$1000.00 Amp. for Klipschorns

[Parrot]

There's no need to further treat your room unless you determine from listening that it has a problem. Then you try to correct for that problem. You may not need to do anything to your room at all.

Lots of people love McIntosh amps and since that is what you have your eye on, that's what you should get, and if you can find someone with good feedback on audiogon, that'd be a great way to get one (or two). Generally a more reliable site than eBay.

[NOSValves]

Acoustical treatment can't address sonic issues associated with the upstream equipment [^o)] Likewise, even the fanciest electronics can't address acoustical issues either. Two separate problems with two separate solutions. You do however need to pick the speakers before addressing acoustical treatment. Proper acoustical treatment is going to be the same, regardless of the components up stream as long as the speakers and their position in the room stay the same.

I'm a solid state guy so I don't have any tube amps to recommend, but I couldn't let the acoustic comments slip by.

Bullsh!t, If you have wonderful speakers and a horrible amp, preamp and source that is tilted to the hot side in the HF to your ears you will tend to over dampen the room to tone down the HF harshness in the room. If your electronics are dark sounding you may find no treatment to sound just fine and maybe find bass traps to help. The ENTIRE SYTEM works together in the fine balance including the room. Every piece of the puzzle has to work together and play nice.

Craig

Craig,

I guess I am a bit skeptical about trying to use an amplifier as an equalizer. My simple minded opinion is that an amp should be something like a wire with gain.

-Tom

Tom,

I'm not suggesting that at all!! I'm simply saying the a system is a fine balance that works together in a the room. The room is part of the system. No magic wand exist that say you won't end up needing different acoustic treatments with different systems. I'm not taking just amps.... Speakers, Preamps, sources all sound different.

No such thing as wire with gain......................... never has been and most likely never will be. Heck there is no such thing as a truly transparent wire as far as that goes []

Craig

[PrestonTom]

Craig: I agree that the room treatment is integral to the speaker (and how they are positioined). However, I am not convinced that the room treatment needs to be changed when amps, pre-amps, & sources are swapped (assuming they all have comparable & sufficient bandwidth).

-Tom

[Wrench722]

So what is wrong with tuning the room to a system? If a system is a good one then it should be ez to tune it.

[jackpod]

I might be missing something here, but which comes first the chicken or the egg? How are you going to tune the room without the equipment and if you use equipment other than what will end up there, will the room be tuned appropiately for the equipment that is not there yet?

Back on amp topic, you could easily obtain a pair of McIntosh MC250 (run them in mono) for under a grand, Solid State, with autoformers, but sound really nice with Khorns

[DrWho]

I'm by no means an acoustics expert, but all these comments about
"tuning the room to the system" wouldn't be made by people with an
understanding of what exactly acoustical treatment can and cannot do.
Room Treatment deals only with issues that occur in the time-domain
after the sound leaves the speaker. How is changing the amplifier going
to change how the sound bounces around the room??? [^o)]

Just to
help portray the point, I've attached the resultant frequency response
for an early reflection on a wall 0.5 feet from the speaker...and note
the huge dips. This is classical comb-filtering and only gets worse as
you move the speaker further from the wall (the first dip moves lower
in frequency). Keep in mind that every reflection in the room that
makes its way to the listening position is going to impart its own
magnitude of comb-filtering. It only gets worse when you consider that
every reflection in the room is going to impart its own set of
comb-filtering - talk about a lot of ugliness in the frequency response
[+o(]

The problem with my analogy is that I'm ignoring the
time-domain, but I provided the analogy because its easier to show on
paper.

In reality, the direct sound is reaching our ears first,
which is going to be free of the comb-filtering. Then slightly later
(because the sound is travelling further), the reflected sound will
mingle with the direct sound, introducing the crazy dips in the
response. If this reflection occurs much later, then we percieve this
as an "echo" or "reverb" and our ears are able to filter it out as a
second sound (and ignore it). However, if the reflection arrives within
the window of the Haas effect (~20ms), then our ears aren't able to
percieve it as a different sound. In other words, if the reflections
happen too early, then we end up hearing the effects of the
comb-filtering. Comb-filtering has a very distinct sound and is
definitely not pleasant (though I'm sure there is someone in the world
that enjoys it). Maybe one of these days I can put together a sample so
those unfamiliar with it can hear it.

I know I'm way
over-simplifying the issue, but the point is that the tonal balance of
the direct sound (which is achieved by matching upstream components)
has nothing to do with removing comb-filtering effects (which will
always be percieved as negative in nature).

One area that I
didn't go into (because it opens a whole can of worms) is the
"reverberant" nature of rooms (which is probably what most people
associate with "room acoustics"). A room that sounds harsh or pingy is
probably a room with too much high frequency energy in the "reverb". A
room that sounds boomy has too much low frequency energy in the
"reverb". I use "reverb" in quotes because technically in a small room
it's a "semi-reverberant" field (which has some important
implications). Anyways....let's say someone has a boomy room.
Naturally, it might seem logical for the person to pursue a brighter
system so that it doesn't excite the lower frequencies as much.
However, the problem here is that the direct sound (that arrives before
the influence of the room) is going to sound bright, followed by the
boom in the "reverb". In other words, the timbre of a viola holding a
note is going to change over time. [N]

However, a properly treated room is going to make the "reverb"
match the tonal balance of the amplification. This is easy to do
because you just need to make sure that the semi-reverberant field has
the same tonal balance as the direct sound coming from the speakers -
and in order to do that, you need to redirect the sound in the room
such that the same amount of each frequency arrives at the listening
position. The latest measuring techniques allow us to measure just how
well this is being done. Once the direct sound and the reflected sound
have the same tonal balance and the reflected sound occurs outside the
Haas window, then the timbre of the viola is going to remain the same
over the length of the note being held. [Y]

Changing the upstream equipment is only going to change the
direct sound coming from the speakers, not how the sound bounces around
the room. So if you carefully choose your source and amplification such
that the direct sound is as good as possible, then the indirect sound
in a properly treated room is going to maintain that same as good as
possible sound.

I feel like I'm saying the same thing over and over, so I'll
just conclude with the real point I'm trying to make. Anyone that
claims you need to treat the room to match the timbre of the
electronics is full of crap and doesn't know what they're talking
about. The only thing that can change the acoustical treatment is if
you change the speakers.

Granted, these are just the claims of
some random punk kid on a forum, so I would encourage anyone that
thinks I'm full of crap to go read up on the latest research being
done. I've got no incentive to go on about acoustics either, nor any
rooms that I've treated myself to back me up. However, I have heard
what some "crappy sounding electronics" sound like in a fully treated
room, and it's lightyears beyond that of the most expensive electronics
in a "well tamed" room. But combine nice electronics in a great room
and then you've got sonic bliss, but you're going to realize the better
bang for the buck by treating the room first (because only then will
you be able to realize the full potential of the electronics and not
inadvertantly choose a route that is attempting to compensate for
acoustical issues).

[PrestonTom]

Mike,

You pretty much hit the nail on the head with the example of comb filtering. It will change with room treatment and speaker set up. It will definitely not change with pre-amps etc. It is a nice example. If you wnt a time-domain example, think of decay rates (ringing bass). Again, it does not change with electronics, and it is not a matter of fine tuning after the electronics have been swapped.

-Tom

[Parrot]

I think if I were Mr. Wrench722, after reading that, I'd be afraid to listen to music at all, at least without having an acoustics expert fix my room for me. Let's get real here. Out of let's say 50 million home stereo systems, how many of them have acoustically fine-tuned rooms. Maybe a dozen? Do you think the other 49,999,988 systems sound bad and none of them can enjoy the sound of a viola in a symphony recording?

Your brain can make sense out of a room. You can differentiate between friend's voices at a party even if you're not looking at them. You can differentiate between instruments in an orchestra or band. You can also tell quickly if a room is too dead or too live. Wrench hasn't even said that there is a perceived problem in his room. Don't try to fix something that doesn't need fixing!

All he needs to do is buy an amp that appeals to him and then figure out if he enjoys the sound as is or if he wants to change something. He can move a plant somewhere, or add a bookshelf, or put a quilt over a railing. He can adjust the positioning of his speakers. He doesn't need to get all hyper-scientific about a listening room for pleasure.

[PrestonTom]

I think if I were Mr. Wrench722, after reading that, I'd be afraid to listen to music at all, at least without having an acoustics expert fix my room for me. Let's get real here. Out of let's say 50 million home stereo systems, how many of them have acoustically fine-tuned rooms. Maybe a dozen? Do you think the other 49,999,988 systems sound bad and none of them can enjoy the sound of a viola in a symphony recording?

Your brain can make sense out of a room. You can differentiate between friend's voices at a party even if you're not looking at them. You can differentiate between instruments in an orchestra or band. You can also tell quickly if a room is too dead or too live. Wrench hasn't even said that there is a perceived problem in his room. Don't try to fix something that doesn't need fixing!

All he needs to do is buy an amp that appeals to him and then figure out if he enjoys the sound as is or if he wants to change something. He can move a plant somewhere, or add a bookshelf, or put a quilt over a railing. He can adjust the positioning of his speakers. He doesn't need to get all hyper-scientific about a listening room for pleasure.

Parrot,

At one level I agree with your comment. My perspective is that a $1000 amp is not going sound substantially better than a $500 amp of a similar topology. Following that line of thinking, the extra $500 is much better spent on some room treatment. The improvements will be real and substantial, even if the fine-tuning is not to the n'th degree. Incidentally, better seats at the symphony do make a difference.

-Tom

[cjgeraci]

Nice post, Parrot. Acoustic treatments were emphasized in this thread, even after Wrench posted that his room already has some acoustical treatment. Don't get me wrong - my primary room is "tuned" so to speak with various panels and bass traps, and I think treating a room has tangible benefits. But, I've also heard some fine music in some untreated (and odd shaped) rooms - and the vast majority of audio owners do not have any treatment (although many should).

Wrench, I would seriously think about adding an inexpensive tube preamp (e.g. JuicyMusic Audio's Merlin at $800 or the Tercel kit at $500, etc.) as the major chunk of your $1000 because a good tube preamp can make just about any amp sound better (even solid state). Then, maybe pick up a decent rebuilt Dynaco Stereo 70 (tube push-pull amp) with the remainder to get your feet wet. A nice tube integrated amp is also a good idea, but starting with a quality tube preamp first leaves you with many more future options.......

Carl.

[Parrot]

Parrot,

At one level I agree with your comment. My perspective is that a $1000 amp is not going sound substantially better than a $500 amp of a similar topology. Following that line of thinking, the extra $500 is much better spent on some room treatment. The improvements will be real and substantial, even if the fine-tuning is not to the n'th degree. Incidentally, better seats at the symphony do make a difference.

-Tom

As Carl just pointed out, Wrench already has some room treatment. And at the risk of repeating myself, HE HAS NOT SAID THERE IS ANY PROBLEM WITH HIS ROOM.

Of course better seats in a hall make a difference. Has anybody ever disputed this? I'm advocating not getting so bent out of shape about whether a room is Dr. Who-certified as an acoustically perfect room that he can't sit back and enjoy his recordings. "Perfect is the enemy of the good."

[NOSValves]

Nice post, Parrot. Acoustic treatments were emphasized in this thread, even after Wrench posted that his room already has some acoustical treatment. Don't get me wrong - my primary room is "tuned" so to speak with various panels and bass traps, and I think treating a room has tangible benefits. But, I've also heard some fine music in some untreated (and odd shaped) rooms - and the vast majority of audio owners do not have any treatment (although many should).

Wrench, I would seriously think about adding an inexpensive tube preamp (e.g. JuicyMusic Audio's Merlin at $800 or the Tercel kit at $500, etc.) as the major chunk of your $1000 because a good tube preamp can make just about any amp sound better (even solid state). Then, maybe pick up a decent rebuilt Dynaco Stereo 70 (tube push-pull amp) with the remainder to get your feet wet. A nice tube integrated amp is also a good idea, but starting with a quality tube preamp first leaves you with many more future options.......

Carl.

Carl,

Great post!!

[anarchist]

I think if I were Mr. Wrench722, after reading that, I'd be afraid to listen to music at all, at least without having an acoustics expert fix my room for me. Let's get real here. Out of let's say 50 million home stereo systems, how many of them have acoustically fine-tuned rooms. Maybe a dozen? Do you think the other 49,999,988 systems sound bad and none of them can enjoy the sound of a viola in a symphony recording?

Your brain can make sense out of a room. You can differentiate between friend's voices at a party even if you're not looking at them. You can differentiate between instruments in an orchestra or band. You can also tell quickly if a room is too dead or too live. Wrench hasn't even said that there is a perceived problem in his room. Don't try to fix something that doesn't need fixing!

All he needs to do is buy an amp that appeals to him and then figure out if he enjoys the sound as is or if he wants to change something. He can move a plant somewhere, or add a bookshelf, or put a quilt over a railing. He can adjust the positioning of his speakers. He doesn't need to get all hyper-scientific about a listening room for pleasure.

I must admit this was an excellent post and cut through to the heart of the matter. Don't complicate that which doesn't need to be complicated. Hell, take it to the next level and we'll be advising the guy to build an acoustically perfect room.

[DrWho]

And nowhere did I comment on Wrench's acoustical situation...I was addressing the people claiming that acoustical treatment changes with changes in electronic components. What's wrong with a little explanation? My goodness. I've never understood this possessive thing with threads that the older generation seems to believe in. [:@] Next time I'll keep the forum police in mind and just call out the idiots - seems y'all prefer pissin matches. *end of rant*

[NOSValves]

And nowhere did I comment on Wrench's acoustical situation...I was addressing the people claiming that acoustical treatment changes with changes in electronic components. What's wrong with a little explanation? My goodness. I've never understood this possessive thing with threads that the older generation seems to believe in. [:@] Next time I'll keep the forum police in mind and just call out the idiots - seems y'all prefer pissin matches. *end of rant*

Nice post!! I'm watching you []

I'm sure my concept are just to deep for young mind to comprehend in a few years you will most likely get it. It seems that the other acoustic treatment poster in this thread got my point. I am in no way saying one should not use acoustic treatment. But its easy to over due anything including acoustic treatments. Any one that truly believes that acuostic treatments will garnish a nasty sound premap, amplifier or source into some wonder machine surely doesn't need to call out any idiots............

Craig

[Audio Flynn]

I think I get away with no room treatments since only 2 walls in the room are full the other walls are "partials" of sorts. thus minimizing reflection!

[Wrench722]

Don't mean to change track. I am thinking of buying this.

AudiogoN ForSale: Jolida JD 1000a

Any input?

Go EZ guys Don't need any one getting hurt.

[PrestonTom]

Don't mean to change track. I am thinking of buying this.

AudiogoN ForSale: Jolida JD 1000a

Any input?

Go EZ guys Don't need any one getting hurt.

Gee Wrench, You mean you wanted us to comment on amps....

I was just over at Audiogon and they have a bunch of stuff well within your price range. There is some nice Class A stuff (Classe & Threshold). There are some Nelson Pass designed amps (Adcom 5XXX). There is some Mcintosh and some Parasound (they are biased as Class A for the first watt or two - the important ones) there is also some Rotel (which has a reputation for sounding best when it is turned up). There are a number of possibilities. Again, as I stated much earlier, the Klipschorns can be very revealing of any hiss, hum or distortion. So amps that sound good on other types of speakers may disappoint you on K-Horns. If there is any chance you can demo the amp first, that would be a big plus.

Good Luck,

-Tom

[NOSValves]

I've had one here and I wouldn't bother if I was you. Very disappointing sound for a tube amp. Joilda has a few decent ones but that surely wouldn't be one of them IMHO Might just as well buy a $500 SS amp and use acoustic panels to fix the sound []

Craig

[Wrench722]

Here is some Pic's