Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Emjay last won the day on February 28

Emjay had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Sydney, Australia
  • My System
    RC-52 (let me know if you come across/want to off-load an RC-64!)
    Sony KDL70W-85B TV
    Cambridge Audio Azur 751BD
    Bada Purer 3.0 hybrid tube/SS amp
    Marantz SR-6003

Emjay's Achievements


Member (2/9)



  1. He's going to get an electrician in to test the mains power supply If one of you has a Radio Shack (or other) SPL meter, put that "constant wall of sound" on and measure the SPL at the Main Listening Position. Then Google OSHA standards for hearing safety. With music with variation -- like you like -- occasional, brief big peaks, even as high as 115 dB are probably O.K. (with meter at "C" "Fast"). See what OSHA says about constant loud sound ... I think that even 80 dB may be pushing it Yeah, I've got one, we'll test this over the weekend 3 different pairs of speakers, so I doubt this is it
  2. I actually enjoyed his article right up to the little spiel at the end, where he tries to claim his copyright on the article especially prevents you from printing the page for personal use(!!) and that you have to pay $5 for the privilege. This couldn't be more wrong - I understand that he wants to make a living from blogging, but that's no reason to mis-represent copyright law. If there was any way he could possibly know whether you print the page, I would print multiple copies just to prove the point
  3. I am a ignorant. What losses are you referring to. The ones intentionally introduced by the person running the desk? I mean 24bit/96kHz LCPM is pretty lossless isn't it? Or are you talking about an analog desk? I watched an entire documentary on the Sound City (Los Angeles area) that almost entirely focused on an analog console: meaning..."it has it's own sound". They were quite proud of that console. Why? The answer to that rhetorical question is the answer to your question. Why not use a digital mixer? Because it doesn't "...sound like they want it to sound...". For me, I'd prefer adding as little as possible to the master recording in order to preserve the notion of "hi-fi". YMMV. Chris, So you are alluding to taking the digital master, converting to analog, mixing on an analog desk(cuz that's what we got or we like the "sound" of this desk or whatever reason one may have) then reconverting back to digital. Yep there is going to be losses or coloration of the sound. Eric Isn't this what people like about tube amps? The colouration ("warmth") that they add to the sound?
  4. No - and I have no idea how to do that. any advice?
  5. If I had $10k, I would've snapped them up. One day...
  6. This issue has been apparent across 3 different pairs of speakers in stereo mode (2x pair of RB-41s and 1x pair of RB-61s) Speaker wire has been fully replaced 1 x Marantz slim-line AVR, 1 x Denon AVR, 1 x NAD dedicated power amp all trip protection Initially, he was using PS3 as CD player. We read some forums that the PS3 outputs 5.1 via HDMI at all times (3.1 of silence when playing CD) so, thinking this might be putting unnecessary load on the AVR, he purchased a used Cambridge Audio 650BD. HDMI lead has been replaced None of this has resolved the issue
  7. The real issue at hand is - should you be able to run an AVR or power amplifier > 75% for extended periods of time while listening to music I'm not a fan of the sort of music he likes - he tends to like punk and metal and other music where there's a constant wall of sound, Personally I like music that has quieter moments leading to a crescendo I am able to watch the Eagles Farewell I blu ray with my Marantz AVR at 0 for 2 1/2 hours without issue, but this has more peaks and troughs than his preferred music, so probably doesn't require the same sort of constant power output On another front - RB-61 is rated at 95dB/1 watt/1 metre RF-52 is actually the same Both have power handling of 100w continuous Am I right, then, in my understanding that it works like: Watts SPL 1 95 2 98 4 101 8 104 16 107 32 110 64 113 128 116 And that the apparent volume drops by 6dB with each doubling of distance? Distance Apparent SPL 1 116 2 110 4 104 8 98
  8. Copy protection is often mentioned as a negative against SACD I wonder, though, whether, given that 15 years ago, the capability of MP3 encoders was low, the 'copiers' are in the same demographic as the potential SACD market? The early cost of players is something I'd completely over-looked. I'm not sure that I would have spent $800-$1,000 10-ish years ago on an SACD player You say this as though the multi-channel surround-sound is achieved by hitting the "Dolby Music PLII" button and burning the result to a disc. That's not been my experience. The surround-sound is achieved in the studio through careful placement of various instruments, vocals, sounds in various channels, blending and mixing to achieve a cohesive whole. Just for the record, the last thing I'd want on my surround-sound SACDs is chit-chat and the ***** of glasses in the rear channels Ah, I see a difference in several of our listening expectations. Although I sit looking forward when I am enjoying SACD/DVD-As I don't always imagine a band playing in front of me but instead what was going on in the artist mind...A perfect example of this is the Talking Heads disks in DVD-A where the majority of the instruments/vocals are coming from the front but the surround channels get filled with interesting sounds/vocals that add to the experience--Sort of like a Pink Floyd concert. I also like REM DVD-As in this regard where it's usually a subliminal vocal coming from the sides or rear. I also have a "9.2" setup in a small room (library with books being natural room treatment) and on the disks mentioned above as well as concerts instead of reflected sound coming from 2 speakers the surrounds and rears also play more of the 'natural' sound I would hear coming from music sources that are still trying to make the allusion that you are experiencing something coming from the front soundstage with natural reverberations that a live venue represents. The reason I don't listen to much 2 channel material anymore is because I don't get the same effect as I do with multichannel music. I also don't separate out what is DVD-A, SACD, or even DTS surround that doesn't have video accompanying it--That said, I initially watched a lot of concerts on DVD before I discovered the other above media...Now with Blu ray, I have started watching those again but hardly ever CDs. Fwiw, I saw it postulated that those people who experienced hallucinogens in their experimental years probably appreciate Multichannel music more than those that didn't--Dunno. Just a theory. {EDIT: I also don't listen to much Jazz (Steely Dan/Donald Fagan is the closest and I love those) or any Classical (tried to when I first got into SACD but couldn't dig it) and see that there are a lot of those titles in this format--Those listeners may appreciate these formats for a different reason than I stated above.} One of the things that I enjoy in my listening experience, at times, is to listen to (focus on) different parts of the piece. Sometimes I let the whole wash over me, but sometimes I'll focus on the bass line, or the percussion, or some other part. This is one of the reasons I like 'layered' music, like orchestral, or Pink Floyd, and not so much pop music, with it's synth drum beats and 1 or 2 other (perhaps synth) instruments. SACD multi-channel mixes make this listening mode a much more enjoyable experience, as well. I do, though, listen to the 2-channel SACDs at times, as well, depends what listening I feel like doing I won't comment on the 'history of hallucinogens' theory
  9. I thought I'd included everything above, but forgot to mention - he's running a sub (Klipsch SW10), with the Audyssey-set xover @ 60Hz Previously, when using the RB-41s, Audyssey set the xover @ 80Hz I did mention: X4000 is rated @ 125wpc (2-channel driven) All speaker wire has now been replaced with 13 gauge wire Also, for completeness, the NAD is rated to 150wpc and, according to the stereophile measurements, delivers this easily (http://www.stereophile.com/content/nad-c-372-integrated-amplifier-specifications)
  10. I'm pretty sure we can rule out wiring, now Do you really think the answer is more power?
  11. Because he can (except he can't!) He wants to be able to listen to the music from outside. I tried telling him to get some out-door speakers on zone-2, in this case, but...
  12. First up, apologies, this is going to be a long post! I have a friend (no, really, this isn't me too embarrassed to admit it!) who has recently stepped up from a Logitech 5.1 speaker setup to Klipsch (on my recommendation) He purchased 4x RB-41s and an RC-52 from ebay, and was using the 5-channel stereo mode when listening to music. I gave him an old Marantz slim-line receiver which only output 50 watts into 8ohm, which he was continually sending into protection mode once the volume was around 0dB (max volume being +18). Growing frustrated with the continual protection mode, he purchased a brand new Denon X4000 AVR (rated at 125>>8) which also goes into protection mode I told him that, in my experience, protection mode is often caused due to a short somewhere. We both checked/double-checked that there were no shorts at either end; some of his speaker wire had, over the years, been roughed up, so he ended up replacing all wiring with brand new 13guage wire. Still tripping protection. I don't believe it's thermal, because I checked the Denon support site, and it stated that, if the AVR shuts down due to over-heating, the amp will cut out until the temperature drops, then come back on. This never happened, even leaving it for 30 minutes. I've told him that little book-shelf speakers cannot and will not fill the entire neighbourhood with sound; his position is that he should be able to run the amp around 0dB for extended periods without issue. He read an article claiming that bookshelf speakers + sub can be as effective as floor-standers, so wouldn't listen to this argument. I convinced him to try just 2-channel stereo mode, rather than the 5-channel mode, but this made no real difference. I also lent him a pair of RB-61s which I wasn't using, which seems to have won him over to my 'bigger is better' philosophy - he currently has a pair of RF-52s in transit. In the mean-time, I came across a number of forum posts wherein the point was repeatedly made that you cannot run an AVR at or above 0dB for any length of time; when I pointed this out to him, he decided to buy a dedicated power amp for the front 2. Fast-forward to today, and he purchased a NAD C372 from ebay (one that I'd had my eye on, as well!) and, while acknowledging that he is getting more volume than before, he remains displeased, because now the NAD is tripping it's protection circuit when he cranks the volume. I'm fresh out of ideas for him (other than the 1 I keep returning to - that he can't expect to fill the entire suburb with concert-level sound!). He's now upgraded from PS3 to Cambridge Audio 650BD for CD play-back, replaced all the HDMI/RCA leads, speaker wire, speakers (he's still using my RB-61s until his RF-52s arrive), AVR and is using a dedicated power amp (pre-outs from the Denon), and still tripping protection mode. He is convinced that he should be able to run the amp(s) at volume "without worrying about it cutting out". He's considering buying some sort of power conditioner to see if it's a power issue from the mains; I told him I'd post here to see if anyone has any other ideas. So, thanks if you've made it all the way through this - do you have any other suggestions?
  13. hmmmm.... I fear that this way madness lies! Let's say I'm leaping around the front yard with my speaker buried in a hole(?), and I use REW to produce a 200Hz test tone which is not measured at 200Hz. Is it: a) The microphone? The speaker? c) The speaker wire? d) The amplifier? e) The DAC? f) The transport? g) The PC? h) Any combination of any of the above? It might be best not to start down this slippery-slope!
  14. I think there is a perception problem with "the 2 channel guys" both of themselves and also as they are perceived by the rest of the audiophile community. The "2 channel guys" arose as a group following the quad debacle of the 70s. Of course, many of them today weren't around for that. What they really are is QUALITY oriented not only in the specs but in the experience. While the quality of surround mixes has improved greatly, for many of us they still remain contrived, phased, multiplexed, processed, steered...one or more. Engineers have failed to produce a "Mercury Living Presence" microphone plan to deliver the purity "2 channel guys" expect. It is not hard to do naturally if one simply places the microphones such that they emulate the 360 degree soundfield we hear, but for whatever reason they seem to want to try to produce it the hard way. "2 channel guys" are perfectionists are not luddites. I don't think you'd find a single one who would prefer having concert seat with a semi-circular backpiece of sound absorptive material to reproduce that "real stereo experience" whether it was a rock, jazz, symphony, or whatever concert. Dave This is an interesting point. The other evening I went to see a performance of Vivaldi's Four Seasons, performed by the Sydney Symphony Orchestra. One of the things which struck me, (aside from the rude couple beside me, who, after turning up 20 minutes late, basically talked ALL the way through the performance! ), was the fact that the sound envelopes you in such a venue. Turning my head back and forth made no difference to the localisation (or lack thereof) of the sound. I had cheap seats in the back row off to the side (almost over the orchestra), yet the sound simply came from everywhere and nowhere. That's something that I almost never experience at home, though multi-channel SACD comes closest (certainly closer than 2-channel anything delivers)
  15. Thanks for the info on REW, it looks pretty comprehensive, and the price is right What about the mic, though? I would think that a fairly professional (read: expensive) microphone would be needed to accurately capture the full audio range? Actually, having RTFM, it appears that this is actually designed to measure the accuracy of reproduction of the frequency? My curiosity was more along the lines of "what frequencies are currently being reproduced?"
  • Create New...