Belle listening fatigue

[Chris A]

30 minutes ago, billybob said:

Countless third-party add-on and plug-in products keep the computer industry advancing at a rapid pace. The third-party vendor is often the most innovative

This portion wasn't on the Google search page result definition that I saw.  The one that I referenced included only the prior sentences. While it may be true that third-party products can be more innovative, that doesn't mean that they are. 

 

In fact, and by way of example, most that I come across are simply less expensive alternatives, like spark plugs, oil and air filters, brake pads, and even transmission fluid.  Usually the third party products (especially replacement hardware parts for your auto) are much cheaper than OEM prices. Most consumers accept the usually more limited life and/or performance of the third-party parts without complaint. I know that I do.  I also haven't gone onto an OEM's website to champion third party products.

 

13 minutes ago, Honeybadger said:

You pimp this product on the forum more than any vendor.

 

You mean the Klipsch K-510 and K-402 modified tractrix horns?  They are spectacular horns compared to any others that I've heard.  If you ever heard them set up well using good compression drivers, good active digital crossovers balanced properly, and good room acoustics, I don't believe that you'd go back to using "tractrix horns with no equalization".  YMMV.

 

I wasn't talking about a "tractrix midrange horn" by the way. Those are actually different animals.

 

 

Chris

[Max2]

42 minutes ago, Honeybadger said:

What I have found is Tractrix horns sound great, and they do not require equalization, 3 amplifiers and active crossover.

 

I have tried it all, and gone back to passives with Tractrix.

 

You pimp this product on the forum more than any vendor.

 

Hey, Chris has it made. No infringement here for "modding" your source content.

[jwc]

20 minutes ago, Chris A said:

You mean the Klipsch K-510 and K-402 modified tractrix horns?  They are spectacular horns compared to any others that I've heard.  If you ever heard them set up well using good compression drivers, good active digital crossovers balanced properly, and good room acoustics, I don't believe that you'd go back to using "tractrix horns with no equalization".  YMMV.

 

I would still say the K402 is the best thing Klipsch has.....sadly, I don't own one right now.

 

However, I did have a K402 with a TAD driver and an EVDx38 with Roys settings as a two way on two different bass bins.  Not the Jube-like clone I had for awhile.  dBBs and the KPT-904's.

 

I also had Roys digital settings on a K510 on two bass bins as two way.

 

You know....I've heard the TADS elsewhere as well with Digital and appropriate settings.

 

So here we go.....I'll say it....I have found out.....I don't like two-way (Smart a$$es will love that).  Go ahead and shoot me.....but that is how it is. 

 

When I had my own settings EQ'ed (active but not digital) (because Klipsch doesn't have home settings), the K402 and the K510 together for three-way was the best.  Hands down to my ears.  I would say the same what I've heard at Mark1101's house. 

 

The mids out of the K402 is killer. 

 

I love pure tractrix in three way too.  Seems I'm back to that ..... for now.

 

 

[Chris A]

What active crossover(s) in which configurations were you using, if I might ask?

 

I've found sonic differences using a Yamaha SP2060 vs. Dx38 - significant ones.

[jwc]

Dx38 and DBX PA with K402 with TAD or K69; 510 with 69.    Then later moved to more than one Ashly Analog Active XO and more than one Analog Active EQ.  Preferred the Ashly setups and then later moved to the three way rigs with K1133

[Deang]

I thought the three-way Jubilee walked all over the two-way. Two things stopped me from going three-way; room and money - but it was the three-way I fell in love with. Just killer all the way around. 

[billybob]

 

Chris A,

This portion wasn't on the Google search page result definition that I saw.  The one that I referenced included only the prior sentences. While it may be true that third-party products can be more innovative, that doesn't mean that they are. 

 

Your link carried me to the definition at the top of the page:

 

 

separate individual or organization other than the two principals involved. A third party is typically a company that provides an auxiliary product not supplied by the primary manufacturer to the end user (the two principals).

third party Definition from PC Magazine Encyclopedia

www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia/term/52846/third-party

PC Magazine

 

***Click on the PC link and there is where the last sentence was added on to the definition. I did not do it...

If you only use OEM parts, you may find out that they are not available...

 

[Chris A]

16 hours ago, Max2 said:

Hey, Chris has it made. No infringement here for "modding" your source content.

Actually, I'd characterize that activity more like un-FUBARing what the music companies tried to "produce for maximum commercialization" (i.e., one size fits all...especially those little earbuds that came with your iPods).

 

It's like using an EQ file for each track, except I don't have to live with the clipping and line noise, too, and I don't have to keep remembering which EQ file to use on which track.  If you want to put it back the way it was, that's not an issue--just pull out the CD master on the shelf and copy over the flac tracks on the hard drive. Voila!

 

I now know what it means to be a "mastering engineer" at least from the functions of the exact EQ and clipping used, for each genre. and each artist. It's actually fairly interesting. Perhaps there's money in telling that story.  Perhaps self-published via Amazon?  I'd bet it would be better than The Confessions of Congressman X  and 1001 Albums You Must Hear Before You Die.

 

Chris

[Max2]

15 minutes ago, Chris A said:

Actually, I'd characterize that activity more like un-FUBARing what the music companies tried to "produce for maximum commercialization" (i.e., one size fits all...especially those little earbuds that came with your iPods).

 

It's like using an EQ file for each track, except I don't have to live with the clipping and line noise, too, and I don't have to keep remembering which EQ file to use on which track.  If you want to put it back the way it was, that's not an issue--just pull out the CD master on the shelf and copy over the flac tracks on the hard drive. Voila!

 

I now know what it means to be a "mastering engineer" at least from the functions of the exact EQ and clipping used, for each genre. and each artist. It's actually fairly interesting. Perhaps there's money in telling that story.  Perhaps self-published via Amazon?  I'd bet it would be better than The Confessions of Congressman X  and 1001 Albums You Must Hear Before You Die...?

 

Chris

 

What well known recording have you found that needs minimal work and what well known have you found that needs the most?

 

Thanks

 

 

Just speaking to studio mixed recordings and not too old

[Chris A]

Yes, the best ones are in this post:

And some of the worst in this one:

 

I haven't compiled a list of Razzie awards yet.  The one that comes to mind is "Little Shop of Horrors" soundtrack (the 1980s musical, that is), which was unbelievable and totally unlistenable.  I think that I used over 27 dB of attenuation at 1000 Hz relative to 50 Hz and 10 kHz.  Amazing.  I'm pretty sure that no one actually listened to that disc before its release.

 

[cincymat]

I'm sitting here listening to Joni Mitchell's Court and Spark that Chris has "unMastered" and it really sounds so much more engaging than the original. Chris knows his stuff. Oh, and so does Dean since his cross overs are in my La Scalas. Haven't taken the digital cross over plunge just yet.

 

Mark

[mustang guy]

2 hours ago, babadono said:

Otay! Good try. Can you say Egg McMuffin?

Try saying Peanut Buster Parfait three times. My wife always kidded me about the fact that I get tongue twisted saying it once.

[dBspl]

5 hours ago, Deang said:

Seeing that peak, why did PK choose to do nothing about it? He even designed a filter for the Belle that had no low pass section - he ran the woofer straight out. The LaScala and Klipschhorn have a similar issue. I don't know for how long he did this, but PK did the same thing with his Klipschorns - no low pass - just two caps and the autoformer. What led to this thinking, and why did it stay in place for so long? Just seems weird to me.  

 

 

 

I never really understood why the early Belle's didn't utilize a low-pass filter in the woofer leg, either. I was told it was because the woofer horn had trouble getting out to 500 Hz - which is true. However, it also had a very shallow roll-off which resulted in a wide crossover interference band.  The solution is to add Q to a low-pass filter to boost the region just before cut-off. I believe this was eventually done.   

 

On the other hand, I don't see why the absence of a low-pass filter on the mid-range (I think that's what you mean) is necessarily bad? The K-55 cuts off really hard. As long as the output is attenuated enough not to cause interference with the tweeter output, what's the harm?

 

Kerry 

[Deang]

My comment was strictly in the context of the low pass section.

 

I totally agree with you regarding the midrange driver/horn combinations. I've argued that same point around here ad nauseum. 

[oldtimer]

I'm throwing up right now.

[oldtimer]

2 hours ago, Chris A said:

Yes, the best ones are in this post:

And some of the worst in this one:

 

I haven't compiled a list of Razzie awards yet.  The one that comes to mind is "Little Shop of Horrors" soundtrack (the 1980s musical, that is), which was unbelievable and totally unlistenable.  I think that I used over 27 dB of attenuation at 1000 Hz relative to 50 Hz and 10 kHz.  Amazing.  I'm pretty sure that no one actually listened to that disc before its release.

 

I couldn't listen to it before its release. 

[mark1101]

6 hours ago, jwc said:

Honestly, I couldn't have lived with the Belle w/o an EQ or something.  It would have been a piece of showoff furniture.

 

Plus.....the tweeters didn't match.  Which do I replace.  Does the most modern day network   (last type made) work in this "version" of Belle?  Too many unknowns to "Keep Klipsch".

 

So I'm in the camp of "updates" if the retired bone stock Klipsch doesn't have available replacement parts appropriate.

 

Why in the Hell am I getting into this discussion.........I need to shut up.

 

Good lord........I had you covered, and then this.  Can't help you now bro except to say I never saw any of those Belle mods.

[WMcD]

On the other hand, I don't see why the absence of a low-pass filter on the mid-range (I think that's what you mean) is necessarily bad? The K-55 cuts off really hard. As long as the output is attenuated enough not to cause interference with the tweeter output, what's the harm?  Per Kerry.

 

If I understand, the described none existent  low pass filter on the mid  design is to say that if the highs are cut off and we would overall we get a passband filter rather than just the high pass (at 500 Hz or so).

 

The issue is whether there is energy above say, 6000 Hz from the K-400 or K-500 with any of the K-55's.  It seems to me that even though driver output is dropping, the narrowing of the pattern above 3000 Hz is causing on axis gain.  This allows the mid output to go very much higher.  PWK, apparently based on the F-M curve did not like to crossover to the tweeter at 3500 Hz where the F-M curve shows the ear to be most sensitive. And the gain allowed this lower crossover point to be avoided.

 

Please consider the Dope from Hope on the new phase plug.  The graphs show a glitch at about 7000 Hz, though it moves a bit higher with the better phase plug.  Yes, Bob C has said it doesn't exist or only on some drivers.  I don't want to misquote him of course.

 

Therefore, if the DfH is accurate, then there are outputs from the mid in the tweeter region.  It seems to me the polar narrowing is doing too good a job.

 

There is some evidence of problems.  The Heyser review reports issues with female vocals (can they sing this high?)   The Vacuum Tube Valley article recommends the P-Trap to get rid of the glitch which reportedly eliminates a "shouty" effect.  The new crossovers are bandpass in the mid with a high freq rolloff starting at 4500 Hz, which should attenuate the glitch significantly.  (I think there are some earlier ones too on other units from Klipsch.) There is a lot of fishing in these waters.

 

- - - -  -

 

I'm also wondering about the theory of keeping our crossover problems out of 3500 Hz where the F-M curve shows the ear is most sensitive, which is true.  It seems to me this is the region where the ear is least sensitive to changes in level.

 

If we have constructive interference we get a 3 dB rise.  No so bad.  We hear the soujnd.

 

If we have destructive interference we could get a total null, but realistically let's say -40 dB at best / worse. Edit, we have to look at the F-M curve in terms of phons.

 

The initial though is that -40 dB dip is awful. "Oh my gosh, there is a hole and I can't hear anything -40 dB,"   However, the F-M curve shows that our ears can hear down to this lower level  (phons) at 3500 Hz better than at any other freq.  So we still perceive the sound.  There may be a hole, be we hear sound in the hole.

 

Essentially, although 3500 Hz is where our ear is most sensitive, it is also the place where our ear is least sensitive to the destructive interference dip.

 

I may have to ponder further.

 

WMcD

 

 

 

 

 

[oldtimer]

I thought the discussion had progressed beyond those issues to the differences between the actual shape of the horns?  It wouldn't be the first time that I have been wrong however.

[mark1101]

6 hours ago, Chris A said:

I believe that's a bit over the top (in terms of cynicism).  I don't believe that there is a conspiracy, but I do believe that common sense applies.

 

1) If what you're doing is DIY, especially if using Klipsch-supplied hardware, then no one can really have a problem.  You take full responsibility for the integration.

 

2) If you're using third-party HW, then just be aware that there is no "magic", only lower prices, but perhaps lower performance (i.e., you shouldn't expect the highest performance with third party HW). You take full responsibility for the integration.

 

3) If you're using third-party HW that's advertised to have magical properties or performance exceeding Klipsch's hardware, then I'd recommend keeping it to yourself, or at least not advertised on this forum.

 

I don't think that's too much to ask, especially since Klipsch is providing this service free-of-charge.  I think a healthy respect for their interests is warranted and fair.  Wouldn't you if you were providing this kind of service (a quality web site) free of charge, on top of trying to run a business...Mark (both of you)?

 

Chris

 

Yes.......just ribbing the town.

 

I am ALL FOR MODS, UPDATES, UPGRADES, SALT AND PEPPER, EQ, NICE CAPS, WHISKEY BOTTLES......whatever you want to call these things.  I totally support DIY for home experimentation and entertainment......not to sell for profit.  I support all DIY....even Claude and his whatchamacallit pumpkin pies.  Most posts in forum history possibly.

 

Routinely, unique home built stuff shows up here built upon Klipsch platforms.  It's one of the most important reasons I come here year after year.

 

Now I wouldn't drill out my precious 402s to try and build a Danley out of a Klipsch..........but I get it.  That was a cool project even though a nice pair of horns went to the dark side.  Might not be a klipsch speaker anymore.

 

I just hope that the future support of DIY is safe and continues around here for that purpose...............and maybe some helpful hints when a mistake gets detected.  We all know the old man would make his point but I bet he would be easy on us given we have been his biggest fans.

`