Jump to content

ATLAudio

Regulars
  • Posts

    89
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ATLAudio

  1. If it truly made a difference, then I'd suggest tossing the monster cable surge protector in the trash as there's something wrong with it, and it's a potential fire hazard. Again, I wouldn't use it for the toaster in my hunting cabin if it was possible for it to do something that interfered with the sonic performance of any of your gear. Especially a DAC which needs such a modest DC load compared to an amp for instance. The price on that Furman seems fine. Get your wife to help you with a blind test and see if you notice.
  2. I'll try and unpack this suitcase... "The 3 db is only percieved as slightly louder. To double the percieved volume you need 10X the power. This is most applicable to a system running the mains as Large and no subwoofer For example a 1 kHz signal using 1 watt produces 70 db. Now add a 40 Hz signal that you want to be as loud requires 100 watts. Add a sub in the picture and XO at 80 Hz and you now need around 11 watts. See the waste in dynamic headroom running the speakers set to large." Your example speaker, while easier I guess to prove your point with, would be an incredibly awful design. 3dB can be perceived as noticeably louder which increases efficiency and reduces distortion. While using an active crossover (setting to large is Audyssey speak) to an active subwoofer is a fantastic (but in no way necessary) way to allow your main amp to be more efficient, passive bi-amping CAN bring benefit. But, not everyone has, nor wants or even needs to bring subwoofers into the mix. "Also, running speakers as Large causes more cone movement=more distortion." dafaq? Running a speaker to the point where the amp causes a clip causes distortion harmonics which are to be avoided. Do you think that the cone movement in your active subwoofer doesn't count? "This is why many of us with tube amps and Klipsch are running flea power amp of 4-20 watts." No, you do this, whether you realize it or not, so that the tube amp is closer to distortion levels and is adding distortion flavor (from the softer clipping characteristics of tubes) which you find pleasing, but is the purest definition of distortion, and inaccuracy. "I run my RF 7 II's off a 40 or 45 watt tube amp for music which is plenty loud. I also have a 200 watt power amp that I use on the speakers for HT. Less than 10 watts on the tube amp get me over 100 db with the RF 7 II's ran as Large." I'm nearly certain that your tube amp is constantly clipping and that this is likely fine, tubes being what they are. Your speakers stated specs have needs of up to 250 watts RMS, and 1000 watts peak, all which could be demanded depending on listening levels. Unused amp sections passively bi-amped would not hurt to be run to both halves of the RF-7, with or without a subwoofer, and potentially see noticeable benefit, YMMV
  3. It has the effect of increasing the gauge of the wire, but any other claims outside this scope is pure voodoo.
  4. If you're not stuck on the "LaScala on top of sub" approach, I'd strongly suggest giving the PSA S1500 a look. I have the earlier model and they have incredible tight impulse control. You'll get down to the 20s hz with a pair
  5. It's not distortion, it's a fuller sound that you'll get from a rock solid 4 ohm stable amp separate; that will also come with more power, but that's not the deal. When I put an Emo XPA 2 on my RF 62 II, it was less "OMG I need to change my pants," and more, "ok, I can see what some folks are saying." I still have the amp because I thought it was worth it. One no cost choice is to see if there's a friendly local audio store in your area that will allow a take home demo for a couple of weeks.
  6. Does anyone have Klipschorns set up in their home in the Atlanta area and would be willing to allow a stranger (me) to come over for a demo? Thanks!
  7. I think this explains it to me the best. I had not thought of how with a Khorn or LaScala, that the controlled directivity goes into the bass as well. This makes sense.
  8. I was wondering what approach absorption would work, if any. I'll have to try this. Also, how can I get klipschorns like yours?
  9. These speakers do best 2-3' from any boundary. That 50-60hz is generated by the ports so the mores space they the better behaved they will be. I want to move my speakers out another foot if I could, but the floor isn't level there. So I just rely on Audyssey.
  10. How far are they to the closest wall?
  11. “I agree that the goal of sonic perfection would be the "faithful and accurate replication of a signal from a source; music with nothing added or taken away." So how do you know that you are actually getting that? By taking measurements?” I usually review independent measurements of amplifiers prior to purchase, so yeah. “Sure, that's the way that it is done but the devices being used to measure for accuracy are electronic instruments and those electronic instruments do not behave the same way that the human ear behaves along with he corresponding interaction between the human ear and the human brain.” As you continue in my following sentence, I’m referring to a comparison of the output signal from the amp compared output signal from the source. The goal should be for it be accurate, but amplified. You can’t hear this, I’m not referring to whats heard out of the speakers “There are no instruments available to this point that can accurately simulate those organic devices. Then don't forge that all human ears hear differently, including the two on your own head. I won't even get into the differences in brains.” This sounds like something rooted in a naturalistic fallacy. If this were the case then there would be no science in sound above and below the threshold of human hearing. We have measurement devices which are far more sophisticated and sensitive than human ears. As a matter of fact; we can change a litany of sonic effects that can’t be detected in blind ABX comparisons. But holding all that aside, you only helped prove my point and expand on my question I’ve asked; how can an amp designer make a single coloration which survives speaker selection, speaker placement, room selection, and room condition. Now toss in 12 billion ears on this planet. “Overall, tubes are more accurate to me.” This is nonsensical. You can’t use “accurate” without changing its definition. If we can’t rely on a word accuracy to mean what it means, toss the whole dictionary in the garbage. If you like colorations to source material, then you are IN FACT, not seeking accuracy. Sorry. There are some tube amps which test just as accurate as solid state, so if there’s still a sonic benefit, what’s the secret sauce? “(Tubes) sound more like music to me. Yes, with solid-state I can hear the music and all the instruments, but I always can tell it is a musical reproduction. I get closer to the sound of live music with tubes. That is the type of accuracy I'm interested in.” Accuracy is an either it’s there or it’s not. If the artist wanted you to hear some colorations which you insist are apparent with your tube amp present, he could have added them, and I’d hear them in my SS; that’s accuracy. Again, what secret sauce in tube amps which does this universally, and with consistency past speaker selection, speaker placement, room selection, and room condition.
  12. “So, if I understand your point correctly, you are saying that it is not possible to make a blanket recommendation for tube amps in all systems. I totally agree with you.” However, this is routinely given by tube enthusiasts “There has to be the proper synergy between any amp and the system in which it is used, and that applies to SS equipment as well.” Please explain to me, scientifically, the synergies which at least routinely line up that provide benefit for a tube amplifier vs a solid state. I disagree that this applies to solid state equipment that is equally well made, and matched for frequency response, power output, and ohm stability. “Being the Klipsch forum, however, the assumption is usually that a person is going to use a tube amp with Klipsch speakers. And that's where the universal recommendation can be made in my opinion.” There are 100’s of Klipsch speakers, all with their own characteristics, you simply can’t do this with any sort of scientific reliability. I also disagree that your universal recommendation can be made with specific models. You’re forgetting speaker placement, room selection, and room condition, all of which can’t possibly predicted by an amp designer for consistent benefit. “I have never heard a Heritage Series speaker (and various Reference Series speakers) which sounds poorly with tube amplification (unless the amplifier is a disaster- there are many examples of SS amps in this category as well). To my ears it's the opposite. But, that said, auditioning an amp in each system is imperative and that's why I try to restrict my activities to the local area. Here, I can try various amps to allow a person to select what they consider is the best sound.” I’m equally certain too, because I’ve heard them before that there are tube amps that sound fantastic. If an MC275 fell in my lap today, I’d be gone for the next few days from this forum playing with it. I might burn a vacation day. However, the odds of me buying one or pretty low, more on that later. I’m equally certain that any amp comparison, when properly controlled, will sound exactly the same. This is what Bob Carver did with feedback loops in a hotel ball room. He made his $500 solid state amp test and sound indistinguishable from a $30,000 tube amp which all the woo prone from the audio press said was the best. “As to all tube amps having a premium price tag, that's nonsense. Of course, some are ridiculously priced as are some SS amps. Yet, there's a great deal of equipment out there which is very inexpensive and does a very fine job.” I ignore all exotic gear, solid state included. Pick up an audio magazine, none of those tube amps are reasonably priced. I can’t find a tube equivalent to my Emotiva XPA-2 without spending thousands and thousands more. List price new at purchase time was $700. Specs are online. Please prove me wrong. “Regarding choosing equipment which colors the sound in some way over that which doesn't, I can only say that many find certain colorations pleasing. My second harmonic example above is one of them.” Second order harmonics are hard to detect unless there’s a lot of it, like when you’re running at distortion levels by clipping or approaching clipping levels of your amp. Guitar amps do this, and that’s fine, that’s the artists canvas. Yes, tubes do this better “naturally” but SS can do it too- see NAD soft clipping technology, and again, if the artist wanted more distortion, he’d had added it on his/her end. Why do you want to add something to the art? I find this mind boggling. A wise man once said something about accuracy in reproduction having a premium. “And, some coloration may actually negate the effects generated by the speaker and room resulting in a better presentation for that particular system. Again, it's a matter of individual preference and is no different from one person preferring vanilla over chocolate ice cream.” Again, how can the amp designer come up with a single, built in coloration which would survive speaker selection, speaker placement, room selection, and room placement? “It would be great if some of the SS guys joined in with this and described their experiences with different types of gear. I know that many SS users on here have gone through frequent changes of amps/receivers until they achieved the sound they were looking for. And, in my own experience, I have serviced much SS gear and have found huge differences in sound when tested with the same speakers. I'm speaking of equipment with very low levels of distortion.” My experience is that when frequency response, power output, ohm stability is properly controlled then there is no difference in a solid state amp. However, there are more choices which don’t cost an exotic premium on the solid state end. Most of the time when SS amps are compared, they aren't comparing different bottles of exotic priced snake oil. “This is an informative discussion for those interested in hearing the differing points of view about this hobby.” I simply think that this discussion should have been settled in the 70s, but alas…
  13. I just assume that everything that isn't Heritage line is -6 dB for comparison purposes.
  14. "Plans of My Own" Great Recording, highly recommended!
  15. Accuracy from the amp compared to the source is, in fact, all we should be talking about here. But you're right in a sense, we should dive into the last part, and weakest part of the chain; the speakers. I guess you just haven't connected all the dots; so here's my question: Why would you spend a premium (and tube amps almost always are- most ridiculously so) for this signal to be colored, if you have a proper understanding as to what happens to that signal when your speakers and room get ahold of it (and it appears that you do)? What you hear out of the speakers, no matter the amp WILL be colored due to speaker selection, speaker placement, room selection, and room condition, and all to a much greater and astronomically unpredictable extent than any colorations an amp introduces can possibly be prepared for to deliver any kind of universal benefit. An amp designer can't possibly introduce a single beneficial coloration which tube amp lovers see as so broadly appealing; like vocals, music type, or all the words that they make up, that can survive what happens to the signal when it leaves the amp.
  16. http://www.audioholics.com/tower-speaker-reviews/2010-1k-faceoff/copy3_of_1k-faceoff-comparisons Audioholics notices that the RF 62 is at 92dB, not 97
  17. You're always better off with an active crossover on your speakers, either from an AVR, or by using the high pass filter on the sub as you said. i think doing one of these, and crossing at 60-80 will drastically help. If you use an AVR to crossover, go full range on the sub and just use the AVR cross.
  18. I run Audyssey, and it turns down these speakers A LOT in the 50-60 range. I've heard folks using up to 100, but my subs vanish in my room at 80 just a tad bit more than they would at 100. I also use my speakers for TV and HT, and at 100hz, male voices can give you a headache
  19. "I did not want to prefer tube amplifiers for many of the reasons I mentioned above, but by golly when I first heard one I was hooked! The difference was immediately noticeable to my ears." Here's the deal; for the purposes of reproduction, there is absolutely no scientifically discernable reason for tube amplifiers to have intrinsically "better voices" or sound intrinsically better with different styles of music over solid-state amplifiers assuming both have the same flat frequency response. Assuming wattage and ohm stability are the same, the only way I know of an amplifier, of any design, having intrinsical advantages here would be because of colorations in frequency response. But, my question remains, why in the hec would you want your amp to do this?! "The #1 quality I look for in my system is musicality. Characteristics such as frequency response, imaging, sound stage, and even accuracy come in afterwards." You'd think that the textbook definition of sonic perfection might be the faithful and accurate replication of a signal from a source; music with nothing added or taken away. The signal sent to the speakers would be as true as possible to the original but as a precise magnified version of the waveform fed into the amplifier. But no, you don't have to go far until you have folks who will demand that this waveform should not be truly accurate! It should be changed in some way from its original source and that the tube amplifier adds some sort of magical universal and beneficial coloration! The tube amp is then given terms to describe the sound like something from a restaurant or wine-review, like lush, or fluid, or warm, while the solid state is said to be cold, barren, or rocky. Or we have in your case, saying something which is clearly self-defined, like "musicallity." I want accuracy from my amp, and I want as much accuracy for the dollar that I can get. Demanding less than accurate reproduction, and spending more to do it is simply the exact opposite. Accuracy is a universal definition, which I can't hide from using my own subjective dictionary.
  20. By all means, if I had a closet full of MC275s from a lifetime of being in the hobby, I could see myself finding a use for them. I have heard tubes in show-rooms, and honestly, I couldn't tell a serious difference. Then again, I usually request to hear from SS just so I'm not introduced to tube colorations which are routinely added to tubes; I'd prefer my tastes uncorrupted. I certainly wasn't suggesting you do an ABX test, as neither have I. But, many have been done and there's no benefit unless you're going for a thinner wallet. But you've already got some tubes laying around it seems, so there's that.
  21. "I have a soft spot for tube amplification in my long experience with guitar and bass amps, as in that world, there is no comparison, tubes take the cake in all ways." For the purposes of musical PROduction, tubes' inherent advantages, softer clipping at distortion simply sounds better than solid state comes into play in ways it should NEVER come into play with REproduction. Since so much electric guitar and bass production is done at distortion it's a very good idea to go with tubes; in production. It's also the ART that is being produced. A musician could prefer an amp with a hole kicked in it and now it sounds perfect! "First off, i have done a few tube/SS comparisons now." Were your comparisons ABX and level matched? Probably not, I haven't either, but you can read about those which are. Tube lose all the time. Google machine. "a low wattage tube amp matched to them should enable enjoyable-low level listening" As would a well made SS amp of either low or high power, and cost less, or even way much less. At a later day you could also take the high power SS amp and crank it up. I think I know where you're coming from, and this sounds like a rehashed argument which I mentioned before. Up until the 70s the amount of crossover distortion, especially at low wattage made SS sound inferior. This argument has gone the way of the first dinosaur. Well made SS don't suffer from this. It kills me that this argument won't die! It's like telling me I still need to buy leaded gasoline. "no combination of amp/pre amp/source/speaker etc, will do every genre the best." Disagree on all but speakers. Assuming everything is of well-made quality your speaker (selection and placement) should account for any audio taste variation. This is especially the case when you bring a well made, rock solid flat SS to the table which costs less, lasts longer, etc A few of you are suggesting the la scalas over the cornwalls. The Lascalas are fully horn loaded and provide the advantages you said. The Scalas will more likely demand the need for a sub, but some say it's fine without depending on room and placement. For me, I'll always have subs
  22. Did that cause local brown outs? lol
  23. Thanks! I crossover at 80 from my AVR on my subs (2 PSA XS15-SEs) I'm not a fan of how these speakers perform bass at 60hz, but this could just be my room nodes.
  24. Correct, PWK called BS needing tubes if not in print, but in practice. Bob Crites went on record that PWK switched over to solid state in 1971. Tubes cost more per watt with nothing to add but potential disadvantages over a well made solid state. Moreover, PWK wrote in a 1977 Dope about how well made solid state amps perform just as well with *some* still not performing as well until proper negative feedback loops were developed. Tube flat earthers still like to fall back on this early accurate, but no longer relevant criticism on SS as if it were still relevant today, and it's not. Tubes are one of the biggest lies in audio, but who am I to get in the way of a fool and his money. See signature link
×
×
  • Create New...