Jump to content

ODS123

Regulars
  • Posts

    899
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ODS123

  1. So bean counters have stood in the way of every speaker sounding it's best except, not surprisingly, yours. Besides, I wouldn't be so quick to denigrate bean counters (ie., managerial accountants). They are every bit as essential to keeping Klipsch in business as are engineers and product planners. That is true today and was true when your speakers were built.
  2. I think we're past the point of changing any minds here and are well into navel-gazing territory. Still, I can't help but reply to the above. Your comparison is utterly nonsensical. Because one material may be better for a house doesn't mean it's better for a speaker. Have you been reading the posts above yours? You seem to be ignoring the convincing arguments for why MDF is better for speakers: less resonant, far more consistent from one sheet to the next, easier to router/ mill, etc... etc.. You and Dave seem convinced it's the "bean counters" fault. I find that hard to believe. I seriously doubt Richard Vandersteen choses MDF over Birch plywood for his $40,000 speakers because it reduces construction costs by $75. ..Besides, isn't MDF much heavier? Wouldn't that mean the small savings in construction costs are negated by the greater expensive of shipping them out dealers? More likely, plywood is a pain in the butt to work with (ever try routing plywood?) and each sheet is different from the next. Even with my limited carpentry experience I have seen plywood sheets with warps, and inconsistencies in thickness and density. ...Not a good thing if you want each product rolling off the assembly line to be the same, etc...
  3. The above Wilson Audio video seems to suggest they use a fancy form of MDF.
  4. Dave I'm not trying to harsh you. But your suggestion that people who buy speakers made from MDF have basically been suckered deserves a pointed reply. To my knowledge, pretty much EVERY wood speaker these days (Harbeth being the only exception I know of) is made from MDF. ..Are they all junk??
  5. IMHO, the great thing about Klipsch speakers is that they are easy to drive and therefore don't need anything beyond an affordable integrated amp or A/V receiver. So, IMHO, buying inexpensive electronics allows you to spend more on what accounts for 99% of the sound - the speakers. A well treated used pair of CW1's and a 40+ watt A/V receiver would make for an awesome sounding and awesomely affordable system. I can't think of any hobby where the law of diminishing returns is more apparent than audio.
  6. I did see the comment about difficulty in repairing. But why should this be such a huge consideration for either the manufacturer or consumer? I mean, who the heck is exposing their multi-thousand $$ speakers to water?? I listed all of my speakers over the last 30 years and not ONE of them ever needed to have the cabinet fixed. In fact, I don't know anyone who has had to have a cabinet repaired. So why make ease of cabinet repair a priority? And you suggest their use of MDF is b/c "they're getting cheap on their customers." Well, I tend to believe the reasons offered by Richard Vandersteen: MDF is more consistent, easier to route/shape, less resonant, more stable, etc...
  7. And what about all the brands I have owned (and pretty much EVERY brand in existence these days) that use MDF w/out speakers falling apart or screws coming loose. ..So then, how exactly is it inferior? Interestingly, back when I owned Vandersteen 3A Sigs Richard Vandersteen promoted his use of MDF as being ideal b/c it's more consistent from sheet to sheet, fewer voids, less resonant, and easier to router. Not saying he's right on those counts but they seem to make as much sense as your gripes to the contrary.
  8. okay, so it seems you're saying the MDF used is high grade and engineered for stability and consistency. ..A far cry from the "particle board" derision some have used to describe it. Again, every speaker I've every owned was made from MDF and have never had a problem w/ cabinet integrity or screws staying put. .
  9. I know Klipsch states that the Cornwall is made w/ MDF, but looking at this picture of a Cornwall III being built, I'm not sure what it's made of. ..I doesn't look like typical MDF. ..And look in the background at the cabinets on the table behind her..
  10. Why the problem w/ MDF?? Every speaker I've ever owned - Polk Audio 5jrs, Spica TC-50's, PSB Stratus Minis, Vandersteen 3A Sigs, Paradigm S8 sig v2's, and now my Cornwall III's - have been made w/ MDF and I've never had any issues with them. I keep them well away from water and don't mess with the screws.
  11. Find a dealer with Cornwall III's on display and listen for yourself. It's predictable, btw, that anyone who has ver 1 will say it's the best, those w/ ver 2 will say same and so on. ..I think you just need to listen for yourself. ..And for the love of god, don't buy new then start customizing. ..I think it's ridiculous for people to think they can out-think all the engineers who had every tool available to them when designing a speaker and spec'ing parts. Not only do you void the warranty, you also ruin their resale should you one day have to sell them.
  12. Exactly... I absolutely love my Cornwall III's and do not find either mid or tweeter horn to be deficient in any way. ..But if you do, then buy a different speaker. ..Lord knows there's hundreds to chose from. I can understand swapping out components in a speaker that's out of production. But the idea that one could improve on a current design is something I can't quite fathom. The designer who chose the drivers for the CWIII had the benefit of lots of testing equipment, an anechoic chamber, blinded listening trials, etc. By comparison, what does the tweaker have or know that the designer did not as they embark on deconstructing what is a proven and successful design?s I would guess that the chances of screwing things up is far greater than actually improving it's performance.
  13. He states, "All signal processing circuitry (e.g. bass boost, filters) must be turned off, and if the amplifier still exhibits nonlinear frequency response, an equalizer [ or cap, and resistor] will be set by Richard Clark and inserted inline with one of the amps so that they both exhibit identical frequency response. The listener can choose which amplifier gets the equalizer." He went on to say this was usually used when comparing Tube amps (which are usually non-linear) to S/S amps. If both amps have linear responses (like most modern-day amps) then no equalization was used.
  14. That's funny. So you're accusing me of being a closet subjectivist. Well, that's a first What's hard to believe about my reasons?? I love the retro look, tactile feel, heritage and feature set of Mac gear. For decades I've looked forward to owning one and only now (well, 5 years ago) have I been able to afford it. Also, I insist on having Bass/ Treble, Balance, and a Mono switch to help make poorly recorded (usually tipped up) more listenable. ..I'm not aware of many brands that offer these incredibly sensible features.
  15. Well, so you say. But without any effort made to compare these without knowing which you're hearing, I'd say it's expectation bias. Or perhaps Nelson amps are non-linear devices, which I can't imagine ANY audiophile would want. Better to have a linear amplifier, then use an equalizer to tip or dip certain frequencies according to taste. To Beginners!! Remember, at the start of this I referenced the $10,000 reward that was offered by Richard Clark to any golden-eared audiophile who could reliably differentiate b/w two amplifiers, provided they were engineered to be linear and they weren't driven into clipping. ..No one claimed the money. And you can be quite sure that everyone who took this test felt the same way as many here: "of course, i can tell a difference!" http://tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/
  16. I have driven my Cornwall III's w/ an Onkyo TX-NR1030 AVR for weeks while my Mac was being serviced. It sounded awesome (..actually, identical to the Mac). While I could hear slightly more hiss with the volume cranked, source paused, and my ears pressed to the tweeter horn, the S/N ratio is excellent; there is no way this would be audible at the listening position while music is playing. It is quiet, it can drive the Klipsch's to "hear it down the block" levels without hint of strain, it and has an awesome feature set. And the build quality - while not quite the level of the Mac - is impressive. ..When used for movies, my son's crank it to near Theater levels and is has never overheated or shut down. A "set it and forget" music lover would find this an excellent choice, apart perhaps, from the fact that is 7.1 channel rather than 2 (or 2.1) ..And no one in my family, all of whom are music fanatics and have a keen sense for musical nuance, could hear one iota of difference b/w it and the Mac.
  17. No, I'm not intent on imposing my view, I'm simply trying to provide balance. Looked at collectively, this and other audio forums are like 98% subjective impressions offered by people who don't give a wisp about validity testing. ..So while my viewpoint may comprise a large part of this thread, this "objectivist" view (your description, not mine) is largely drowned out throughout audio blog-dom. And DBT isn't strictly necessary. It would be a huge improvement if people would simply ask that the amps or speakers they are comparing are volume-matched using either a voltage meter (tougher to do) or using a db meter. .Just a modicum of validity testing is better than nothing.
  18. Committed minds aren't likely to change, but Beginners taking in both sides of the argument might be influenced. The future of this hobby depends, IMHO, on a degree of self-imposed validity and honesty tests/controls by reviewer, mfgs., and just a bit of skepticism from consumers.. I know several people who sold their floors standers and components in favor of a Sonos b/c they regard this hobby as totally off it's rocker. As to your Power Cord. ..Not trying to convince you, but I must share a word w/ beginners who may have read your comment: To All Beginners!! Before upgrading your power cord from the one included w/ your component ask yourself: How is it possible that electricity travels through hundreds of miles of outdoor power line (with countless splices, and new ones possibly added after every power outage), then hundreds and hundreds of feet (maybe yards) of Romex in your home, and yet it is somehow improved by swapping the last three feet of cable b/w the wall and the component? Please think hard on this before buying! And again, if it does improve the purity of the electricity, why doesn't any Power Cord mfg. point to a controlled listening trial where the improvement was proven to be audible?. ..And be doubly suspicious if the cord comes with instructions that mentions a break-in period.
  19. So he made conclusions about how an amp sounds listening to it on YOUR speakers in your listening room? Or if you're saying he listened first to the Para, then McC... Did you carefully equalize volume levels?? Simply leaving the volume knob on the pre-amp is not the same (and I'm sure you know this..). Even if it's only slightly so, the louder amp will sound "more open, more bloom, better liquidity, faster, etc.....". (Ugh) You and others keep saying I'm wrong b/c you recall hearing a difference that was unmistakeable! ..But these anecdotal accounts mean nothing if no effort whatsoever was made to control bias.
  20. Ever wonder why NO amplifier manufacturer has ever mentioned in an ad how their amp, dac, speaker cable, power cord (sigh), etc.. was preferred by listeners in a blinded trial?? I mean, how compelling would that be!? Imagine an ad like "In 30 blinded listening trials, our amp was preferred 87% of the time." ..They could describe all trial details in a footnote, etc.. But no, they'd rather include instructions that you "need to give X-component 20-100 hours of break-in before any critical listening." Again, this hobby's disinterest in ANY form of validity testing is discouraging and keeps it from being respected by practitioners of the scientific-method. Heck, forgot DBT, I'd be partly satisfied if they'd at least keep a component under consideration behind a screen so no pre-conceived notions about the brand, or whether its "separates" or "tubes" or whether there are tone controls on the faceplate can creep in and influence what they hear. Thank god the FDA doesn't allow drug companies to make unsubstantiated claims the way gear companies do.
  21. Yes, a receiver or integrated amp (if no interest in AM/FM) is a great starting place. But I would add to this sage advice, don't bother upgrading UNLESS your are able to able to hear a difference - while unaware of which you are hearing! - when you compare it the "upgrade". This is such plain, simple, and obvious advice. As I said earlier, not everyone is interested in making audio an on-going, endless work in progress. Most people just want the best system their money can buy then enjoy years of listening to it. I have no interest in convincing the "amp selection is like wine tasting" crowd. You are entitled to enjoy this hobby any way you wish. I wish you years of audio nirvana. But beginners need to know that the claims that modern-day amps, which are engineered to be linear and well-behaved into any typical speaker load (which is EVERY s/s amp/ or receiver these days) sounds different is NOT supported by any plausible rationale or blinded trials.
  22. That or maybe I proved my system sounds better when Roger Federer is in a Wimbledon final, or that it sounds better on Sundays, or when my wife if moving furniture in a nearby room,
  23. Sorry Westcoast, but I stand by my statement. I would refer you to the clinical trials listed in the prescription inserts for inhalers you (or your HCP) prescribes and you will see there is a slight improvement in FEV, post inhalation of a placebo inhaler (and yes, I understand patients complete this test 3 times). ..The improvement isn't therapeutically meaningful, but there's an improvement suggestive of a patients expectation that they just used this device (unaware it is inert) and they should now be able to breath better.
  24. Deang, ..Even some of the trials that collect quantifiable metrics - rather than patient-reported symptom scores - reveal a placebo effect. For example: A percentage of patients who are given inhalers w/ inert contents will demonstrate an improvement in Forced Expiratory Volume (called FEV1), which is basically a measurement using a Spirometry device, of how quickly a patient can exhale. Expectation Bias has A HUGE impact on what we experience with medication AND, I contend, in Audio.
  25. This is absolutely NOT true!! Both my wife and I are in pharma. I'm in sales and my wife is in charge of clinical trial data collection for numerous oncology studies. While some drugs treat measurable things like A1C (diabetes) and HDL/LDL (hyperlipidemia), a great many others rely on symptom scores provided by patients. COPD, Asthma, Pain Management, Psych disorders just to name a few. And with each of these, patients in the placebo trial arm CONSISTENTLY report an improvement in symptoms; sometimes to a degree that absolutely astonishing. ..Not unlike the audiophile who ALWAYS reports an improvement in sound following an upgrade to amp, cables, etc...
×
×
  • Create New...