Jump to content
The Klipsch Audio Community
  • Sign Up


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

15 Good

About rjp

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. I like tone controls as much as I like L-pads. And we all know I like L-pads, right? I see no problems as long as when they are set to zero I hear absolutely no change in the signal compared to a direct path. I auditioned and ultimately returned a product called miniDSP HD for this reason. I rigged up an A/B switch on the line level inputs and with all EQ functions on the miniDSP set to off I could still hear a definite degradation in the sound quality. I assume this was due to the A/D - D/A stage itself which is essential for any digital tone control product of course. It was subtle but consistent. I performed the same test on a Schiit Loki 4 band EQ and it passed with flying colors. I may have already mentioned this above. I forget what thread I'm on sometimes. My advice is if you have to have tone controls, get the good Schiit http://www.schiit.com/products/loki Speaker placement is effective. Many people roll tubes as a method of tone control as well. All methods have one thing in common: they emphasize some frequencies more than others. It's all "tone control".
  2. I know you try to help members. Thanks for your contributions. Let's just move on for now and put this behind us.
  3. Back on Page 3 we had this conversation. I told you I like L-pads. I even told you I bought the same L-pads as you from Parts Express for just this purpose.
  4. Do they make analog versions?
  5. Me too. I learned to love the PEQs from working sound for bands. But where can one buy a nice *analog* 2-band PEQ for home use that doesn't look like a guitar stomp box?
  6. It depends on the room I suppose. Maybe "too hot" is not the right word. It's just that sometimes I want them to calm down and be mellow for a while It's hard to describe musical stuff with words.
  7. Westcoast, perfect! This is why I like parametric EQ the best. Find the "annoying" frequencies and cut them out. It's hard to do this with a graphic even with 1/3 octave sliders. Give me to good PEQs any day!
  8. wdecho: I had made up my mind I wasn't going to respond to any more of your posts after the way you have abused everyone, including myself, trying to help you. But for the sake of other readers who might be confused by your latest missinformation I want to set the record straight. (1) The Klipsch HIII is the best speaker I have heard in all of the speakers I have auditioned, but yes, it is still a little harsh on my ears at times. I plan to keep them because they do so many other things well. (2) I believe L-pads are an *excellent* way to tame "too hot a driver". I explained this to you in this thread and months ago in a similar thread. The point of all the math was to demonstrate to you that the L-pad will change the load the crossover sees (an assertion you seem unwilling or unable to recognize). I never made the claim it was "the wrong way to do it", just that it wasn't totally inert as you claimed. Hear this. I believe that although the L-pad will change the load, this change is *very likely not significant* enough to ever be heard, This means I agree with you that L-Pads are good!!!!!!!! Get it yet? (3)L-pads may in fact be the best approach to too hot a driver. Equalization is another very good approach. I like and use them both. (4) I don't want to change the crossovers in my new speakers. (5) Please stop telling people with way more education than you that they need to go to electronics school. Here is the simplified version of the above: (1) L-pads are an excellent choice for taming too hot a driver. (2) L-pads will effect the crossover slightly but you probably wont hear it. (3) Stop being rude.
  9. What was this thread about?
  10. You have the resistance part right but are missing the point we are trying to make about the frequency dependency of the speaker. The diagram you posted above may help illustrate this as follows. Let's call the impedance of the speaker be Z3. Now the input resistance to this network that the crossover sees (on the left side) is Zin = R1 + (R2 * Z3)/(R2 + Z3) Now using the values indicated in the diagram for R1 and R2 we get Zin = 2.34 + 19.39*Z3/(19.39 + Z3) Now if we let Z3 be exactly 8 ohms, solving for Zin gives Z3 = 8 >> Zin = 2.34 + 19.39*Z3/(19.39 + Z3) Zin = 8.0034 Which is almost exactly 8 ohms. Which is the goal of this properly designed L-pad,. (This is your point I believe) But this speaker is not always 8 ohms. Its actual impedance changes with frequency. Let's suppose that at a certain frequency the speaker's impedance is 16 ohms, then re-evaluate the same equation setting Z3 to 16. Z3 =16 >> Zin = 2.34 + 19.39*Z3/(19.39 + Z3) Zin = 11.1063 Now we see that the load the crossover sees is approximately 11 ohms, but if the speaker was connected to the crossover without this L-pad it would be 16 ohms. Hence the introduction of the L-pad changes the load presented by the speaker on the crossover. Hopefully this helps clear things up.
  11. Mike is right. The combination of the speaker's complex and frequency dependent impedance and the resistor's real and constant impedance will add to produce something different than what the crossover was designed for. I doubt anyone could hear any ill effects of the L-pad, but yes, it is definitely going to be a different load.
  12. For anyone on the fence about tone controls. One thing I like about the Schiit Loki 4 band tone control is that is is completely transparent to my most critical listening. And I listen very critically. In general, I don't favor EQ or messing with the sound, but I have got to give some praise to this little device. It greatly exceeded my expectations. By "transparent" I mean that when it is in the circuit and all 4 knobs are at zero I hear absolutely no difference between a direct path and the path through the equalizer. I performed this test using an A/B switch box on the RCA lines to instantly bypass the unit. I can not hear any difference between the direct path and the path through the zeroed out Loki box. That is a good starting point. First do no harm! EQ later. For comparison, I did the same test with the miniDSP HD unit (also with all EQ functions defeated) and I could definitely hear a difference. When the miniDSP was in the circuit (even though it was set to no EQ) it degraded the signal quality slightly. Very slightly, but I could hear it. I sent it back. The miniDSP HD is an amazingly powerful device, but I didn't really need the full blown room EQ, and didn't want any degradation whatsoever that I could hear. When I begin to turn one of the knobs on the Loki away from flat I hear it smoothly and almost imperceptibly begin to effect the sound, and with a simple turn back to zero it is invisible again. The Loki is fully analog. This makes a big difference. There is no added A/D - D/A stage to mess things up like some other EQ boxes. So if you are looking for just a little more bass at low volume or moving the mids a bit back in the mix when you get a recording that is not so well recorded, but are not sure you want to "mess up" the sound with tone controls I suggest giving the Loki a try. You may find it as sonically transparent as I did. It also has it's own built in bypass switch. I dare anyone to tell me you can hear when this thing is in the circuit.
  13. Sound bar EDIT: With L-pads
  14. The music we are playing back has already passed through an awful lot of Op-amps and equalizers before we ever get it.