Delicious2
-
Posts
414 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by Delicious2
-
-
8 hours ago, Tarheel TJ said:
...That is why my experience in front of the kilo-buck system was so interesting. His system did not resemble my own, and it did not resemble the "top of the mountain" type systems you often see on here. And yet, it was really, really good. I have been doing some listening to my own system since, and it is also really, really good, although a little different in presentation. However, I can't help but miss a little bit of sparkle and magic that his had. Again, I think a lot of this was source related more than speaker related.
I guess my main point in posting was to marvel at the excellent results this gentleman was able to achieve from such a drastically different approach. His passive crossover, non-horn speaker, non DSP setup easily equaled my own in most areas, and far surpassed it in others. Granted, he has some 40 or 50 times the investment that I do, so I suppose this shouldn't be too surprising. It is just interesting to me that there appears to be more than one way to skin this cat. I still definitely believe in the approach that I and others (like Chris A) have taken. It absolutely appears to be the most effective way to achieve what we are all looking for..... but as I have learned, it is not the only way.
Thanks for reigning this in Tarheel. I also have gone down the big horn, active, dsp route recently with gratifying results thanks to ChrisA. Please say more about the "sparkle and magic". And in terms of equaling yours in MOST areas, was there something that it didn't do as well? I'm wondering if we're striving for somewhat different goals with these systems sound-wise.
-
4 hours ago, Max2 said:
I think that's the biggest kicker, the variables that go overlooked. So many trying to make improvements without starting on a real foundation to reveal the differences.
Yes, I can agree. Now if we could just discuss and reach consensus on which variables are foundational or "macro" variables
- basic symmetrical setup of speakers in a room that can support a symmetrical sound field in relation to the primary listening position
- speaker radiation pattern control,
- room treatment to minimize dominate bass mode excitation and provide even absorption and diffusion
- all components in the chain working together such that none are operating outside their design parameters (e.g. an amp that can't handle an impedance swing gracefully)
-
other "macro" variables which we discuss and may agree are foundational such as eqing to flat response in room (at least as a starting point or home base)
then we might discuss and reach consensus on what are more "micro" variables - those that make a difference but not nearly as much and wouldn't be considered foundational
what I find myself wondering about from this discussion is : Do our systems become closer and closer to the ideal of what is possible with reproduced sound in the home and so more alike to each other and changes in components make LESS of a difference? OR do our systems become more and more transparent and so sensitive to smaller and smaller changes (better microscopes)?
Maybe there is more than one ideal or a continuum what we're striving for? A system that gets all the macro variables right may not be particularly "refined" may not be a very good "microscope"
Conversely a system that is very refined and excels in certain "audiophile" criteria may not sound particularly "live". Then there's the whole thing already touched upon about the "wow" factor and whether a system is satisfying long term...
-
I like to live with component, configuration, settings changes for a while before commenting since I find that sometimes any change that's not grossly wrong can seem better at first. After a week of daily listening both casual background classical HD FM and focused test tracks disks in the Oppo, some impressions are forming.
- Bass in this room has never been better. It is more powerful than before but not boomy at all. Kick drum, electric bass, string bass, toms, tympani, low brass, synth bass all benefit from this tune. (gotta try some pipe organ). There is a tactile and tuneful quality to bass that was missing. The greater power vibrates the room and surfaces more in a satisfying way akin to live music/bass.
- When I first turned on the system this morning there was some moderately complex but not loud classical music broadcast. My impression was of a coherence that the system hadn't had before. It spoke with one voice. Although the system was cold, hearing it was immediately pleasurable.
- I think I like the highs of the TADs more than the BMS, not sure yet or why.
- I was worried that going active digital DSP would have one or more down sides - noise, artificial sound, opacity due to more D/A, A/D conversions, loss of life or air etc. None of that has been true. The only down side to the dsp so far is the same effect I have with the aftermarket full dsp system in my car (Mosconi Aerospace 8-12). There is an audible latency and volume changes associated. IOW, when the disk or stream starts the next track it may miss a few notes or start soft then come up to full volume after a second or so.
- I was taught early on in my life-long audiophile hobby that the minimalist/purist approach was best. This has fit right in with many years not having much cash to spend 😁 I'm now starting to think that there are macro factors to get right about a home reproduction system and there are micro factors. I've been fooling with the micro factors much of my career without getting some macro factors right until now. It is a revelation and very enjoyable!
-
1
-
I'm reviving this thread since I now have the TAD 4002s on the new (to me) K402s with stands on top of the Khorn bass bins. I've gone through 2 iterations of REW measurement and Chris' tuning with excellent results. Just as a reminder the chain is -
- sources: Oppo 103D, Sony HD FM tuner (modded), MacPro usb via AudioQuest DragonFly 1.1, Basis 1200 TT with Sumiko MMT arm and BenzMicro cart, phono preamp is on an old Parasound preamp (Oppo is the main HiRez source)
- preamp: NuForce AVP-16, 7.1 analog in from Oppo
- Digital Xover: Xilica 4080
- Amps: VTL TT-25s on the bass and First Watt SIT2 on the tweets
- cable - whatever cheap interconnects I have lying around or what came with the equipment, spkr wire - zip cord.
-
On 11/17/2018 at 11:11 PM, wvu80 said:
I'm really dating myself right now. I love the new digital stuff where the hiss can be electronically removed.
No, I'm going back to the last century in the days of the old cassette decks that had tape hiss. Dolby was new then and took out the hiss at low volume. When I listened with Dolby enabled the hiss was gone but so was the dynamics, the HF that made music sound good. With Dolby disabled there was more hiss but a better high end sound.
The point I'm making is I like a more live! sound and I didn't hear the hiss when the volume was cranked.
These are the good 'ol days.
I'm old enough to remember those days too. Recorded a lot of vinyl to Maxell and Fuji chrome/metal tapes with Dolby.
These are the good 'ol days indeed!
This thread may have a pause while I focus on the TADs/K402 on the Khorn bass bins. When I start on topic here again it will have morphed into the BMS 4592s/K402 on the FH-1s in the cellar/mancave/HT
-
On 11/9/2018 at 6:01 PM, wvu80 said:
I hate hiss but I have to admit when the noise floor or hiss is louder, when you get into the mid range and high end the sound is spectacular with clarity and dynamics .
Not sure why I'm only picking up on this now. This hasn't been my experience. Maybe you can expand on this wvu80. The only thing that comes to mind is that when the noise floor or hiss is louder you may be have it "cranked up" and so the sound is spectacular for that reason...
I set aside the Xilica 8080 for now and am just using the (so far) quieter 4080 in the living room. Trying different changes in gain structure including using amps with volume controls I can't say I heard any advantage to having the amps turned down and the AVP up higher so that the Xilica input and output signal indicator lights came on. Different settings didn't seem to make much difference in the noise floor, even increasing the Xilica's own input and output gains. I did find out that once I had the Xilica signal lights and software meters dancing it didn't take much more input to hit the red lamps.
-
23 hours ago, Delicious2 said:
Update: Tired of the overstuffed living room, I pulled the K402/BMS off of the Khorn bass bins and put the K402/TAD combo with stands instead, angling them down at the "2" mark on the stands. I carried the K402/BMS down the cellar stairs to the home theater and the Peaveys will follow (carefully). I reprogrammed the Xilica 4080 so the 2 in 4 out arrangement has Chris' latest settings for the TADs on top of his latest settings for the Khorn bass bin. It sounds good but not quite right (a bit sibilant for example). Not as good as the BMS/Khorn combo but probably needs some more of Chris' magic applied for this specific new combo. Will measure soon.
I sent Chris REW measurement files of the K402/TAD/Khorn blend both Xilica settings that combined previous PEQs for those drivers and zeroed out settings. He got back to me with an initial Xilica settings file to try. It's a lot of fun plugging in Chris' new settings file on the fly while a song is playing when sitting with the laptop at the LP and hearing the transformation almost instantly! Now if I can just leave work and get home and try it...
-
1
-
-
On a side note I had a chance for a brief audition of a very different more mainline audiophile and much more expensive system. I visited a local guy last night with a system based around Magico Q5s with the big CAT monoblock tubes and dArtzeel preamp. Not sure what he was using for digital sources but I got to hear a cut I'm very familiar with - Steven Wilson's opening from PT's Stupid Dream "Even Less" - very dynamic, well recorded prog rock.
Initial impression was that there was more high frequency energy than I was used to. I quickly got accustomed to that. There was great detail and a sense of being able to hear into the mix. I immediately missed that dynamic/immediate feeling of the K402 - for lack of a better word "live" sound. The Magicos in a less than optimal room seemed focused, perhaps "polite" with excellent timbre/tonality. The owner volunteered that he wasn't getting the room pressurizing/vibrating bass that this music calls for in this open space with few enclosing walls.
-
Update: Tired of the overstuffed living room, I pulled the K402/BMS off of the Khorn bass bins and put the K402/TAD combo with stands instead, angling them down at the "2" mark on the stands. I carried the K402/BMS down the cellar stairs to the home theater and the Peaveys will follow (carefully). I reprogrammed the Xilica 4080 so the 2 in 4 out arrangement has Chris' latest settings for the TADs on top of his latest settings for the Khorn bass bin. It sounds good but not quite right (a bit sibilant for example). Not as good as the BMS/Khorn combo but probably needs some more of Chris' magic applied for this specific new blend Will measure soon.
-
On 11/12/2018 at 12:09 PM, babadono said:
The Xilica is a full 24 bit A/D and D/A processor. It does not truncate bit depth dependent on level. 0dbFS on them is +20 dBu. Remember these are made mostly for live sound speaker management where signals are very dynamic. In my home setup I still like to add input and output gain to mine to utilize more of their dynamic range. And make the meters dance a little
Thanks babadono. If I understand you correctly, the Xilica doesn't truncate bit depth (dropping the LSB) at low input levels so at least in terms of having full digital resolution it shouldn't matter if input averages 1 dBu or 10 dBu as long as it doesn't overload. That of course doesn't answer the question of whether it sounds best or quietest in a certain range. I was reading elsewhere that we should have gain control over each channel at the amp itself for proper gain matching/low noise with these active setups. I don't have that now with most of my amp channels, but, could use 4 channels of questionable fidelity that do have volume/gain control to experiment. Psychologically I guess I would like it if the meters "danced" 😃
-
thanks Chris I'll try that. Still wondering though, is the Xilica like some other A/D devices where too low of an input level truncates some bit depth (and decreases fidelity?). What if we put a line level(s) into the Xilicas and controlled the volume afterward before the amps? Perhaps I just don't understand how they work.
-
I swapped 8080 to low watt amps then 4080 reconfigured from tr-amp to bi-amp output also to low watt amps looking for the quietest config. Nothing conclusive yet. Is there an ideal input level for the Xilicas? and why does my 4080 light up its level indicator green lights at loud levels but the 8080 doesn't from the same input even louder?
-
jumpering the Phoenix side from ground to minus seemed to help and Chris' tuning definitely helped but I'm not satisfied yet. If I swap out the amps and swap with the non-phoenix Xilica - the 4080 - I should narrow it down to the most noisy part. I'd like it to be at least as quiet as my K402/BMS/Khorn blend which isn't silent but is much quieter.
-
On the noise front, I've switched, outlets, cables and even amps to try to quiet things down. I think it's mostly my older SS marantz monoblocks. These big horns and sensitive CDs magnify everything. Interestingly, after 2 rounds of ChrisA's tuning of the Xilica based on REW sweep measurement files I sent him it seems much quieter.
Chris' work has dialed in the K402/TAD such that I'm now starting to hear what folks rave about. We're working on getting the voicing of the new blend more in line with my recent K402 BMS 4592 Khorn blend. The Peavey FH-1 doesn't seem to be right yet as the whole effect is bass shy.
-
Had a few hours last night for setup. A new Xilica 8080 got hooked up with RCA to bare-wire connections for 2 inputs and 4 outputs. I just hooked the bare wires to the + and ground on the Phoenix blocks. Amps are some old Marantz SS monoblocks (MA500 and MA700s) I've had forever. It worked with some mods in software to the previously saved config file for the K402, BMS 4592 and Khorn bass bin blend, but, it was very noisy. I saw on a youtube video that I should jumper the ground to - connection on each input/output on the Phoenix block. Would that quiet things down? The Xilica connections with a 4080 and XLR to RCA adapters is very quiet.
-
Initial quick and dirty setup of this blend with the amps and settings on the Xilica for the BMS driver and the Khorn bass bin got me thinking I like the speakers closer together and more at ear level.
I’ll be measuring soon however since settings made for one blend and used on another sound like shiite 😝 especially the bass
-
1
-
-
23 hours ago, ClaudeJ1 said:
Just to set the record as straight as I know how. What makes a speaker a "JUBE" is the bass bin and NOT the K-402. This, in accordance with first hand listening to Roy Delgado, Klipsch Chief Engineer who designed both the Jubilee Bass bin AND the K-402. So a JubeScala and a JubeKhorn, are both seemingly popular misnomers that have been propagated to near myth levels on this forum.
Thanks for this clarification ClaudeJ1. I think I'll stop using those names just out of respect for the designer.
-
1
-
-
Thanks mikebse2a3. I located some set screws at a local hardware store.
Thanks babadono. That explains it. 😀
-
3 minutes ago, babadono said:
@Delicious2 When i changed out the K-691 for Tads on my Jubs the head of the machine screw ended up on the Tad flange and the nuts and washers are on the K402 horn. And it is a tight fit. I can't remember how the 691s were mounted. Probably the same way otherwise I would not have thought to do it that way.
Thanks babadono. My TAD "snout" flange is threaded and has a stop on the driver side so I can only screw in a bolt or stud from the horn side and anything screwed in from that side will only go so far - flush with the flange. So, I'm not really picturing what you're describing where the head of a machine screw would be on the TAD flange side as nothing could be put through that hole unless it were very much smaller in diameter than the 1/4" threads. My 691s were mounted with studs sticking out and washers/nuts on the horn side.
Local HD/Lowes hardware stores don't seem to stock threaded studs of various sizes, just threaded rod of 6" or more. Maybe they'll cut it down to 1.25" studs for me. Problem with that is the cuts may not be clean for threading. Tap and die set anyone?
-
thanks Chris. Do you happen to know what length studs?
-
Not sure how to proceed with attaching the TADs to the K402/stand. 1" allen bolts work fine with washer and lock washer for 2 of the 4 attachment holes but positioning of the other 2 holes on the flange relative to the horn flare is tighter and 1" won't fit. Maybe just use a shorter bolt with no washers? Should I be reversing this and looking for (or fabricating) threaded posts to fit the adapter and have washer, lock washer and nut on the horn side?
-
Once those FH1s go down the cellar stairs I won't be able to bring them back up alone so I'll enjoy comparing them to the JubeKhorns in the living room first 😋. I'm wanting to hear not only how the FH1s are different, but of course BMS vs TADs and driver at ear level vs higher. Oh, and what happens to the soundstage in this room with the speakers a lot closer together.
-
1
-
-
Whoever resealed this hatch last reversed it so who knows how long it played not sealed properly. Both drivers seem to check out with low to moderate volume sweeps thankfully.
-
thanks Chris. So, don't try to do anything with the hatch off? Re-seal the unit and run an REW sweep (pretty loud) recorded at 1m on the floor, mic about mid height of speaker tilted up at 45 degrees? and send that to you? Listen for obvious buzzes and rattles.
Eye Opening Experience
in 2-Channel Home Audio
Posted
Thanks for expanding on the macro variables idea Chris. Your detailed answer grounded in measurement and experience helps me realize both how far I've come in recent months and some areas ( "Absorbing nearfield acoustic reflections close to the loudspeakers and listening positions") where I could do better.
I'm already starting to experience that relaxation of audiophilia nervosa - digging into my music collection as never before!
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=audiophilia nervosa
I'd like to have that eye opening/ear opening experience of the OP with a megadollar system I couldn't possibly afford just as a point of reference. At the moment I'm really enjoying my recent break-through into a new dimension.