mike stehr Posted December 14, 2002 Share Posted December 14, 2002 My room acoustics are better than yours! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted December 14, 2002 Share Posted December 14, 2002 Are not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike stehr Posted December 14, 2002 Share Posted December 14, 2002 Are too! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invidiosulus Posted December 14, 2002 Share Posted December 14, 2002 So, Mine are worse than both of you guys rooms subtracted from each other Peace, Josh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted December 15, 2002 Share Posted December 15, 2002 What are room acoustics? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted December 15, 2002 Share Posted December 15, 2002 The way to solve a room acoustics problem is to have no room for acoustics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Bey Posted December 15, 2002 Share Posted December 15, 2002 Artto, I'm glad you're back. I checked the web page with the room mode xls, lots of other info there; will take a while to digest. The drawing is not the best, I am not an architect. Here is a plot of the room response as observed with a Rat Shack SPL meter and Stereophile test CD #3: I don't have a source for the other publications you mention. Where could I find them? They are not at my library. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soundthought Posted December 15, 2002 Share Posted December 15, 2002 Well... you can clearly see the 15dB loss at 1kHz. John. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobile homeless Posted December 15, 2002 Share Posted December 15, 2002 Lordy Randy, that is a seriously COARSE graph! It looks a bit like an Etch-n-Sketch drawing I did at age 10! But it does serve the purpose. I personally am working on installing another "sliding glass door" to aid in the highs.... heh. kh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted December 15, 2002 Share Posted December 15, 2002 Randy, Did you make the calibration curve adjustments? http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/general/messages/49147.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Bey Posted December 15, 2002 Share Posted December 15, 2002 Dean, yes I did. The Stereophile test CD has 19 or 20 frequencies per band (bass, midrange, treble) so the results are a wee bit coarse but better than nothing. I sent these results to Klipsch who said that my speakers were operating within plus/minus 5dB for the rated frequency ranges, and so are "OK" by their definition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soundthought Posted December 15, 2002 Share Posted December 15, 2002 That's good news, Randy. Did they happen to mention what their maximum allowable variance is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Bey Posted December 16, 2002 Share Posted December 16, 2002 No they didn't, just said that was good. I think from reading trade rags that Klipsch now specifies within 3db, but not sure if that is 'in-room' or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soundthought Posted December 16, 2002 Share Posted December 16, 2002 Thanks Randy. Just curious. It would be intresting to see whether that is "in room" or not. My guess is not. John. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robforst1 Posted December 19, 2002 Author Share Posted December 19, 2002 Wow!!! I had no idea my post would spark such heated debate... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Bey Posted December 19, 2002 Share Posted December 19, 2002 Sorry Robforst1 this thread has been hijacked.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horn player Posted December 21, 2002 Share Posted December 21, 2002 With all this discussion of room acoustics - how would you all rate an open room (chock full of stuff), inside dimensions 26.75' wide by 60.75' long with poured 8" thick 9' high concrete walls with windows & doors, concrete floor with exposed 6" thick fiberglass batts overhead. This is where the klipschorns live - they are in the corners of the one end of the house - a short wall. I originally wondered how they would sound in this environment, but after sliding them tight into the corners and listening to them, they sound a lot better then I thought they would, and definitely belt out the bass. Wife and kids won't let me crank them up loud for more than a few minutes at a time, as the sound (mostly bass) comes up through the floors to the upstairs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cornwaller Posted December 22, 2002 Share Posted December 22, 2002 Whoah...hijacked is an understatement! Welcome to the compendium of sound-recording-reproduction variables. I'll offer this as an effort to get back to the original question: I have a 530 w/p/c SS amp, running through a parametric EQ/preamp to 2 pair of Cornwalls (one stacked on the other in pairs) and seperated by 14 feet. The bottom speakers are set in the corners at 45 degrees and the top axis are parallel to the walls. You can imagine the sound stage this presents and it truly looks like an ex-rock and roll band member lives here. The TDH of this amp at rated output is something like .006. At a reasonable listening level (concert level) the amp is coasting along between 4 and 19 watts indicated. This gives me head-room to spare and a "realism" that in a word is breathtaking, and very, very clean with none of the harshness that everyone seems to be talking about. The source for this sound is a Carver reference CD deck with tube circutry, 1bit DAC, and 44.1HZ sampling rate. This a music only setup until I push a couple of swiches, which changes from the two channel amp to the DSP and integrates the Cornwalls and 5 other speakers for Home Theatre. In either setting the raw source (MUSIC/SOUND) is as close as I can get it to the oringinal recording. The timbre, attenuation, harmonics, etc. are not lacking and compare more favorably to the recording than any tube setup I have heard.(MHO) Also in my humble opinion, the reason this works so well is the efficiency of the speakers allowing for low power-low distortion, smooth transients, rich full peaks and no(or very very little)coloration. I love sound, I love it more if it closely resembles the source from which it came!! Isn't this the whole reason for recording anyway?...if you record and therefore reproduce apart from the original source the result is different. It is still sound, and it may still be pleasing to the ear even though it is unlike the source. No matter what equipment or method is used there will always be a change and it is up to us to subjectively choose which outcome is optimal. That's my story...and I'm stickin' to it, Cornwaller Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HDBRbuilder Posted December 24, 2002 Share Posted December 24, 2002 I've been reading this thread with interest, but I just had to remind folks of one thing yet again. PWK did NOT intend to use the floor and the walls as REFLECTIVE surfaces for his k-horn...instead they are intended to become an integral PART of the bass horn lens, itself!!...channeling the sound as parts of the lens mouth!! Plain and simple!! For anybody to construe anything differently leads me to believe that they do NOT understand the design of the k-horn's bass bin to begin with! Now, with this being said, without my having to completely rehash what I have already said so many other times on this subject of the walls and the floor being a part of the bass horn lens, and what it takes to make them perform at their best AS an integral part of the horn lens...it is also important to note the reason corners are used to start with...and that is to provide NOT ONLY more complete coverage of the listening AREA, but ALSO to "in effect" to double the AFFECT of the speakers when positioned in such a manner...ie., PWK's "mirror" analogy as found in his audio papers. Again, pretty simple! The COMBINATION of the above two things is what makes the k-horn work so well, and also WHY it was designed to begin with!...ie., to create a basshorn that could be fit into a room, that gave the performance of a horn of much greater size, in a much smaller package, utilizing the CORNER of the room due to its sonic advantages, AND as an INTEGRAL PART of the horn itself! Pretty simple, yet again! The previously mentioned reviewer, who wrote of the k-horn being designed to utilize the "reflective properties" of the corner's floor and walls, obviously did NOT understand the concept behind the design of the k-horn to begin with!! And to stand by his comments about it, after realizing his mis-understanding of the design concept to begin with, is pure folly!...and as such his statements should NOT be used as a source of "knowledge" on the subject...IMHO! One other point...the goal of REDUCING a room's reflective properties is NOT to ELIMINATE all of them, but just to reduce the tendency for standing wave problems, and unwanted sonic "clutter" for the listener. To completely eliminate all reflections is not the intent...since SOME reflections are actually needed to replicate the "live performance" aspects of the reproduced material for the listener....even PWK commented similarly on this one! 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.