NOSValves Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 others like me can enjoy music no matter what it is playing on....I love music with my ear buds while mowing the lawn, I enjoy music in my pick up truck...I enjoy music out of the TV speaker system while watching TV. Aha! This proves it doesn't take much to please some people. I kinda wish I could enjoy listening to music on lo-fi equipment, but when the sound is not right it seriously affects my enjoyment of the music. Whenever I hear equipment that has problems, I either fix the equipment or replace it. No you EQ it or add more garbage in the path to fix it.....hate to tell you dude that ain't fixing shite..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 Sorry, I tried to remove those comments before you saw them. If nothing you meant was intended as a cheap shot, then it's all good. In my experience Coytee is one long cheap shot if you don't agree that the only speaker on earth that is worth anything is a Jubilee... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 (edited) We use an eq for better sound. Not to fix it Aren't those two things supposed to be the same thing -- you "fix it", and then you get "better sound". Most analogies aren't perfect, and it applies here. I look at it like your xo upgrades. You dont need them but they do upgrade the sound. If you upgraded my cornwall xo they would sound better, But thats not saying they did not sound good before. So If someone adds an eq and is able to make his system sound better. How is that any different then upgrading the xo. It's very different. The drivers in the Heritage stuff are relatively well behaved, so you can just string them together. The crossover point, for the most part, is determined by the horns themselves, so from the electrical side of things, the networks are pretty simple, which allows me to use some of the highest quality parts available to let the signal pass through. A better example would be this -- could you elevate the quality of the sound by adding an EQ to your Cornwall system? No, you can't, because some of the parts in those crossovers have reach the end of their life cycle, and depending on what year they were made, the quality of some of those parts weren't that great to begin with. The sound is a little grungy and closed in sounding, and you decide to add an EQ "to fix it". The EQ is of relatively low quality too, because both the input and output stages are filled with little dirt cheap electrolytics. All that has happened here is that the signal path went from dirty to dirtier -- and the EQ is only being used as an extended set of tone controls to boost the bass and reduce the midrange and treble output because it's either driving a spike into the ear or sounds like sandpaper. Some of us assign a different definition to "better sound quality" than others here. Sometimes you can clean up the signal path, and still miss the mark. I sometimes do work on the crossovers that were just purchased. Your new purchase is an example of that. Klipsch routinely makes use of polyester capacitors. They sound okay, there's nothing wrong with them, They are probably fine for HT use, where you're mostly absorbed with what's going on with the screen, and as long as the room is shaking appropriately -- who cares. However, the high frequencies are going to sound pretty raw compared to what you would get out of a good film cap. There are other examples, but I think you get the general idea. A lot of people have no real baseline with which to compare. Since they haven't heard anything built by me, they can only go by what they have, or by what they've read. I've built crossovers using different parts, so I'm pretty comfortable with any claims I make. At this point we begin to overlap with the other thread. We have equalizers, both electronic and passive, and then we have the active or electronic crossovers, which incorporate EQ functions into their feature sets. If you think my top tier crossovers are expensive, you should check out the prices of high quality consumer versions -- along with the extra amplifiers you're going to need. Most here haven't heard or experienced a tube driven system using a really good set of passives, and even that world has several levels of transparency and musicality associated with it. There is "musical" solid state too, it's just harder to find -- most tube gear is musical by default. I love the pro world, where you get two cheap polyester capacitors and a huge piece of crap wirewound resistor run in series with the compression driver. The upgrade path is to use an active unit filled from one end to the other with electrolytics and nasty metal film resistors. That world is for people who believe there is no real audible difference between parts, and they believe this in spite of the fact that there are real measurable differences. Depending on what you're trying to do, you may end up forced into combining pro and consumer level equipment. The signal is run through the low quality parts, which is damage that can't be undone -- and then you have to deal with the gain structure issues. Have fun with that. http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/home-theater-receivers-processors-amps/35677-gain-structure-home-theater-getting-most-pro-audio-equipment-your-system.html How can you argue your xo is not like an eq Dean. You eq the sound with your xo. You have even said so. Any turning up or down is a type of eq. When you lower the mid horn level with your xo that is eq the sound. I know your backing up your friend here but saying your xo is not like an eq at all is a really far stretch. Well that it is pretty simple... ITS A PASSIVE CROSSOVER IS NOT AN EQ...............my god is there any sense in some of you folks brains. A crossover is a device that sets the crossover point between drivers and matches the output of the drivers in use so they all match nothing more and nothing less... yes parts type can and does change the character but that does not make it an EQ. That is about the most absurd thing I have ever heard. Well maybe I should rephrase that a bit the crossover we are references here are what I describe above. I'm sure some crazy engineer has and does force crossovers to do more then intended to cover up his/her mistakes else in the speaker system... Edited August 3, 2014 by NOSValves Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 (edited) Something about Craig and me pimping each other's products - I read it, but can't remember where I saw it. I'd like to respond to that outlandish accusation : ) Show me where. Please use a thread or post that isn't on page 80-something or older. Edited August 3, 2014 by DeanG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Richard Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 (edited) No you EQ it or add more garbage in the path to fix it.....hate to tell you dude that ain't fixing shite..... Then why does it sound better after putting "more garbage" in the "path"? Hate to tell you, dude, but you're clueless. Edited August 3, 2014 by Don Richard 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schu Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 (edited) No you EQ it or add more garbage in the path to fix it... Then why does it sound better after putting "More garbage" in the "path"? Certainly does... "tailoring" output to listeners desires based on all the variables that come with every distinct listening space is critical. I can run my set up in as many as six pre sets including FLAT, and I can switch them on the fly... zero'ed out EQ can't come close to a custom leveled set up to my ears. I understand why putting another component in line might be an issue, but I don't hear a loss in resolution, gain in distortion, or loss of presence... as a matter of fact, it is enhanced. I get room treatments to combat issues, but I feel the EQ does more than correct room issues. By the way... isn't the eq is already in "the path" even it's zero'ed out? That is unless pass through is selected. Edited August 3, 2014 by Schu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heritage_Head Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 Wow! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heritage_Head Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 (edited) Thanks for letting us know what you think of us. Edited August 3, 2014 by reference_head Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heritage_Head Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 Most here haven't heard or experienced a tube driven system using a really good set of passives, and even that world has several levels of transparency and musicality associated with it. There is "musical" solid state too, it's just harder to find -- most tube gear is musical by default. (bolded by me to highlight) into Khorns that had Al's extreme slope crossover That's your definition of "simplicity"? I've also spent some time with those networks in my own Klipschorns, and wasn't very impressed with them -- I sent them back to Al. I thought they were considered a good pair, though not necessarily simple. I guess an interpretation of that could be you think Al's ES crossovers aren't very good. (?) Tis ok by me. I don't like mustard.....perhaps you & others do. The bold is pimping each other Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heritage_Head Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 No one is calling a xo a eq. But they both can and do change the sound. Changing the driver levels is a form of eq. It's just much larger than a single frequency. Lower the mid horn 6db would be eq everything in the midrange frequency that that driver handles down 6db. This is absurd? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 (edited) Craig is thinking in the context of equalizers and/or active processing, and to the same extent, so was I -- because that's what we were comparing passive crossovers to. We were trying to keep the emphasis on parts quality and how it relates to signal quality. You keep trying to drag us back into this signal shaping thing, which isn't even what we were trying to address. Fine, I concede. Dropping or raising the output of a driver with an autotransformer is "EQ". Now, how does that properly relate to this discussion in its proper context? Don, in the cable myths thread, I learned that a lot of people just like bombastic output, and wouldn't know how to recognize a musical system even if it came up and bit them in the ***. Edited August 3, 2014 by DeanG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 (edited) "Bold" ... That's just me supporting what I think sounds better to me personally (passive networks with high quality parts). I don't see where I'm "pimping" (or shilling) for Craig and/or Nos Valves. There are quite a few manufacturers of good quality tube equipment out there, and I like the sound of a lot of it. When someone comes in and asks what kind of tube amp to buy, you won't see me jumping in and recommending VRDs, and when someone asks about crossovers, you won't see Craig jumping in and telling them to check out my crossovers. We deliberately refrain from doing that for obvious reasons. I think most people just like "tinkle boom speakers". I've rarely seen settings on an EQ that doesn't reflect this. Some are using equalizers (usually parametric) correctly. They take a lot of in room measurements, and then use good software to help them make the proper adjustments. I tried this with my Denon and Audyssey. I spent a half a day with that business, and after five hours, decided it sounded better without it. Whatever. I spent some time tonight checking out consumer version, high quality active units -- the kind I might actually consider using. Pretty much like I figured -- no wonder you guys use EV and DBX. In typical forum fashion, no one is going to change anyone's mind about anything. Edited August 3, 2014 by DeanG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derrickdj1 Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 (edited) I see XO upgrad and EQ a little different. The upgrade replaces cheap, worn out , or improved design of the xo in the speaker and will change the sound. EQ is used to tailor the sound due to the room, speaker location, ect. and will change the sound. There is no reason that both can't be used synergistically. E ither will improve the sound in the room and both used together is best since most of us don't have a perfect acoustically designed room. The old notion of not EQ'ing the mains in 2 ch. systems, is just old. Edited August 3, 2014 by derrickdj1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallette Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 Hmm...looks like dangerous waters, but after scanning a few posts here will at least wade. One of the earliest maxims I ever heard in audio was "the best amplifier would be a straight wire with gain." In all things audio since, whether playback or recording, I have attempted to heed that. I find it to be TRVTH, at least for my ears. I do not do a lot of measuring and such to balance my system, but simply use the minimum path I can between source and speakers. It's served me well. I will be balancing my new Cinema F-20 subwoofer this afternoon to my K'horns. I'll do it by listening to recordings I know well, my own and others. I'll tweak when I hear something that doesn't sound accurate. Eventually, I'll get it where I am happy, and I'll do so without so much as an SPL meter. Like Dean said, no one is going to change anyone's mind about anything, and I am not trying. Just stating my story and sticking to it... Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebse2a3 Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 (edited) What exactly is the point of what your postings in here? They are gear heads that this hobby really has very little to do with music or the love of it... plenty of folks are in this for all kinds of reasons...some are what I call the techno babble crowd...they spend more time reading specs and debating about the importance of them then they do listening to music.. If you didn't get my point I don't think any more explanations will help. So I guess by your description PWK fits into the "gear heads" and "techno babble crowd" since he spent a lifetime measuring his loudspeakers and used those tests with listening tests to improve his designs....... I learned long ago specifications and techno babble that goes with them are completely useless in this hobby! Sure you want good specs but they will tell you zero about what something will sound like regardless of the type of gear were talking about. Why would you want good specifications if they are "completely useless" and "they will tell you zero about what something will sound like" ....? miketn Edited August 3, 2014 by mikebse2a3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcmusic Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 (edited) I see XO upgrad and EQ a little different. The upgrade replaces cheap, worn out , or improved design of the xo in the speaker and will change the sound. EQ is used to tailor the sound due to the room, speaker location, ect. and will change the sound. There is no reason that both can't be used synergistically. E ither will improve the sound in the room and both used together is best since most of us don't have a perfect acoustically designed room. The old notion of not EQ'ing the mains in 2 ch. systems, is just old. Here is a pretty obvious pic to that fact!!! My room before and after a little acoustic treatment and eq.... pretty much a night a day difference!!! Edited August 3, 2014 by canyonman 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebse2a3 Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 One of the earliest maxims I ever heard in audio was "the best amplifier would be a straight wire with gain." In all things audio since, whether playback or recording, I have attempted to heed that. I find it to be TRVTH, at least for my ears. I do not do a lot of measuring and such to balance my system, but simply use the minimum path I can between source and speakers. It's served me well. Ah Dave the challenge .......what is the minimum path and is your minimum path sufficient to deal with the real world of audio reproduction where rooms are less than ideal and we have limited flexibility to deal with the acoustical issues they have? What do you do when so many real world recordings suck? Do you stop listening to that music or suffer through it? I will be balancing my new Cinema F-20 subwoofer this afternoon to my K'horns. I'll do it by listening to recordings I know well, my own and others. I'll tweak when I hear something that doesn't sound accurate. Eventually, I'll get it where I am happy, and I'll do so without so much as an SPL meter. Dave it's like your bragging....."and I'll do so without so much as an SPL meter.".... Yes the listening experience has to be the final judge but why would you not use tools that can help you to understand even more what might improve your system or assist you in achieving your goal? People like PWK, Heyser, Toole and many others have set very good examples of how Technology and the Trained listener can advance the reproduction art. They both can have the same end goal of accuracy in reproduction if used properly. miketn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 No you EQ it or add more garbage in the path to fix it.....hate to tell you dude that ain't fixing shite..... Then why does it sound better after putting "more garbage" in the "path"? Hate to tell you, dude, but you're clueless. Yea okay start the insults and see where it gets you. You are definitely in the boneheaded techo babble anal retentive crowd... Specs, Specs, Specs....the spec's are better so it has to be better.....you wouldn't know quality sound if it came up a slapped you in both ears at once. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvel Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 Specs, Specs, Specs....the spec's are better so it has to be better.....you wouldn't know quality sound if it came up a slapped you in both ears at once. Lighten up. You are responding in kind. Sheesh... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOSValves Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 What exactly is the point of what your postings in here? They are gear heads that this hobby really has very little to do with music or the love of it... plenty of folks are in this for all kinds of reasons...some are what I call the techno babble crowd...they spend more time reading specs and debating about the importance of them then they do listening to music.. If you didn't get my point I don't think any more explanations will help. So I guess by your description PWK fits into the "gear heads" and "techno babble crowd" since he spent a lifetime measuring his loudspeakers and used those tests with listening tests to improve his designs....... I learned long ago specifications and techno babble that goes with them are completely useless in this hobby! Sure you want good specs but they will tell you zero about what something will sound like regardless of the type of gear were talking about. Why would you want good specifications if they are "completely useless" and "they will tell you zero about what something will sound like" ....? miketn You really can be an obnoxious A-hole but hey I've known that for years..... Let me repeat myself and please do not take what I say out on context again.... SPECIFICATIONS tell you ABSOLUTELY nothing about how something will sound....IF THEY DID the hobby would be very boring and we wouldn't have a thing to debate. We would all simply go down to the local box store and all buy the EXACT same thing. Two of the same types of devices can have specifications that are dead nuts identical and sound completely different. So putting too much emphasis on specifications and tests is a road to disappointment.... Do you really think Paul Klipsch or any audio designer worth a shite really designs by specification alone.... if Paul Klipsch did then why not use the drivers with best specifications available in his speakers? Hell look at the POS driver is in the infamous Jubilee... that thing is not even remotely the best driver for that horn specification wise! THEY USE the most important piece of test gear available as the final judge, yup those good old reliable ears...problem is many around here don't have them...especially the techno babble crowd. I tell you what I've sat back and read on the side lines around here for a long time now while painfully watching a good number of boneheads lead the crowd in here to total ear bleed....for some reason these days I'm just sick of reading the total Bullshit spewed around here.. The techo babble bunch needs to head to the ear doctor and get a check up the damage has to be severe... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.