| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Horn-Loaded Speakers» Adding one more spherical to Macondo. (93 posts, 5 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 5 of 5 (93 items) Select Pages:  « 1 2 3 4 5
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Macondo Horns: biography...  Macondo with Pussy Eyes....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     2  56806  05-18-2005
  »  New  The “Primary Frequencies”...  Melody range and the other octaves...  Audio For Dummies ™  Forum     5  67821  09-08-2005
  »  New  The most promising “best” commercial speaker..  Cessaro new Loudspeaker...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     191  1604755  12-06-2006
  »  New  Macondo's Axioms: Horn-loaded acoustic systems..  A link to another thread....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     120  544501  07-29-2007
  »  New  Proximity of horn’s crossover and it’s ability to care ..  Does this explain or relate to the "trombone"...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     2  32690  09-16-2007
  »  New  60hz, GPA-515-8ghp horn.....  60hz horn...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     32  278375  07-01-2008
  »  New  Audio and the “Alzheimer’s triggers”..  Yet one more 'trigger' not mentioned......  Playback Listening  Forum     3  29105  08-12-2009
  »  New  Other Ways of getting Special Tone from a loudspeaker...  Paul S....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     8  78647  11-27-2009
  »  New  The Evolution of Honk...  Horn-loading and compression had no direct relativity t...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     2  26041  06-06-2010
  »  New  Adding one more non-spherical to Macondo...  Horn suggestions for 300Hz-1000Hz channel...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     23  219293  12-15-2010
09-28-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
el`Ol
Posts 225
Joined on 10-13-2007

Post #: 81
Post ID: 14578
Reply to: 14577
Stereolab
fiogf49gjkf0d
Probably too "budget", but they have almost everyting.
http://stores.ebay.de/Stereo-Lab
09-28-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
jessie.dazzle


Paris, France
Posts 456
Joined on 04-23-2006

Post #: 82
Post ID: 14579
Reply to: 14576
Revisiting the fundamentals
fiogf49gjkf0d
Romy wrote:

"...Since in my new house I will have no room height limitation I am consenting to replace my 250Hz tractrix horns with 200Hz exponential horns..."

"...I would like my Fundamental Channel to employ 170-180 Hz slow-opening horn and to use a driver with 350-400Hz crossover point. Sine I do not have too much height between tweeter and Injection channel I think to go for a wide horn, since it will not go higher then 1000Hz then I presume it will not impact imaging..."


When you get those cat paws on a 170-180Hz horn, you'll likely try listening to it while letting it cover more than just 600Hz of bandwidth (letting it run up higher than 1000Hz)... There is a possibility that one day you'll decide this is in fact the way you want to use it, in which case you might wish you had gone with a round horn.

You do have the space for it, but it would require that you move the Injection Channel up; since it is running at -12dB, this should not upset the perceived height of the image. 

The new, larger round horn could be mounted not under, but on top of the arm currently supporting the 250Hz horn. Running a physically high-mounted 170-180Hz channel up into lower mid-range, one would logically be concerned about upsetting the perceived height of the image; In my experience (I use this configuration), the image does not so much move up, but rather increases in scale and opens up. This, to me is more like what I hear in a concert hall or theater; such a configuration does require a minimum 12-foot listening distance, which appears possible in your case. You could get some idea of the effect by running your high-mounted Injection Channel at -0dB.

To avoid vignetting caused by the new 170-180Hz horn, the Injection Channel enclosure could be inverted so that the driver is at the top.

You'd likely also have to increase the footprint of the chassis to insure stability (extend the base plates by bolting on square section metal tubes).

jd*


How to short-circuit evolution: Enshrine mediocrity.
09-28-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,967
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 83
Post ID: 14580
Reply to: 14579
Macondo with wings and wide Fundamentals …
fiogf49gjkf0d

 Dominik wrote:
You probably decline this option, because this horn is from plasctic ( You can take carbon horn also).
Polish autotech make Iwata 300 for me. You Can order from them what You want.

Yes, the Iwata horns are good as they have right horizontal vs. vertical proportion for my case but the Iwata profile optimized for HF, something that I do not need. Still I am looking into some kind of derivation of Iwata profile – I need to look into this further. My leading idea is 18-cell horn by in my custom shape…

 el`Ol wrote:
Probably too "budget", but they have almost everyting.
http://stores.ebay.de/Stereo-Lab

Thanks, el`Ol, the Stereo-Lab do juts fast opening horns – I do not need then for Fundamentals Channel. Also they do spherical horns and I very much would like to stay away from spherical for this given lower MF Channel.  Might be I will consider an oval shape - it is hard to do it in mass, however….

 jessie.dazzle wrote:
When you get those cat paws on a 170-180Hz horn, you'll likely try listening to it while letting it cover more than just 600Hz of bandwidth (letting it run up higher than 1000Hz)... There is a possibility that one day you'll decide this is in fact the way you want to use it, in which case you might wish you had gone with a round horn.

I do not think I will. I will most certainly do not need it to go over 1000Hz, why would I? It is very much not my objective. All the I would like to do it to give to Fundamentals Channel some room from the bottom to breathe as I fill it is a bit too contortionistic now.

 jessie.dazzle wrote:
You do have the space for it, but it would require that you move the Injection Channel up; since it is running at -12dB, this should not upset the perceived height of the image.

This is not my objective as well. If anything I would love to find a way to move the Injection Channel down, closer to MF and HF channels. I do not how to do it, though…

 jessie.dazzle wrote:
The new, larger round horn could be mounted not under, but on top of the arm currently supporting the 250Hz horn. Running a physically high-mounted 170-180Hz channel up into lower mid-range, one would logically be concerned about upsetting the perceived height of the image; In my experience (I use this configuration), the image does not so much move up, but rather increases in scale and opens up. This, to me is more like what I hear in a concert hall or theater; such a configuration does require a minimum 12-foot listening distance, which appears possible in your case. You could get some idea of the effect by running your high-mounted Injection Channel at -0dB.

Possible, but this would require moving my Injection Channel up – a big “no-no” in my book. You report that “image does not so much move up”  - it is not what I experienced in my old room. What crossover point and type of filter you use for Fundamentals Channel LOW pass filter?

 jessie.dazzle wrote:
To avoid vignetting caused by the new 170-180Hz horn, the Injection Channel enclosure could be inverted so that the driver is at the top.

I am planning to avoid vignetteing by using non-spherical horns. No matter what it will be the horn high won’t be higher than 17-18”, in fact I would like to keep it 15”-16” at best if possible. If you calculate the surface that is needed to write 170-180Hz horn with 15” then you will have a good near 160 degree horn. For very much LOWER MF…. I see no problem with that. I did not those horns designed but I do not see what it shall not be made. If I knew what driver to use then I would do it. I would love S2/S3 to be able to handle the job as I love their lower knee but they are not good for pushing them too much lower.


 jessie.dazzle wrote:
You'd likely also have to increase the footprint of the chassis to insure stability (extend the base plates by bolting on square section metal tubes).
Yes, it is in my mind. I think I would need to pick up in some of garage sale a used welding machine – to have my own welding is a long dream of a city boy like I was all my life. Then I will weld in nice wings for Macondo to keep it more stable.

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
09-28-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Dominik
Poland
Posts 48
Joined on 09-14-2008

Post #: 84
Post ID: 14581
Reply to: 14580
Multicellular Horns
fiogf49gjkf0d
Maybe they can do it something for You:

http://chaudioroom.com/Lportal.html


Best
Dominik
09-28-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,967
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 85
Post ID: 14582
Reply to: 14581
15 cell vs.18 cell
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Dominik wrote:
Maybe they can do it something for You:

http://chaudioroom.com/Lportal.html

The difference between 15 cells and 18 cells would be around 50Hz -60Hz and 18 cells looks sexier. If I have some horizontal space then why do not waste it on 3 extra cells and to pick up some LF extension?  Anyhow, even if they agree to do custom 18-sell then I do not think I would go with them CH Audio Design. I did not talk with them but their prices are ridiculously high in my view. The Morons created some kind of expensive cult around the multi- cells. I do not support cults and I do not feel that multi- cells is anything special. In fact multi- cells are not good MF performers and they might work out n my case ONLY because I will not push the channel above 1000Hz with second order. Push more HF via multicell and it will show off it’s ugly face. So, the CH Audio sells double bandwidth-limited horns and ask for it as they are golden. They claim that they are made from 530 elements. Great! My phone has 39082454 transistors inside and it cost me $35 … anyhow, if I go multicell then I would like to have as many 18 cells as depth of my frame would allow (more cells means longer horn)

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
09-28-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
jessie.dazzle


Paris, France
Posts 456
Joined on 04-23-2006

Post #: 86
Post ID: 14584
Reply to: 14580
Where to cross MF & theory on depiction of depth
fiogf49gjkf0d

Romy wrote:

"...I will most certainly do not need it to go over 1000Hz, why would I? It is very much not my objective. All the I would like to do it to give to Fundamentals Channel some room from the bottom to breathe..."

Three reasons:

1) To try high passing your upper-MF channel (S2 > 400Hz horn) above the 1250Hz secondary resonance assiciated with the plastic-suspended diaphragms of the S2 when used in wide bandwidth configuration. If I understand correctly, you currently use these diaphragms and run the driver from 10.5KHz down to 1KHz.

2) To try unloading the lower end of that same channel which, again if I understand correctly, in your case is currently covering more than three octaves. Reducing that range may in practice not turn out to be desirable, but I would have thought you'd be curious.

3) To simply evaluate which driver/horn combination is best suited to reproduce the 1-1.5KHz range.

"...What crossover point and type of filter you use for Fundamentals Channel LOW pass filter?..."

Upper & lower MF.jpg
Above image shows response of S2 drivers with metal-suspended diaphragms.

Concerning perception of the vertical center of the sound image; no, we do not want the perceived center to be located somewhere in heaven or hell, but the view of most people who practice audio is that it would be desirable to produce the entire audible spectrum from left and right points as close to ear-level (purgatory?) as possible. In answer to that, I would like to put forth the following idea or sort of hypothesis:

First, what is the objective of audio? For me, ideally it is the selective recreation of an event according to and in reinforcement of the artist's original intention, as well as what I myself might decide to "keep" from that event, had I witnessed it live (the more thoroughly the demonstration integrates and allows me to grasp concepts as concrete wholes, the more I will be engaged; the more those wholes correspond to my view of what life should be, the more I will keep). When reproducing live events witnessed in physical space, that space too must be taken into account.

With the exception of small clubs where we might hear a jazz trio, when we listen to live music, we rarely find ourselves on the same plane with the musicians; we are usually looking down on them. This is not a chance occurrence; when seen and heard from this angle, the depth of the space, in both vision and sound, are more clearly revealed.

Look at the image below showing the layout of an orchestra from the point of view of the listener; this is two dimensional data that successfully depicts a third dimension, that of depth. It does this by using both the horizontal and the vertical (if it were a more accurate drawing, it would make better use use of relative scale and relative intensity). Notice, there are instruments located at the top, middle and bottom of the image. I'm not trying to be silly; realize that sight (light) and sound (pressure) are first perceived as binary, two-dimensional (up-down/left-right) sense data; from this, our brain extrapolates the third dimension; depth.

Orchestra Layout Perspective.jpg

Yes intensity (amplitude) and cast shadows (masking) play a part, but a really convincing illusion of depth is difficult without making use of the vertical axis. I think the depiction of depth in audio relies on the vertical; I think we are using it and I think we are not acknowledging it... It is what gives some mono recordings a semi-convincing illusion of depth. 

Absence of the vertical axis is the principal limitation and resulting frustration associated with headphones.

jd*




How to short-circuit evolution: Enshrine mediocrity.
09-28-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,967
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 87
Post ID: 14585
Reply to: 14584
The thoughts salad.
fiogf49gjkf0d

Sorry, I do not share your sentiments with those 3 reasons. Below are my reasons.

 jessie.dazzle wrote:

Three reasons:

1) To try high passing your upper-MF channel (S2 > 400Hz horn) above the 1250Hz secondary resonance assiciated with the plastic-suspended diaphragms of the S2 when used in wide bandwidth configuration. If I understand correctly, you currently use these diaphragms and run the driver from 10.5KHz down to 1KHz.

My MF channel is crossed well above secondary resonance – at  3200Hz

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/Site_Images/6-Chennal_Melquiades_DSET_Amplifier_Rev3.jpg

I get my 1000Hz by gliding the filter-declining slope of the secondary resonance

 jessie.dazzle wrote:
  2) To try unloading the lower end of that same channel which, again if I understand correctly, in your case is currently covering more than three octaves. Reducing that range may in practice not turn out to be desirable, but I would have thought you'd be curious.

 I do not feel a need to unload lower end from my MF channel. I did listen the naked MF channel extensively and in my view it does fine and do not need any crossover modification.

 jessie.dazzle wrote:
  3) To simply evaluate which driver/horn combination is best suited to reproduce the 1-1.5KHz range.

So we are taking about 500Hz that might be handled by ether MF of Fundamental channel. It might make sense mathematically and looking at graphs but in all practicality it unfortunately doesn’t works this way. In the 1-1.5KHz range I have pretty much 4 channels work together MF, Upperbass, Fundamentals and Insertions. Do not forget that with exception of upper knee of Fundamentals Channel they all are first order, with a lot of overlap and acoustic inner-modulations. Measurements-wise it if flat of course but in reality I never was able to set what I call proper sound by measurements. I do the following. I set the only Upperbass and MF flat by measurements and it will have a little dip of an octave wide around 800Hz. Then I run the Fundamentals all the way up until the peak of the Fundamentals response just touched and very slightly dent the bottom of the 800Hz dent. Then I begin to listen and set by hearing the level of Fundamentals in order to get the MF richness but not too prominent. The rule is that is that I need juts to recognize that Fundamentals channel is engaged but I shall not have it prominent in any auditable moment. A trombone sliding across it’s range and mantling the almost fixed vertical image is good indication that my Fundamentals are not too hot. I said “almost” because I personally feel that that in my old room the right amount of Fundamentals was when in the very top range the Fundamentals shall very-very-very little to shift the image up. It was very extreme nearfiled however and the degree to which it took place was not annoying in my view, particulary after I went DHT for MF.

 jessie.dazzle wrote:
  Concerning perception of the vertical center of the sound image; no, we do not want the perceived center to be located somewhere in heaven or hell, but the view of most people who practice audio is that it would be desirable to produce the entire audible spectrum from left and right points as close to ear-level (purgatory?) as possible. In answer to that, I would like to put forth the following idea or sort of hypothesis:

First, what is the objective of audio? For me, ideally it is the selective recreation of an event according to and in reinforcement of the artist's original intention, as well as what I might myself decide to "keep" from that event, had I witnessed it live (the more the demonstration corresponds to my view of what life should be, the more I will keep). When reproducing live events witnessed in physical space, that space too must be taken into account.

With the exception of small clubs where we might hear a jazz trio, when we listen to live music, we rarely find ourselves on the same plane with the musicians; we are usually looking down on them. This is not a chance occurrence; when seen and heard from this angle, the depth of the space, in both vision and sound, are more clearly revealed.

Look at the image below showing the layout of an orchestra from the point of view of the listener; this is two dimensional data that successfully depicts a third dimension, that of depth. It does this by using both the horizontal and the vertical (if it were a more accurate drawing, it would make better use use of relative scale and relative intensity). Notice, there are instruments located at the top, middle and bottom of the image. I'm not trying to be silly; realize that sight (light) and sound (pressure) are first perceived as binary, two-dimensional sense data; from this, our brain extrapolates the third dimension; depth.

Yes intensity (amplitude) and cast shadows (masking) play a part, but a really convincing illusion of depth is difficult without making use of the vertical axis. I think the depiction of depth in audio relies on the vertical; I think we are using it and I think we are not acknowledging it... It is what gives some mono recordings a semi-convincing illusion of depth.

Absence of the vertical axis is the principal limitation and resulting frustration associated with headphones.

I personally prefer do not have center imaging as close to ear-level. I prefer to have center imaging elevated up and I like to listen with slightly raised my head. It makes discipline impact and put Sound in position of authority. The vertical axis is fine, I am not against it but I think that you are taking not about the vertical axis but rather about radiating surface. I wrote about it manse times – larger radiating surface when Sound comes not from a single point but from a large “cloud” is much interesting configuration. Unfortunately, due to the physics of our hearing (the position of ears) we can increase the size of the cloud only in vertical plane.

The caT


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
09-28-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
jessie.dazzle


Paris, France
Posts 456
Joined on 04-23-2006

Post #: 88
Post ID: 14588
Reply to: 14585
Depth in stereo & the Flat Earth Society
fiogf49gjkf0d
About the 1250Khz secondary resonance: 

Romy wrote:

"...My MF channel is crossed well above secondary resonance – at  3200Hz... I get my 1000Hz by gliding the filter-declining slope of the secondary resonance..."

I know this... What I'd really like to see is that by further unloading the lower end of this channel, you'd once again try using the all-metal diaphragms. I'll let you figure out where I'm going with this (hint; injection channel).

About the 500Hz that might be handled by ether MF or Fundamental channel: Yes, I admit, at first glance it does seems like small potatoes, but at this frequency range, an additional 500Hz represents half an octave. More importantly, an S2 with a 180Hz horn working in this range simply must be heard; my guess is you'd want that horn doing the job.
 
"...I think that you are taking not about the vertical axis but rather about radiating surface..."

I'm talking about radiating surface(s) distributed along the vertical axis, in the interest of conveying depth. My point is that we perceive depth in audio in large part due to the relative vertical relationship of sounds.

"...I wrote about it manse times – larger radiating surface when Sound comes not from a single point but from a large “cloud” is much interesting configuration. Unfortunately, due to the physics of our hearing (the position of ears) we can increase the size of the cloud only in vertical plane..."
 
Our ability to locate the origin of a sound to the left or right is superior, but despite the horizontal disposition of our ears, we are able to perceive and differentiate between sounds coming from above and below (hence the fear of a perceived vertical image center in heaven or hell). We regularly make use of this faculty to recreate the illusion of depth in audio, and we just as regularly deny it.

Reality or illusion, the concept of depth automatically invokes a minimum of three, non-collinear points in space.

jd*




How to short-circuit evolution: Enshrine mediocrity.
12-13-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,967
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 89
Post ID: 15188
Reply to: 2433
Fundamental Channel, what a power!!!
fiogf49gjkf0d
Dealing this new bright PP2000 I was recalibrating Macondo and once again I got a phenomenal demonstration of the power of a Fundamental Channel. Here is a short instruction of how to get THERE...

You setup your Fundamental Channel with your crossover and run it +2-3dB hotter than your MF. Then you close your eyes and begin very slowly drive the Fundamental Channel down, use increments of ¼dB.  Initially the sound will be heavy and dance, like badly played Schumann symphonies. Then it will be pick up some “orchestration details” and then suddenly it will burst with million lights of Xmas tree. You just find one boundary of Fundamental Channel calibration. Continue to drive the Fundamental Channel down. At some point you will feel that sound events stop to feel like hedgehog back and will be more like porcupine back. This is where you drove it down too much. You will have approximately ½ -1db of leverage where the Fundamental Channel might work. You can set your preferable level of Fundamental contribution. Very powerful and very nice expressive tool!

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
03-31-2011 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
gordan
Posts 16
Joined on 01-29-2009

Post #: 90
Post ID: 15900
Reply to: 13170
S3 as a low MF driver
fiogf49gjkf0d

somehow i missed that moment in macondo development when you introduced S3 as a low mid driver so this came as a surprise to me - what i remember is that you didn't write so favourably of S3 back in 2004 due to its ceramic magnet. but it's good to see that you find a good use of it as it's obviously so much cheaper than S2 these days, if you are lucky to find a pair.

what is the final horn & crossover frequencies you've settled down, and what are the realistic thoughts on the lowest crossover frequency S3 can handle in the domestic conditions in the dedicated le cleach horn, say 200hz or little less, with very low power into it (not more than 2-3w). i'm asking because i'm seeking for a driver for 300-1500 (or so) range ideally, it seems that apart from usual suspects like JBL 2482 or EV DH1 there's not much left, and i'd love to see S3 able to dive just a tiny bit lower than it seems it  normally can.

upper midrange is another topic but out of curiosity, do you still find S3 as handycaped at that range as you've thought back in 2004? i assume if it wouldn't be, than there would be no any basis left for S2 hype....

03-31-2011 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,967
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 91
Post ID: 15901
Reply to: 15900
Depending on your amplification
fiogf49gjkf0d
I am not a huge fun of S3 for MF use as the ceramic magnet is less interesting then alnico magnet for HF applications. For the low mid, or as I call it the Fundamental Channels the HF problem that ceramic has do not manifest themselves. My Fundamental Channels roll off at 1000Hz at upper knee with 2++ order, so it would be irrelevance what kind magnet it used.

I use a single stage 6E5P to drive Fundamental Channels, it is about 1.5W, I have enough gain and power. I do not think you will be able to make S3 to go down to 300Hz, unfortunately, particularly in La-horn. The La-Horn and Tratrix are fast opening horn and then drop slop very fast, much faster then exponential. The exponential horn however are more sensitive for precession of high-pass crossover point and toss honk more eagerly if something not up to what they like. 300Hz is the frequency what I would begin to debate about slow vs. fast opening. If you will be debate it then do not forget to add a good 2/3 feet of horn length in case of exponential. In some case people do not have extra length (alignment, etc…)

I did not use S3 for upper range for a long time but I would not use any ceramic magnet for HF unless I use SS amplification. With a good SS, class A the S3 driver shall be very fine.

Rgs, Romy


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
04-01-2011 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
gordan
Posts 16
Joined on 01-29-2009

Post #: 92
Post ID: 15916
Reply to: 15901
S3 and class A amps
fiogf49gjkf0d
truth to be told, i'm so far from building a horn for S3 that the plans may change. the drivers actually haven't left a previous owner yet which makes me a bit nervous. but i understand you presume a short opening horn like expo would allow a more mellow drop near the critical low frequencies. i will explore that for sure.

as to the class A amps recommendation, this is not supposed be a compliment to S3 as a mid drivers, is it? the last class A amp in my room was nelson pass first watt F3 with its warm, fuzzy, pleasant sound that lacked detail and surgical precision of my 10Y amps. actually it is my 10Y amps that i now use for periodical brainwashing of SS audio brigade about their anti-tube attitude, because they have all the parameters that solid state people love and more (clarity, speed, blah blah), plus they reproduce the music, not a wave of disconnected and fractured different electrical data. i don't know if F3 is a valid representative of the class A sound you've meant (it was too many moons ago i've listened old krell KSA/KMA amps to remember details), but in case it is than it would be a serious step back for me, unless S3 rings like hell in upper midrange so it has to be wrapped in layers of class A fake tube harmonics.
maybe i'm wrong....
PS just strucked my mind - of course i'm wrong, i've heard the recent luxman class A monoblocks (30 watt, don't know the model) and they sound a way more transparent and open than F3 so it must be that i need more experience.
04-02-2011 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,967
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 93
Post ID: 15921
Reply to: 15916
It is about magnet and SS type.
fiogf49gjkf0d
Gordan, I think you are missing the accent of what I meant to say. The Class A or not is not important for compression drivers and the S3 in particularly. I mean it is important and it much be ONLY class A but I do not see any SS amps switching in class B or even in A2 driving a load of few miliwatts that S3 driver would be. Sure it shall be A1 and preferably not PP but still it would be across all drivers, not necessary S3. What I meant was a specific predisposition of driver with ceramic magnets to SS amp. Do not ask me explanation or evidence - I do not have any. Still, dealing with many drivers (not recently, I went over in during 1999-2003) I remember that alnico drivers were fine with tube amplification (I used Lamm ML2.0 at that time). If I had however ceramic drivers I did prefer them with Lamm M1.1 SS amp. The SS amp is inferior to ML2.0 in many characteristics but with SS compressions drivers it did force them to sound with more exiting transients then tubes amps did.

You have a power amp with 10Y in output? That is very nice. The Milq direct-coupled version with 10Y in output is the only tube that I would like to try for MF channel with S2. If I had 550-600 voltage in Milq then I would do it…

The Cat


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Page 5 of 5 (93 items) Select Pages:  « 1 2 3 4 5
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Macondo Horns: biography...  Macondo with Pussy Eyes....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     2  56806  05-18-2005
  »  New  The “Primary Frequencies”...  Melody range and the other octaves...  Audio For Dummies ™  Forum     5  67821  09-08-2005
  »  New  The most promising “best” commercial speaker..  Cessaro new Loudspeaker...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     191  1604755  12-06-2006
  »  New  Macondo's Axioms: Horn-loaded acoustic systems..  A link to another thread....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     120  544501  07-29-2007
  »  New  Proximity of horn’s crossover and it’s ability to care ..  Does this explain or relate to the "trombone"...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     2  32690  09-16-2007
  »  New  60hz, GPA-515-8ghp horn.....  60hz horn...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     32  278375  07-01-2008
  »  New  Audio and the “Alzheimer’s triggers”..  Yet one more 'trigger' not mentioned......  Playback Listening  Forum     3  29105  08-12-2009
  »  New  Other Ways of getting Special Tone from a loudspeaker...  Paul S....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     8  78647  11-27-2009
  »  New  The Evolution of Honk...  Horn-loading and compression had no direct relativity t...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     2  26041  06-06-2010
  »  New  Adding one more non-spherical to Macondo...  Horn suggestions for 300Hz-1000Hz channel...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     23  219293  12-15-2010
Home Page  |  Last 24Hours  | Search  |  SiteMap  | Questions or Problems | Copyright Note
The content of all messages within the Forums Copyright © by authors of the posts