Jump to content

Quiet_Hollow

Regulars
  • Posts

    2477
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Quiet_Hollow

  1. 16 hours ago, Schu said:

    What physics is causing the higher frequency to interfere and not lower frequencies if they are all waves of energy that radiate and interact?

    The physics of acoustic waves.

     

    Placing two speakers side by side is a compromise. It is the practice of robbing Peter to pay Paul. It's not simply a matter of placing two cabinets together. It requires some consideration.

     

    I use two La Scala side-by-side as a center channel for two reasons:

     

    1. Controlled Dispersion. When watching movies, and negating the subwoofer channel for the sake of this conversation, the remaining majority of sound power comes out of the center....ie, almost all of it. I don't like spraying all that energy across the room at reference levels, especially the mids. I don't have the luxury of peppering my room with absorbers/diffusers.  Side-by-side tightens up the mid range horizontal dispersion pattern considerably. It parks all the energy on the center listening area which really clears up dialogue...particularly male voices. It also has the side effect of keeping the neighbor's happy, even at stupid loud levels. The couch can be ground zero at war volume, yet in the kitchen you can still comfortably hold a conversation.

     

    Beyond this desire, and the fact that I don't have a projection screen to hide a pile of speakers behind, there is no reason not to stack vertically. :emotion-55:

     

    2. Boundary effects / mutual coupling. A single La Scala placed along a wall will suffer some comparative loss in bass performance. As a pair however, the horns couple and dramatically improve their response. Horns behave differently than direct radiators in this regard. The results don't directly translate between designs. This is where knowing the performance envelope of the speakers helps considerably. Paying attention to the design's Directivity Index, Toe-in to minimize interference, but no so much that the tweeters are bouncing directly off the opposite baffles at crossover. However, toe-in creates a cavity between the rear of the cabinets and the wall, and a nice split along the lower baffle that acts like a port, which all has to be effectively sealed off to prevent interference. So you have to run a thick foam gasket between the two baffles and place a cover across the top with a rigid board that extends over the entire cavity and all the way up to the rear wall, then mass load it with something substantial (like a TV). Otherwise, it sounds like sh*t. Finally, you have to be aware of the 1/4 wavelength distance that the pair is from the L&R main channels and set your global high pass filter cutoff point high enough that front three channels aren't stepping all over one another.

     

    Can you still hear the interference in the treble range? Sure, but it's subtle compared to the dramatic improvement in the mids and bass. Once again, a compromise...and it all depends on what your priorities are. If I sit directly on-axis while listening to some treble material, and translate my head evenly from left to right and back, I can hear the comb filtering. It's not offensive in any way, and it's not like the performance drops into the abyss either. Off-axis, I can't even detect it. The fact that most center channel program material is largely mono, plays into to this as well. Others have pointed out that the tonal shift isn't as bad as it is on paper, and I agree, but I'm also smart enough not to bother trying this with my left and right channels either.

     

    In summary, #2 is why I use a pair for my center channel, #1 is why they are situated side-by-side.

     

    So...yes, I use two center channel speakers without much issue, but the setup is not a benign process.     ...and no, not like the Sonos....not even close. :lol:

     

     

    • Like 2
  2. 9 minutes ago, jazzmessengers said:

    A question about EQ'ing the THT, how are people choosing to do this-

    1. RTA at the listening position in order to pick the ideal low pass filter cut off point

    2. Single channel PEQ to tame the primary room peak, if any, present afterwards.

    • Like 2
  3. On 2/4/2017 at 3:20 AM, RSVRMAN said:

    My goal is for the subwoofer to be able to clearly hit the 16-17hz range. Lower even better.  

    I hear this all the time, and I firmly believe it to be an unrealistic goal. Not unobtainable, just not practical in the majority of cases. :emotion-55:

     

    No, I'm not a bass Luddite. I appreciate healthy performance below 60Hz as much as the next person. This isn't a special case, and you're talking about capability way out on the tail end of the bell curve.

     

    Having spent considerable time around real world stuff that makes SPL in that freq range (the infra-bass region) I'll tell you that:

    A. It's typically not musical

    B. Not subtle in any way

    C. The required acoustic power to approach anything resembling realistic playback levels is beyond the capability of traditional dynamic driver design.

    D. The noise floor down there is ridiculous.

    • Like 2
  4. 3 hours ago, jazzmessengers said:

    How accurate is this statement, and how much sensitivity loss is there?

    Not at all. The sensitivity doesn't diminish with positive changes in EQ, rather it's headroom (ie, desired playback level subtracted from in-room freq response minus any boosted EQ plus total power handling all expressed in dB).

     

    The loss is proportional. For example a +3 dB boost in EQ yields a 3 dB reduction in headroom. Where the K402 is concerned in the home environment, this is typically not an issue in terms of capability.

    2 hours ago, jazzmessengers said:

     

    I believe with the K-402 and TD-4002 (I imagine 4001 as well) you need a decent amount of boost over 8 KHz

     The K402 requires EQ for the typical Jubilee application because it behaves naturally as a low pass filter when driven above ~6 kHz.

    • Like 2
  5. On 1/26/2017 at 5:00 PM, Frzninvt said:

    That said there is no direct replacement diaphram for the K-55M you have to modify one to work.

    IOW, don't melt them. Like say, cranking the piss out of the volume knob looking for bass instead of using an EQ or a proper sub.

     

    New gaskets from Bob; to seal the fronts. Double check the seal on the backs. The diaphragms will last practically forever. :emotion-21::emotion-21:

     

    Lastly, the horn math says don't expect big miracles from changing just the drivers. That being said, A-55G is one helluva nice unit.

    • Like 1
  6. Want your stereo to sound extra juicy for little to no effort??   ...and not involving alcohol...cough cough

     

    Learned this one from watching the tube folks, yet found out it has not so much to do with the electronics, but rather more so the improvement in driver compliance proportional to duty cycle.

     

    Simply leave the system fired up playing the radio (or streaming) at very low-level all day long. BAM... extra smooth and wide by the end of the day when you go to turn it up. Particularly noticeable with horns. :emotion-21:

    • Like 1
  7. FWIW, all this talk about the purportedly "superior" dual phase-plug K55V.....it's also worth mentioning the K55M is a direct descendant of the design. The only reason Klipsch stopped installing them is because the supply was exhausted after EV quit manufacturing them.

     

    Klipsch-K55-M.jpg

  8. There's more to bi-amping in this case (Pioneer w/ MCACC). With the LF and HF split, the DSP is free to adjust delay to compensate for splitting of the filter network (ie. removing the jumpers).

     

    You paid for it, so I'd say use it. You'll hear the difference after you re-run MCACC.

    • Like 1
  9. 5 hours ago, MetalHead3028 said:

    Would I high pass the speakers using the receiver?  As in setting the KG's filter at 100 Hz and let the sub(s) try and keep up?

    :emotion-21: Yup. Possibly even higher depending on how the room is interacting at the listening position, but you can check that with your SPL Meter when you get that. :wink: When you start adding subs (whatever flavor you end up going with), sensitivity will eventually increase to the point of having to really dial down their filters in order to keep them from walking all over (ie. interfering with) the KG. Don't be surprised if you end up running the subs low-passed between 30-60 Hz and the KG high passed between 90-150 Hz. Something worth experimenting with even now. :emotion-55: Might unlock some untapped potential there before spending anything.

    5 hours ago, MetalHead3028 said:

    The KG's don't have the low/high frequencies separated at the binding posts like some of the other speakers I have.

    No worries there.

    5 hours ago, MetalHead3028 said:

    I appreciate your response and suggestions!

    You're welcome. :emotion-22:

  10. On 1/19/2017 at 1:44 PM, MetalHead3028 said:

    This house will undoubtedly have a dedicated theater/music room.  How big?  I'm not sure, yet.  

    As this is the single biggest factor in how any future audio expense is going to perform, you may want to make this decision VERY carefully. 15 foot ceiling height if at all possible.

     

    On 1/19/2017 at 1:44 PM, MetalHead3028 said:

     At this point in time, I definitely have to adhere to a budget.

     

    On 1/19/2017 at 1:44 PM, MetalHead3028 said:

    Honestly, I want speakers that will go loud enough that I have to stop the volume increase due to listening discomfort rather than me stopping the volume increase based on distortion.

    These two are mutually exclusive. It's not because of the speakers per say, but rather the electronics and other equipment involved to pull it off. As distortion goes down, the ear's tolerance for SPL goes up. We can handle a fair a bit of clean sound (80dB SPL in the mid range and 110 dB SPL in the bass is not unreasonable), and it takes the right gear and room to keep things able to play that "physical".

     

    Sure those KG's will go loud, but they need to be high passed to do that. Which places a tall order on that sub. The limiting factor in all this.

     

    High pass the KG to increase their power handling, at the same double or quadruple your sub count to pull as much program power out of the Onkyo, putting into the plate amps instead.

  11. 4 hours ago, jason str said:

    The Klipsch system sounds better on my Bose computer speakers. :emotion-14:

    :ph34r:

     

    3 hours ago, jjptkd said:

    This is a joke right?  :huh:

    The above A/B suggests how each approach works out in-practice. It's not like either system is simply cobbled together, nor recorded too poorly. :emotion-22:

     

    • Like 1
  12. Courtesy of another YouTube audio enthusiast, we can finally present these two videos (about the first minute of each) that afford some degree of comparison between an all-horn Klipsch Heritage based system and a Bose Acoustimass 10, both in a 5.1 arrangement.

     

    Not a perfect scenario, but still close enough to draw some general conclusions. The blu-ray source and particular scene are the same. The amps are very similar (both Pioneer D3). Yet, my sub is not adjusted ideally and my MCACC time window, at the time of recording, was a little on the hot side. On their video the amp is set to THX Cinema, which it shouldn't be, the recorded audio is compressed somewhat (from a cell phone or the like) and the room acoustics....well, you can get a great idea what a hardwood floor will do to the sound in that regard.

     

    There's lots to discuss here so take a listen to both and fire away.

     

     

    • Like 1
  13. Great football none the less. Professional aside from that one move. Some slop by both teams, but each owned it where it counted. Minimal flags. Dak has some serious potential there.

    Hat's off to both kickers...wow!!

     

    Anyone else notice the great sound quality in the broadcast? Dallas stadium is outfitted with all Electrovoice, and it came through in spades over my system.....big bass and all. :cool::emotion-21::emotion-21:

     

     

  14. 1. Go on ebay, buy up a pile of old Bose "cubies" or Anthony Gallo-types and pepper the ceiling with them.

     

    2. Spend a fortune on trying to wire them all up...cosmetically if possible.

     

    On a serious note...

    There is no such thing as "Best" where Dolbly Atmos is concerned. The real magic lies in its high bandwidth, object-orientated signal encoding and processing. Not littering a room with as many speakers as possible.:emotion-55:

     

    200.gif#50

     

    • Like 1
  15. 14 hours ago, jdmccall said:

    All AVR's are definitely not created equal!  That's for sure.

    Big +1 there. :emotion-21:

    1 hour ago, dtel said:

    ...with the huge difference in quality and even moreso the sound of different AVR's I would have to say try it and see how it sounds first, and go from there. It's not always about the cost of the AVR but more the design and just plain how it sounds, expensive does not automatically make things sound better.

    I totally agree. Prior to 2005, the traditional arguments in this regard tended towards holding water. Since then however, things have gotten murky....and recently even more so.  Blanket statements can no longer apply to a product where combinations of on-board DSP, sophisticated noise shaping, and novel amplifier topologies are involved.

    • Like 3
×
×
  • Create New...