| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Audio Discussions » Romy The Cat's new Listening Room (479 posts, 23 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 8 of 24 (479 items) Select Pages:  « First ... « 6 7 8 9 10 » ... Last »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Macondo Alternation. Extending the LF line-array..  Macondo and not only Macondo positioning...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     8  130953  10-29-2005
  »  New  Midbass Horns and Real Estate...  Just a youtube video......  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     247  1845455  07-26-2009
  »  New  A playback and wrong notes...  Why is it not common practice?...  Playback Listening  Forum     5  48368  03-12-2007
  »  New  All Active! A DSET and multi-way acoustic system...  Hahaha...  Audio Discussions  Forum     14  104589  01-31-2008
  »  New  The “Dead Points of Live Sound”..  Confused...  Playback Listening  Forum     28  272395  05-14-2005
  »  New  Don't position speakers but create Sound in room...  Listener position...  Audio For Dummies ™  Forum     1  37093  06-19-2006
  »  New  About speakers Imbedded Macro-Positioning...  Big room AEZ...  Playback Listening  Forum     15  162578  05-16-2007
  »  New  Macondo’s Midbass Project – the grown up time...  Vitavox 15/40...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     455  2507950  05-20-2010
  »  New  Another problem in my new listening room...  Bass Trap...  Analog Playback Forum     1  19804  08-24-2010
  »  New  Superbly interesting effect: Suspended decoupled floor ..  Superbly interesting effect: Suspended decoupled floor ...  Playback Listening  Forum     0  15182  10-08-2010
  »  New  About dymick sparkling...  About dymick sparkling....  Playback Listening  Forum     0  14068  10-29-2010
  »  New  Bass impact on Turntable: how to estimate objectively..  I have done some work on this in the past....  Analog Playback Forum     4  38559  11-01-2010
  »  New  I have a dream, the dream about a Chair...  A bit exaggerated to me....  Playback Listening  Forum     31  187332  10-29-2009
  »  New  Dedicated Music Room Build..  Show it....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     6  50936  03-03-2011
  »  New  Listening rooms and composers...  On "typewriter music"....  Playback Listening  Forum     15  112658  05-16-2010
  »  New  How to play Bruckner Sound in Audio...  Being a pedagogical geniuses…...  Playback Listening  Forum     16  94546  06-15-2010
  »  New  Sound from behind a window...  Sound from behind a window....  Playback Listening  Forum     0  12456  04-24-2011
  »  New  Reinforced live sound in audio listening room..  Listening room acoustics...  Audio Discussions  Forum     4  30404  07-05-2012
  »  New  A listening room for a domesticated Cat?..  Eventually!...  Audio Discussions  Forum     283  673226  02-04-2016
  »  New  The ULF cannel for my new listening room...  The Organic Bass vs. ULF Drivers...  Audio Discussions  Forum     43  75606  07-29-2018
05-15-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
unicon


Posts 72
Joined on 10-14-2009

Post #: 141
Post ID: 13506
Reply to: 13500
Décor maybe fake for playback
fiogf49gjkf0d
oi Romy ,


Since you added a new parameter  in audio play back called : Decor  I'm afraid, it may make it far too hard.
anyhow can I see 360 degree view of your room (video) ? 

I am afraid you are in wrong shape of set up in first place
For instance from pictures you putted in site I guess you may get better response if you put your everything and LF in back of room and faced toward windows ...it can for sure can give you better image on MB LF section ,because the closed windows can act as acoustic low pass filter.
And another thing about timing to consider is distances from your ULF bass and hf section (more than 2ms distance) which may rises a phase problems if not well configured(your LF section may have some 100hz and above resonances which may make it for our ears localized)


I will try to be help more when you can give  some value information to start work with:
1-20hz to 4k response measured in different positions and what I suggested above.
2-your room Q (RT60)
3-waterfall in below 100hz  region in different positions and what I suggested above.

using the limp mass acoustic and how much you need to change your Decor is all dependence based on how you can get results with no treatment helps.

and tuga is dead right about trying symmetry in room

unicon.

05-15-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
el`Ol
Posts 225
Joined on 10-13-2007

Post #: 142
Post ID: 13507
Reply to: 13506
Room correction
fiogf49gjkf0d
And what about the brute force method (room correction for the bass arrays)?

http://www.audyssey.com/hometheater/subeq.html
05-15-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,916
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 143
Post ID: 13508
Reply to: 13507
It migh be more complicated.
fiogf49gjkf0d
 unicon wrote:
Since you added a new parameter  in audio play back called : Decor  I'm afraid, it may make it far too hard.

I agree but it I do not think that it would change my mind. Perhaps “décor” is not right word however; it is not “décor” by rather a desire to do not visually observe audio methods in the room that I do not what to see.
 unicon wrote:
I am afraid you are in wrong shape of set up in first place
For instance from pictures you putted in site I guess you may get better response if you put your everything and LF in back of room and faced toward windows ...it can for sure can give you better image on MB LF section ,because the closed windows can act as acoustic low pass filter.

It might be but it absolutely violate the way how I intend to use this room and the whole house.
 unicon wrote:
using the limp mass acoustic and how much you need to change your Decor is all dependence based on how you can get results with no treatment helps.

I will try the limp-mass membranes after and if I isolate a singular problem as I would like the limp panes to do just limp action and do not work wide-band.
 unicon wrote:
and tuga is dead right about trying symmetry in room

I do not like the idea purely from the standpoint of esthetic.

 el`Ol wrote:
And what about the brute force method (room correction for the bass arrays)?

http://www.audyssey.com/hometheater/subeq.html
Actually I am considering something like this but with “change”.  First of all I concluded that my bass arrays do not work well in this room.  The arrays were fine when I drove them relatively high. Now I need to get from them lower bass and in this room it looks like I need more compact ULF transducer source. So, what I would like is to have the midbass to cover as wide tonal diapason as possible, and they to kick in the lower bass section. In this configuration I might to use digital correction of open-end analog notching but only on lower bass channel. I do not know how auditable the brute force methods will be but if lower bass will care more pressure region and less tonal region then I might get away with it. I do not know, it is only speculation – I need a Midbass channel with which the playback sounds self-contained and complete. To do it over the 63Hz might be complicated.

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
05-15-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
unicon


Posts 72
Joined on 10-14-2009

Post #: 144
Post ID: 13509
Reply to: 13507
Bass EQ ?
fiogf49gjkf0d
 el`Ol wrote:
And what about the brute force method (room correction for the bass arrays)?

http://www.audyssey.com/hometheater/subeq.html


el 0l if you could understand the basics about how audio waves especially bass range acts in closed space you wouldnt even bring the name Bass EQ

it just cures the sound pressure in a single spot(listener) and possibly can not do anything about ring of bass, and what we even hear is the constant  of Frequency over time which in playback audio describes as Q (quality factor) the most importance and usually  the most ignored aspect of room audio by DIGI EQ makers ...

good to hear a breif note on audyssey website :
("Does MultEQ eliminate the need for acoustic treatment?"
No. Although MultEQ will improve sound significantly in untreated rooms, a properly treated room calibrated with MultEQ can achieve stunning results throughout the listening area. ")

I'm not ignoring the benefits we may get from it but
actually A well treated room does not need any EQ
05-15-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,916
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 145
Post ID: 13510
Reply to: 13509
Agree and not.
fiogf49gjkf0d

 unicon wrote:
el 0l if you could understand the basics about how audio waves especially bass range acts in closed space you wouldnt even bring the name Bass EQ

it just cures the sound pressure in a single spot(listener) and possibly can not do anything about ring of bass, and what we even hear is the constant  of Frequency over time which in playback audio describes as Q (quality factor) the most importance and usually  the most ignored aspect of room audio by DIGI EQ makers ...

good to hear a breif note on audyssey website :

("Does MultEQ eliminate the need for acoustic treatment?"

No. Although MultEQ will improve sound significantly in untreated rooms, a properly treated room calibrated with MultEQ can achieve stunning results throughout the listening area. ")

I'm not ignoring the benefits we may get from it but
actually A well treated room does not need any EQ

Unicon, I agree with what you say and not.

LF the digital EQ will flatten the response for a single listening location. It will do it with no problem. Will it result sonic improvement? This is more complicated question. Let pretend that EQ does not destroy sound by DSP in case it is digital and does not spin phase. Still, flat response is not the objective. I have seen in some rooms very un-flat response that did not affect listening. Some peaks and some dives in the response are fine – it all depends how wide, where, how they related to the rest of the room response and how they masked out. No one advocate running digital IQ to flat bass (it is not complex) but to use digital IQ discreetly, fixing the major problems I think would worth to explore. BTW, what you do is not much different – only you use resonating limp panels. I consider your way of doing the thing is preferable but you endure a lot of acoustic treatment in your room. If it is a dedicated or demo room then it is fine but I do not have an objective to have DEMO room, I am looking for to make it living room.

Frankly I think that my way to do the ROOM is more preferable: do not fine with room and do not treat the room but rather to design the accustom system around the specific room behavior. I admit that so far I do not have in my room success but I just started. I think the final result might use some of your limp methods but the EQ ONLY for LF doe not sound too absurdish as well. My problem not is not with EQ but with absent of ULF channel with which I would model some lower bass behavior. Again, the jury is out but I still would not put the treated room in the epicenter of attention.

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
05-15-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
tuga


Posts 174
Joined on 12-26-2007

Post #: 146
Post ID: 13511
Reply to: 13510
Two "diseases"
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Romy the Cat wrote:
 unicon wrote:
el 0l if you could understand the basics about how audio waves especially bass range acts in closed space you wouldnt even bring the name Bass EQ

it just cures the sound pressure in a single spot(listener) and possibly can not do anything about ring of bass, and what we even hear is the constant  of Frequency over time which in playback audio describes as Q (quality factor) the most importance and usually  the most ignored aspect of room audio by DIGI EQ makers ...

good to hear a breif note on audyssey website :

("Does MultEQ eliminate the need for acoustic treatment?"

No. Although MultEQ will improve sound significantly in untreated rooms, a properly treated room calibrated with MultEQ can achieve stunning results throughout the listening area. ")

I'm not ignoring the benefits we may get from it but
actually A well treated room does not need any EQ

Unicon, I agree with what you say and not.

LF the digital EQ will flatten the response for a single listening location. It will do it with no problem. Will it result sonic improvement? This is more complicated question. Let pretend that EQ does not destroy sound by DSP in case it is digital and does not spin phase. Still, flat response is not the objective. I have seen in some rooms very un-flat response that did not affect listening. Some peaks and some dives in the response are fine – it all depends how wide, where, how they related to the rest of the room response and how they masked out. No one advocate running digital IQ to flat bass (it is not complex) but to use digital IQ discreetly, fixing the major problems I think would worth to explore. BTW, what you do is not much different – only you use resonating limp panels. I consider your way of doing the thing is preferable but you endure a lot of acoustic treatment in your room. If it is a dedicated or demo room then it is fine but I do not have an objective to have DEMO room, I am looking for to make it living room.

Frankly I think that my way to do the ROOM is more preferable: do not fine with room and do not treat the room but rather to design the accustom system around the specific room behavior. I admit that so far I do not have in my room success but I just started. I think the final result might use some of your limp methods but the EQ ONLY for LF doe not sound too absurdish as well. My problem not is not with EQ but with absent of ULF channel with which I would model some lower bass behavior. Again, the jury is out but I still would not put the treated room in the epicenter of attention.

You have diagnosed not one but two "diseases":

 Romy the Cat wrote:
Ok, I found my RTA cable and did some very basic measurements of what Macondo does in the room. The results were in the direction that I anticipated but worth in amplitude. 

My right bass channel that that sited right next to the equipment bay has no bass. The left LF channel is sitting in a very good “hot” spot but the right is in bass hole.  I would need 6-8dB of extra gain across the entire bass bandpass to have to work properly but Milq does not have these 6-8dBs. The bass channel have a strong room mode around 63Hz that severally mask any lower response. I need to find a way to deal with it. Also, I do not think my bass channel do a lot of good in this room in sub 30Hz region. I would need, I would need another 6-8dB to handle it…. 

I am curious as to how you'll "integrate" the 63Hz mode into your acoustic system but I can see it possible without any "room treatment".

On the other hand, the bass-sucking equipment cubicle looks far more challenging and the question is whether you can "minimize" it's nefarious influence without closing it.
Looking forward to the upcoming episodes.

Cheers,
Ric


"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira Pascoaes
05-15-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
el`Ol
Posts 225
Joined on 10-13-2007

Post #: 147
Post ID: 13512
Reply to: 13509
Parametric filters
fiogf49gjkf0d
 unicon wrote:

if you could understand the basics about how audio waves especially bass range acts in closed space you wouldnt even bring the name Bass EQ
it just cures the sound pressure in a single spot(listener) and possibly can not do anything about ring of bass, and what we even hear is the constant  of Frequency over time which in playback audio describes as Q (quality factor) the most importance and usually  the most ignored aspect of room audio by DIGI EQ makers ...


In fact I don't understand why a parametric filter of exacly the right Q not also flattens the frequency response at a particular room mode, but also removes the ringing (in theory), but I have read about it and I have also seen a CSD of an experiment that verifies it. There is a company from Finland that makes subwoofer crossovers with auto-tuned parametric filters, but I have forgotten the name.
And that a sufficiently long FIR filter can do compensation also in the time domain for a particular listening position is self-evident even for me.
05-15-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
el`Ol
Posts 225
Joined on 10-13-2007

Post #: 148
Post ID: 13513
Reply to: 13512
Ceiling arrays
fiogf49gjkf0d
Romy,

it would be interesting to test whether it is really that impossible to get into the near field at 30 Hz as Griffin's simple formula in the line array white paper implies. I am thinking about laying the arrays on the ground, having in mind ceiling-mounted arrays in the final version.


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
05-15-2010 Post mapped to one branch of Knowledge Tree
jessie.dazzle


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

Post #: 149
Post ID: 13514
Reply to: 13510
Experiences with DEQ'd ULF
fiogf49gjkf0d
El`Ol wrote:
"...And what about the brute force method (room correction for the bass arrays)? [Digital EQ]..."
 
Romy wrote:
"...Actually I am considering something like this... I think the final result might use some of your limp methods but the EQ ONLY for LF does not sound too absurdish as well... Let pretend that EQ does not destroy sound by DSP in case it is digital and does not spin phase... Still, flat response is not the objective. I have seen in some rooms very un-flat response that did not affect listening. Some peaks and some dives in the response are fine..."
 
Having less than ideal lower-bass response in my current room, I bought a single Velodyne SMS-1 as an experiment.
 
The idea was to use it only on the ULF channels, and to use it as sparingly as possible. 
 
With more than two years of experience using this device I can say the results are impressive, and to my ear, non-destructive (it is possible to defeat EQ via the remote for quick A/B comparison). I say this while running the ULF channels higher (in frequency) than I will once the mid-bass horns are done.
 
As for phase, it is completely adjustable, though in my case it was not necessary (I left it at zero; ULF channels are sitting next to the main channels), and I see no difference when defeating the EQ; like all changes made, the results show up in real time via a graph/onscreen display (requires a television or projector).
 
As for flatness of response, I would agree with Romy; I left smaller peaks and valleys, and oriented the composite curve (all channels) to slope down gradually from the higher LF end.
 
From my experience, I conclude that if used intelligently, and only for ULF, the effects of this device are not destructive, at least not to the point where they are perceptible. Think of it as accepting to pixelate the blackest 10-15% of an image, while leaving everything else untouched. Defeating the EQ will convince you not only of the non destructive intervention, but also of how much the device is actually helping the situation. Given the right enclosures, armed with high-excursion drivers and adequate power, I cannot imagine a situation this device would not remedy.
 
Forget the auto-correction feature; it is crude and the result is not even close to what can be obtained using the manual adjusters. Also, I find the presets for different types of music to be of no interest; I use one setting all the time... Once set up, I don't touch the remote; don't even find it necessary to vary the volume of the ULF channels relative to the main channels.
 
Using the ULF channels in stereo requires daisy chaining two SMS-1s together.
 
One word of caution: This device is intended to be used with drivers that can handle a lot of excursion, and will permit asking a "normal" drivers to perform beyond their limit.
 
Unicon wrote:
"...You need to correct your fundamental room modes(below 100hz) by using limp mass acoustic..."
 
It is possible that I am currently using this technique without knowing it... I'm not entirely clear on what is meant by "limp mass acoustics", but I use several flexible polycarbonate panels onto which I've attached blocks of 4" deep wedge foam. The panels are probably not flexible to the point that they would qualify as "limp", but they are far from rigid. They can be suspended back to back in mid air, or mounted on foam supports. These devices make one hell of a difference, as I have a "polished concrete" floor, stone walls, a steel and glass ceiling, and very little furniture.
 
jd*


How to short-circuit evolution: Enshrine mediocrity.
05-15-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,916
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 150
Post ID: 13515
Reply to: 13511
Room treatment I would like to avoid at this point.
fiogf49gjkf0d
 tuga wrote:
I am curious as to how you'll "integrate" the 63Hz mode into your acoustic system but I can see it possible without any "room treatment".
Ric, what I need to know how my dedicated midbass section will be decaying. There is a ketch in there. The midbass section might not be exposed to the 60Hz problems. The 60Hz problems manifest itself when I source it from front of the room. I just will not do it with midbass and the problem might not even come to existence. If it will be the midbass horn on attic then it will be a totally different story, I hope. So, the room treatment I think might be used but as the concluding very fine stroke of a final brash. I would like to avoid curing the main problem with room treatment as I feel that the room treatment is none narrow enough and not specific in bandwidth, ales you go for very large and very expensive resonators that I would like to avoid at this point.

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
05-15-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,916
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 151
Post ID: 13516
Reply to: 13513
The Middle of the Room.
fiogf49gjkf0d
 el`Ol wrote:
Romy, it would be interesting to test whether it is really that impossible to get into the near field at 30 Hz as Griffin's simple formula in the line array white paper implies. I am thinking about laying the arrays on the ground, having in mind ceiling-mounted arrays in the final version.

Yes, it did not come to me. It would be interesting to test but unfortunately it would not have any practical use. I am afraid that if it works then what will I do. Still, I think it will not work in the mid of the room, well probably I could turn the woofer to floor, still…

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
05-15-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,367
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 152
Post ID: 13517
Reply to: 13514
On the Shoulders of Giants*
fiogf49gjkf0d
The thing is, other people have been here before, and between them they have already gotten results that would take most of us at least a few steps closer to verisimilitude.
 
Sorry to be such a whore, but it just seems reasonable to make use of readily available technology, if and when it works.  I have not used DSP, at all, and I have to say I have not liked what I have heard of it.  But then, I could say the same about SET, or horns, for that matter.  At the least, DSP is probably the easiest way to determine the operating parameters for the (U)LF, for future "real time" bias, should that ever be desired.

As for writing (U)LF bias curves, Danley recommends starting at 15 Hz with his TH50 sub, so, obviously, there has to be some way to match the inductor against the impedance.  I would bet nuts that Danley includes digi-curves in the self-powered versions, so as not to stifle the amp, if nothing else.

I would agree that pro audio is generally no good for hi-fi.  Ironically, most pros snicker at home hi-fi as weak-ass, watered down dross, compared to live music; and I have to say I agree with them on this score, too.

Best regards,
Paul S

* with apologies to Anselm of Bec, and also Thomas K. Merton, who penned a truly hilarious book on scholarship that goes by the same title.
05-15-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,916
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 153
Post ID: 13518
Reply to: 13514
LF EQ: an interesting observation.
fiogf49gjkf0d

An interesting observation about the Velodyne SMS, thanks, Jessie.

There are a number of similar units out there. The Velodyne specification is very fine:   

http://www.outlawaudio.com/products/SMS_manual.pdf

I did not use those units and I do not know how they perform. It is obvious that with drop of frequency the negative impact of DSP will be minimized. How much minimized – that is the question.

There are a number review of the Velodyne and the similar units, I did not read them but I do not think they will be talking about what I would like to know.  Jessie’s transient comparing of the unit in and out bypass I think is not convincing as well.   Still, this area very much worth to explore.  Jessie, or anybody who use the similar units, can you do some specific tests for me? Also, did anybody has a circuit of output stages of those units?

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
05-15-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,916
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 154
Post ID: 13519
Reply to: 13235
Stop!
fiogf49gjkf0d
OK, I decided to stop today to do what I do as it does not feel like me anymore. For a month as I live in here and have the playback up my playback is a source of great pain and I do not like it.  I am accustomed that I turn the thing on and USE it. I did many experiments and had weeks or month playback in bad shape but I know what is going on and I had no problem with it. Now, in new house I for some reasons constantly fight with playback and practical do not USE it as I would like to. The audio experiments I fine, I like them but today I convinced myself the unit I have a dictated midbass channel I will not get the sound I would like to get. So, what people do after they have a strike of revelation? Right, they begin to re-read my site.
So, I look at my comments in the Audio For Dummies  section:  do not pursue full-range without being ready, do not go for lower bass without being ready and I asked myself – what I am doing?

So, I took everything from my listing room out (I have a tone of the speakers I have in there, trying to imitate the midbass) and connected just two woofers to Milq’s bass channels. As the result I got the same Macondo as I had only the LF section runs at few dab doe and well underdeveloped for this room. So, I have no bass but I have nice balanced and peaceful sound from 60 Hz and up. I will keep it for a while until I will do something radical with midbass – I am not ready to move in there now.

The sound as it is not bad. I rolled of HF and there is not bass. The LF section (the dose lower upperbass in effect) is time aligned and the Macondo got some imaging back.  The MF tone is partials back. So, the Macondo works now in monitor mode, but it is OK for now. At least today playing my playback I did not have the feeling that I need to spend a night with an ex-girlfriend who you dumped because you did not like sex with her…
Back to the normality…

Rgs, Romy 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
05-15-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,367
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 155
Post ID: 13520
Reply to: 13518
Appendectomy
fiogf49gjkf0d
It has been a while since I heard any Velodyne subs.  Do they change models annually, like everyone else?  Whatever; they have been around for a long time, and I have heard many of them over the years, including several of the Stereophile Recommended ones.  I always hated them in the music range, over ~40 Hz, though I can't say I was ever able to get a handle on them below that, due to unfamiliarity with the rooms, etc.  What I hated about them was, they lacked content, sounding musically vague and threadbare to me, and no one was ever able to integrate them with any speakers that I otherwise liked, so they always sounded "appended", to boot.  Same with the Carver/Sunfire, for that matter.

On the other hand, REL used to offer some way-too-expensive consumer models that were actually decent, although I could not say from experience that they are anywhere near as powerful as the pro stuff.

Best regards,
Paul S
05-16-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
msaudio
Posts 45
Joined on 12-09-2009

Post #: 156
Post ID: 13521
Reply to: 13519
Extra Back Bedroom Problem Fixed
fiogf49gjkf0d
If you put your speakers in the back extra bedroom, you could have your cake and eat it 2. You will have a normal living room and your headphones sound that you love from small room will be back and better then ever and it don't cost anything except your time and bad back, after you move it again. Then all will learn nothing from ordeal, I am reading these comments and i realize why most people's hifi systems sound like shit because they donot have a clue about audio in the first place. Any 1 that would add solidstate in there line of tube electronics is a nonbeliever in audio purity. EQ bab idea, bass modules center of room a joke, that would be against everything this site stands 4.  Preaching Horn Religion     MSAUDIO
05-16-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,916
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 157
Post ID: 13522
Reply to: 13521
...particularly if you have tried it?
fiogf49gjkf0d
 msaudio wrote:
If you put your speakers in the back extra bedroom, you could have your cake and eat it 2. You will have a normal living room and your headphones sound that you love from small room will be back and better then ever and it don't cost anything except your time and bad back, after you move it again. Then all will learn nothing from ordeal, I am reading these comments and i realize why most people's hifi systems sound like shit because they donot have a clue about audio in the first place. Any 1 that would add solidstate in there line of tube electronics is a nonbeliever in audio purity. EQ bab idea, bass modules center of room a joke, that would be against everything this site stands 4.  Preaching Horn Religion     MSAUDIO

Msaudio, I have you have a wrong perception about what is going on. I am negotiating and weighing different option. Your proposal to isolate LF section in extra bedroom is no less ridicules then putting the bass modules in the center of room. Do not forget that I am looking for not only pressure building but also proper localization of LF source, not mention the delays from extra bedroom … So, it is ridicules but no less valuable from the perspective of options. Audio is not only about listening and moving boxes but also about thinking. Thinking it is what I am doing nowadays… The digital EQ might be a bad idea but proper thinking implies proper methodological handling of subjects. I sound confident about some subject because I have divert experience in them. I do not have any person al experience with use digital EQ for LF. I know and I pitch that digital EQ is garbage but how about the digital EQ dedicated to sub 40Hz channel? You state that it will be EQ bab idea, can you share more thought on it, particularly if you have tried 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
05-16-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
msaudio
Posts 45
Joined on 12-09-2009

Post #: 158
Post ID: 13524
Reply to: 13522
No Isolation
fiogf49gjkf0d
Romy   I ment put everything in back bedroom electronics and speakers not isolate bass. Then it would sound very close to your old house sound room. I have played with some solidstate and mixed with tubes and i do believe you could add solid state below 120 hz and getaway with it without harm to sound but any higher i would'nt use. I have used lot's of solidstate for bass only but finding a good solidstate amp for HF-MF is hard to do. In the past i have found some good solid state amps and have had some good results from amps that have autoformers on them, the solidstate amps that have autoformers have 4,8,16,70 ohm output So they seem to match you speakers output better so the sound is more like tubes sound. I don't know if you have ever used solidstate amps threw input or autoformers but the transformers gives your sound a more sweet all around tone and i have noticed they are more tube like because of the transformer. Just like output transformerless tube amps sound more like solidstate because they are missing that sweet sounding output transformer. I have lot's of amp's on hand and have the part's to build any style to A,B. I wish i was closer because you would like some of my toy's. Preaching Horn Religion   MSAUDIO
05-19-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 9,916
Joined on 05-27-2004

Post #: 159
Post ID: 13584
Reply to: 13235
It is rain in Macondo Marquez said…
fiogf49gjkf0d
And it is raining today in the Kitty home. Still there is Bach and my Macondo is up. Looking at the picture of my new listing room I see no rain… 

NewRoom_Night.jpg


 


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
05-20-2010 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
oxric
Posts 194
Joined on 02-11-2010

Post #: 160
Post ID: 13590
Reply to: 13584
Potential contenders?
fiogf49gjkf0d

30cm Subwoofer

Type Number: 30W/4558-00
• Fiberglass/Paper Sandwich cone, black coated
• Fs 19,5 Hz
• SPL 90,5dB @ 2,83V / 1m
• 56 mm peak excursion – hereof 25mm linear
• Aluminum Short Circuiting Ring and the

Aluminum Spacer on the pole piece to reduce distortion and power compression.

• Aluminium Voice coil former
• Vented cone / dustcap
• Nomex spider
• Low damping rubber surround
• Litze wire woven into the spider

Specs: Electrical Data Power Handling Nominal impedance Zn 100h RMS noice test (IEC) Minimum impedance Zmin Long-term Max Power (IEC18.3) Maximum impedance Zo Max linear SPL (rms) @ power DC resistance Short-term Max Power (IEC18.2) Voice coil inductance mH Voice Coil and Magnet Parametres Voice coil diameter Resonance Frequency fs Voice coil height Mechanical Q factor Qms Voice coil layers Electrical Q factor Qes Height of gap Qts Linear excursion +/- Tm Max mech. Excursion +/- Mechanical resistance Rms Flux density of gap mWb Moving mass Mms Total useful flux mWb Suspension compliance Cms Diameter of magnet Effective cone diameter Height of magnet Effective piston area Sd Weight of magnet Equivalent volume Vas ltrs Unit net weight Sensitivity (2.83V/1m) Ratio fs/Qts IEC Specs refer to IEC 60268,5 third sdition. All Scan Speak products are RoHS compliant

Well Romy:

If you wanted to stick to some known quantities, you might do well to look at these soon to be released drivers from Scan Speak which seem fairly promising, and might work quite well. They are rather inexpensive according to their indicative prices and so may not be such an expensive experiment. The excursion of 58mm is rather good, they are current production and you could easily add more as you feel necessary.

Regards
Rakesh

Page 8 of 24 (479 items) Select Pages:  « First ... « 6 7 8 9 10 » ... Last »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Macondo Alternation. Extending the LF line-array..  Macondo and not only Macondo positioning...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     8  130953  10-29-2005
  »  New  Midbass Horns and Real Estate...  Just a youtube video......  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     247  1845455  07-26-2009
  »  New  A playback and wrong notes...  Why is it not common practice?...  Playback Listening  Forum     5  48368  03-12-2007
  »  New  All Active! A DSET and multi-way acoustic system...  Hahaha...  Audio Discussions  Forum     14  104589  01-31-2008
  »  New  The “Dead Points of Live Sound”..  Confused...  Playback Listening  Forum     28  272395  05-14-2005
  »  New  Don't position speakers but create Sound in room...  Listener position...  Audio For Dummies ™  Forum     1  37093  06-19-2006
  »  New  About speakers Imbedded Macro-Positioning...  Big room AEZ...  Playback Listening  Forum     15  162578  05-16-2007
  »  New  Macondo’s Midbass Project – the grown up time...  Vitavox 15/40...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     455  2507950  05-20-2010
  »  New  Another problem in my new listening room...  Bass Trap...  Analog Playback Forum     1  19804  08-24-2010
  »  New  Superbly interesting effect: Suspended decoupled floor ..  Superbly interesting effect: Suspended decoupled floor ...  Playback Listening  Forum     0  15182  10-08-2010
  »  New  About dymick sparkling...  About dymick sparkling....  Playback Listening  Forum     0  14068  10-29-2010
  »  New  Bass impact on Turntable: how to estimate objectively..  I have done some work on this in the past....  Analog Playback Forum     4  38559  11-01-2010
  »  New  I have a dream, the dream about a Chair...  A bit exaggerated to me....  Playback Listening  Forum     31  187332  10-29-2009
  »  New  Dedicated Music Room Build..  Show it....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     6  50936  03-03-2011
  »  New  Listening rooms and composers...  On "typewriter music"....  Playback Listening  Forum     15  112658  05-16-2010
  »  New  How to play Bruckner Sound in Audio...  Being a pedagogical geniuses…...  Playback Listening  Forum     16  94546  06-15-2010
  »  New  Sound from behind a window...  Sound from behind a window....  Playback Listening  Forum     0  12456  04-24-2011
  »  New  Reinforced live sound in audio listening room..  Listening room acoustics...  Audio Discussions  Forum     4  30404  07-05-2012
  »  New  A listening room for a domesticated Cat?..  Eventually!...  Audio Discussions  Forum     283  673226  02-04-2016
  »  New  The ULF cannel for my new listening room...  The Organic Bass vs. ULF Drivers...  Audio Discussions  Forum     43  75606  07-29-2018
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