Jump to content
The Klipsch Audio Community

Recommended Posts

I’m confused. When I listen to say Sarah McLachlan angel on my rf-7III the sound is impeccable and so beautiful it could bring me to tears. But then I go to David grey sail away on tidal and it just seems to all fall apart, I mean it’s not horrible but from angel to sail away I just don’t know how there’s such a drastic change in overall quality and depth and Fidelity and clarity And both are so called hifi quality. I don’t understand how it can be both “hifi”  music and I’m sure both well recorded but yet the sound quality on my end is so different. And this happens with many songs sometimes. Why does this happen? And like it’s kinda loud but Not too loud only at around -33 and it seems about 2 times close to when the songs almost over when Sara is singing the tweeter starts ringing or distorting for just a split second or so and it seems like its only coming from my right rf7iii. Probably has to do with the crossover or the horn? I’ve noticed klipsch speakers don’t like certain tones. Does anyone else get or notice things like this from Angel or any other songs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Klipsch are very revealing.  Feed them music that's been recorded well and they'll sound fantastic.  Feed them anything less and you'll experience what you're describing. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/28/2020 at 11:27 PM, David y said:

...But then I go to David grey sail away on tidal and it just seems to all fall apart, I mean it’s not horrible but from angel to sail away I just don’t know how there’s such a drastic change in overall quality and depth and Fidelity and clarity And both are so called hifi quality. I don’t understand how it can be both “hifi”  music and I’m sure both well recorded but yet the sound quality on my end is so different...

 

The studio that mastered the album that you speak of (White Ladders by David Grey) is named "360 Mastering" in the UK. They currently advertise the following loudspeakers that they use:

 

PMC-MB2S-XBD-A Active Monitoring System

PMC-MB2S-XBD-2.jpg?v-cache=1544808969

Amplifier power per channel: LF 600W, LF 600W, MF 120W , HF 120W
Crossover frequency: 380Hz & 3.8kHz
Dimensions: H 68.5" W 15" D  21"
Drivers: LF x 2 (12" driver) , MF (1"  fabric dome) , HF (soft dome)
Weight: 194 lbs

 

Genelec 1029a active nearfield monitor

Speaker_Genelec1029A_Med_1.jpg

 

SPL -- Short term RMS @ 1m -- 100 dB SPL, Peak per pair with music material 110 dB SPL @ 1m

Drivers -- Bass 5", Treble 3/4" metal dome + DCW

Crossover frequencies 3.3 kHz

Free field frequency response ± 2.5dB (70 - 18,000 Hz)

Amplifier power / ch -- Bass 40 W, Treble 40 W

 

Here is a shot of their current studio:

54f6f9_061ec024c5ba42288a2e07c4cafc8384.

 

The above is part of the issue with the track in question, but especially the judgments of the person who did the mastering and the musician that accepted his work.  The track of which you speak (Sail Away) has a dynamic range rating of 9 (dB).  (I don't own a copy of track.)  Apparently the mastering person pushed the loudness of the track too far and couldn't hear the effects of that loudness level on the loudspeakers and room shown above...or he could hear the effects but chose to make it that loud anyway.  There is an unknown amount of compression and limiting used in this track, probably well over 10 dB.

 

The Sarah McLachlan track (Angel) has a dynamic range rating of 12 (dB), i.e., 3 dB higher.  I own a copy of this track from the album Surfacing.  While the album isn't terrible, it does have ~3 dB of clipping average across the album.  The particular track that you identify (Angel) has a solo piano and female voice with an electric bass accompaniment that was overdubbed after the voice and piano were recorded.  This track isn't particularly hi-fi, but it's not terrible either. It sounds "edgy" as released, not really very close to what it would sound like live without amplification--and more like the microphones used were placed too close to the singer and piano.  There is also a fair amount of artificial reverberation used.  It has about 1 dB of limiting/EQ to compress the dynamic range.  The is an unknown amount of compression used in this track, probably ~6 dB.

 

Chris

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, David y said:

I’m confused. When I listen to say Sarah McLachlan angel on my rf-7III the sound is impeccable and so beautiful it could bring me to tears. But then I go to David grey sail away on tidal and it just seems to all fall apart, I mean it’s not horrible but from angel to sail away I just don’t know how there’s such a drastic change in overall quality and depth and Fidelity and clarity And both are so called hifi quality. I don’t understand how it can be both “hifi”  music and I’m sure both well recorded but yet the sound quality on my end is so different. And this happens with many songs sometimes. Why does this happen?

All recordings are not created equal.  Different sound engineers, philosophies, compression, etc. can contribute to the quality, good or bad, of the final product.  The more revealing the system the more revealing sound that hits your ears.  If the master recording is not good quality, nothing can be done to make it "better".

 

One example of great sound engineering is the group Steely Dan.  Their worst most compressed least dynamic copies are better than 75% of what you can find out there.  

 Google "Loudness Wars" and you will see.

 

Bill

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) The recording engineer is king. Everything and anything he/she does will affect how EVERYTHING further down the line will sound. As Chris mentioned above there are a multitude of things that can be done, especially nowadays, to enhance or destroy the quality of the recording depending on the poison(s) chosen.

 

1B) add to that the mastering engineer

1C) add to that the post production engineer

1D) add to that any re-mastering engineer (happens more than you think)

1E) hopefully the producer and mastering/remastering engineer are not someone like Jimmy Page, Iggy Pop or Pete Townsend - guys who are not quite completely deaf yet, but might as well be.

 

2) Then there is the room YOU are listening in. This is often the most overlooked, unacknowledged component. In my experience, when you finally get your "system" (including the room) properly balanced, unbiased, you will still notice all these differences from recording to recording (as you well should), but you'll also begin to notice that many of the irritating qualities of various recordings go away, or at least are substantially reduced. More of what you listen to will sound better.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, willland said:

All recordings are not created equal.  Different sound engineers, philosophies, compression, etc. can contribute to the quality, good or bad, of the final product.  The more revealing the system the more revealing sound that hits your ears.  If the master recording is not good quality, nothing can be done to make it "better".

 

One example of great sound engineering is the group Steely Dan.  Their worst most compressed least dynamic copies are better than 75% of what you can find out there.  

 Google "Loudness Wars" and you will see.

 

Bill

 

Google Loudness Wars + Iggy Pop. There's an excellent example floating around out there showing how Iggy Pop literally destroyed remastering one of his older recordings for re-issue to make it sound louder. It ain't pretty. A perfect example of how & why the older original recording "sounds better"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, willland said:

All recordings are not created equal.

 

Bill

 

I believe in the direct method... ^This

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Schu said:

 

I believe in the direct method... ^This

 Which is? (what)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@artto said .. @David y

 

Then there is the room YOU are listening in. This is often the most overlooked, unacknowledged component. In my experience, when you finally get your "system" (including the room) properly balanced, unbiased, you will still notice all these differences from recording to recording (as you well should), but you'll also begin to notice that many of the irritating qualities of various recordings go away, or at least are substantially reduced. More of what you listen to will sound better.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I’m listening to it on tidal which is suppose to be equal to cd quality. Or atleast I think masters is. Yes I’m starting to do a little research on how important your room is. But on the tidal desktop app they don’t have the critical listening mode like they do on the phone app. So I’m trying to figure out which way would acually sound better, either through the phone app Bluetooth or hardwired through thround the desktop app on windows 10. I’m guessing Windows 10 cause it’s not Bluetooth. If anyone knows this question for sure please be kind enough to answer it for me. Also, thank you guys for all the other answers. I downloaded some hi rez audio from the audiophiliac and it sounds quite lovely, enjoying that as I speak. I think I’m going to end up buying a CD player. Is that the best way to get the beat sounding and best quality Audio. I’ve also heard of the lumen d2 which is like a music streamer that takes music from all of the streaming apps or something but it’s suppose to be better quality than cd, idk about that but what I do know is it would be another 2 grand about. 🤷‍♂️. What would you guys recommend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Chris A said:

 

The studio that mastered the album that you speak of (White Ladders by David Grey) is named "360 Mastering" in the UK. They currently advertise the following loudspeakers that they use:

 

PMC-MB2S-XBD-A Active Monitoring System

PMC-MB2S-XBD-A-2T.jpg?v-cache=1544808969

 

Amplifier power per channel: LF 600W, LF 600W, MF 120W , HF 120W
Crossover frequency: 380Hz & 3.8kHz
Dimensions: H 68.5" W 15" D  21"
Drivers: LF x 2 (12" driver) , MF (1"  fabric dome) , HF (soft dome)
Weight: 194 lbs

 

Genelec 1029a active nearfield monitor

Speaker_Genelec1029A_Med_1.jpg

 

SPL -- Short term RMS @ 1m -- 100 dB SPL, Peak per pair with music material 110 dB SPL @ 1m

Drivers -- Bass 5", Treble 3/4" metal dome + DCW

Crossover frequencies 3.3 kHz

Free field frequency response ± 2.5dB (70 - 18,000 Hz)

Amplifier power / ch -- Bass 40 W, Treble 40 W

 

Here is a shot of their current studio:

54f6f9_061ec024c5ba42288a2e07c4cafc8384.

 

The above is part of the issue with the track in question, but especially the judgments of the person who did the mastering and the musician that accepted his work.  The track of which you speak (Sail Away) has a dynamic range rating of 9 (dB).  (I don't own a copy of track.)  Apparently the mastering person pushed the loudness of the track too far and couldn't hear the effects of that loudness level on the loudspeakers and room shown above...or he could hear the effects but chose to make it that loud anyway.  There is an unknown amount of compression and limiting used in this track, probably well over 10 dB.

 

The Sarah McLachlan track (Angel) has a dynamic range rating of 12 (dB), i.e., 3 dB higher.  I own a copy of this track from the album Surfacing.  While the album isn't terrible, it does have ~3 dB of clipping average across the album.  The particular track that you identify (Angel) has a solo piano and female voice with an electric bass accompaniment that was overdubbed after the voice and piano were recorded.  This track isn't particularly hi-fi, but it's not terrible either. It sounds "edgy" as released, not really very close to what it would sound like live without amplification--and more like the microphones used were placed too close to the singer and piano.  There is also a fair amount of artificial reverberation used.  It has about 1 dB of limiting/EQ to compress the dynamic range.  The is an unknown amount of compression used in this track, probably ~6 dB.

 

Chris

Lovely information, love it. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try different  branded recordings of the same artist or other artists , if this is the only problematic recording -------you may have a bad factory media which happens , I have seen this more than once --and  sadly , it happens ------the one off bad one , one in 100 thousand -----but if it's the same across the board and , you hear it ,  with various recordings , the speakers have an issue -

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RandyH000 said:

Try different  branded recordings of the same artist or other artists , if this is the only problematic recording -------you may have a bad factory media which happens , I have seen this more than once --and  sadly , it happens ------the one off bad one , one in 100 thousand -----but if it's the same across the board and , you hear it ,  with various recordings , the speakers have an issue -

It happens just on some songs. I’m thoroughly impressed by these speakers. I think the way Chris described it he described it best. Just has to do with who records it and how they record it. Very impressed by these speakers but that doesn’t mean I haven’t had my Troubles with them... getting them sorted out I am. Thanks for the help. I think there’s more bad recordings thaN 1 in 100,000. Quite often I can tell a difference in so called hifi sound quality because who ever recorded it or what not didn’t do a very good job.  Or I’m sure there’s more factors than that that go into the final sound quality. In conclusion I don’t think it has to do with my speakers being faulty. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, David y said:

In conclusion I don’t think it has to do with my speakers being faulty.

glad to hear it -------but crossovers do have an impact  on overall sound , and higher quality  capacitors will bring out more nuances -  it's the extra mile in bringing out the best in these speakers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, RandyH000 said:

glad to hear it -------but crossovers do have an impact  on overall sound , and higher quality  capacitors will bring out more nuances -  it's the extra mile in bringing out the best in these speakers

Right I’ve being watching some videos of gr research and he really makes some amazing content and some really informative stuff. Especially about klipsch speakers and the capacitors they use for the crossover and whatnot. Very interesting and intriguing. Would love to know what my RF-7III’s would sound like with some high quality components and some air core inductors and poly caps and without all the sand-cast resistors, which I’m guessing is what it has a lot of in it. Wonder how much of a difference it would make audibly.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/29/2020 at 6:48 AM, willland said:

All recordings are not created equal.  Different sound engineers, philosophies, compression, etc. can contribute to the quality, good or bad, of the final product.  The more revealing the system the more revealing sound that hits your ears.  If the master recording is not good quality, nothing can be done to make it "better".

 

One example of great sound engineering is the group Steely Dan.  Their worst most compressed least dynamic copies are better than 75% of what you can find out there.  

 Google "Loudness Wars" and you will see.

 

Bill

Exactly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, JoeJoeThe3rd said:

Right I’ve being watching some videos of gr research and he really makes some amazing content and some really informative stuff. Especially about klipsch speakers and the capacitors they use for the crossover and whatnot. Very interesting and intriguing. Would love to know what my RF-7III’s would sound like with some high quality components and some air core inductors and poly caps and without all the sand-cast resistors, which I’m guessing is what it has a lot of in it. Wonder how much of a difference it would make audibly.  

 

Klipsch Crossovers are built like 99.9% of all speakers you can buy.

Very few manufacturers use Real High Quality Products.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, JoeJoeThe3rd said:

Well I’m listening to it on tidal which is suppose to be equal to cd quality. Or atleast I think masters is. Yes I’m starting to do a little research on how important your room is. But on the tidal desktop app they don’t have the critical listening mode like they do on the phone app. So I’m trying to figure out which way would acually sound better, either through the phone app Bluetooth or hardwired through thround the desktop app on windows 10. I’m guessing Windows 10 cause it’s not Bluetooth. If anyone knows this question for sure please be kind enough to answer it for me. Also, thank you guys for all the other answers. I downloaded some hi rez audio from the audiophiliac and it sounds quite lovely, enjoying that as I speak. I think I’m going to end up buying a CD player. Is that the best way to get the beat sounding and best quality Audio. I’ve also heard of the lumen d2 which is like a music streamer that takes music from all of the streaming apps or something but it’s suppose to be better quality than cd, idk about that but what I do know is it would be another 2 grand about. 🤷‍♂️. What would you guys recommend.

 

Joe, with Hi_res streaming services like Tidal or Quboz, to get the best quality you really need to be able to stream the files directly to a "player" that can handle at least 192Khz/24bit.

 

When I say "player", I'm speaking of something a little different than what we have come to know as a "player". Traditionally this has been, for example, a record player, tape deck (player) or CD "player". We usually associate the term "player" with another piece of hardware.

 

That's now changing. For the most part, we won't need those things anymore.

 

The best way to enjoy Tidal is to have a receiver (amplifier) that can accept an ethernet connection directly (or WiFi, although ethernet is faster & more reliable). Devialet Expert Pro, Hegal H120, NAD M32 w/BluOS are examples that can all accept your network connection directly. With these you'll also be able to use a phone or tablet (with the proper free app) to stream a Bluetooth source to these amp/receivers. Bluetooth will obviously not be as good as streaming Hi_res Master files, but I prefer to stream (via Bluetooth) some of my local radio stations instead of using FM radio. FM broadcast quality is is not what it used to be.

 

I've experimented streaming Tidal directly into the BluOS module in my M32 vs. from the Windows laptop with HDMI connection to the M32. On *most* material it probably doesn't make too much difference, especially if you're not familiar with it (like new stuff you haven't heard before). But if you want the current best quality you really need to eliminate all the extra components & cables/connections in between.

 

As an inexpensive alternative, a product like Bluesound Node2i ($500) you get the ethernet input connection, Bluetooth, WiFi, analog or digital outputs to your amplifier, and if you don't want to use the DAC built-in to the Node2i just use the analog outputs to bypass it's internal DAC. I had one of these hooked up to a McIntosh MA5300 integrated and it sounded excellent.

 

EDIT: the main point I'm trying to make is that in the above examples, the amplifier is "the player"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, artto said:

 

Joe, with Hi_res streaming services like Tidal or Quboz, to get the best quality you really need to be able to stream the files directly to a "player" that can handle at least 192Khz/24bit.

 

When I say "player", I'm speaking of something a little different than what we have come to know as a "player". Traditionally this has been, for example, a record player, tape deck (player) or CD "player". We usually associate the term "player" with another piece of hardware.

 

That's now changing. For the most part, we won't need those things anymore.

 

The best way to enjoy Tidal is to have a receiver (amplifier) that can accept an ethernet connection directly (or WiFi, although ethernet is faster & more reliable). Devialet Expert Pro, Hegal H120, NAD M32 w/BluOS are examples that can all accept your network connection directly. With these you'll also be able to use a phone or tablet (with the proper free app) to stream a Bluetooth source to these amp/receivers. Bluetooth will obviously not be as good as streaming Hi_res Master files, but I prefer to stream (via Bluetooth) some of my local radio stations instead of using FM radio. FM broadcast quality is is not what it used to be.

 

I've experimented streaming Tidal directly into the BluOS module in my M32 vs. from the Windows laptop with HDMI connection to the M32. On *most* material it probably doesn't make too much difference, especially if you're not familiar with it (like new stuff you haven't heard before). But if you want the current best quality you really need to eliminate all the extra components & cables/connections in between.

 

As an inexpensive alternative, a product like Bluesound Node2i ($500) you get the ethernet input connection, Bluetooth, WiFi, analog or digital outputs to your amplifier, and if you don't want to use the DAC built-in to the Node2i just use the analog outputs to bypass it's internal DAC. I had one of these hooked up to a McIntosh MA5300 integrated and it sounded excellent.

 

EDIT: the main point I'm trying to make is that in the above examples, the amplifier is "the player"

My receiver is the anthem mrx720. Is that something that would work well in your opinion? I mean I would think to use a hardwired connection would sound much better than Bluetooth right? Using optical or HDMI has got to sound a lot better than wireless right? But I guess your saying it doesn’t make much of a difference. But the difference it does make is what? Which sounds better? What do you mean eliminate all the  extra components and cables/connections in between? I mean I know what you’re saying but I don’t know what those might be. All I do is hook up my computer to my anthem mrx720 via optical cord because if I try to use an HDMI cord I get this bad static sound from my front sound stage. Now I downloaded play fi on my computer and can play it through that also but I don’t see the need to because it works without me having to use it unlike if I was to use tidal on my phone. I don’t even know if my receiver is hooked up to the Internet wirelessly I was having problems getting it connected wirelessly but I know I did get it connected eventually but when I turn it off I don’t know if it reconnects automatically when I turn it on and I don’t plug an ethernet cord into the back of it because I need my only one to plug into the back of my computer to get my Internet connection on my computer. I think The has static something to do with my computer because I tried it with my other laptop and it didn’t do it. 
 

 

also what do I set my sound quality too in my control panel on my computer, in tidal it said to set it to 16bit 44100hz cd quality. Is this what it should be at?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, rebuy said:

 

Klipsch Crossovers are built like 99.9% of all speakers you can buy.

Very few manufacturers use Real High Quality Products.

Right, but I did see a budget b&w bookshelf speaker and they used higher grade stuff like air-core inductors only one sandcast resistor. Would love to get all higher grade components in the crossover and see what it would sound like in my klipsch. Also would love to line the walls with some no-res.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...