Jump to content

Emjay

Regulars
  • Posts

    39
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Emjay

  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?"
  16. Hi again First off, apologies if this, too, has already been covered. I did a quick search and didn't see anything on the first 3 pages... Do any of you have any experience measuring the frequency response of your setup? Preferably something that doesn't cost $x,000s as this is purely idle curiosity I downloaded 2 (free) aps from the Google Play store which purport to offer such measurements, but there's no way in the world that they're accurate. First of all, I'm sure the mic on a mobile phone isn't calibrated all that carefully for the full frequency range, given that it's primary job is to capture the human voice in spoken conversation. Secondly, just look at the screen-caps I got from them - there's no way in the world that my RF-83s (with no sub) are producing single-digit frequencies while playing "MTV Dance" channel on cable (Dolby Digital encoding). Alright, so my (carpeted) floor is chip-board, so may provide some resonance (and may be why I have entirely done away with a sub), but there's still no way these are right I got a second opinion, so to speak, from another ap which actually allows a 'pinch-to-zoom' which changes the scale the graph is shown in, but, if anything, it's even worse! So, can anyone suggest something which is relatively cost-effective? I really don't want to spend all that much, so it may well be that my curiosity will have to go unsatisfied (i.e. I really don't even want to spend 3 figures, let alone 4!) These are the screen-caps from the aps: [attachment=97471:Screenshot_2014-10-18-13-11-19.png][attachment=97472:Screenshot_2014-10-18-13-12-16.png][attachment=97473:Screenshot_2014-10-18-13-17-50.png]
  17. Look, I'll try being a little more conciliatory - maybe it's just a difference in phraseology? Saying the format was rejected implies, at least in my reading, a willful act. My point is that I, personally, never rejected SACD, it's that it was never something within my experience to accept or reject. Now that I've fleshed-out my thoughts on the subject further, I think I should have posted this in the Home Theatre forum, not 2-channel audio, because it was the 2-channel guys who really did reject SACD, or at least the surround capabilities of the format, as being a gimmick. Not in every instance, of course; some embraced the format for 2.0 sound improvements (whether due to different mastering techniques, or inherent differences in the DSD vs PCM underneath matters little to this discussion). It would be interesting to know how many others went from being '2.0 guys' to embracing surround-sound audio off the back of SACD/DVD-A (other that tkd, above), but that's another forum post Perhaps the title should have been "Why didn't I know about SACD 10 years ago? It's great, and I'm loving surround-sound mixes of some of my favourite albums, but, being late to the party, my support won't matter to the future of the format, and many of the SACDs I want are now out-of-print, and therefore command huge prices" Gary made the point that there was little advertising of the format, and I think I have to agree with that - that might even be the simple answer to the question that I'm actually asking (although I like to think I'm somewhat immune to marketing, I'm probably having myself on). Being someone who invested is 4/5.1 nearly 20 years ago, and knowing several other people who did the same, primarily for movies (in my case also PC gaming), and being a music fan, and knowing those others are also the same, we are a prime demographic to have been brought into the SACD fold. "Come for the surround-sound, stay for the improved sonics" Instead, none of us ever had SACD on our radars. Not a one of us actually rejected SACD - I've spoken to several people since I posted the initial question to confirm - it's that SACD was simply never brought to our attention. The most active verb you could ascribe to our interaction with SACD is "ignore", but even that probably over-states our mental engagement with the format. ("Ignorance" might be more accurate - perhaps using any verb is inappropriate, since it implies an action)
  18. (somehow managed to double-post - sorry!)
  19. Most of the potential market did not know SACDs existed, thanks to a lack of advertising. Exactly! That's the frustrating thing about someone jumping in who admits they don't actually read the full topic, and instead spout off. Some of the 2-channel guys (self-appointed 'audio purists') rejected multichannel SACD out of hand - I actually read a post on another forum stating "I only want to hear the stereo mix that the artist intended" - completely ignoring the fact that mark Knopfler was integral to the 5.1 mix of Brothers in Arms, or that quadraphonic albums were being made in the 70s, with experimenting since the 50s, and, laughably, overlooking the fact that, unless their devotion to purity kicked in during the mono years, they, too, are actually listening to multi channels. But no one I know 'rejected' SACD - it was just never on our radars to begin with.
  20. I can tell you what they cost me in February 2010: That's from Edge Digital in QLD. So that's $16,000 for the pair? Not as bad as I expected!
  21. Because two great channels sound better than 4/5/7 good ones. Doesn't make any sense in the context of what I'm saying
  22. I hope some of you guys from the US see this - it's actually a really good price, when you consider that they sell for AUD$28,000/pr (or did, last time I checked) For a long time, we only had 1 authorised distributor in Australia for any Klipsch above the Synergy line (which were sold at Harvey Norman, our equivalent of your Best Buy), and that was their asking price a few years back. It seems that the exclusive arrangement has now lapsed, thankfully, but I haven't found anywhere listing a retail price for these in Aus. http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Klipschorn-AK4/331346685082 I'd hate to think what Jubs would cost, here (if I ever win lotto, I intend to find out!)
  23. I don't know what went wrong previously, but it's working now. However, it appears that it will not play FLAC or MKV files, so is of little practical use OK it turns out that my 5 year old NAS doesn't serve FLAC via UPnP, which is why it doesn't show on the 751 D'oh!
  24. It's interesting that you should say that, because my experience is the opposite, and a big part of what prompted me to post this question in the first place. I know this is straying from the "2-Channel" forum that I posted in, but the majority of guys I know who have investigated in surround-sound for movies are also music fans. Not that I know anyone who has built a dedicated theatre room, but people I know who have invested in 5.1 also appreciate music In my case, my initial Klipsch investment was Quintets, then Synergy F3/C3/S2, again for HT. One of the things that prompted me to upgrade to the Reference line was that I was not satisfied with the F3s for music. Having said all that, I really enjoyed multi-channel SACD despite only having Synergies, and I wonder why the people I know (myself included) who invested in HT never got the multi-channel SACD bug. This seems like a failure in promotion of the format.
  25. Hi I know that there's at least 1 other user of the CA 751 on here, so I thought I'd pose this question, without really expecting to get a solution I have a NAS with GBs of music, mostly FLAC, but also MP3, DTS/WAV files and others I have a media player (a DXtreme DX-480) which I have been using to play media over the LAN, but it seems to have developed some issues playing music The 751BD has WiFi/Ethernet support, and I can access YouTube (proving network connectivity) but I cannot get it to find either my NAS or my PC, both with Upnp support Is anyone currently using their CA to play music over the LAN? Any tips or tricks you can share? My manual states that this is an experimental feature, but I logged a support request through the Cambridge Audio website, and they confirmed that the feature should work, but (understandably) can't support all combinations and permutations. Thanks for any advice, and apologies if this isn't appropriate for this forum
×
×
  • Create New...