Chris A
-
Posts
9702 -
Joined
-
Days Won
15
Content Type
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by Chris A
-
-
Does this mean you will be changing your screen name ? Or does it depend on how they sound, ok never mind on that. Maby " Me loves klipschorn Jub's " ?
Can't wait to hear what your wife thinks of the sound !
My friend Dtel is quite correct. Remember guys - they aren't 'jubs', 'Jubes', or even 'Jubilees'. The proper name is the Klipschorn Jubilee. Roy finished the job but Paul started these behemoths. It's carried through on our part number- KPT KHJ stands for Klipsch Professional Theater KlipscHorn Jubilee.
A rose by any other name...
Roy's been a huge help in getting these set up for home use, whatever the (K402+K-69) and KPT-KHJ-LF two-ways are called. I don't think I could ask more from the guy.
Bravo, Roy.
Chris A.
-
Some of your reply addresses Haas effects (for others on the forum, this is the loudness-integrating effect of the human ear and the selection of the direction of the first arrival for multiple-source delays of less than 50 ms). Everything else connects the dots on my understanding of the physics of matter. Have you ever wondered if the RTA/EQs are doing some sort of cross correlation on the input pseudo-random noise generator as reference? That would change our understanding of the behavior of RTA/EQs if true. I look at how the unit sequentially adjusts the bands and wonder if the unit is doing something like this. This would preserve phase/time-of-arrival information. However, the RTA/EQ information from Behringer doesn't say enough to really understand what it is doing. RTA/EQs typically don't consider Fletcher-Munson, Haas, etc. effects because, first cut, machines don't integrate listening like humans do.
At it's very minimum, an RTA is just running a continuous FFT while it generates the pink noise. I believe the reason it looks like it updates certain bands at a time is because the pink noise doesn't always contain every frequency. Usually averaging filters are used in RTA's so that the results of multiple FFT's are averaged together (so that there is more frequency content showing up). Sometimes there are peak holds that just record the loudest amplitude at each frequency and then of course there are the smoothing filters that make the frequency response less jagged and a continuous line. One of the interesting things about the FFT is that the low frequency limit is set by the length of the sample...however, the longer the sample length, the less often the frequency response updates. In other words, it's not going to give you very useful time domain information...
Mike,
Do you have documentation on the Behringer UltraCurve Pro 2496 RTA algorithms, by chance?
Chris A.
-
Mike TN:
I tried 2' x 4' x 6" bass traps ( http://www.readyacoustics.com/index.php?go=products.proddetails∏=RT426B --- plus 3 Owens Corning 703 2" fiberglass panels per bag) in the corner above each speaker, each angled at 45 degrees toward the center of the room. This didn't affect the liveness or width/depth of the soundstage but it made the listening sweet spot much wider, slightly taller and much less sensitive to changes in listening position. Since my ceiling is 9' high I didn't have to rearrange the Jubs to set the bass traps directly on top of the horns toward the driver end; the traps are lightweight enough to do this.
Subsequent to the above results, I laid out floor covering--my floor is tile--which slightly damped the soundstage liveness but increased the vertical dimension of the image. I haven't had a chance to try many other locations for the other two traps I've got but it seems like they do well down low on the left to balance the couch's damping on the right. My wife could really hear a difference.
Deneen:
Have you thought about wooden shutters for your windows, like plantation style?
Regards,
Chris A.
-
So by complementary logic, should we assume that younger folks don't pay for any entertainment?
http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/the-generational-divide-in-copyright-morality/
-
-
Double post...
-
Thanks Mike,
I'll take a look. I've used golden oldies like Harris' Handbook of Noise Control and Olson's Acoustical Engineering or even Beranek's Acoustics for reference in the past. However, these books are not up to date with respect to current acoustic treatment products, etc. Your URLs will help.
Thanks again,
Chris
-
Nice looking black speakers with ficus tree. Kind of tall, though, don't you think?
-
Roy,
Commercialization of music can be a terrible thing. The whole rush toward vinyl today is sometimes justified based on commercialization of "loudness compression" in CDs. I really don't understand this but there it is. Anyone that would change the music of the artist (i.e., the musician/composer, not the guy pushing sliders) seems pretty brazen, but who am I.
Chris
-
Well, I've had an itch for audio since - well I can't remember. We had a Khorn clone in the house growing up. I built acoustic suspension speakers in high school and college. Much more recently, I acquired a pair of Khorn clones. I then learned about Jubs on this forum. Well, you know the rest.
-
I believe that your whole argument on room acoustics really points out that we must deal with early reflection and "mode" problems at their source because EQ just rotates the early reflection problems to other parts of the room, and standing waves really wreak havoc on listening position selection.
I think (seriously) that you & MAS would probably enjoy a conversation. I realize you might not (yet) necessarily know who he is.
Coytee,
I'll take that as a term of endearment. I've only seen a couple of posts from "MAS" but I can't say that I know that person.
What I really want is this: practical and effective solutions to problems that I've run into listening to sound reproduction systems.
-
Mike B: I've just now taken the time to munch on your EQ vs. room acoustics reply.
1) I don't mind anyone being rough in their responses as long as it isn't ad hominem/childish stuff. My wife reads some of these posts, and I didn't want to turn her off after the first posting on the Jubs. Roy recommended that I go the forums, which I happily obliged.
2) Some of your reply addresses Haas effects (for others on the forum, this is the loudness-integrating effect of the human ear and the selection of the direction of the first arrival for multiple-source delays of less than 50 ms). Everything else connects the dots on my understanding of the physics of matter. Have you ever wondered if the RTA/EQs are doing some sort of cross correlation on the input pseudo-random noise generator as reference? That would change our understanding of the behavior of RTA/EQs if true. I look at how the unit sequentially adjusts the bands and wonder if the unit is doing something like this. This would preserve phase/time-of-arrival information. However, the RTA/EQ information from Behringer doesn't say enough to really understand what it is doing. RTA/EQs typically don't consider Fletcher-Munson, Haas, etc. effects because, first cut, machines don't integrate listening like humans do.
3) Both of my "stupid questions" I asked are actually connected to each other . I believe that your whole argument on room acoustics really points out that we must deal with early reflection and "mode" problems at their source.
4) Source material (i.e. CDs, SACDs, vinyl, whatever) mixing/EQ problems are horses of different colors, I think. These issues are hard-coded into our source bit streams/RIAA pathways, and I was wondering what the membership of this thead does about those problems. Generally speaking, I just don't listen to poorly mixed music for very long before I hit the eject button. This is a sad situation, really. If the problems are induced via "sound engineer signal processing" or mixing room acoustics issues then I believe we are basically out of luck.
-
And apparently a really nice guy.
Ray Charles mentioned that the only person that could stay in the room with Art Tatum was Oscar. Ray called Tatum "God over in the corner." He wanted to count his fingers...
Chris A. -
Paul,
Congratulations on the Jubs. You obviously have a pretty spectacular wife, too.
When it comes to Jubs, hearing is believing...
Happy new year to you and yours,
Chris A.
-
My wife just said that she really likes these speakers...even though they're ugly. She says that they're easy on the ears (She's singing along right now.)
She also asked if there is a Klipsch widows forum since I told her that "...statistically, between 81-98% of audiophiles are male". I told her I'd look for that forum.
-
I appreciate your directness in answering those two stupid questions of mine. Thanks Bill, Mike B. and Mike TN. These are real questions for me--and maybe for others.
Mike B.: when you get more material on your website (URL?) I'd like to keep reading whatever you find in this area and on related acoustics and sound reproduction issues. Because the Jubs apparently have such good controlled directivity and coverage within their zones, I just don't know about room treatments. Your experience is in fact very valuable.
Bill - I am going to use these in at least a 4.0 HT system; the preamp on its way is 7.1, but any future surround/center channels probably need to be small enough to fit in the "WAF envelope". My surround speakers are currently semi-large bookshelfs that I had. I don't know where I would put the Jubscala, but I would be interested in hearing more and seeing a picture of them. Heck, who knows, maybe its possible to change venues in my hacienda (or potentially change haciendas in the far term).
Mike TN: Sounds like you have been doing the room treatment thing for a while. I'd be interested in any insights you have with moving your panels around. I'd also like to have an idea of your relative room dimensions so I can understand if your setup is applicable to mine.
To all readers: Merry Christmas and Peace to You. I hope our troops can redeploy home soon from CENTCOM theater deployment. We need all those good people alive and healthy for the future of this country.
Regards,
Chris A.
-
Wow, I think that I take back question #1. I turned them up this morning... Wow.
-
Interesting EQ curves and crossover freq. Thank you very much Bill and Mike. I have updated the Crown settings to match your supplied settings. I assume these are the EQ curves that were generated in the anechoic chamber environment (as alluded to in Roy's separate email). My previous settings were 800 hz gentle slope and RTA/calibrated mike in the sweet spot. The difference is really quite large, I must admit. Even so (and it is early in the AM here to be cranking it up for a "hand volume" listening test), the sound is still amazing if perhaps less forward now with these new settings.
Now the new kid on the block asks stupid questions:
1) How do you reconcile EQing your speakers in a real listening environment relative to using anechoic corrections? Do you use an automated RTA/EQ, just stoically set them flat to anechoic and leave them, try to shape the EQ by ear, or some specific combination of the above techniques? Do you personally vary your EQ based on source material? If so, generally how do you do it?
2) With the really excellent directivity of the Jubs at freqs above the bass region, how much and where would you apply room treatment (diffusers and traps) as a first cut? Have you considered the ceiling near field relative to the listening sweet spot. How far back is your sweet spot? I realize these questions are specific to those who've had their hands on Jubs but the answers really don't have to be limited to just Jubs. Any pi (wall/floor mounted) or pi/2 (corner-mounted) speaker probably has similar characteristics.
Chris
-
I'm using an UltracurvePro DEQ 2496 (the RTA works in the graphic mode). An AV preamp is on order. My prior setup included Khorn clones (actually Shinalls) which are extremely nice looking in these corners (i.e., high WAF). There is no mistaking the presence of the Jubs - they grab your attention in basic black.
The Jubs are breaking in and sounding sweeter and more natural daily. If you haven't heard Jubs in a real living room environment, all I can say is that you have got to hear them first hand. My wife mentioned that she had never heard such effortless deep bass while she was listening to Patricia Barber's A Fortnight in France. The upper horn/driver unit really distinguishes itself from the Khorns- piano and female voices sound much more natural on the Jubs than the Khorns. I'm still looking to experiment with bass traps to see what, if any effect these will have for this room. Bass traps are low WAF, however...
The room dimensions are 15.5 ft W x 9 ft H x 39.5 ft D with some intrusion into the rectangular floor plan by the room under the stair on the right. Although this arrangement isn't supposed to work as well along the short dimension, I find that the depth of the room adds depth and presence for these big voices. Charles-Marie Widor's Toccata in F (organ) is literally a religious experience.
Chris
-
How about these? Jubs, Crown XTI-1000s and a RTA/EQ. Opinions? (Gently, please.)Chris
-
Rigma,
Have you thought about trying a higher power and higher slew-rate SS amp, just for grins? (No kidding here.) Also, getting driver phase delay corrected may also help, assuming you haven't already tried this (but you probably have done this...).
I recall that impulse and "sizzling" cymbal response is something that Bob Carver tried to duplicate using some really high-end monitors and an unbelievable amount of power in the mid-80s. He was using a pair of scissors to cut a sheet of paper, if memory serves. I don't think he was successful in duplicating the real sound even from a system that would today cost $100K+.
I would also wonder if using some hf acoustic treatment between and above the speakers to absorb rather than diffuse hf energy, but leaving the back of the room (behind your head) "live", i.e., a dead-end live-end mixing room concept. A few unused comforters or blankets arranged on the wall between might be useful for a test.
Regards,
Chris A.
jubilee
in 2-Channel Home Audio
Posted
Cool, very cool...