AA networks...

[erik2A3]

18 hours ago, Deang said:

 

We did this in Hope back in 2007. The passive filter walked all over the active set up. Didn't talk to a single person in the room except two who saw it any other way. 

 

To make this statement, I'm guessing you have a pair of Jubilee passives on hand. What parts did you use - and where are your comparison plots proving your assertions?

 

What brought all of you to that conclusion?  I'm assuming this comparison was based on listening to each with all things being equal except line-level active vs passive frequency division.  Is that correct?  If so, were the differences immediately obvious?

 

edit: Please disregard the bottom portion of the quote.  I'm still used to the old days, and it's the first time since then I have even tried to use the quote function when responding to another member's post.

[PrestonTom]

8 hours ago, wvu80 said:

 

I'm not Dean, but your premise is not correct.  Dean has made it clear that in the past he assembled and sold networks, I don't remember him saying he designed them.  More to your point, he is NOT designing them now. 

 

If your premise was correct Tom, your conclusion would be as well, but I don't think that's the case here.  Dean can correct me if I'm wrong, it won't hurt my feelings.

My mistake. I stand corrected.

[Chris A]

14 hours ago, Chris A said:

Fair enough - I'll start a new thread on the subject to leave this one to its intended purpose.

 

Chris

Here is a link to the start of that new thread:

 

[sunnysal]

Ray's comments made me remember way back when I played around with my system I think the most significant positive contribution to improving the sound of my system was made with steep slope crossovers.  Looking back at the period where I implemented triamping, time and phase adjustments, swapped out drivers, amps, etc. the only thing that really shook my world was when I had extremely steep crossover slopes.  That seemed to provide numerous sonic benefits.  In the end I dumped all that electronic wizardry and went back to a tube amp and ALK's first run of crossovers.  I am happy with the music my system makes.  But I still think about implementing a steep slope crossover again (without all the electronics, just a nice, analog steep slope xover). Warm regards, Tony 

[NOSValves]

Tony,

 

 No way could you enjoy it like that  the graphs tell us its not possible...

[richieb]

55 minutes ago, NOSValves said:

Tony,

 

 No way could you enjoy it like that  the graphs tell us its not possible...

 

That's pretty good. You mean to say graphs can't enjoy the same system we find enjoyable? I'm sure graphs would have me putting my rig out to the curb for the scrapers to find - KHorns and all!

[NOSValves]

yup....

[mark1101]

Tony said:

Looking back at the period where I implemented triamping, time and phase adjustments, swapped out drivers, amps, etc. the only thing that really shook my world was when I had extremely steep crossover slopes.  That seemed to provide numerous sonic benefits.  In the end I dumped all that electronic wizardry and went back to a tube amp and ALK's first run of crossovers.  I am happy with the music my system makes.  But I still think about implementing a steep slope crossover again (without all the electronics, just a nice, analog steep slope xover). Warm regards, Tony 

 

 

 

I am right in the middle of this myself right now.  My MCM and all digital setup with all the bells and whistles and time alignment simply does not have the "life, front to back 3D soundstage and dynamics" of my most recent passive system with steep slope passives, analog EQ, tube pre and amps.  Having the ability to do virtually instantaneous comparisons between both sharing common sources brought me back to all this that I had and traded for the technically correct digital world.

 

For those interested I posted a picture of this setup in the "show your cornscalas" thread.  Yeah, not even bass horns.  

 

What I found over time is that just because a system is "technically correct"...........that is something totally separate from the actual quality of the sound.  A simpler, less technically correct setup can be more pleasing to listen to.  Wow..........I really said that.  

 

I really enjoy having both since the big digital setup also has some pleasing characteristics that the simpler passive system does not.

 

But in the end, eyes shut..........I am really enjoying my trip back to simple with tubes.

 

While I am not using AA networks right now, I do have one in a lascala we took out over Memorial weekend and enjoyed for several hours in mono.  I do share the appreciation for the simple now and again.

[Chief bonehead]

11 hours ago, NOSValves said:

Tony,

 

 No way could you enjoy it like that  the graphs tell us its not possible...

Right it's magic. 

[Chief bonehead]

Enjoy what you like. Ignorance is bliss. 

[mustang guy]

I would really like to A/B an in-spec AA LaScala with a brand new LaScala II. I would like to know what I am missing, if anything. As Dave can attest, I am a bit OCD with stuff like this, so if I no longer have the ignorance of that comparison, it might drive me crazy.

 

In my case, "ignorance is me not going crazy. 

 

Bliss: supreme happiness; utter joy or contentment (dictionary.com)
Sane: free from mental derangement; having a sound, healthy mind (dictionary.com) 

[NOSValves]

12 hours ago, Chief bonehead said:

Enjoy what you like. Ignorance is bliss. 

 

 

I'm pretty sure Paul was pretty happy with the sound coming out of speakers outfitted with type A and type AA networks when he designed them... I guess that means his "ignorance was bliss"... 

[Don Richard]

1 hour ago, NOSValves said:

I'm pretty sure Paul was pretty happy with the sound coming out of speakers outfitted with type A and type AA networks when he designed them...

 

And I'm sure he was happy with the ones he designed after that too.

[mikebse2a3]

32 minutes ago, Don Richard said:

 

And I'm sure he was happy with the ones he designed after that too.

 

+1

 

Funny and sad how some people assume they know what PWK would think or do.

 

Wonder why he bothered becoming an engineer or supporting his old college when magic is all we need. 

 

this HTML class. Value is http://ece3.nmsu.edu

 

miketn 

[ClaudeJ1]

38 minutes ago, Don Richard said:

 

And I'm sure he was happy with the ones he designed after that too.

When I was in hope in August 1985, 4 years before he sold the company to Fred, I was in the lab with Paul and Jim Hunter (when he had dark hair and more of it). Paul seemed surprised at the slopes of the latest Khorn network as designed by Jim Hunter for the K55 driver made by EV. So, I'm assuming he never designed the newer networks beyond the A and AA. He appeared to be less involved with the day to day activities in the plant at that time. I'm sure Hunter could tell us more.

[Chief bonehead]

7 hours ago, NOSValves said:

 

 

I'm pretty sure Paul was pretty happy with the sound coming out of speakers outfitted with type A and type AA networks when he designed them... I guess that means his "ignorance was bliss"... 

Lol!!  So you were the guy mr k talked about....connects so many dots....

[Chief bonehead]

10 hours ago, ClaudeJ1 said:

When I was in hope in August 1985, 4 years before he sold the company to Fred, I was in the lab with Paul and Jim Hunter (when he had dark hair and more of it). Paul seemed surprised at the slopes of the latest Khorn network as designed by Jim Hunter for the K55 driver made by EV. So, I'm assuming he never designed the newer networks beyond the A and AA. He appeared to be less involved with the day to day activities in the plant at that time. I'm sure Hunter could tell us more.

Or roy.....and you assume waaaaaay to much. 

[NOSValves]

So Paul released a product he wasn't happy with? 

[Max2]

Why did Klipsch cut the mid output 3db or so with the AK-2?  Was the AL-2 and AB-2 done the same way?     It seemed the 3 series brought the mid output back to the normal levels.  Does  anyone have any info on why this came about?

[absolve2525]

Why does the AK2 get attacked? Some people prefer less forward midrange. I would always see people on here saying to dump the AK2 and move to AK3 or something else. I'm honestly curious.