When does a hobby overtake you...

[Mike Lindsey]

In 8,500 words no less...

[dkp]

Back to the initial question. At what point does pursuit of sonic perfection intersect with, and then overshadow, enjoyment of the music? At what point does experiencing sonic imperfection, either real or imagined, lead to obsessive - compulsive behavior (complete with the need to classify anyone who might not share your perspectives and goals as "zombie-idiots" or "audio-idiots")?

Also, if there is no "need to be impressive", why put it all out there on the web for the world to see?

I wondered the very same thing, especially in light of the criticism of viewing others' systems. Quite a few pics were posted in that link, yet the author was critical of others for the same thing?

Arrogance is my favorite personality trait. [8-)]

-David

[garymd]

I think Doc and The Cat have more in common then they think.

[Deang]

Was part of that objective time-smear, early specular reflections, and incoherant wavefronts?

I thought those were the requirements for capturing that "live" sound?

Looks like a kick *** system, I don't get the negativity.

[Romy the Cat]

I do not have the time or desire to educate, but I am more than willing to answer questions and share in the exploration through the realm of modern acoustics.

Just some articles that touch on various aspects pertaining to time domain spectrometry:

http://www.prosoundweb.com/install/tech_corner/ty2/time.shtml

http://www.prosoundweb.com/install/sac/v28/2/interact.php

http://www.mcsquared.com/tefadr.htm

http://www.rpginc.com/news/library.htm

It's interesting that you talk about "X-Space" which I think can be considered a non-technical description of the time-domain behavior of the system. You should consider getting a TEF so that you can quantify the very things you describe.

Mike,<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

OK, I will try to reply, although my post will be burden among the general adulterant idiocy that this thread has already contains. Yes, I am familiar with the subject of the time domain spectrometry. I do not go there as I have developed my own ways to answer the questions that I need to be answered, or let me to putt in this way to answer that have applied use.

The TEF analysis is very tricky. It gives measurable data but does not present the reasoning of the data and does not interpret the measurements in context of means, methods and anything else. Still, it is not your stress of the modern acoustics was something that picked my interest in what you said but rather your comment about Macondo. I wonder what characteristics of Macondo implementation inspired you to accuse Macondo in time-smearing or incoherent wavefronts? (Actually the stressing of the waterfront shape is a separate subject)

It is certainly that Macondo topology would produce much worst TEF result then a simple time-aliened 5 woofer with a suffocating ribbon but did you try to listen the simplistic TEF-perfect solutions? Have you seen a lot of properly TEF-implemented accustic systems (for home use) that actually sound interesting? Trust me, there is so much much much much MORE in acoustic then juts blind TEF-following. Sure TEF should be considered but First of all: I disregard the time-misaligned installations to begin with. Second: if you look a little bit less superficial then you will recognize that the design principles of Macondo do not have any needs to use TEF (if you know what I mean). Perhaps thinking about it you will find educational

I appreciate that you picked the "X-Space" subject from my site and you are right it is the subjective perception of time-domain behavior. However, the quantification of the time-domain behavior is not what I have interest; I can get the data by other means. A high resolution time-domain analyses does not set DIRECTION OF REASONING and with it I found that in context of my objectives the domain spectrometry would be juts a self-entertaining toy. If you would like to understand that my current objectives are (and you most likely will be able to intrepid them from TEF perspective) then you might read my DPoLS article:

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?postID=994

I ma sure the TEF will shows that you are there but it does not unfortunately indicates a direction there. All the rest I know without the domain spectrometry of modern acoustics.

Rgs, Romy the caT

[kaiser SET say]

Hey if he has the money whatever makes him happy![]

If most of us had a much larger bugdet what gear would we have?

I'm in 100% agreement jbsl[]

Like Jay Leno's vehicle collection, if money were no object I would need a whole house just for this crazy hobby[][][8]

[capo72]

Where is mas when you need him?

Threads like this make me miss Dragonfyer.

Jeremy

[LarryC]

OK, I will try to reply, although my post will be burden among the general adulterant idiocy that this thread has already contains.

How's tricks, Analogman?

[dkp]

Where is mas when you need him?

Threads like this make me miss Dragonfyer.

Jeremy

lol, I remember the blue font...

[whell]

Mike,

OK, I will try to reply, although my post will be burden among the general adulterant idiocy that this thread has already contains.

I may be one of the contributors to the adulterant idiocy, so I resemble that remark!

By the way, I'm pretty sure that the word "adulterant" is not used in the correct context here.

[DrWho]

The TEF analysis is very tricky.

Tricky? Only to the inexperienced and uneducated.

It gives measurable data but does not present the reasoning of

the data and does not interpret the measurements in context of means,

methods and anything else.

You're right, no measurement technique does this. It takes the

intelligence of the operator to provide meaning to the data - which

involves actual experience with taking the measurements. What kind of

time-based tools have you experimented with? Care to share any of your

results? The crazy thing about measurements is there is always some

correlation to that which is percieved. I will never argue exact

correlation, but the trends are there and significant. Combined with

subjective listening analysis and application of well founded

psychoacoustic principals, one can glean a very good understanding of

the system without ever hearing the system (which is the entire purpose

in the first place).

If you were indeed familiar with TEF, you would be saying one of two

things right now. Either you would be boasting about lack of early

reflections and achieving a very natural and dense semi-reverberant

decay, or you would be exclaiming the results of an approach that

somehow avoids the blurring and reduction in clarity resulting from

comb-filtering occuring within the Haas window.

You're very proud of your setup and there is absolutely no reason why

you shouldn't be. I am sure it sounds good. The thing that has spurred

my response is the arrogance with which you disregard everyone else. So allow me to be brief and mention that just by looking at

the pictures of your system that I have absolutely no doubt that I have

heard dedicated audio systems that have sounded far superior. I should mention that they cost much less too, but

that's not really an issue when you're talking absolute supreme sound

now is it?

But ultimately, I read your review and look at

your pictures and think to myself of all the ways that the system could

be improved. And then I observe the manner in which you take criticism

and then blatantly disregard concepts that you don't understand. When

you wanna suck up your pride and bring your system to the next level,

let me know.

[jacksonbart]

The TEF analysis is very tricky.

Tricky? Only to the inexperienced and uneducated.

It gives measurable data but does not present the reasoning of the data and does not interpret the measurements in context of means, methods and anything else.

You're right, no measurement technique does this. It takes the intelligence of the operator to provide meaning to the data - which involves actual experience with taking the measurements. What kind of time-based tools have you experimented with? Care to share any of your results? The crazy thing about measurements is there is always some correlation to that which is percieved. I will never argue exact correlation, but the trends are there and significant. Combined with subjective listening analysis and application of well founded psychoacoustic principals, one can glean a very good understanding of the system without ever hearing the system (which is the entire purpose in the first place).

If you were indeed familiar with TEF, you would be saying one of two things right now. Either you would be boasting about lack of early reflections and achieving a very natural and dense semi-reverberant decay, or you would be exclaiming the results of an approach that somehow avoids the blurring and reduction in clarity resulting from comb-filtering occuring within the Haas window.

You're very proud of your setup and there is absolutely no reason why you shouldn't be. I am sure it sounds good. The thing that has spurred my response is the arrogance with which you disregard everyone else. So allow me to be brief and mention that just by looking at the pictures of your system that I have absolutely no doubt that I have heard dedicated audio systems that have sounded far superior. I should mention that they cost much less too, but that's not really an issue when you're talking absolute supreme sound now is it?

But ultimately, I read your review and look at your pictures and think to myself of all the ways that the system could be improved. And then I observe the manner in which you take criticism and then blatantly disregard concepts that you don't understand. When you wanna suck up your pride and bring your system to the next level, let me know.

Cricket 1 Cat 0

[Romy the Cat]

Tricky? Only to the inexperienced and uneducated.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

You misunderstand my definition of tricky and did not read it in context of the rest of the post. When I said tricky I did not mean the complexity of application but the negative feedback the TEF inflicts to methodological capacity and the listening awareness of the individual who are heavy rely on TEF. I witnessed it many-many times.

What kind of time-based tools have you experimented with? Care to share any of your results?

I use a simple RTA (Gold-line with 1/12 octave, DAS options) with a very good calibrated mic that allows me to set the channels in correct time alignment. Since, all my channels are at first order and the hone are religiously parallel to align them running RTA with ¼ octave resolution is not difficult job to do. It is the only thing that I care and I never had needs to do into TEF as I have no other parameters that I am able or wiling to change.

You're very proud of your setup and there is absolutely no reason why you shouldn't be.

I do not think what I feel has anything to do with proud. It is your perception but no my expression.

I am sure it sounds good. The thing that has spurred my response is the arrogance with which you disregard everyone else. So allow me to be brief and mention that just by looking at the pictures of your system that I have absolutely no doubt that I have heard dedicated audio systems that have sounded far superior. I should mention that they cost much less too, but that's not really an issue when you're talking absolute supreme sound now is it?

I really do not know also what it was all about! Once again it is you addressing your own internal cartoons, nothing else. I know all shortcomings of my Macondo, and trust me better then anyone else including you, in fact I told about it many times. Have I heard better acoustic systems then mine? I think it is incredible stupid way of thinking or asking but it a good way to hide rationally of own judgment. As you understand I will ask you about your dedicated audio systems as I would like do not be disappointed with your replies :-)

But ultimately, I read your review and look at your pictures and think to myself of all the ways that the system could be improved.

I have many people who propose many improvements. However, before I accept them seriously I demand to name the actually problems against which the improvement might be applied. Usually at this level 99% of advisers are automatically filleted out.

And then I observe the manner in which you take criticism and then blatantly disregard concepts that you don't understand. When you wanna suck up your pride and bring your system to the next level, let me know.

I have no problem to take criticism. Unfortunately people do not criticizes the actual subject but behave like adolescents (whell, that word I meant to use) who could not help themselves but by posting foolishness at online forums. Why I need to suck my pride, to have a pride or to trade my pride I relay do not know.

Cricket 1 Cat 0

It was exactly the adolescent idiocy that I meant

Rgs, the Cat

[dkp]

jacksonbart-If I had anything in my mouth, it would have been all over my screen by now! lolol

all in good fun, all in good fun

[fini]

They are juts not accumulate all this audio just accumulate in their rooms without any rational or exercising very primitive judgment that the Industry have made them to embrace. I would say a lot about the simplicity, bordering with stupidity of perception, when audio people learn about others playbacks (the Morons most watch pictures), but I see no need to do it at this forum.

The caT

Are you translating your posts from another language using an online translator?

[Me Loves Khorns]

How did Romy the Cat figure out about the Klipsch forum, and that he was being featured on it?

Paul

[jacksonbart]

Turtle 1 Cricket 1 Cat 0

[BillH2121]

They are juts not accumulate all this audio just accumulate in their rooms without any rational or exercising very primitive judgment that the Industry have made them to embrace. I would say a lot about the simplicity, bordering with stupidity of perception, when audio people learn about others playbacks (the Morons most watch pictures), but I see no need to do it at this forum.

The caT

Are you translating your posts from another language using an online translator?

My question exactly Fini - there seems to be an incredible discrepancy regarding grammar, writing style, etc., between the "Objectives" section of Romy the Cat's website and the responses given here. I wondered if they were actually written by the same person. As far as his system, I think its certainly interesting and I enjoy his attempt to meet certain well-considered listening crtieria, but the arrogance that is found in his replies today, that is not evinced in his website writings, is a little offputting.

[Coytee]

How did Romy the Cat figure out about the Klipsch forum, and that he was being featured on it?

You'll notice it was about 3 hours after the first reference to his website?

Kind of interesting he "found" it so quickly in light of his comment "Yes, it is very far from the Klipschs level of audio inelegance"

Makes one wonder if he was a closet lurker or perhaps has a spy amongst us?

[:|]

Either way, he's clearly keeping tabs on our forum so we should be flattered.

[Y]

[BillH2121]

How did Romy the Cat figure out about the Klipsch forum, and that he was being featured on it?

You'll notice it was about 3 hours after the first reference to his website?

Kind of interesting he "found" it so quickly in light of his comment "Yes, it is very far from the Klipschs level of audio inelegance"

Makes one wonder if he was a closet lurker or perhaps has a spy amongst us?

[:|]

Either way, he's clearly keeping tabs on our forum so we should be flattered.

[Y]

Another example - "Yes, it is very far from Klipsch's level of audio inelegance" - a nice use of language even though reeking of a paternalistic attitude. Yet, in some of the replies posted today, Romy the Cat is unable to string five or six words together using proper grammar to create an articulate statement. I'm getting suspicious......................