bracurrie

Should I use my AVA solid state amp or my Manley Labs tube amp for my Jubilee clones, then using the other for my 25Hz tapped horn subs? Current system: Computer digital front end using Pure Music active crossover driving a two way system. Manley GY50 Stereo 100 http://www.manley.com/mds.php driving Faital HF200 drivers attached to Eliptrac 400 horns. Audio by Van Alstine Synergy 240 http://www.avahifi.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=158&Itemid=209 driving Jubilee clones with Crites drivers. Current problems: The Manley is too noisy for the super efficient tweeter horns. All grounding has been confirmed and impedance mismatch has been eliminated as a possible cause. I now have some classical recordings in high resolution digital with 30db from the quietest parts to the loudest cresendo so a dead quiet amp would be desirable for the tweeter horns. As good as the Jubilee is for bass, it rolls off at 38Hz and I would like to go lower. Changes: I am going to try a three way system. I have committed to buy an ampsandsound.com Stereo 15 amp from Justin Weber. He and I talked on the phone at length and given my preference for rock, blues, pop, classical and jazz, he believed the push pull 15 watt tube amp would be a good match. If its as dead quiet as he claims (no real reason to doubt him) It will take the place of the Manley. I have also purchased two complete kits to build a pair of the 25Hz tapped horns https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/138019-25hz-tapped-horn/ . I want to try and go three way with the tapped horns as subs and thus my need to decide the following: Question: Do I use the Manley or the AVA for the tapped horns and the other for the Jubilee clones?

It so tainted what managers and record companies wanted to achieve that many a great band and music never saw distribution and discovery. How many other great sounding and entertaining bands that could have been will never be known. That is why I am a fan of "Little Steven's Underground Garage" on satellite radio. It features samples of bands and music I never knew existed. That and Seti's blog posts on some interesting bands keeps my backlog of new material to listen to quite high. Brad

Thanks to those who answered my question. I guess that why they call them compression drivers. Brad

Dummy question? Please explain in detail what unloading is. I can't be the only non engineer to wonder.

I have used REW with much frustration due to my ignorance of the principles involved. However I have learned a great deal and now feel that REW has given me the ability to integrate successfully a sub that takes over where the Jub clones leave off. I have some first reflection treatments on the outside and rugs along the floor. Plus I have some mid range panels around the room in a very unscientific arrangement that serve only to reduce the liveliness of the room. The low frequency magic of using REW is easy to use for me. Its even helped me with my active crossover setup. Where I feel inadequate is working with REW and treatments to address 1000 Hz and higher. Trying to find the best position from the front wall, where the fewest deadspots were, I ended up in a nearfield listening position that has also led to really good imaging. BTW Canyonman, that is a fine looking room.

Why does the reviewer cite a lack of clarity? Does it have something to do with the nature of a three way? Or is it purely subjective with a bias to protect other opinions? Other than that, a great review. Thanks for posting.

Indeed, I am sure had a good time. How did they sound?

Maybe try Faital HF200 drivers. No beam at all on the 400s.

Dave, Oh. I get it. My ignorance showing though. Thoughts on what would go well for the tweeter?

Dave, Was just curious, sorry if this is a dumn question, but why that driver? Why not go for a driver than goes higher? Say the Faital JF200. Its impressed me from midrange on up on your Eliprac 400 a lot.

So, what driver are you going to test with? Brad

No, but was considering it. Given the computing power available I thought it intriguing. I am not an audio engineer so the viability of this concept is difficult for me to evaluate. I did talk to Rob at Channel D software, makers of Pure Music, and he played with one of these processors. His conclusion was that the effect was real but had created a very small sweet spot to listen in. After a while he abandoned it as effective but impractical. I will not pursue this further for now. Thanks for the reply Mike. Brad

Here we go again. Who wants to hold his arms back so I can get a clear shot? Dean...this Fact Sheet was to help anyone that has an interest in the K402 and wants reliable information from the designer. I suggest we all try not to feed into the non-sense. mike tn Mike, I was thinking that wouldn't it be nice if there was a sticky thread or locked thread that would only have the Jubilee interview and specs on it. This could substitute for the lack of advertising info and spec sheet for the "home" version of the Jubilee. It would be a valuable (and easy to find) source of info for those wanting to drink the kool aid. I am not sure what should go into it. Certainly the above interview and specs for the K-510 and K-402 versions, dimensions, and crossover setup. By keeping the thread locked, then all the nonsense and contentiousness could be eliminated. I am thinking about what unfortunately happened when a fact sheet was posted for the bass bin and all heck broke loose with a flood of misinformation. What are your thoughts and do you think the moderators might allow this. Yes indeed. On this I whole heartily agree. Makes it easier for those just starting the discovery process.

I have been reading a lot lately about time and phase correction in active digital crossovers. With the ability to process data with the modern high powered MAC or PC there are some interesting things that can be done with drivers to improve coherence and sound stage. For example I submit the following paper from 2006: http://files.computeraudiophile.com/2013/1202/XOWhitePaper.pdf Thoughts? Its out of my comfort zone. I thought jubilees and K402 would solve it all.

That information means that maybe there is something there that may affect what I can hear IF I can reproduce it. Thanks for question and I apologize if I am not getting it. Brad

Claude, Thanks for the lengthy reply. Good stuff. Would you do me the favor of making a recommendation. I am using a computer sound card to drive an active crossover bi amped setup that can easily go to tri or quad. I am using a tube amp for the high end and a new Audio by Van Alstine solid state for the low end. Assuming I go the pair of Danley DST-10 route for subs what amplification recommendation would you make to drive them. Brad

I don't know exactly what you mean. If CD's go to 4 Hz. and modern amplifiers are DC coupled, then they are not the limiting factor. The Danley DTS-10 is approx. a 24-foot long tapped bass horn, so it's 1/4 wave represents 11.72 Hz. Besides you can simply use a sine wave sweep from 10 Hz. on up and plot the response using a $50 Behringer microphone with any number of outboard phantom supply/digital I/O device with USB connection on a laptop. REW software is free, as is Audacity. Tested mine against a $2,000 calibrated microphone and it was only 1/4 db off at 19 Khz. which I can't hear anyhow. Hope this answers your question. Well in a way. But then why does a DC coupled amp inherently have the ability to go that low. Seems most of the equipment I remember reading about always seem to use 20Hz as the low end. Then there are pre-amps and in my case sound cards (because I am computer driven all digital). Seems the modern A/V amps rely on the subwoofer amp in most setups. Things were simpler when my source material was limited but with high res digital I am now embarking on options to go lower and higher. Brad

Well from my original post in this thread I mentioned that my computer based music processor uses an EQ plugin that reports content higher than 20k in some of my music files.

Don't you have to be careful to have equipment in the chain capable of processing sound down to that level? If so what specs do you look for?

I know that there is some ambiguity about the value of reproducing music sound beyond 20k. However, as a hobbyist not an audiophile, I am intrigued by the possibility it may enhance the sound of acoustic instruments recorded and distributed in digital high def formats. I am using an Eliptrac 400 horn with Faital HF 200 drivers. The speakers are placed in the corners of the room and I am very happy low end response of the Jubilee clone bass bins. What suggestions would forum members make on adding a third driver/speaker element to add the supersonic 20k+ sound? Also What amp would you use to drive the third element? I am using computer based active crossover so I would then be tri-amping. Thanks Brad BTW I like this new forum platform, it just takes a little getting used to.

Jeez, the bandwidth of those treadmills and the transient response of those footfalls are stunning. Funny as all get out. Thanks for sharing.

Indeed. Right now I finally get that DSD is as good as it can get. As good as reel to reel tape or better.

I found this article instructive. It may have been shared already, but I thought it was good enough to share again. http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue59/dsd.htm

I would offer that it would be best served through a downloaded format. Most of us have good internet connections and the DSD DXD formats seem to be as good as studio master quality. Why not trade down a little and double the channels?

I do not consider reading your material a waste of time. As with a good many of the members here, your knowledge and experiance is facinating to an amatuer like myself. It is not a waste of time to read and discover something you may not have considered or understood. Besides I choose to read the blog entry and found that I wanted to re read it just so I could retain the concepts. In my opinion, listening to music reproduction systems that try to faithfully put you in front of the performers again can be attempted in two basic ways. The first way is to throw gobs of money at it. I was floored, when after getting back into hi-fi after a 25 year hiatus, that people spend upwards of $100,000 for sound systems. I took that challenge and have done pretty well for a small fraction of that. The second way, that is much more in keeping with the old hi-fi tradition, is to learn, experiment and trade equipment until you find your sweet spot. But then you must in my way of thinking focus on the source material. Garbage in garbage out. Now I tried quad way back in the middle seventies. I even found a recording or two that seemed to benefit from a well setup quad system, but 95% of the bands and music I listened to then didn't care to make the most of quad. So I abandoned it. Now that I have for the last three years been getting back into hi-fi its been exclusively 2 channel or even 3 channel and I feel now that improvements will come only at the margins. But after reading your blog entry I again believe that a true surround system will be a glorious achievement. After listening to the Klipsch tapes I get the simple path for mixing and mastering. Less is more. But where is the source material going to come from?