6foot8 Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 Hey, thanks. It's about 3700 cubit feet. Yes, active on both the Jubs (stock) and the sub with the sub xover at 120 Hz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6foot8 Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 Welcome back 6foot8 I would love to see a picture of your room showing the three way jubs and the electronics. jc Thanks, I have been meaning to get pictures to send to Roy and Chuck. I'll try and borrow a digital camara from a friend. I don't have a decent camara and the disposable one take lousy pictures as can be seen from my posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
6foot8 Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 Hey Roy, I don't know that I have ever thanked you for those wonderful speakers you and Chuck worked so hard to get me. So I would like to do that now...Thanks! I Talk to and email Chuck frequently ant still owe him pictures of the completed room and set up from our last discussion a few months ago when the KPT 884 showed up. I use a complement of 3 BGWs for the Jubliees and a QSC 4050HD for the sub. I remeber reading somewhere that PWK had an affinity for one particular amp that is near and dear to my heart, the BGW 100. It was back in the early 1980s that I started using those amps, and Klipsch speakers, in part because of each products reputation. That was a very important factor for me in selecting the amplifiers I used for the speakers you designed...PWK's opinion of the BGW 100. I am certain that there are some other amps (both Tube and SS) that would sound better on some recordings and not as good on others but I like what I have and it sounds good to me. For me I think it was the opinion PWK had of that amp and the nostalic experience of going back in time for me that was the two biggest determining factors of my slection...and I think it sounds very good none the less. I have played around with settings and balances, EQ...etc etc for a year and a half or so and found the "tune up" that sounds very good to me without contantly changing bass, treble or the balance between the amps between each song. And I admit that although I break out an "electronic measuring device" occaisionally the over riding factor is whats sounds good to my ears. And while I am sure there are purchases that I could make that would enable me to travel a little farther down that yellow brick road to audio nirvana, I have come to that place in the road where I am fully content. I think anything else would be just "different"...not necessary any better overall and most certainly not worth the added expense. Thanks again! hey eric, i am glad that you like the 3 way jubs. you were the first and only three way guy (that i know of) and now you have an 884 to boot (bill hendrix also recently bought an 884 for his jub ht; ask him about it)! most songs are not mixed flat (either bad engineers or bad monitors or both) and so you have to flavor the top and bottom end just a bit. i would like to see pictures of your setup if you don't mind. in Christ, because of God's grace, roy Will do Roy. I would like to hear your thoughts on the arrangement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest " " Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 Hey, thanks. It's about 3700 cubit feet. Yes, active on both the Jubs (stock) and the sub with the sub xover at 120 Hz. Thats a big room by NYC stadards. 120hz....very interesting...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 "Measuring equipment is still primative relative to the capabilities of the eye's, ears, tounge, and our sense of touch." That is simplistic. I can measure a 0.1dB difference in level trivially easily. Unless you are way outside the norm you can't hear that. Ditto small FR changes, small distortion changes, phase changes...etc...etc. What can't be directly measured is someones preferences. And not everyone has the same preferences, that is why measurements can't be used to universally predict how someone will respond to something. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 Most were deeply puzzled by the lack of correlation between measuring and listening. I would argue that if there is no correlation between the measurement and the listening, then you are incorrectly interpretting the measurement. And/or starting with the assumption that what one 'likes' is the more accurate of whatever is being looked at. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 "Then, after he showed it, I asked very simply if he was proposing that was the way to discover the most accurate amplifier. Then he said, "no."" I said no (meaning globaly), but that the test shows which is the more accurate of what was being tested. It does. The amp with the low output impedance more accurately reproduces the input in the FR/phase domains compared to the higher output impedance amp when connected to a real load. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaudeJ1 Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 good ones, even great ones -- don't bring anything near the level of improvement to the sound as a better loudspeaker does. How many amplifier dollars/quality does it take to equal the performance/sonic gains found in better drivers and horns? Amen, brother Dean. I use the same old amps with better speakers and the sound is much better than any .0000001% nuance in electronics, the room treatments being right up there with better Horns and drivers in order of importance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfogg Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 Mark, "What you showed is exactly what I expected - a measurement showing one aspect of performance where two amps will be different in their outputs with the same input." What I showed was exactly what I said I would show. That it is very possible to objectively measure an amplifier on music, something you implied couldn't be done. Read what you quoted from me again. "is there any test that shows a difference between two amplifiers?" That is not what you asked. You had been going on about measurements only being based on sine waves and square waves. When talking about Crown engineers: "Exactly right Tom! They are using sine waves and square waves from an oscillator. So, it is a dead certainty to me that if your listening pleasure is a sine wave, or maybe square waves, you ought to purchase the amplifier with the best output when a sine wave is the input!" Implying that that was the only way to measure equipment.... hence your notation of testing with Rolling Stones CDs which was again shown in your challenge of: "You can't compare accuracy of Amp A and Amp B while playing a Rolling Stones CD because the only way to "examine" the contents of the CD is to play it with the Amp in question and hear it with a human ear, and store it in a brain! I challenge anyone to describe for me the objective instrument reading which you make to declare that Amp A has a "more accurate output" than Amp B when the Rolling Stones "Exile on Main Street" is the input. " Which is bunk. I already described the objective instrument reading which I made to declare that amp A is more has a more accurate output compared to amp B while playing the Stones and connected to a real speaker.Since we all know that any of the common tests we can use "shows which is the more accurate of what is being tested" I did not think that there was a qualification needed for that statement. Shawn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kudret Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 Gentlemen, The title of this thread is "Jubilee". Can you please create a new thread for whatever else it is that you want to discuss. Some of us might be interested in owning a pair and would like to learn more about Jubilees and do not want to read tens of pages about distortion of amplifiers, accuracy, etc. Kudret Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodcaw boy Posted December 7, 2007 Author Share Posted December 7, 2007 Gentlemen, The title of this thread is "Jubilee". Can you please create a new thread for whatever else it is that you want to discuss. Some of us might be interested in owning a pair and would like to learn more about Jubilees and do not want to read tens of pages about distortion of amplifiers, accuracy, etc. Kudret hey kudret, you forgot someone. it should have read "Gentlemen and you too deneen". [8-|] what is it you want to know? just let me know. no way i allow the boneheads to silence me....[8-|] in Christ, because of God's grace, roy ps. i am finding out what you asked before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodcaw boy Posted December 7, 2007 Author Share Posted December 7, 2007 deneen, are you allowed to say "amen"?[] in Christ, because of God's grace, roy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZAKO Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 BoneHeads???my my Roy... This discussion on low distortion amps, transfer function etc.. The reason Roy cant understand what I,m saying is because the distortuon of all speakers are the highest in the chain of reproduction, and he needs to go to live concerts more often (several times in a week) To hear the obvious.. Jubes are no where near that,,,,AS good as they are. To make any measurment of amps and speakers the equasion still needs the LIVE acoustic instruments for final evaluation of a audio product. Thats the ABSOLUTE SOUND. AHMEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodcaw boy Posted December 7, 2007 Author Share Posted December 7, 2007 BoneHeads???my my Roy... This discussion on low distortion amps, transfer function etc.. The reason Roy cant understand what I,m saying is because the distortuon of all speakers are the highest in the chain of reproduction, and he needs to go to live concerts more often (several times in a week) To hear the obvious.. Jubes are no where near that,,,,AS good as they are. To make any measurment of amps and speakers the equasion still needs the LIVE acoustic instruments for final evaluation of a audio product. Thats the ABSOLUTE SOUND. AHMEN as usual and quite amusingly, you have no idea what you are talking about!! as i read this, it's not my ears that are trying to read this distorted message... in Christ, because of God's grace, roy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZAKO Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 Then when was the last time you measured your speakers for distortion???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest " " Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 Gentlemen, The title of this thread is "Jubilee". Can you please create a new thread for whatever else it is that you want to discuss. Some of us might be interested in owning a pair and would like to learn more about Jubilees and do not want to read tens of pages about distortion of amplifiers, accuracy, etc. Kudret I second that..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZAKO Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 Fritz..... Amp. manufactures publish distortion specs on there products...Microphone manufactures publish distortion specs on there products... Bur speaker manufactures always leave that important spec out,,,,Ever wonder why???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bodcaw boy Posted December 7, 2007 Author Share Posted December 7, 2007 Then when was the last time you measured your speakers for distortion???? gee, i missed that memo....the one that obviously said that i have to report my work to you...... in Christ, because of God's grace (and boy do i need plenty of that right now!)[8-|] roy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 We all have the right to say amen! So be it. Maron, it is impossible to objectively compare live vs. reproduction, that's why we have "audiophiles" to tell us what sounds good. Even live music has distortion depending upon the player and/or the listener. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest " " Posted December 7, 2007 Share Posted December 7, 2007 Fritz..... Amp. manufactures publish distortion specs on there products...Microphone manufactures publish distortion specs on there products... Bur speaker manufactures always leave that important spec out,,,,Ever wonder why???? I have a klipsch brochure that publishes distortion spec's relative to power input and sound pressure levels. The bochure was for the Belle, but the data would be valid for a lot of the heritage products. But to answer your question, my take on it is that publishing technical data does not sell speakers. What sells speakers are pictures of folks sitting around holding their hearts enjoying their music. This is because pictures stimulate the part of the brain that wants to play and have fun. Technical data stimulates the Dr Spock portion of the brain. A sure fire way of ending a sales presentation is to start asking logical questions rather than painting word pictures. For example....just imagiine, you come home at the end of a day...no one else is home yet....you grab a beer and crank up your speakers. vs my watts is bigger than your watts....I have measurements and they're not 36-24-36. 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.