lne937s

An exact figure is difficult to find. However, in general, figure a 3db gain for each doubling of output sources of equal output. figure 2-2.5db for the third. You can use complex equations to figure the exact output in ideal circumstances, but listening room parameters will throw this off. It is difficult for the human ear to hear fractions of a decimal. So, unless you're a perfectionist or engineer, don't worry about it. The best way to figure it out is to buy a cheap SPL meter from Radio Shack and measure it in your room at the listening position. Yes, you could do math all day to compensate for positioning of speakers, room parameters, resonance and sound absorbsion properties of the materials used in the room's construction, etc. However, if you went to work and earned money with that time, you could buy the meter and have money left over to buy music. Also the SPL meter is good for measuring adjustments to your system. good luck Larry

Chickey, First of all, where in Jersey are you, what's the neighborhood like, and how expensive is it? I am contemplating buying property in a couple of years. If you are not in the NYC metro area, please don't tell me property prices because it will only make me very sad. Anyway- Here are a few suggestions- Stay all Academy/Chorus, buy ebay. Take the other speakers and store them. Or even better, spend <$100, buy a low power reciever, and set up the RS7's up for ambience sound upstairs- the diffuse sound would be good for this application. or- if funding is high- buy multiple academy/choruses for the rears, set them out of phase with each other, and adjust the impedence/attumation settings on your amp. This would give you an even more diffuse surround sound than bipoles and would let it mix with the other chorus/academy channels. or- buy an entire Reference 7 series, use the chorus's for stere in another room and sell/store the rest. Just some ideas Larry

Hi everyone, I pulled an all nighter @ work last night and am somewhat delerious- the joys of advertising. Anyway, Its great to hear some more ideas. Cory- like the electrostatic idea- very similar to my planar idea, since they use similar technology. I do like the idea of making the transducer to fit over any screen that size! Glennbarn- I think the idea of reducing clutter is very relevant, but I think your proposed system might be a little too futuristic and would need so many inventions and advancements to come in the forseeable future. However, I do think it could be a valid concept to model future innovations to. Ed- I don't know much about holographs. Does anyone out there know how they work/ the physics/ practical applications. Lets keep the ideas flowing- I hope everyone enjoys this topic as much as I do Larry

Hi everyone I would like to reiterate the idea of tangental coding for tracks as a way to accomadate systems of various complexities and prices. You could have this work with as few or as many channels as you want and have a coding system that supports minimalists as well as extreemists in channel complexity. I also have to say that I encourage CONSTRUCTIVE criticism. My fear is not that people will disagree with the ideas on this topic, but that ideas will be written off without being analyzed or ommitted because posters are reluctant to go out on a limb for fear of negative people who are out to slam them- we know they are out there. I just want to hear some new/creative ideas. Who would of predicted the current technology 25 years ago? I want to look to the future. I have enjoyed all the ideas so far and hope they keep coming- Larry

where do all the dented drivers go? it is my experience that the dents are more cosmetic than anything- this could be a great opportunity for DIYers on a budget or people, people who have the patience to work out the dents or people who want a 10" woofer center channel. Larry

I think that the standards issue is critical. I also think that in many ways a smooth transition from left to right in stereo is superior to a single high and center source for all dialog- especially if the sound is coming from the lower corner of the screen. How's this for a new idea of encoding- to have one type of signal. In that signal, each track of multitrack sound would be encoded for a particular tangent from the listening area and overall size of soundfield. That way, each individual system could split the signal into it's respective number of channels- and complexity would be limited by budget. Also, (i hate to think that I might be recommending something Bose is doing) it might be beneficial to create matching amp/speaker packages that compliment each other- conforming to each system. I also think that surround speaker type should be determined by room size. In a movie theater monopole speakers are necessary to project far enough to reach people at the front rows and the combination of multiple speakers and significant distance from the audience creates spaciousness. However, I do think that monopoles are too forward for surrounds in small rooms and that bipoles or multiple speakers per channel need to be used to create the same spaciousness. I want more ideas- Let's get an intellectually stimulating discussion going rather than just a rant about one thing or the other. Larry

I'm not sure how well that would sound, but for surrounds, the diffuse sound would be great- if they sounded OK. I remember seeing early developements of what you are talking from Ames labs, funded by GM back in the 80's. I remember thinking it was neat, but don't recall it sounding very HiFi. You would probably have to have some type of standard size and composition of the wall to make repeatable results. I am not even sure how those devises work- are they just suped-up Bass Shakers? Maybe- you could use that for a separate channel that uses frequencies that are suitable to the application. Overall, I would say that surround channels are guessing at what is going on off screen instead of recording on-screen action with the exception of creating noises that are entering and leaving the view of the audience. So as far as future developements are concerned, does anything go? I want too hear more ideas!! Larry

I have to state my opinion- I have seen DLP and LCD projectors at work and have to say that I prefer my CRT projectors. I have had an 8" Zenith and 5.5" Sony. Yes, its old- tech and it is not as brite, but it also has a number of advantages if you have a very dark room. The first is black level. Both dlp and lcd projectors shine a light through a lcd/dlp screen. as a result, light leaks out of the black parts and the result is that balck always looks gray. The variation in brightness is less smooth for LCD/DLP. Also, you can find a good quality used projector on ebay for around $1000- a little more maybe for HDTV capable. I picked up the 5.5" Sony for less than $500 that plays up to 900 lines with component input. And the life of CRTs is substancially longer than that of lcd/dlp bulbs. Yes, it takes up more space, but mine doesn't have that annoying fan noise. Although DLP/LCD are portable, more user-friendly, and better for conference rooms and other high light areas, but for home theater- I'd stick with CRT Larry

I just wanted to reiterate that I started this line so I could hear some of your ideas- not just critiques of my own. Any body have anything really creative- going beyond the confines of current audio technology. I was doing some more thinking about the things I thought up while writing my original post and had some more ideas. First of all- rather than concentrating on the multitude of speakers that are representing what's on screen, more attention should be paid to what's on screen. I keep hearing misplaced sound by the center channel- eg. dialog from an image at bottom left on screen coming from top and center. Much of the time, I think that stereo speakers placed close to the screen(dialog moves across it) sound better than the high center. I think that multichannel audio for on screen- replacing the center channel- should be the top priority. The emphasis on sound that we can't see is overdone. Secondly, I have a hard time believing that any encoding for audio is really all that complex/expensive when video takes up so many bytes and is relatively inexpensive- I guess it all breaks down to marketing and standardization. The more I think about, the more I like my planar screen idea. Exciting planars from multiple magnetic points intrigues me. Could this creat a speaker that excites specific areas for the high imaging frequencies moving to the whole diafragm for bass. Although, you wouldn't need as "audio pixels" as you would video, if you went high res, you could recreate the actual size and shape of the audio on the screen. Using the lcd video circuitry, consider a 100-1000 point screenwith a high refresh rate- you would also only need one signal carrying high frequency or digital wire. The compression should be easier than video. The higher frequency of the signal to the screen might allow switching amps and other aplifier types that are used for radio broadcast and are much more efficient than the standard class A.- just thinking Secondly- What about video. When I was working for an OOH media firm I saw something that made me think. Remember those sitckers with little ridges of prisms on them that made the picture shift when you moved it (lenticular). Well, the make ads with them now so tiny that when you look at them, one eye sees a diferent image than the other- making a 3-D image without those annoying glasses. How about making a true 3-D television? Anyway, I refuse to believe that the beginning and end of audio is 3 front channels of cone-box-spring-electromagnet (dynamic) speakers and x amount of surrounds. How about horns with planar/ribbon drivers? -the virtually perpindicualr projection of sound amkes for some interesting physics. But enough of that, I want to hear your ideas. Please don't be afraid of not being absolutely right, stating something that already exists, or offending someone's tastes in audio correctness. Jump outside the box- let's start thinking about the future instead or reiterating the past. Larry

I just want to hear some creative ideas on the future of home theater. I hear a lot of criticism and applause for various current products- but what is possible? How many surround channels? 4? 5? 23? Monopole, dipole, quadrapole? Ceiling channel? Multiple subwoofer channels to envelope/ balance bass better? Crossover points? How about subwoofer couches? It could give you a place to put a huge cabinet, emulate those trendy platform beds, and give real kick-in-the-pants bass. There is so much emphasis on surround channels, but what about the fronts? I've noticed that sound can seem misplaced by high-mounted center speakers if the action is not happening at that part of the screen. Afterall- the most important sound is that corresponding to what's on screen. You could have one planar speaker radiating from the entirity of a front projection screen? The diafragm is transparant, could you use this for rear projection? Or even better- multiple front screen speakers to place the sound on screen? This would work well for front projection through an audio transparant screen, or on the edges of a rear projection/tube/lcd screen. It also would be compatible with movie theaters? Or even better- there are planar speakers out now that radiate sound out across the diafram from a single point using a circuit to create a concentric pattern in the magnetic matrix. Could you use a processor on a powered planar to take an encoded signal and radiate sound out from the exact location that each individual, on-screen sound is coming from? Kind of like LCD computer screen circuitry? Or even better- could you modify the concentric pattern on the the powered planar to create the characteristics of sound at vaious distances from the screen and sizes on it? True 3-D sound? You would probably want to use something else for pure music- especially for all you horn lovers and big rooms. Granted, you would need to get movies encoded, a huge amp, and a huge budget (Wilson Grand Slam?). However, the raw materials for planar speakers are relatively cheap (cheaper than video screen components), the magnetic matrix is pretty much already there, and the coding wouldn't be that hard to figure out (similar to fixed-pixel displays)- so, if something like this was mass produced, I'm sure the price could be made reasonable. There would have to be great engineering to make the imaging range usable- maybe multiple smaller panels instead of one big one. (i'm sure it's possible, but probably still going too far!) We devote so many bytes to video, how about some more for audio? Or even better- have the planar wrap completely around the audience - have multiple-projector wrap-around video (60's cinemascope-esque) and make the floor out of an array of subwoofers? (definitely going too far) I'd like to hear some more crazy ideas, as well as some serious ideas about the future of realistic products. just trying to get some discussion going and creativity brewing- Larry This message has been edited by lne937s on 05-31-2002 at 11:34 PM

Here's a prediction about HornEd's response- ~~~~~~~~"Use the same speakers as your mains all the way around."~~~~~~~~ let's see if I have a future as a fortune teller- Larry

on a more basic level- Bose sats have one "full range" driver instead of the woofer/tweeter setup of the quintets. In theory- a designated tweeter will play higher and a woofer lower. Also- the higher the crossover is on the sub, the less the bass will seem to come from the Sat location. Bose subwoofer also uses 2-5" drivers instead of one 10". In theory, the larger the woofer, the easier it will be to make it play low. Try loosening the smallest diameter string on a guitar so that it plays as low as the thickest and you'll get the idea. Also the woofer area (3.14 X radius squared) is more than twice as large for 1 10" than 2 5". More area moves more air for every mm of excursion. just the basics, not even going into the crappy Bose componentry, philosophy, and engineering. Larry

Actually, playing new speakers loud for extended time actually loosens up the woofer suspension, extending excursion and "breaks them in"- so it is beneficial. Even so- the improvement is minimal

I like some JBL, DIY, and am interested in Maggies, but understand that you have to have a really fast sub to keep up and a strong amp to power them. I have yet to hear any, though. I really don't need speakers to play loud enough to damage my hearing anymore.

JM I can't believe I'm already getting NY tunnel vision (where you forget there is a world beyond the reach of subway tracks). Of course your right- in rural instances, where ground clearance and off-road/over-snow factors have a significant impact, an SUV is completely justified. Here and in most urban/suburban areas, they make no sense. Alcohol has great potential but a number of drawbacks. It takes a lot of money to process it, it does not provide lubrication to engine parts, and it does not contain energy as efficiently. Currently ethanol is only close in cost to gas because of federal subsidies. However, its burn rate gives it a high octane equivalency and it contanes oxygen in the fuel- making combustion more efficient. In time- the conversion process may improve and it will become a viable alternative. I don't know how much grain the government buys, but it seems like a waste. The energy being expended to plant, cultivate, irrigate, and harvest the grain has to be very substancial. This is not to mention the environmental problems of irrosion, fertilizer/herbicide/pesticide runoff, water use, and adding nutrients to streams and lakes (algae growth- death- decompose- eliminate oxygen from streams). A better alternative to drive up grain prices would be for the government to buy farmland and convert it to parks, reserves, etc. Or let cattle graze there and keep fedral lands seperate for hunting and fishing. Even though I am a huge FDR fan and realize the importance of doing things like buying grain to drive up prices- this should be only a short-term fix used for crisis situations (Great Depression), not a long term policy- it is wasteful. And it's not like we need it- even our bums are fat. Overeating-obesity-high colesterol must kill millions a year- in addition to reducing the number of attractive women in Bikini's. We need to keep in mind that some basics. Little speakers can be improved, but they will still sound small. Huge vehicles can be made more fuel efficient- but they still expend more energy to have equivalent performance (force=massXacceleration) than and equally engineered small vehicles. Crappy components will still be crappy even if they are given attractive packaging. Don't buy Bose more to come Larry

First of all- Do not go to a BMW dealer for maintenance.- they will gouge you. It's not that BMW parts are significantly more expensive or that the components are less accessable(they're not) or that the oil is different, but since BMW owners generally have significant incomes, the dealers can ask high prices. When I had a mechanic look over a BMW before a friend of mine bought it, he told me as much and went over the cost of basic repair's. He also showed me the cost comparison between new German and American cars- they are approximately the same, although this was previously not the case. In this case it would cost me $50/hr to have a mechanic who works on Ferrari's and actually knows what he is doing rather than $40/hr for a "Firestone Certified" (What exactly does that mean?) high-school kid. I think it's worth it. Chosing a mechanic should be done carefully- if you don't intend on fixing it yourself. Secondly- I think "cool" is somewhat subjective. I definitely don't think Vics are "Cool"- but that's my opinion. I am also 165 lbs, so my butt will fit in almost any car-I don't need a huge car. Living In NY, I prefer one that can weave in and out of trafic easily. The images of American coolness are now pretty much extinct with the exception of the Corvette, Viper, and Mustang (Camaro and Firebird are being 86ed). Winston Cup racing cars have more in common with 540 BMW's (V8 engine, rear wheel drive) than the front-wheel-drive v6 cars they emulate. The reckless abandon, who needs handling-just give it a bigger engine, what refinement?, American muscle cars of a generation ago have no current counterparts. The thrill is gone. Thirdly- Not all German cars are created equal- most Volkswagons sold here are made in Mexico. Porsche Boxters have taken styling over serviceability and require dropping the engine for a number basic repairs. But inline six BMW's are great. I think anyone who has experience working on cars or engineering knowledge will appreciate the intellegent layout. Open the hood and compare it to other cars. In addition to what you can see, the cars are assembled to much closer tolerences, the parts are balanced, and use quality materials. Although they have previously had some high maintenance components (eg. Adjustable valves), the current generation sixes are now very low maintenance. I can say from experience that BMWs are very fun to drive recklessly and can be done so at a much higher level without totally losing control. Turn off the traction and stability control, find a twisty road, drop the clutch (I don't like slush boxes- and it is hard to find American cars without them), and go for it. BMWs are also not Police magnets like Camaros and Mustangs. I hate to admit it, but I don't think American engineering will be able to compete if we keep having such horrible math and science education. I also think that modern American unions should have some kind of limited membership and aprenticeship programs- actually bringing some benefit to to automakers. Wouldn't you rather have a well trained and educated person putting your car together? However- Even American car companies are catching on. You can buy an American brand car designed in Europe(Caddy CTS and sigma platform, new Saturns, next Malibu, next Grand Am, Crossfire, Ford 500, Focus, etc.), Australia (new GTO, possibly new Camero and Impala), and Japan (too many to list)- I am sure they will be better, but what's the point. The ONLY domestically bred Ford cars by mid-decade will be the Vic, Town Car and Mustang (Forbes Magazine). Even the S-10 replacement is being developed with Isuzu. But like Bose- Marketing will be the winner. If the Americans can market partiotism and produce superior machines I think they would sell more cars. Currently, Chevrolet and Ford are falling behind Toyota and Honda in total car sales for the first time ever (Forbes), and only their truck sales keep them afloat. But we all know that even a superior product is not always the sales leader. Also- I personally detest Luxo-trucks and SUVs. They are wasteful, handle poorly, brake poorly, put more wear on the road, take up parking space, and are a danger to everyone who has a lower bumper or a lighter car. A work truck is one thing, but why have cargo hauling capacity if you rarely use it? Here's my idea of patriotism. Lets stop buying oil from anyone that does not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they are not satan incarnate. Bin Laden's income as well as virtually all middle-east terrorists is American bought oil (it also happens to be the source of the Bush and Cheney family fortunes). Persian Gulf "war"- oil. Keeping oil companies wealthy, politicians happy, and SUVs running is NOT worth the loss of life and misery. I look across Manhattan and am reminded of that every day. If that requires a small, foriegn car; than so be it. While I'm at it- Since when was the purpose of our government to protect us from ourselves rather than protecting us from others. If I want to buy a car without airbags, ride without a helmet, or have a low bumper, I should have the right to do so- I'm not infringing on the rights of others. Give me the crash data so I can make an informed decision as an adult, but don't tell me what I can and can't do unless I'm infringing on the rights of other people. We do need regulations for some things- we all share the environment. Regulate on the danger my car is to others- not to myself. Test the force on the wall in the crash test. Require minimum braking distances. Oh, and don't buy BOSE speakers. Larry PS- I have really enjoyed everyone's comments

As for american cars... I think that the Crown Vic and Town Cars and the like are great for professional taxi's- they do last a long time and are easy to fix. However, they lack the refinement and handling of a German car. I personally test drove a ten year old BMW 5 series with 145,000 miles on it and no major work done to it, and it handled better and felt more solid than a new American car. The inline sixes are well designed and all the components are easy to get at (even though most of the people who buy cars now will probably never lift the hood). The parts are only marginally more expensive than US parts- as long as you don't go to the dealer. Here's the important thing to keep in mind- resale value. I had a friend who recently bought a loaded Pontiac Sunfire GT- I did some research. If he bought a Honda Civic for the same price, after five years, the high resale combined with the fuel savings, he will have actually spent about twice as much for the Sunfire. Becuase of its high resale and dependability, base 3 series BMW (approximately the same fuel economy) would end up costing him almost the same amount of money after five years for a vastly superior car (increased insurance for a 26 year old and loan interest make it slightly more expensive). Of course, he didn't have the money for the downpayment, but, if he was older and had more capital, it wouldn't be a bad investment. Another friend bought a Hyundai loaded (it is better to put in your own stereo- less expensive and better sound) for sticker (why?). It really isn't that bad of a car, but it lost half of its value in less than two years. Another friend bought a loaded 2000 Tahoe for sticker (Why??$40K+ WHY???- huge markup) that lost almost $20,000. He also bought a BOSE lifestyle system. I also have a friend who bought a used '97 750il two years ago below blue book that is still worth more than he paid for it. It is also a vastly superior car than the Tahoe. See any pattern here. The five series is also a much better car than any Lncoln or Caddy. The strength of the dollar and economic problems in Germany have kept them relatively close in price. And it holds its resale value- the aforementioned ten year old car sold below blue book for almost $13k, while the 90 caddy next to it with fewer miles sat with a $2500 sticker on it. It boils down to application- If you do not need refinement, are a very large individual, plan on abusing your car and keeping it till it croaks- a new rwd american car isn't that bad an idea. I personally own an old Mustang I bought used that refuses to quit. However, the fwd american cars are outclassed. They are still better than Koreans though American cars will get better- read the forbes article about them being engineered in Europe. I also think rear wheel drive is better, reguardless of where it comes from, with the exception of the MINI-very impressed. On dry pavement it is better. While RWD has a lower limit in the snow, it is more controlable when that limit is exceeded- you just need to know how to drive. Just like Bose- there are differences in preference and application- but some purchasing decisions are simply bad. Larry

I just watched Star Wars in DLP at the AMC on 42nd street in Manhattan (huge screen) and have some observations. Overall, I think the DLP theater reminds me of a super high-res version of the home projectors. The black level is not up to par. In the opening sequence with the scrolling text, deep space looks grey. Yes the picture is brighter, but the black suffers. Also, the colors seem un-natural, the makeup on the actors becomes obvious. I think a new, clean copy of actual film is still better. However, the dlp was pretty impressive for what it is and will, with a few improvements, probably be better in a few years. And, regardless of what other people say, you can hear verticle placement of speakers. In this case, the speakers were at the top of a large, solid screen(rather than the perforated screens with the speakers behind them, like in many theaters) and directed at the audience. The misplaced sound was very distracting and destroyed imaging. If I closed my eyes, I heard dialog coming from one point high up and effects from two, rather than realistic imaging. I looked behind the screen after the movie, and sure enough, the speakers were exaxtly where I thought they were. The center channel was also overused, carrying dialog that was coming from the far edge of the screen. This reminds me of my problems of 100" screen on a 10'X10' wall- the center up high sounds out of place, especially with the L/R speakers so close to the screen and my viewing position of about 9' away. Even the gods of THX and pro-audio can get it wrong some times. Larry

I did it with All Solen- fast caps, solid wire air core inductor for the low end and litz wire for the high. Use the closest values available to the originals, use a meter. A little variation from the original will not cause a problem- crossover filter values are usually not exact.

I would replace the woofer with one from the Klipsch website- they carry a great selection of replacement parts. This should cost you less and be more reliable than trying to repair the old one. Relpacing it yourself should be pretty easy. I have no idea who to use in the area. I'm sure you know that people will gouge you here if you aren't on your toes. I would be interested in finding a reputable shop here myself for future reference. Where are you finding these great amps so cheap. I usually buy of ebay, is there someone in the area that has good deals? Larry

I do want to put it on the street. As for most modern safety devises (air bags, 5 MPH bumpers), they usually only apply to production vehicles. I think that racing harnesses, roll bars, etc. are more effective in wrecks anyway. I know that I will need some type of turn signals, headlights, mirrors, basic emissions, etc. I have heard that motorcycles are registered by the engine unlike cars that are registered by the frame; and that by using a motorcycle engine you could theoretically register a 4 wheeled vehicle as a motorcycle!?! This would circumvent a number or regulations. My problem with Kit Car is that their forum sucks, I thimk I am actually the 3rd post on it. Thankyou for all your help so far... I know that this is not the correct forum, but I need ideas thanks again Larry

crt front projection.... look on ebay

I am a big fan of the Klipsch Forum, but need to find quality forums to ask questions about other interests. I thought that the engineers and DIY'ers here might know. I have always been interested in building a car since I was a kid, and have a fair amount of knowledge from rebuilding them while growing up and researching in magazines and the internet. I was wanting to rent a garage starting next spring build a small, simple, lightweight car... What forums should I use? I was thinking about using a motorcycle engine (Hayabusa) Legend style or mid mount. Any forums? I want to also use carbon fiber, based on some research I have done, but want a practical forum where I can ask questions as I go along. I was also wondering about the practical aspects of using cyanoacrylate adheasive (superglue) to join aluminum parts (like Lotus Elise and Panoz). I love Austin Healy 100-4s and was thinking about making a pseudoreplica, any good kit sites, chassis and body diagrams? Sorry to have to ask here, but I thought it might be a good place to get some input. thank you everyone, please excuse my spelling. Larry Evans

I personally would recommend the heavy guage copper speaker wire from Home Depot. I know of some K-horn and pro owners who use it and have used it myself. I really don't see much importance in buying very expensive wire unless you plan to span extreemely large spaces. The shorter the wire, the less difference it makes. I know there is a Home Depot in Brooklyn in Redhook that is open 24hrs. I think the F train will get you pretty close, but I'm not sure which stop would be best, maybe the one after Carrol Street. Just a question, how big is your apartment and how do they sound there? I have a very small apartment and think buying new horn speakers might be overpowering for such a small space. Also, I am a big fan of heavy late 70's ss amps. I think the new ones tend to sound to mechanical.

I would have to say its a balancing act. If the sound is bigger than the picture or the speakers cannot keep up with the visuals, the imaging will be mismatched. Larger screens need larger speakers. Video covering a large space needs sound covering a loud space. The challenges involved matching audio to a large video image are much more involved. Sound coming from a small point in space will work with a small screen, but not a large one. Dispersion angle, I have used front projectors for video at 100" (the size of 4 50" screens). The larger the video, the more complicated the sound becomes. When I used a 27" previously, the sound overwhelmed the image. I would go for large CRT based (DLP and LCD still look to mechanical and grainy) front projectors first. You can get used ones on Ebay that are HDTV compatible for around $1000. Use this as a foundation and develope the audio to fit the image. It is more difficult the other way around. I would upgrade equally This might be biased because of my undergrad degree in media with a concentration in film and former work in video. People with more audio experience will be motivated the other way. Yes you can listen to the audio when the video is off, but, late at night, you can watch the video with headphones and not disturb anyone. Just my thoughts.