GoodSoundClub - Romy the Cat's Audio Site - Yes, this is an option too.

| Search | Login/Register

Home » Audio Discussions » A listening room for a domesticated Cat? (284 posts, 14 pages)

Print Thread |

1st Post |

Page 10 of 15 (284 items)

Select Pages:

« First ... « 8 9 10 11 12 » ... Last »

	Target	Threads for related reading	Most recent post in related threads	Forum	Replies	Views	Started
»	New	Romy The Cat's new Listening Room..	Won't be the last time he makes that trip!...	Audio Discussions Forum	478	2914170	03-28-2010
»	New	Midbass Horns and Real Estate...	Just a youtube video......	Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum	247	2138129	07-26-2009

07-13-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

martinshorn
Germany
Posts 114
Joined on 04-14-2017

Post #:	181
Post ID:	23313
Reply to:	23312

Could be, could be not :) im not you...

Luckily, im just bored in the office, so I can reply right away ;-)

Well. That guy looks like doing nice quality. Id go there.

Knowing your profile a bit, Im not surprised you don't want a digital delay on your mains.
For me theres no non-digital life anymore, I desire perfect transient, and fullrange sucks.

Knowing your profile I also see sensitivity to timealignment. And human sensitivity increases in the lows, especially below 200 cycles. So careful.
Id recommend to hear it first, again, as a refresher, with focus on some characteristics, which you will most likely not overcome completely.

Youll definitely get the unique benefits, which I can skip here, its amazing and not subtle and only Khorn can do it.
But with the delay, youll have 2 main issues:
- drums separation. Listen to drums. Youll notice that the "Tommmm" sound will get a slight "tock-flummmm". on microscopic scale, you really need A-B comparison to clearly identify.
it will also make the bass more bouncy rolling soft. Which is quiet nice Smile

but yes, not as dry hard as the recording was taken.
- depth of field / stage will extend further away. On some recordings it will unveil first time difference between the instrument position. On others artificially overexaggerate a 2 meter difference into 10. which is cool, but also not so realistic Smile

All in all, the benefits are big, the downsides pleasant.
But you should know what youre heading to.
Many do mistake to put them approx. cornerish with gaps behind, no lid, midbass becomes horrible!
They also abuse it as a sub with force to 20Hz (with >24dB boost), doesn't get nice on hi level as you modulate the prechamber size with xcursion and distort the fundamentals.

If... you stack 2 (cut xcursion half), add a phaseplug (reduce prechamber volume and such shift the modulating frequency up out of the range), cross bit lower (200?)... you can reduce that a lot.
Phase plug easiest is get a wooden bowl that fits into the cones, cut them in 3 slices, take the gap of 10 centimeter in the center out, close the middle left and right with a halfmoon board, and the plug is done.
Next would be that the subs for the bottom end need to have the same delay then to fit the K's. Meaning moving them further away... (some roof corner end of the room?).

Lot of thoughts, but listen. Its worth driving 100 miles.

cheers
Josh

PS: for me the superior rock solid midbass and fundamentals are the killer feature. no matter which volume, its just layed back unconditional stability that makes goosbump like no other. It also, despite the delay effect of soft rolling impulses, makes it still .... how to say, its ironic: fast dry ? Its contradictionary as the delay should cause the opposite, but the clearity somehow compensates. Overcompensates. And don't neglect how little electricity you need. Especially using DSET. I just ran mine weeks ago for fun-test on a non-D SE-pentode with 1 single watt. Still easily rocking the house!

07-13-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,132
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	182
Post ID:	23314
Reply to:	23313

Just thinking out loud...

Hm, your advice to discard the Midbass time alignment and to go to ULF time delay to catch up with Midbass timing is very interesting. Theoretically I have no auditable sound from ULF. They are at 20Hz. As you understand there is no way to align the ULF by pulse at such a lower octave but I can do it by totaling gain. The delay ay LF is not the same as delay at HF and it is in face very easy to do, particularly since there is no true sound coming from the ULF.

What is your opinion for KHorning with two drivers? Is any critical height of KHorn that make a single driver to be problematic to care the tallness? My presumption is that if a KHorn it too high then the internal time cancelation might be a problem as the pressure escape from middle of the hors (where the driver is) compare to top and bottom would be too different. Again, I have no practical experience with it and just thinking out loud…

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

07-13-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,644
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #:	183
Post ID:	23315
Reply to:	23314

Room Mode Gain vs. Speaker/Amp Output

Romy, do you still have the "bass traps" from your previous house? I also hate an "over-damped" room, but it might be useful to know more about the "character" of the room modes you have mentioned. Sure, the 60 Hz plagues everyone. The RTA will tell you SPL, but Mahler 3 should help, too, to tell you how "significant" and how "relevant" is the sound at augmented frequencies.

Best regards,
Paul S

07-13-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Wojtek
Pinckney (MI), United States
Posts 178
Joined on 09-01-2005

Post #:	184
Post ID:	23316
Reply to:	23313

Driver?

JoshWhat driver do you have in mind when writing about K-Horns ? K-33-E is not a very good sounding one .

07-13-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

martinshorn
Germany
Posts 114
Joined on 04-14-2017

Post #:	185
Post ID:	23317
Reply to:	23314

Two separate individuals

priviet. I tried many ways. I cut the front outside faceplate open, and put a second driver on it. So that two drivers were firing onto each other face to face in one single hornthroat, rest normal single K. To my surprise the output didn't increase at all. Neither response. No clue where the energy went.
Expected enlarging the throat might help but didnt. Then the horn was demolished Smile

Couple of other mods on the mouth continued as failures.

Starting over. Taking the right khorn, so one complete individual horn, and just lifted it up on top of the other. That worked amazing! The nearfield measures showed 2 big notches in the fundamentals though. Probably what you meant by having a unsteady phase on the wavefront. But well, who listens with the head in the corner. At about 2 Meters distance it got the way it was supposed to be. The further the better. The whole response curve lifted equally 6dB with a slight bottom extension of a view cycles.
I assume this must be connected to minimum listening distance to the mouth in correlation to the mouth size. Unless you got waveguides like some do for HF in PA. Luckily the K's actually have 2 vertical slits on top of each other approaching the corner wall. So its already slightly guiding the waves with a period of 48cm / 358Hz which was where the lowest notch appeared in nearfield roughly. Long story, the vertical slits add nicely to a vertical cylinder wave, and once you're at least 2-3 meters away you get great response. 1 Meter collapses in the fundamentals.
So no fear in normal listening distance its al good in phase. Just double the efficiency. Which is a lot imho.
PS: the height of the sound image is just right. At least my ears sitting r at 92cm height. The Ks are 97 hi, stacking two is 198+ but the center is again exactly on height of your ears. Its like made for stacking Smile

07-13-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

martinshorn
Germany
Posts 114
Joined on 04-14-2017

Post #:	186
Post ID:	23319
Reply to:	23316

Not a fan of weak magnets

hi Woitek. The K33 extend the bottom end by the high Q, to almost 40 cycles . Which is only ok if you work with passive XO on a single amp. Well that's how they were designed. Having designated amps that allow you to steer the parameter or even better a separate woofer below, you can take full advantage of low Q drivers. Which i prefer. I got 4 Fostex PA38 i liked the most. Once i heard bout the Vitavox AK15s i was surprised how similar they r. Good cause i cant afford them Smile

But the Fostex aren't built anymore either Smile

I recommend strong magnetics with lo mass. Browse a bit for 15 inchers with following parameters:
Qts < 0.28 the lower the better / Mms <80 grams the lower the better / VAS >400 the more the better /

Youll most likely find this looking for high output midbass PA, alnico guitar speakers, straight cones preferably. Avoid big coils and longthrow as the copper is the biggest weight and just makes tired sound imho. Mine got 1 mm overhang only and run just fine, 79mm coil, more than enough in a horn. I know such are hard to find. I think 18sound had 1-2 almost goodies. TAD got some, but too expensive. Old JBL D/K Series 130 or 140 are amazing! Once a year u get a mint pair on ebay.

07-13-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,132
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	187
Post ID:	23321
Reply to:	23314

Hm, who would believe that I might be happier now?

I got today RTA and decided to play with the midbass location a bit. As I expected it is very hard as whatever I moved the things the problem still there. Then rather to annoy myself I position the speakers where they use to be but turned them 90 degree outside. The response go MUCH flatter. The left channel still had some problems but as I put it to fire directly to the wall with just 2” distance and all my peaks are gone. Honestly I was running the graphs multiple time and scratching my head as I did not think it would be so simple.

I sat down to listen what I got and it was VERY nice, I did not connect my ULF channel though. The Macondo is at 11-10-2 position and I am not frustrated to move it now. As the damping and response got fixed the Macondo throw a spectacular imaging from, literally amassing and it is still with no ULF. I did not play anything complicated or very loud and I want to go sleep but my feeling not are very good. The listening room does look a bit stupid and boxes turned 90 degree of the way and not in nice symmetrical position but it is what it is. I am bit hurt that the solution was so simple. I am not sure that it is a final solution but it is a very respectable sound with the imaging so good that I can sell ticket to audition. I can wait when I will be rested and will have more listening…

Good, it is a first time since the twins born that I can wait to be in my listening spot…

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

07-13-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

noviygera

Chicago, IL
Posts 177
Joined on 06-12-2009

Post #:	188
Post ID:	23322
Reply to:	23321

One more simple idea

Flip the Vitavox woofers so the magnet is on outside of box and the cone is facing inside. This will increase the overall box volume and maybe reduce the mid/high output. Also voice coil will be closer to time aligned to rest of system...

07-15-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,132
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	189
Post ID:	23323
Reply to:	23322

A good thinking.

noviygera wrote:
Flip the Vitavox woofers so the magnet is on outside of box and the cone is facing inside. This will increase the overall box volume and maybe reduce the mid/high output. Also voice coil will be closer to time aligned to rest of system...

Thanks, noviygera, it was a good idea. I did try it yesterday at one of the channels. The Vitavox are huge and they are deep, so they cleared up a lot of volume extra. I did not detect that the inversion of the drivers made a whole lot of difference. I did measured and I listed. It made the midbass assembly a bit too bulky and hardly manageable. To a degree I like the appearance of it as well. I like the techy fool and feel but eventually I felt that it is too visual distractive. I do not like to see playback equipment what I am listening. If I have well defined sonic benefits from it then I might keep and put some black cloth wrapper around the drivers. But since I did not see a huge difference I think it is easier (and safer for kid) to keep the driver in the boxes. Still, I do not think that my current boxed are final solution, so I am still looking…

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

07-15-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,132
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	190
Post ID:	23324
Reply to:	23321

A next day.

I think my dysfunctional one 15” driver in my Midbass was for a while and THAT was something the make me to feel that I need to move Macondo to 9-9-1 position. With the recent changes (recovery of a woofer, recalibration of channels, EQ of the midbass by rotation) the imaging presentation of Macondo took at very new level, probably at the level I never had it before. For whatever reasons, the listening location become unexpectedly large. Moving the listening chair back and force for a good 3-4 feet does not change the presentation too drastically. Yes, there are “some” differences of course but they are all good. Another interesting aspect is the system now demonstrate a super high demand for symmetry. If I move one of my midbass a few inches in a different location then another channel then the system punishes some “less smart” space presentation. It is particularly auditable with split stings pizz-like or staccato play when second violins are slightly off the beat. With complete symmetry it sounds like magic, truly stunning. With some luck of symmetry is sounds a bit technical and non-involving. I have no idea why….

Another this the I at this point has no idea why in my use of ULF channels. I mean I do not use it as it does not sound right. This is strange because it is VERY same ULD that I had before and that worked very well in my old house. My suspicious is because my ULF is not in time-aligned position. I just physically can’t locate upper bass and ULF in the same time-aligned spot. So I need to think again how to accommodate and as I can’t evene to test this hypnotizes… If I stick with sealed box upperbass configuration then it would be nice to integrate ULF and midbass in the same line array and to share the same footprint.

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

07-16-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

anthony
Posts 338
Joined on 08-18-2014

Post #:	191
Post ID:	23325
Reply to:	23324

Deja vu

Romy the Cat wrote:

Another this the I at this point has no idea why in my use of ULF channels. I mean I do not use it as it does not sound right. This is strange because it is VERY same ULD that I had before and that worked very well in my old house. My suspicious is because my ULF is not in time-aligned position. I just physically can’t locate upper bass and ULF in the same time-aligned spot. So I need to think again how to accommodate and as I can’t evene to test this hypnotizes… If I stick with sealed box upperbass configuration then it would be nice to integrate ULF and midbass in the same line array and to share the same footprint.

I seem to remember you had this sort of issue when setting up your previous room and eventually you moved them time aligned.

The one stack of 15" and 10" sounds like a nice solution. Do you think more 10" scanspeak instead of the 15" vitavox for the midbass would also be a good solution? Might be worth trying if you have a few more drivers about somewhere.

07-16-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,132
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	192
Post ID:	23326
Reply to:	23325

It is all depend of your roo

anthony wrote:
I seem to remember you had this sort of issue when setting up your previous room and eventually you moved them time aligned.

The one stack of 15" and 10" sounds like a nice solution. Do you think more 10" scanspeak instead of the 15" vitavox for the midbass would also be a good solution? Might be worth trying if you have a few more drivers about somewhere.

Well, this is complex and I do not have a definitive answer. My presumption that my ULF does not work because of time aliment is just a guess. You see, I having now a compromised midbass and therefore I is normal that I do not have properly integrated ULD. The ULD shall go along with midbass and since my midbass is very transitional I have nothing certain. The complexity that I mentioned above come from subjective (or objective if you know how) evaluation of ULF time alignment. The ULD might sound like shit or not to be properly ingrate because if so many reasons, hot to nail down and to isolate the time alignment problems? The only know to me way is to do how we do with tweeters: make the playback to sound perfect with MF and THEN to think about tweeter. The same here: I need the playback to sound perfect down to 40-50Hz and THEN to think about ULF. Here is the question is you want to play games: If your Mildness ae not time aligned then do you alight your ULF to midbass or to MF? If you ask me to answer this question then I would say the I do not know….

The stack 15" and 10" in the same line array (with obvious different sections) sounds like a nice solution, I still contemplating it as on option.

The third of your question about more 10" scanspeak instead of the 15" vitavox for the midbass is the easy one. First of all you need to understand that my “scanspeaks” are not the best drivers for 125Hz. If you have very small, very lucky room, very lucky (active) positioning of your ULF and a lot of drivers (>8 per channel) then you might try do not use a dedicated Midbass. I had this configuration when I lived in Boston. It might be hard however to drive the drivers with Fs20Hz all the way to let say 100hz and to expect o have more or less flat response. In your case I would not think at this point about midbass, Make a provision for the LF output transformer to be able to drive anything and in case if your playback will not be able to handle ULF then you switch your LF channel to a dedicate midbass and go ULD outside the Milq. Again, it is all depend of your room. My very approximate estimate that under 350 feet you still might not need a dedicated midbass.

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

07-26-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,132
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	193
Post ID:	23347
Reply to:	23321

What the holly garbage.

I meat with a local gentleman who runs North Reading Engineering. He turned out to be quite intelligent with whom is stimulating to bounce different design ideas. We might try the K-Horn with Vitavox drivers, which would be the same as CN-191 bass section and we have some other idea on pipeline. I do not know where it will go.

Last night I did an interesting experiment. I took the bass towers, just 4 driver per side, crossed them at 90Hz, line-level and drove them not with the Milq’s bass channel but with SS Yamaha B2. I use it with the tube crossover that I used for ULF. I figure out that it has enough power and gain to drive my towers to whatever I need. I found a good flat response via RTA and sat to listen it. Good. That was juts the most revolting thing that I hear for a while. As much as driving the towers by Milq’s LF channel made it to sound nice as much driving it by SS direct-coupled made to sound horrendous. The sound of tower juts did not communicate in any way of form with the horns and it was like 4 laser beams shooting from 4 separate locations. I never seen anything like this. The bass-wise it was enough but there was no size or space of any kind and it was just scare. I want to stress it that it was so bad the I GOT SCARED and turned the playback off. I did not want even to think WHY it was. It was so frightening.

Might be if I add more of the driver to the towers, like 4 more then I will be able to drive it with Milq but it will be with 10 driver per side a but bulky configuration. With a dedicated midbass in the sealed boxes, no matter how not perfect it was but driving from Milq it perfectly “talks” to the horns and it gives an imagine to die for. I really would like to have a dedicated midbass. A proper midbass is to a degree what defines a high-end audio in my view and it is hard to get. Well, will see where the life will land me in my midbass journey…

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

07-26-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

anthony
Posts 338
Joined on 08-18-2014

Post #:	194
Post ID:	23348
Reply to:	23347

What about at a lower volume...

Romy the Cat wrote:

Last night I did an interesting experiment. I took the bass towers, just 4 driver per side, crossed them at 90Hz, line-level and drove them not with the Milq’s bass channel but with SS Yamaha B2. I use it with the tube crossover that I used for ULF. I figure out that it has enough power and gain to drive my towers to whatever I need. I found a good flat response via RTA and sat to listen it. Good. That was juts the most revolting thing that I hear for a while. As much as driving the towers by Milq’s LF channel made it to sound nice as much driving it by SS direct-coupled made to sound horrendous. The sound of tower juts did not communicate in any way of form with the horns and it was like 4 laser beams shooting from 4 separate locations. I never seen anything like this. The bass-wise it was enough but there was no size or space of any kind and it was just scare. I want to stress it that it was so bad the I GOT SCARED and turned the playback off. I did not want even to think WHY it was. It was so frightening.

Might be if I add more of the driver to the towers, like 4 more then I will be able to drive it with Milq but it will be with 10 driver per side a but bulky configuration. With a dedicated midbass in the sealed boxes, no matter how not perfect it was but driving from Milq it perfectly “talks” to the horns and it gives an imagine to die for. I really would like to have a dedicated midbass. A proper midbass is to a degree what defines a high-end audio in my view and it is hard to get. Well, will see where the life will land me in my midbass journey…

Romy,

Have you experimented at lower volumes with running the bass array from the Milqs LF Channel at that 90Hz low pass filter? I know you are already scratching for more volume in that room but I ask because perhaps that would shed some light in whether it was the SS amplification or the bass array itself or both that is causing the issue. If you have nice imaging at lower volumes with the bass array in play on the Milq LF channel then it could indicate that extending the array is not out of the question. Do you still have the extra boxes with two drivers to stack on top of the arrays?

Regards,

Anthony

07-27-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,132
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	195
Post ID:	23350
Reply to:	23348

I do not know why.

I am not sure what volume has to do with anything. The problem with Milq driving my towers in my room not with Milq power but with Milq’s gain. A lower volume would not change anything. In my smaller room I was running my towers from Milq’s bass channels for years and it was very fine, in fact it was the whole idea of Mild DSET and at that time it did not even included midbass. Perhaps by living with Lamms SET driving bass for 5 year and then with Milq’s for 12 year I forgot how horrible SS amps are bass are… Migh be it was something else, I do not know. It might be worth to look into and to find the reason. I still have all this crap connected and I might listen more but honestly it sounds so bad than I am afraid that playing like this is very bad for my maid. I am not kidding, it makes me scares and angry, I have no ide why.

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

09-18-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,132
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	196
Post ID:	23398
Reply to:	22459

Changing Macondo Configuration

Lately I have been thinking a lot, trying figure out what I am and where I would like to go with Macondo. The Macondo base, the horns isle is still there and I have no motivation to change anything. The conceptualizing and assembling of what I have in the isle is an evolutionally thing and in my view and to my ears presents a pineal of what might be done in within the given topology. The Macondo support in base region is something that I am not certain for now.

In the first Macondo version, when I lived in my city apartment, the base was handled my line-arrays of 6 my favorite pimpled SunSpeak drivers. It was sitting at 107Hz, the room was small, the Upperbass horns were positioned at very active spots in the room and the overall result was spectacular. The bass did not have that “vintage glow” but it was VERY interesting result with very accurate, well controlled, very transient, very lush and very noble bass. I drove it by Milq bass channel and the small size of the room made it possible the Milq to stay in class A1.
In my West Woburn house, I built 40Hz straight horns with Vitavox 40/15 drivers and drove it from Milq’s low bass channels. Even though I feel that the Milq’s low bass channels were loaded 2-3 times heavier then I would like it to be but it was VERY wonderful result. The ULF was handled by the same SunSpeak line-array and 100W SS amp behind an active tube crossover. To my huge surprise, hiding behind the midbass horn decay the ULF was very effective.

Now I have my new listening room. The upperbass horn are not in active spot and they do 130-140Hz. If I put in use the SunSpeak line-array with 6 drivers per side then I good 6-7dB down in gain. To rectify it I would need extra 4-6 drivers per side, I have no room to accommodate it and the array will be 14’ height. To drive it by anything other than Milq (DSET) does not sound attractive. I do not have more powerful and with more gain SET. To use SS would be sacrilege, let do not even discuss it.

I am looking now in the direction of small folded horns. K-Horns, Jamboree and etc. My initial testing results are very negative but I still will be working on it. The conceptual problem is that if I make them to work then I will lose my time alignment and still will need some SS amps to drive my ULF. I am very afraid my high-power SS to drive lower bass. It was OK in my former room but it was way behind a very slow decaying straight horn. The small folded horns stop response very abruptly like a rock and I will not have a log decaying tail where my SS crap ULF might hide.

So, am a bit at lost. I might go with upper bass horns, I have room to do it but I do not have zeal at this point. I would like the kids to grow a little and the family stop bleeding from the nights when the Charley’s teeth growing, Abby’s dipper rashes or with Thomas’ temper tantrums.

In meanwhile I clearly would like to have Milq to drive my midbass, no SS amp and I would like to have time alignment. One of the direction is keep working on corner horn. I will not have time alignment but I might have a good room loading. The problem is that with the corner horns I get 50Hz, heavy EQed and very rapid roll of. There is no way in hell I will find a SS amp that will run in auditable region. If I have a SS amp to run in sub 20Hz where sound is not tonally auditable then it is fine but I for sure do not want a SS to drive my tower all the way to 50Hz. One of solutions might be to come up with 15” line-array with near 100dB sensitive drivers. Employing 3-4 of them I can get the output I need, I can even to set them to run as 2 in midbass and 2 in sub-bass. Like 2 Vitavox 15/40 and 2 Altec 505G. I can make all of them run from Milq bass it is might be enough. I can eventually set a SS to run in sub 20Hz but this it already less important. The bitch is to able to predict how the 15” direct radiators will be decaying in sealed enclosures of let say 6 cub feet. If I able to make it fast/slow (high transient but slow decay) then I will be able to compliment if with SS crap at the bottom… Ah, I wish I had time to experiment with all of it as I did 15 years back and not to be afraid to make mistakes!!!

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

09-19-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

martinshorn
Germany
Posts 114
Joined on 04-14-2017

Post #:	197
Post ID:	23399
Reply to:	23398

SSET ;-)

Hi Romy!
Im taking the risk of u punching me in the face...
Its been some months I tried an SS amp of a different kind. I personally don't like the SET sound, but aknowledge some of their advantages from technical POV.
Found this here
https://www.buscher-endstufen.de/produkte/se-50/
I send them back after listening, its indeed just like a SET. May be what ure watching out for.
The kit uses a super fast FET, in full class A single ended. Its hooked up like a tube and got the same response / behavior etc, just 10 times lower impedance and higher power.
That could catch up with your 10dB sensitivity issue. Theyre kind of similar to the Nelson Pass concept.

09-19-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,132
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	198
Post ID:	23400
Reply to:	23399

Thank you, I might need to look into it.

Thanks, martinshorn. I very much not claims the I heard all SS amps out there and in my particular case I used Yamaha's V-FET. It is direct coupled amp and from a sensible practice is should not be able to have good bass, nothing direct coupled does at power level. I is perfectly fine for ULF where bass not auditable tonally. It perfectly possible that there are amps out there that have better sonic characters from what I have seen, to find them would be an endeavor that I am not ready to embark right now.

Regardless of you personal or my personal liking or do not liking SET I always feel that it is VERY beneficial for multimapping systems when each channel is amplified by identical, at least by topology amplifier. That was the whole DSET premise: to accommodate one topology for multiple chennals with different individual demands.

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

09-20-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

anthony
Posts 338
Joined on 08-18-2014

Post #:	199
Post ID:	23401
Reply to:	23398

More of the same?

Romy,

Is a new cabinet for the Scanspeak drivers an option? Have it the same width facing you but just make it deeper so that you can group the drivers closer together while still maintaining a similar volume for the drivers. That way you could stack 8 or so drivers to the same height as the horn stack and if you really wanted to go to town you could go 10 high...but those last two would have diminishing returns as far as sensitivity goes.

Of course, this is what I am doing (if work ever slows down to let me back at my audio build) with 8 drivers a side in a smallish room. Perhaps you would need more yet more sensitivity but from memory I will end up with close to 100dB sensitivity which should suit the Melquiades.

Cheers,

Anthony

09-20-2017

Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree

Romy the Cat

Boston, MA
Posts 10,132
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #:	200
Post ID:	23402
Reply to:	23401

Yes, this is an option too.

Yes, you are absolutely right. If I make a much deeper cabinet and put many more drivers closer to each other then I will have much more sensitive array. I do have 18 more of those drivers and the idea did hit my mind. From what I have now an extra driver give you 1.4dB gains in sensitivity. I have now 6 per side, so I think if I put 6 extra then I will be somewhere when I need to be. To have an array with 12 drivers will be very nice but then I would need to go for 4-5 feet deep and have 11 feet toll enclosure. The box 11 by 4 will be huge and I am not sure if it be practical. If you do have a smallish room, in partially in context of LF, then started from 4-6 driver and then add if you need them. I think for me if I do go for 12 drivers then I would make sense to put them in 6 enclosure by 2 drives and to shift the enclosures, forming a curve.

"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche

Page 10 of 15 (284 items)

Select Pages:

« First ... « 8 9 10 11 12 » ... Last »

	Target	Threads for related reading	Most recent post in related threads	Forum	Replies	Views	Started
»	New	Romy The Cat's new Listening Room..	Won't be the last time he makes that trip!...	Audio Discussions Forum	478	2914170	03-28-2010
»	New	Midbass Horns and Real Estate...	Just a youtube video......	Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum	247	2138129	07-26-2009