers with low damping factors like many Single Ended Tube types then definitely try using the 4ohm and 8ohm taps to see which sounds best. These amplifiers in combination with speakers having variable impedances across their spectrum will experience tonal balance influences and you will want to decide which sounds best in your system.
miketn
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Flevoman said:
Can you perhaps check if this is at the same Hertz as with Chris?
Just curious...
@Flevoman Here is a 20 sec clip from ~ (1:38 to 1:58)
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Flevoman said:
Same for this song.
When the piano goes down (1:50 and 1:58 for example) I hear the resonance.
The song is overal in balance, and at these moments the piano sounds thick with some resonance. The air in the music is gone, it sounds a bit fat/thick.
@Flevoman The mix of this song is interesting.
On the Audeze/McIntosh headphone system the sense of air/spaciousness during vocals is obvious but as the passage when the piano plays it is as if it is distant and closed in somewhat and a bit muddy sounding in comparison to other parts of the mix and the sense of spaciousness and air are definitely reduced.
The La Scala AL5 system gives a very wide soundstage with good depth and airiness during the vocal passages but again during the piano passage it sounds distant and somewhat closed in and lacking clarity and muddy sounding and the sense of spaciousness and air are definitely reduced in comparison to other parts of the mix. I can’t say I hear a particular resonance during this but more just a mix that goes from open, spacious and airy during the vocal passages to closed, distant, somewhat muddy on the piano passage.
The UG Jubilee system gave me pretty much the same experience as the La Scala AL5 system with added low frequency detail below what the La Scala AL5 provides by design.
miketn
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, Flevoman said:
Thank you so much for the effort you've put into this, @mikebse2a3. This really gives me some insight. When I listen to your audio file, I can clearly hear the thickening. It might not be as pronounced as on the La Scala, but this could be due to the recording and playback through my earphones. I recorded a piece of music with my phone and listened through earphones to compare with your recording, and they sound quite similar through the earphones. It's not conclusive yet; it might still sound a bit more pronounced on my end. However, I'm starting to think that what I sometimes hear as a resonance is likely present in the song itself, enhancing the La Scala and possibly amplified a bit more in my acoustic environment, making it unpleasant for me. I'll mention it here when I come across another track. Could you please test it again on your La Scala to see if you can hear it too?
@Flevoman I would ignore the sound on that clip as far as any reference to listening to it since it was just picked up by my iPhone while filming the RTA display showing the frequency spectrum of energy when you experience the resonance sounding issue. I included the sound just so we could match the spectrum display with what was occurring in the song at any given time.
Note: The RTA is receiving line level input so that we see only what is in the recording itself without any loudspeaker/mic/room interference. I wanted to see the actual recordings frequency response during the problems you experienced.
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, Islander said:
Many people confuse resonance with inherent peaks. The shape of the La Scala and La Scala II (and presumably the AL-5) bass horn is the cause of the notorious 148 Hz peak. It is not due to any kind of resonance.
What is it about the shape that causes the 148Hz peak… ?
Looking at the Impedance Plots seem to indicate resonances of mechanical/acoustical nature.
Finite horn length and mouth size cause reflections in the horn due to impedance mismatching at the mouth/room interaction leading to what I understand to be standing waves and resonances in the horn.
@Chief bonehead maybe you can clarify what causes the 100Hz - 200Hz region of frequency/phase anomalies of the La Scala models.
miketn
-
Listening to Chris Isaak (Blue Spanish Sky) on my Headphone System (Audeze LCD2-Fazor Headpones and McIntosh MHA-100 Headphone Amplifier) you can hear as he sings Red and Blue Skies that it close to the edge of sounding resonant/reverb like but I have no problem listening to it and am able to enjoy it as reproduced. This is a very revealing system of recordings and allows me to experience nuances in a recording beyond what seems possible with loudspeakers in rooms and I use it as a reference to judge if the issues are in the recordings or room/speaker related issues.
UG Jubilee:
I also listened to the recording over my UG Jubilee system and found the resonant/reverb like sound to be somewhat more observable than with the Headphone System Experience but still I could enjoy listening to the song but again the song/recording is borderline itself of sounding to resonant/reverb like during parts of the vocal sections.
La Scala AL5:
When I listened to the recording over the La Scala AL5 system it was obvious that the resonant/reverb effect was increased above the UG Jubilee system I experienced and even though I could still enjoy the experience it was very very close to being over exaggerated and intolerable. The La Scala does appear to have some peaking in the 100Hz to 200Hz region so any additional exaggeration due to placement of the La Scala relative to room boundaries or room modes could easily make this recording unlistenable IMHO.
I experienced very similar issues in my listening room which is almost square and proved to be very difficult to find a location for the speakers in the room and ultimately came down to movements of less than a few inches until I found the location that provided the most neutral balance for the loudspeakers. I would probably try playing this recording as I moved the La Scala relative to the room boundaries to try to find a neutral area in the room where it least excited this region centered at ~140Hz to see if you can minimize the problem your experiencing. Also it should be noted listener location should be taken into account and experimented with relative to boundaries and room modes for this problem as well.
miketn
-
2
-
1
-
-
As can be seen in this clip of the recording (line level sample) when he sings Big and Blue Skies you can see the range in the 100Hz - 180Hz is very active with maximum peaking ~141Hz.
-
1
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Flevoman said:
I immediately heard something I hadn't heard in all those years – that annoying resonance at precisely the same frequency in a specific song. I only noticed it in one song, but it was unmistakably present. And this is challenging to explain. Is this something inherent to the LaScala/Khorn that I'm particularly sensitive to, or do this person and I share the same issue?
I’m curious can you share what this “specific song” is and at what “specific points in the song” you are hearing the “ annoying resonance”.
I assume you have listened to this song on other systems or even headphones also and have not experienced the “annoying resonance”
miketn🙂
-
3
-
-
On 12/16/2023 at 6:46 AM, Flevoman said:
I'm currently pondering the best approach to address my issue. It could be through a lengthy detailed text or perhaps a shortcut. I'll opt for the shortcut.
The LaScala 1 was known for its cabinet resonance. I believe this was addressed by placing a wedge in the bass cabinet to reduce the resonance. The LaScala II and the AL-5 have thicker walls. Is the general assumption that this completely eliminates the resonance? Or is there still some resonance present, and could, for example, a wedge in the bass cabinet still provide improvement?
You can see the measurements made by Stereophile here and as can be seen there are some mechanical(sidewall) and acoustical resonances of it’s woofer horn in the 100Hz - 200Hz region that we need to be aware of.
https://www.stereophile.com/content/klipsch-la-scala-al5-loudspeaker-measurements
They show using a plastic-tape accelerometer attached to the center of the woofer horn’s sidewall (3) High Q resonances at (~125Hz, ~250Hz, ~500Hz). What signal type and level was used to produce the results aren’t mentioned in the article so how this relates to reproducing music isn’t fully clear for me. How audible and frequent this is in normal use while listening to music is questionable because any potential resonance becoming audible will depend on the exciting frequencies being present in the music and at what amplitude level and length of time applied to the resonance for it to develop it’s maximum audible effect.
Regardless of all the causes there is an apparent peak of up to +7db in the frequency response of the La Scala woofer-horn in the region between (100Hz - 200Hz) of it’s spectrum that we should be aware of.
IMHO based on experiences having owned both the original La Scala model as well a the La Scala AL5 is that it is very important to pay attention to how we position the speaker relative to (SBIR) Speaker Boundary Interference Response and Room Modes. What we must avoid is any additional SPL increase in this region of (100Hz - 200Hz) due to reinforcement from the Speaker-Boundary distance and Room Mode Coupling. IMHO if proper attention is given to the speaker’s location by again avoiding any additional reinforcement in the (100Hz - 200Hz region) then the La Scala Sidewall resonance potential hasn’t been an audible issue for me when listening to music.
miketn
-
6
-
-
1 hour ago, Trippigs said:
Here is the label. Style might be helpful in determining approxmate age but all the handwritten part is too faded to read.
If you look on the back of these you should find the serial # stamped in the wood in various areas like the tail board for example..
miketn
Lascala cabinet resonance
in 2-Channel Home Audio
Posted
Based on my own experience with the DSpeaker and my La Scala AL5 I believe with some fine tuning the OP will be able to reach a place of satisfaction with more of his music being enjoyable.
The “emphasis” in the 100Hz - 200Hz region is audible and I personally consider it a significant improvement and that a more accurate reproduction of the recordings are achieved when it’s effects on the recordings are removed.
I respectfully disagree and I certainly don’t believe the OP, myself or others discussing the “emphasis” in the 100Hz -200Hz region of the La Scala AL5 is wrong or misleading anyone.
It’s really simple in my mind and that is if you want to fine tune and thus improve the reproduction of the La Scala then implement the PEQs that Roy has suggested for active user who have that capability. This is easily achieved by active methods but my guess is that it is impractical in passive crossover designs (impedance would drop to low in value with compensation network) or “I believe” Roy would have implemented it in those as well.
@Flevoman wants the most enjoyment he can achieve from his system as I do and I believe most anyone on this forum wants so he is searching for the answers to achieve that goal wherever it leads and thus started this thread simply to find answers and solutions.
miketn🙂