| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Audio Discussions » My new “New” listening room, 2024 (32 posts, 2 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 2 of 2 (32 items) Select Pages:  « 1 2
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Macondo 3.0..  Toilet Paper...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     51  42918  06-21-2023
  »  New  Macondo’s Midbass Project – the grown up time...  Vitavox 15/40...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     455  2994894  05-20-2010
  »  New  Macondo's Axioms: Horn-loaded acoustic systems..  A link to another thread....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     120  686910  07-29-2007
05-21-2024 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,184
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 21
Post ID: 27394
Reply to: 27393
Milq/Macondo 2024
 anthony wrote:
Both UB Horn roll off circa 130Hz in room.  There are a couple of rough MDF boxes here that I knocked up from spare sheet a while back.  Have not tested them specifically at the intended spot behind me but running around with a microphone shows those problem frequencies high at that location.  Probably need to get no lower than 40-50Hz with the midbass so was planning on using the Injection Channel from Melquiades and the Lundahl transformer, at least to start.  We will see.  The guy that wound my bass channel transformer is no longer doing it so if I go custom it will be with someone new (to me).

Yep, if you get 130Hr, you are at an unlucky bass spot. Your woofer towers are not so pretty at 100Hz. Those Scanspeak drivers do wonderfully at lower frequencies but are not too excited at 100Hz. Ironically, the fact that your room's upper-mid bass is unhappy is a perfect case for using a dedicated midbass channel. Remember my rule: do not fight room but use it.
 
It is serially your playback and you can do whatever you want. Still, I would like to pass some recommendations that are tested and in my view work very well.
 
1)    Since you use the injection channel, stop using it. The injection channel was a ridiculous idea with exceptionally beneficial results, but now I have found it better. You have two Tannoy Red 10 drivers. Use the HF section of them as tweeters. You will be very surprised how beautifully they work as twitters in the context of S2 drivers as a mid-range. You can drive it from your Milq’s injection channel or change the transformer on your Milq’s HF channel.  It still will be an injection as I recommend crossing it with the second order between 1800 and 3000 cycles. So, the S2 driver and the Tannoy tweeter will work together.  All unpleasantness off Tannoy Twitter that we know from the sound of complete Tannoy red drivers will not manifest itself. The Red will not need an enclosure. I however built a small box because it just looks ugly when they hang along. When I have time, I will ask my mechanic to cut off the low-frequency basket for Tannoy. It will undoubtedly demagnetize the magnet, so it will be a ceremony to put it all the way back together. I will also need my Macondo frame modification to accommodate the driver. For the time being, a small box was a quick and convenient solution. Also, I do not know if the Tannoy Twitter will change its own sonic signature without this large woofer cone acting as a small rate horn.
 
2)    Do introduce educated direct radiator mid base channel. If you convert your high frequency channel to drive Tannoy Twitter, then you have the injection channel of your amplifier free to drive your new midbass. You will need a lot of power and a lot inductance in your transformer for midbass. I feel that Milq’s bass is a perfect candidate. After you introduce midbass you will certainly change how you use your woofer towers. I can only assure you that if you cross them at let's 20-30 Hz put them on a transitional slope, and let your mid base to cover down to 40-50 cycles, then you will have a completely new sound from the Scanspeaks



"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
05-22-2024 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
anthony
Posts 338
Joined on 08-18-2014

Post #: 22
Post ID: 27395
Reply to: 27394
Recoup the energy
 Romy the Cat wrote:

1)    Since you use the injection channel, stop using it. The injection channel was a ridiculous idea with exceptionally beneficial results, but now I have found it better. You have two Tannoy Red 10 drivers. Use the HF section of them as tweeters. You will be very surprised how beautifully they work as twitters in the context of S2 drivers as a mid-range. You can drive it from your Milq’s injection channel or change the transformer on your Milq’s HF channel.  It still will be an injection as I recommend crossing it with the second order between 1800 and 3000 cycles. So, the S2 driver and the Tannoy tweeter will work together.  All unpleasantness off Tannoy Twitter that we know from the sound of complete Tannoy red drivers will not manifest itself. The Red will not need an enclosure. I however built a small box because it just looks ugly when they hang along. When I have time, I will ask my mechanic to cut off the low-frequency basket for Tannoy. It will undoubtedly demagnetize the magnet, so it will be a ceremony to put it all the way back together. I will also need my Macondo frame modification to accommodate the driver. For the time being, a small box was a quick and convenient solution. Also, I do not know if the Tannoy Twitter will change its own sonic signature without this large woofer cone acting as a small rate horn.
 


I do not presently use an Injection Channel.  The Red 10" pair is here, and the channel exists within the amplifier but currently just powers a resistor rather than the Reds.  Injection was always seen as the final channel once all others were sorted and it may or may not be done depending on Midbass needs.  When the Red 10" were purchased I was scammed by the seller because the woofer cones are certainly not genuine and are of unknown origin, which was another reason not to rush to set up the Injection Channel, but it seems as though I managed to get two genuine tweeters so nothing is lost in the end.

At present I am very pleased by my sound.  It does things that I've not heard other systems able to do, especially unwrapping complex passages into a message that I can interpret and appreciate.  So much so that a large portion of my listening is to live, single take recordings, of all kinds of musical genres.  What is a wall of sound in other high-end systems is unwrapped by Melq/Mac into individual bricks each in their right place.  I LOVE this ability to make sense of cacophonies.  The RAAL Lazy Ribbon tweeter seems to fit very well within the entire presentation and it's cleanliness certainly does contribute to the sound....but....sometimes I do wish for a less "white" sound up top.  More colour, or perhaps contrast, not that anybody could ever accuse my sound as lacking any of those things.  The treble is so clear and well behaved that with some material it is almost, well, boring.  Listening to well recorded piano, an instrument that can separate the wheat from the chaff so to speak, is bliss...absolutely wonderful, addictive.  No qualms with the RAAL there.

I will trial swapping out the RAAL for the Red tweeter.  Is a single stage Melq channel suitable for the Red tweeter?  Is this something you have tried Romy?  Not a lot of power on tap.

 Romy the Cat wrote:

2)    Do introduce educated direct radiator mid base channel. If you convert your high frequency channel to drive Tannoy Twitter, then you have the injection channel of your amplifier free to drive your new midbass. You will need a lot of power and a lot inductance in your transformer for midbass. I feel that Milq’s bass is a perfect candidate. After you introduce midbass you will certainly change how you use your woofer towers. I can only assure you that if you cross them at let's 20-30 Hz put them on a transitional slope, and let your mid base to cover down to 40-50 cycles, then you will have a completely new sound from the Scanspeaks


I am sure that correcting my midbass will change how I interpret the HF channel, but I am not certain exactly whether it will be perceived as more or less "white".  In the past, with other speakers, when resolution of the bass has been improved I have generally appreciated the high frequencies more but I am not so sure this time.  Melquiades/Macondo is different, and my instinct here is that as I improve the quality and quantity of bass in my room that I may appreciate my HF less, and it has almost been an excuse to follow interests other than audio for a while.  The energy and will to experiment and create in this endeavour has returned and it is time to once and for all finalise my bass in this room.
05-22-2024 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,184
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 23
Post ID: 27396
Reply to: 27395
Try it.
 anthony wrote:
....but....sometimes I do wish for a less "white" sound up top.  More colour, or perhaps contrast, not that anybody could ever accuse my sound as lacking any of those things. 
   
Ironically it is exactly what you get with Red’s twitters. It introduces a whole new concept of twittering, I am not kidding. It does all necessary injections into the MF channel, running it virtually in parallel but a few dBs down, but it overperforms MF at HF and is almost like jumping out when it is needed. It is not that one decal and another not. It is not about the dB pressure and certain frequencies. It is very hard to explain. Somehow, it injects amazing HF colors when it is called upon, but the amazing thing is that it is not always the same. The Red 10 driver at full range is virtually not listenable, and it is so horribly syrupy that it impressed during the first 3 minutes and becomes hugely annoying every minute after. The injection channel was an idea of very precise and very calibrated injection of this syrupy into Macondo sound.  By using the Red’s tweeters only, I got the same injection across the board and slightly more injection at HF. I spent a LOT of time analyzing and thinking if my current system has any permanent color pattern. In my view it does. If I have a VERY loud and extreme HF event, then I can detect some syrupy signature. In all the music I know, I faced only two fragments that I was able to detect when the orchestra whacked a triangle VERY loudly. I clearly hear there the Red signature, but this signature is not something that is the opposite of “clean” but rather something that gives me an erection. If you hear that warm and gentle HF tone, you will never go back to the “clean” sound. With the range of woodwinds, voice and strings this effect does not manifest itself.
 anthony wrote:
I am sure that correcting my midbass will change how I interpret the HF channel, but I am not certain exactly whether it will be perceived as more or less "white".  In the past, with other speakers, when resolution of the bass has been improved I have generally appreciated the high frequencies more but I am not so sure this time.  Melquiades/Macondo is different, and my instinct here is that as I improve the quality and quantity of bass in my room that I may appreciate my HF less, and it has almost been an excuse to follow interests other than audio for a while.  The energy and will to experiment and create in this endeavour has returned and it is time to once and for all finalise my bass in this room.

 
Just an idea. If I remember correctly, you have your LF section separated from Macondo. If you are able to get your midbass from a small midbass channel, then you will be able to move your LF section to any other place where it will do better room loading. Do not forget that if you cross the LF at lower frequencies it will be less directional and might sit anywhere in the room. I know, they are too sexy not to be in front of you, but it is your fault that you make them so attractive.



"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
05-22-2024 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,184
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 24
Post ID: 27398
Reply to: 27390
Back to Macondo Axioms,
Head today to another local audio guy who listen to my new configuration. The reaction was fascinating. He was asking: what the hell I had done to midrange? Of course, I did nothing, but the question was very accurate. A lower mid-range changed very dramatically and became almost new. So, what, in fact, was changed? Previously, my midbass channels ran 78 Hertz high-pass filter. In addition, it was complimented by a 130Hz high pass filter, as my ear told me that the decay of the mid-based channel was too long. As I added two parallel drivers, the output stage was significantly more loaded, and the mid-base decade became less prominent. This permitted me to remove the large speaker-level coil that formed the 130 Hertz high pass filter. Now, I could run my meat best in the same polarity with my upper base horn and my mid-range, so, essentially, I have removed phrasal distortions from my integration between my mid-base and upper channels. Effectively, I returned to my Macondo Axioms, permitting drivers to run strictly first-order filters with minimum phase. The what's formatting part that the audio guy who visited me four days back, who else very much familiar with all my audio configurations over the last 20 years told me that in the way my sound now reminds me what I had 20 years ago in my Boston apartment. At that time, my premature version of Macondo did comply with my Macondo axioms, and at that time, I ran only phase-consistent filters. Even if I used 2nd order for my woofer towers, they were line level and used a very precise Bessel curve, which is time constant. It is beautiful that the person was able to detect the same Sonic signature that is strictly derived from time-constant channel integrations. I know it is an irrelevant post for most of you but for somebody who at the standard and can hear that is a spectacular evidence of Macondo axioms righteousness and a great topology to follow.
 


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
05-23-2024 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Newtohorn
Posts 13
Joined on 01-03-2018

Post #: 25
Post ID: 27399
Reply to: 27387
Wilson and ml2
 Romy the Cat wrote:

 large Wilsons driven by first generation of Lamm ML2. It is important to know that it should be large Wilson, starting from Grand Slams, the small Wilsons are not interesting. I did not hear newest large Wilsons but I heard Alexandria with ML2, supposedly properly installed by Wilsons own people. If we discard lower base which is absolutely not appropriate for this price range they did superbly interesting job in mid base. It was super high contrast, surprisingly dynamic for low 90's dB sensitivity. However even then, without knowing what I know now, I detected that this spectacular mid base was always spectacular. It sounded like each orchestra get converted  into Chicago under Sir Georg Solti and each piece of music was flooded with overly errected brass. It was very impressive but in the end of the day it was still on algorithmic signature ever present in music.



Romy, congrats on your new listening room.  The above caught my attention, did you listen to the Wilson with one or two pairs (biamp) of ML2?  Thanks.
05-23-2024 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,184
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 26
Post ID: 27400
Reply to: 27399
Of course I did
Yes, sure. I wrote about it quite a lot at my website. In fact most of the large Wilsons that I heard where driven by ML2s...


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
05-23-2024 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Newtohorn
Posts 13
Joined on 01-03-2018

Post #: 27
Post ID: 27401
Reply to: 27400
Biamp?
 Romy the Cat wrote:
Yes, sure. I wrote about it quite a lot at my website. In fact most of the large Wilsons that I heard where driven by ML2s...

in biamp configuration (x4 ml2s)?
05-23-2024 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,184
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 28
Post ID: 27402
Reply to: 27401
All the same....
Yes, in bi-amp as well; which is not the best topological solution. Newtohorn, if you do not mind, try to use posting at this forum, not as a chat style, and to express yours in complete thoughts.


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
05-23-2024 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Newtohorn
Posts 13
Joined on 01-03-2018

Post #: 29
Post ID: 27403
Reply to: 27402
Too brief
Sorry for being too brief in my post.  The reason for my question on ml2/grand slam - many years back I heard the grand slamm driven by a pair of lamm amp.  I did not pay attention to the model back then but it was either the single ended ml2 or the pp ml1.  My focus was on the sound generated by the grand slamm.  It was superb - nuance, delicate, definition, all there at moderate level.  The Alexandria s2 was already out back then and I was trying to fine tune it in my friends system without success.  I came to conclusion that the grand slamm was a better speaker and for a while was looking for a pair.  In hindsight perhaps it was the lamm/grand slamm combo.  Too bad I did not pay attention if it was ml1 or ml2, and if it was ml2 - how would 2 pairs of them sound in Biamp config.
05-23-2024 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,184
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 30
Post ID: 27404
Reply to: 27403
I have written about it years ago
 Yes, I am familiar with “large Wilsons,” starting with Grand Slam and up. Since I have long had 4 ML2s and bumped with them, the bumping configuration of large Wilsons has always interested me. I do not like the smaller Wilsons, but the large Wilsons are remarkable in terms of sound reproduction. I wrote about it years back in my Wilson's Thread, but here is a brief summary. You for sure want to drive the top of large Wilsons by ML2; you simply will not find any better amplifiers out there. It should be the production before ~2004-2005 as then ML2s were not good anymore. ML2s are slightly lazy in terms of dynamics, and here is when super contrasty large Wilsons do a very good job and the very excessive prose that Wilson ask for them is very much justified in my view as large Wilson's are unique and accomplish many things that no other speakers can.  When we go to Wilson's bass, then, it is a very different story. It is wonderful for a single box, but it is topological dishonesty. Per the investment of a pair of large Wilsons and a pair of good-sounding amps to drive them, the bass that you can get out of them is not worth it. You might have an incredibly lucky room and with this proper positioning of the speakers you might have a very decent result, but it is a rarity. Still, no matter what you do, the quality of base you can get from large Wilson’s not on a pair of quality of higher range might get from large Wilsons and vintage ML2. Trust me, Wilson's know it, and they are perfectly capable of making the right decisions by selling products, the SCUs that the idiot-reviewers will move from storage facilities to UPS. ML2 is not a good amplifier to drive large Wilsons at the bottom. ML1 is not even remotely matching of quality of bass to ML2. ML2 uses indirectly heated output tube which cannot work with plate current and after you get 18 watts it drops dead instantaneously. To drive Wilson base you need to have if not solid state (which mostly never does bass properly) but something like ML3. The matter here is not in absolute power but an ability on amplifier very gently to enter plate current mode and force the power when Wilson’s port begins to create noise. I have never heard of ML3 in a situation where I would be in the position to express my opinion about it, particularly about its bass. I have a lot of concerns at ML3 came after they reduce expressivity of post 2004 ML2. I also have some designed disagreement with ML3, for his creme de la creme I feel alarm could go for more sophisticated solution what he did in ML3.  


"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
05-24-2024 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Amir
Iran Tehran
Posts 361
Joined on 02-11-2009

Post #: 31
Post ID: 27405
Reply to: 27403
Wilson subwoofer
If Lamm ML2 is not enough good for bass you can use crossover and add a wilson passive subwoofer.
Lamm ML2 will do his job better if you use a high power amplifier for wilson subwoofers.
this approach will also reduce the Port noise of wilson alexandria.


www.amiraudio.com, www.hifi.ir
05-24-2024 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,184
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 32
Post ID: 27406
Reply to: 27405
That is not enough efforts in this direction.

Yes, the ide do not let large Wilson's to go down let's say 40 cycles is probably what I would do if I own those speakers.. I would probably plug the port, and if necessary change the base driver. My point is that you need to be absolutely insane if you go for Wilson's expense and to do to experiment how to get the sounds that you want outside of what Wilson offers. Did you see any person out there whoever tried to work with a large Wilson base? I didn't. Also, do not discard Wilson and they are not stupid and they know what they do. They do not sell sound they sell products. Pay attention how they position their subwoofers. None of them are sealed, instead they are ported and tune to use at the bottom of full range large Wilson speakers. Soon a or later or ported designs sounds the same producing absolutely identical port noise. I was listening yesterday a guy demonstrate please play back at YouTube and he was playing third movement of Tchaikovsky six. She use vintage large JBL and all double bass play literally the same note. In my book it is extremely annoying. 


Now, if you have large Wilson's and drive it with old ml2, and you are willing to discard anything that come from Wilson's under 40 cycles then you are in very good shape. Now you need to find a solution and it might be only infinite Buffle or sealed topology, that will do lower base. Then you need to find amplification and crossivering solution for this. If I were in those shoes and need it ready to go product then I will look for Dunlavy TWS-6 product or something similar. Obviously to drive those monsters would be a problem and if you insist to stay in Lamm wold then M1.1 might be a good choice to start. Nowadays nobody produce those solutions out of box and there's a reason for this as the people who do it seriously understands that it is very specific to the any given room and there is no way to abstract it to are ready to go product. Again you can use anything of the shelf to compliment Wilson's at the bottom but whatever I seen so far would not be and the level of large Wilson/ML2 midrange combination.


Unfortunately anything good person that I've seen who have large Wilsons so devoted to the products and never pursue any personal objectives, or even have any.




"I wish I could score everything for horns." - Richard Wagner. "Our writing equipment takes part in the forming of our thoughts." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Page 2 of 2 (32 items) Select Pages:  « 1 2
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  Macondo 3.0..  Toilet Paper...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     51  42918  06-21-2023
  »  New  Macondo’s Midbass Project – the grown up time...  Vitavox 15/40...  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     455  2994894  05-20-2010
  »  New  Macondo's Axioms: Horn-loaded acoustic systems..  A link to another thread....  Horn-Loaded Speakers Forum     120  686910  07-29-2007
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