| Search | Login/Register
   Home » Audio Discussions » A quest for a better monitor. (98 posts, 5 pages)
  Print Thread | 1st Post |  
Page 4 of 5 (98 items) Select Pages:  « 1 2 3 4 5 »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  “A” sound from “B” system?..  Re: “A” sound from “B” system?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     13  137485  05-22-2005
  »  New  Rightsizing from extreme systems......  It is Hot! The summer playback...  Audio Discussions  Forum     7  71155  06-17-2006
  »  New  Monitors: Wishful thinking..  Digital crossover...  Audio Discussions  Forum     8  104549  07-23-2006
  »  New  Cool running AB amplifier.. with good sound...  How about more current integrateds?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     11  110240  07-25-2006
  »  New  Metal domes..  Try the one Lansche is using...  Audio Discussions  Forum     6  75768  11-08-2007
  »  New  The loudspeakers for a powerful SET..  Mission Accomplished?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     48  405600  04-11-2008
  »  New  Macondo’s MiniMe or about Pilot Acoustic Systems..  Injection Pilot?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     213  1912042  09-03-2008
  »  New  Tannoy Red or Gold monitors..  Tannoy Red or Gold monitors...  Audio Discussions  Forum     0  14991  03-16-2011
11-10-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
manisandher
London
Posts 158
Joined on 09-05-2008

Post #: 61
Post ID: 12227
Reply to: 12225
Another Berning with the Druids? Small world!
fiogf49gjkf0d
Hi Montepilot,

Thanks for your thoughts. I'll certainly let you know how I get on high-passing the Druids... with and without sealing the port.

Mani.
11-10-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
unicon


Posts 74
Joined on 10-14-2009

Post #: 62
Post ID: 12229
Reply to: 8121
Monitors again
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Romy the Cat wrote:
 Romy the Cat wrote:
...To substitute SL600 original tweeter with anything else, would it be Revelators, Diamond or made from Faberge Eggs is like to make a movie with Humphrey Bogart and ask busboy form a nearby Chinese restaurant to re-record the Bogart’s dialogs. The SL600 tweeter with pure copper dome and phenolic suspension was probably the most perfect tweeter even was made (sonically), with only disadvantage in sensitively department.
romyio.
most monitors serve dry decay. and they cant do anything right below 100hz they blow it they just cut it .
u may like it short time. but im worried if your ears can enjoy them.

im little late but i suggest you hearing a pair of wharfedale diamond 8.3 (its 2 way floorstanding and ported)
ok when u finish laughting, give it a try ... . i tested the pair(fq response, room response, decay, waterfall).  it sounds great and not exhibiting alot with room character.
u can count on them . label 1 as monitor and use it .
just wanted to be help.
11-10-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
coops
London, United Kingdom
Posts 115
Joined on 02-16-2007

Post #: 63
Post ID: 12230
Reply to: 12226
Zu
fiogf49gjkf0d

Romy can you tell us what you thought of the Zu loudspeakers, I spent an afternoon in their company recently, they were being used with a 25 watt PP Luxman, I believe.

Keith.

11-10-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,049
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 64
Post ID: 12231
Reply to: 12230
I do not care about monitors anymore, I sick with the MiniMe.
fiogf49gjkf0d
Thanks, unicon, I know nothing about the Wharfedale and I do not really looking for monitors anymore. In fact my monitor quest ended up to be catastrophe and if I know then what I know now I would not do it and would just buy off a pair of vintage active Mackie's monitors and it would be it.

Keith, if you spent an afternoon with Zu loudspeakers then why you ask me what I think about them? You know, man, you with your interests keep trying to convert this site into Audiogon. I do not like 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
11-10-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
coops
London, United Kingdom
Posts 115
Joined on 02-16-2007

Post #: 65
Post ID: 12232
Reply to: 12231
Becase
fiogf49gjkf0d

You have an opinion on most things ( whether you have heard them on not ) I thought you would jump at the chance to pronounce on the Druids, seemingly not.

11-10-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,049
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 66
Post ID: 12233
Reply to: 12232
Keith, let it be the last conversation.
fiogf49gjkf0d
Keith, you are increasingly boring with you absolutely unhealthy interests in audio. What going to be next – you will be adding the Zu loudspeakers to your product line and promote them that "the Cat did not shit on them"? If you still do not understand that you are not able to form a worthy challenge/interest with you questions then this site is something that you need very much stop to read and preferably do not post. Please, your juvenile interests very much annoy me and I wonder why I need to open a branch of AA at my site. Please, demonstrate some respect and do not let yourself to talk.

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
11-10-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,570
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 67
Post ID: 12234
Reply to: 12226
Each Driver According to Its Ability
fiogf49gjkf0d
Mani, I have long run an 8" Lowther DX4 down to 150 hz, over 2nd order high-pass.  My impression after plenty of listening is that I wish I could cross it at ~ 400 Hz.  The "problem"is not simply how "low" the 8" driver will go but it is also a question of the relative "balance" of harmonic development.  IMO, the <8" driver just doesn't "develop harmonics" evenly (appropriately) at a 150 Hz "center" point.  Rather, it develops more upward-tending harmonics than downward-tending harmonics at this "reference" "primary" frequency point.  I hope that makes sense to you.

Best regards,
Paul S
11-11-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
manisandher
London
Posts 158
Joined on 09-05-2008

Post #: 68
Post ID: 12240
Reply to: 12234
Balance of 'harmonic development'
fiogf49gjkf0d

Hi Paul,

Could you help me understand what you mean?

Are you saying that even without a high-pass filter, a <8" driver has an imbalance of 'harmonic development' above and below 150Hz... and that this is not the case above and below 400Hz?

If we go for a <8" driver high-passed at 150Hz, could we not compensate for this phenomenon by having a >8" driver low-passed at 150Hz?

In any event, the Druid has a 10" 'full-range' driver that I'm hoping will be quite 'happy' down to 150Hz. Strangely, my upperbass driver will be a 7" driver (the one in the WB-Chimera's upper chamber)! Perhaps not the best solution for 70-150Hz duties... but I'm just working with what I have. Although no doubt challenged, the 'harmonic development' will presumably at least be even between 70-150Hz.

Mani.

11-11-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,570
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 69
Post ID: 12241
Reply to: 12240
Driver's Worth by Weight
fiogf49gjkf0d
Mani, I am not saying that any driver (let alone any collection of drivers...) will ever be entirely "correct" in terms of acoustical instrumental timbre, no matter the frequency range it attempts to address.  I am saying that the sonic "weight balance" of an 8" driver is "more correct" at "musical" 400 Hz than it is at "musical" 150 Hz.  IMO, in terms of harmonic balance and timbre, it would be better to high-pass the 8" driver at closer to 400 Hz and run a bigger driver from, say, 100 Hz to 400 Hz.  I will eventually try something like this myself, if you wait long enough.

I like the 10" driver a lot better than the 8" driver at 150 Hz.  In fact, I have long said that - other factors being equal - the 10" driver does a better rendition of timbre than the 8" when used in the usual "FR" applications.

Do I understand you are asking 70 Hz from a 7" driver?  Who knows for sure, but I would never suppose this would be worth a fig, and very hard to believe that its harmonic development would compare to the "more comfortable" 10" driver.

Some contrapuntal thoughts on this, including LF, are in the "speakers for use with a powerful SET" thread.

Best regards,
Paul S
11-11-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
manisandher
London
Posts 158
Joined on 09-05-2008

Post #: 70
Post ID: 12242
Reply to: 12241
7" driver in ABR-loaded chamber for 70-150KHz duties
fiogf49gjkf0d
Yes, this may well end up being a total disaster. If so, I'll just use the Druids FR with the Aleph4... until I can find a satisfactory solution.

Meanwhile, I'll have a read through the 'speakers for use with a powerful SET' thread.

Mani.
11-13-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
KLegind
Posts 34
Joined on 04-03-2008

Post #: 71
Post ID: 12255
Reply to: 12221
Zu Druid
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Romy the Cat wrote:
 manisandher wrote:
As I alluded to before, I'm at risk of becoming a DSET convert - it's all very well having a nice low-powered amp, but what the hell do you use with it? Are there any decent high-sensitivity FR speakers out there? Or is this simply physically impossible?

I do not know. My local guy told me initially that Zu Druids are 110dB sensitive and high impedance. Hearing it I lent to him my full-range Melquiades to try. He has a few other PP and SET amps, so I thought with 110dB sensitivity and high impedance my no-feedback Milq will be running the show. He kind of liked Milq initially but what he reported was not what I expected and it in my view it was confusing.  Another day I visited him; we did some changes in Zu Druids (more need to be done) and tried a few different amps. It was clear the Milq was not the best candidate as it was dynamically straggling to drive Zu Druids. He has some kind of 30-40W tube PP that did much better job. That made me to do only and to learn that Zu Druids are 101dB. In really it might be even less as those hi-fi companies lie for am few dB and it become a common practice. Furthermore in LF the Zu Druids have perhaps 90dB efficiency as then use port and what the port begin to become affective the no-feedback SET would die.

I still, can’t figure out Zu Druids. I would heavily highpass it to use with SET or drive it with 50W SET, preferably with feedback. Something the level of Lamm ML1 might be a good candidate for them to try. If you look out there then you will see anybody promote Zu Druids as some kind of wonder that might be perfectly used with flea-power amp. This is why people attracted to them I guess. However, I do feel that it is a bit stupidity to promote Zu Druids as a SET friendly loudspeaker. It might be a good speaker for the money but not for use with SET. In 2006-07 the industry whores created a lot of hype about Zu Druids. I do not know if it was worthy or not but I know that fact that they were pushed as “$3000 solution that can be driven by SET full-range“ was very inaccurate.

The Cat


Initially I thought the Zu might be an interesting speaker in the context of tube amplification, however I tried the fullrange driver approach and I have misgivings about it...

Anyhow, the industry rag Hifi World (with whom I have a hate/love relationship) did a review of the Zu a few years ago. The content of said review I think is irrelevant, however there were measurements of the speaker done by Noel Keywood and they showed a much lower sensitivity than advertised. I believe it to be in the low nineties. The frequency response also looked suspect. I see if I can find the review when I get home from work.

best

PS. I do not express any opinion on Zu sound as I am unfamiliar with it. In a certain context it might be good.
11-13-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,049
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 72
Post ID: 12256
Reply to: 12255
Another tweeter and another midrange
fiogf49gjkf0d

 KLegind wrote:
Initially I thought the Zu might be an interesting speaker in the context of tube amplification, however I tried the fullrange driver approach and I have misgivings about it...

Anyhow, the industry rag Hifi World (with whom I have a hate/love relationship) did a review of the Zu a few years ago. The content of said review I think is irrelevant, however there were measurements of the speaker done by Noel Keywood and they showed a much lower sensitivity than advertised. I believe it to be in the low nineties. The frequency response also looked suspect. I see if I can find the review when I get home from work.

best

PS. I do not express any opinion on Zu sound as I am unfamiliar with it. In a certain context it might be good.

Yep, lying about a few dB sensitivity it looks like become a standard practice nowadays.  About the Zu measurements. They have a first order filter in tweeter and it killed some here in the middle of MF, I do not remember where exactly. I did measure what then show in term of response and it was very clear that the tweeter was kicking one octave further then it has to be. There was very characteristic gap between one driver have already rolled of and another did not kick in yet. I played with polarity but it was not the case. If the Zu were my then I would drip the crossover pains at least for half octave but no one know if that horny Zu tweeter will like it. Well, I would use probably another tweeter… of another MF driver that would go an octane of two higher. The low nineties sensitivity is what I would expect from Zu Druid, based upon how they sound, probably 93-94dB. With this sensitivity they need as much “live” from tweeter as they can get, so I understand why they were afraid to drop the tweeter crossover. Probably they need to use another tweeter…. or another midrange…..

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
11-13-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
manisandher
London
Posts 158
Joined on 09-05-2008

Post #: 73
Post ID: 12257
Reply to: 12256
Jumping ship
fiogf49gjkf0d
It seems like I should just abandon the idea of using the Druids... and trying to get some sort of coherent integration with my WB-Chimeras (acting as the lower- and upper-bass units)... and running the whole hodgepodge with totally different amplifiers (makes and topologies).

I absolutely hate selling hifi components - the only reason for selling something would be because I don't like it... and I find it really difficult to then pass it on to someone else... I kind of feel disingenuous doing this. But perhaps I should just bite the bullet.

At some point I'd like to start a thread asking for ideas on how to go about setting up a DSET / multi-horn system. Are there any threads here that I should read before doing that?

Mani.
11-13-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,570
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 74
Post ID: 12264
Reply to: 12257
The "Whole System" Approach
fiogf49gjkf0d
Mani, I am not talking about the Zu when I say that there is little chance of just buying and plugging in any given ready-made component into any given system and getting Music, ever. If anyone asks me, I always say, think of speakers-amps-room as one "factor" in an integrated system, and try to build from there.  Basically, if you can't [over]load your room correctly, then you are pretty much stuck in the chute no matter what you do from there, on.  

The idea of "mix-n-match" "hi-fi products" is one of the "smartest" (and worst) things the "audio press" has ever worked up and sold to the "audio consumer".  Presently, this idea not only underpins all current audio magazines, but the success of this idea is literally the hinge upon which any current "audio publication" swings.  Of course, they could never have done it without plenty of help from the Morons®, who are both their life blood and their beasts of burden.

Likewise, do not ass-u-me that just moving to the EXTREMELY DIFFICULT horn/DSET mode will result in quicker gratification.  As crazy as it sounds, no matter which way you go, you have to somehow "hear it before you build it". IMO, there is literally No Way to simply "assemble a system" that makes Music using some lucky combination of "bought goods".  Part of you simply must be invested, and that is the part that you wind up building on; your "Foundation", if you will.

Don't worry about selling stuff you "don't like".  To another Moron® it might be the Legendary Stuff of Dreams.  Be honest about what it is; simply hold your current opinion.


Best regards,
Paul S
11-14-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
zanon
Posts 54
Joined on 11-14-2009

Post #: 75
Post ID: 12269
Reply to: 12264
Zu's interesting, but not with flea amps
fiogf49gjkf0d
Mani at al.
I have a paid of zu druids. Running them with 15W amp (d-class) and it is not enough for high level, although it does better than you expect. The soundstage sensitivity measurement was 97dB, but their test did not load the driver correctly. They suspended it in the air, and the bottom (which has a vent) should have a flat surface next to it about 1/4 inch. I suspect that that would increase the sensitivity somewhat, although I don't know if it would bring it all the way up to the asserted 101dB.
They are not horn substitutes, but they do some interesting audio things. Directly coupling a driver to an amplifier is interesting both sonically and, I think, musically. The speakers are very directional in my overly large, high ceiling room, so I position them with a fair amount of toe-in. Thus, I get very little time smear, which clarifyies the attack, but it also does not feel like the room is being fully loaded as it might be with different speakers. Local constraints mean I cannot experiment too much more with position. On axis it sounds special, off axis it is nice, but not special.
One nice feature is that they do not do barrel-roll treble, although I fear that the new version, with lower sensitivity and a ribbon tweeter is a step in that direction.
The tone in the midrange is surprisingly good. This part of tone was revelatory to me.
All in all, I cannot understand why a speaker with such ragged frequency response does not sound worse. I have no idea how to understand how above average dynamics, and below average ragged frequency response, sums to what I hear.
Thinking of new amps. Have no idea how to judge sensitivity. Short term leases, as discussed elsewhere on the site, would go far to increase education level.
11-14-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,049
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 76
Post ID: 12270
Reply to: 12257
Put some principles into the mix…
fiogf49gjkf0d

 manisandher wrote:
At some point I'd like to start a thread asking for ideas on how to go about setting up a DSET / multi-horn system. Are there any threads here that I should read before doing that?

It would be in a direct contradiction with my main audio doctrine. If you are willing to pursue the DSET/multi-horn system then I think it shall be no external knowledge that shall drive you. You need to categorize those very well-defined shortcomings in your current setup that might make your audio-practice uncomfortable and to ask yourself if the DSET/multi-horn idea will address those very specific shortcomings.  Otherwise the whole idea of “better audio” in my view has no sensible meaning and become just eternal chasing of own tail.

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=432

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
12-01-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
manisandher
London
Posts 158
Joined on 09-05-2008

Post #: 77
Post ID: 12386
Reply to: 12270
My reasons for considering DSET/horns
fiogf49gjkf0d

Firstly, thank you to Montepilot, Paul S, KLegind, zanon and Romy for all your thoughts on the Zu Druids.
I recently tried high-passing the Druids at various frequencies and using a pair of Wilson-Benesch Chimeras and various amps for LF and upper-LF duties. The results were certainly not to my satisfaction. Although the Druids seemed happy being high-passed >150Hz (or at least happier than normal), I just couldn’t get any decent integration below this. It was a bit of a mess really, with the other equipment I was using.
So, I currently have the Berning Siegfried driving the Druids FR for now. At low-to-moderate volumes, the sound is very listenable – not particularly engaging, but listenable nevertheless. I’ve tried a number of different 300Bs (EAT, KR and WE) with the Siegfried and have settled for the WEs, as I feel they have the best tone and depth in the mid-range.

 Romy the Cat wrote:
You need to categorize those very well-defined shortcomings in your current setup that might make your audio-practice uncomfortable and to ask yourself if the DSET/multi-horn idea will address those very specific shortcomings.  Otherwise the whole idea of “better audio” in my view has no sensible meaning and become just eternal chasing of own tail.
Yes, I agree. There are two main shortcomings I have with my current setup (Siegfried and Druids): 

1. There’s a lack of low-end weight to the sound. The LF is not extended or particularly tuneful. My reference here is my old, bottom-of-the-range Stax headphones. If I could get the bass to sound more like this, I would be very happy. Indeed, although not particularly extended, my SL600s driven by my Rotel RHB-10 are incredibly tuneful in the LF.
2. The sound is a bit flat across the whole spectrum, but especially low down. I’ve bought ‘Eversest & Pohlmann’ with the hope of improving the acoustics of my room, but I suspect the culprit is really the Siegfried not being able to drive the Druids adequately.
 
They’re the shortcomings I have right now. Does this necessarily mean that DSET/horns are the only way forward? Well, maybe not. Certainly, I’d like to try the Druids with my Aleph4, which I should be able to do later this week. I’d also like to play around with the room acoustics to see if I could liven that bottom-end up a bit.
 
But ultimately, I suppose my objective is to emulate my headphones... in their tone, LF extension, tunefullness, dynamics and overall coherence.

Possible without considering a DSET/horn setup?
 
Mani.

12-01-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Romy the Cat


Boston, MA
Posts 10,049
Joined on 05-28-2004

Post #: 78
Post ID: 12388
Reply to: 12386
The Zurrealism of the Zu Druids’ bass the SMDS
fiogf49gjkf0d

Mani,

I would leave the subject of DSET/horn setup for another thread and would drop a few words about Zu Druids. They are not the speakers that I would ordinary comment but since I have a local guy with Zu Druids and I had a chance to hear them a few times I think it would be worth to drop a few words. I will comment only about one area – the Zu Druids’ bass.

The Zu Druids’ bass is a freaky animal. If course Zu Druids has no bass in normal since but if whatever bass the Zu Druids is able to do would considered as bass then I was wondering why Zu Druids behave so strange. The guy who use the Zu Druids live in center city and use power right from the wall – so it is difficult to talks about absolute terms as sound changes each hour but some feeling about the Zu Druids I would pass. I did not measure Zu Druids properly, did not have them in my own and my view about Zu Druids might be a pure conjecture. But I heard the a few times and some of my sensations about Zu Druids do make sense to me. So, here it comes….

Forget all that you know, read, and heard about loudspeaker design for the sake of understanding and feeling the understood we need to embrace a totally different view. If you visualize a relationship between driver and enclosure (including port) then there are mass, there are velocity and there is volume (including port). The velocity and volume are fine let it be but let to look only at mass. The question would be the mass of what? Let to do even more idiotic and apply an abstract of General relativity to the example. What is mass in loudspeaker? If a cone has 200g for instance and the suspension has compliance X then we can presume that the dynamic mass would be 200X, right? Well, I would reply: it would depend from what frequency you are. If you are 100Hz then you have no problem to push 200X but if you 100Hz then to develop the force 200X at 100Hz is not much harder but you cave harder contra-forces of the moment. So, let introduce mass not as absolute kg or pound but as relativity to the “pushed” frequency, let measure it in mass per wave length – m/wl, or juts MWL. Ok, we have for 1000Hz a speaker cabinet has 150MWL but for 50Hz it has 10MWL. This is what happen with light speakers that starting from some frequency begin to drift upon own mass deficiency. The Zu Druids are one of the examples – the are light, the are resonant like hell (play with gasket bet the driver and box – you will see) and then as soon the reach some upper midrange then flip over and stop act as mass-scenic system.

Let even forget about port – it is a part of the big picture of mass killing. You are 50Hz, you come to the driver, the speaker has velocity but has no mass – what you do – you tell to the peoples that send you – “fuck it; there is nothing to do here”. It is exactly what bass does in the Druids – it destroys itself and modulation of this distraction poison the sound of Druids lower end. I know, the people with engendering background would read it as feel that it all full of crap but there is a detail: the know nothing about Sound but I do. They design the Druids but I am trying to explain why Druids sound very bad in bass.

So, what can we do? We need to add virtual mass to Druids but only at LF. I have a solution how it needed to be done but first I would like to say why I feel my solution shall work. I was observing how Druids’ bass reacted to different amps. Particularly interesting would be topology and deriving output impedance. The Melquiades lorded to 12K (!!!) for instance with no feedback sounded like “chewing carton” when it drove Druids. The SS Yamaha B2 pushed probably 25 db more, forces me to plug the port and it still was hugely bloomy. It shell not be this way unless the speaker experience the SMDS – or the Severs Mass Deficiency Syndrome. So, how to deal with it?

High-passing the speaker will work but it like trashing a half of the speaker away. If you have a speaker that does >150Hz then you do not need Druids but you need ¼ cub feet box. So, how to make the Druids to work its full range (whatever it is has) but prevent the MWL to lose steam and present the LF from self-distraction?  Well, let add mass to LF with dropping output impedance of the amplifiers that drive Druids at LF. Let up to have an amp with current feedback and let to have an attenuator that would moderate output impedance let say from 5R to minis 1R. I stipulate that listening the Druids in a given room and fine-adjusting the output impedance it would be possible to catch the moment when the LF go into suicide and is not to buffer them but at list to prevent their suicide screams to point the sound of the speakers. I personally fell that it will be a very narrow margin (for instance between 1.25R and 1.3R of output impedance) that would allow very fine tuning and would make the Druids bass to be not deep but not annoying. 

So, I think the problem of the Druids bass (and other similar speakers that are made to float on mass deficiency in bass) is not the bass but the randomness of amps (output impedance) that drive them and disability of audio people to dial the output impedance very precisely (for this time of SMDS speakers).

I do not advocate to do it and to run negative feedback. Will it affect many other things – you bet, it will. However, I think that it might be a good journey to confirm that concept that adding virtual mass to LF via feedback and the fact that it will be VERY important for the speakers that suffers from SMDS.  Warn you that all written above sounds like a complete idiocy --- but I have a very high confidence that the proposed solution will work very affectively.

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
12-01-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
zanon
Posts 54
Joined on 11-14-2009

Post #: 79
Post ID: 12390
Reply to: 12388
Have druids, know what you mean
fiogf49gjkf0d
All:

I have Druid MkIV and know exactly what you mean in LF. LF overall is quiet, but the ragged frequency response sounds weird. (Weirder than their ragged response in MF and HF). In measurements there is a massive suck out at 150 and at 30.

http://www.soundstagemagazine.com/measurements/zucable_druid/

Those measurements were not taken quite right as they did not load the port, but I don't think things would be too too different even with correct port loading.

My room imposes additional problems with LF which cannot be dealt with until I move house. My amp is also inadequate from a pure Watts level, but I do not know of any other amp that has the characteristics that Romy suggests. If anyone has ideas, and I can afford it (not likely) then I will be happy to conduct a test. I am guessing that no such amp exists and will have to be constructed, something which is beyond my abilities most likely. I have never heard the explanation Romy gives for the problem though, and will think upon it further.

Right now, I am planning to see what I can do by adding stereo subs. Zu Subs (when they are in production) are also of an unusual design. It has 2 15 inch drivers, and a very weird port design with a audio lens almost. No idea how it sounds, never heard one. I think that Bag End are the only other people making subs with similar designs, and they are not a household name either, so no chance to hear them.
12-01-2009 Post does not mapped to Knowledge Tree
Paul S
San Diego, California, USA
Posts 2,570
Joined on 10-12-2006

Post #: 80
Post ID: 12391
Reply to: 12390
Arc de Triomphe
fiogf49gjkf0d
Resusitate an old Crown DC 300.  You could arc weld with one of those.  I think a couple of the old Thresholds were similar.  Jump start your car with one...

Of course I'm not talking about sound, here; just craploads of current.

Plenty to blow up your Druids, too, BTW...

Paul S
Page 4 of 5 (98 items) Select Pages:  « 1 2 3 4 5 »
   Target    Threads for related reading   Most recent post in related threads   Forum  Replies   Views   Started 
  »  New  “A” sound from “B” system?..  Re: “A” sound from “B” system?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     13  137485  05-22-2005
  »  New  Rightsizing from extreme systems......  It is Hot! The summer playback...  Audio Discussions  Forum     7  71155  06-17-2006
  »  New  Monitors: Wishful thinking..  Digital crossover...  Audio Discussions  Forum     8  104549  07-23-2006
  »  New  Cool running AB amplifier.. with good sound...  How about more current integrateds?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     11  110240  07-25-2006
  »  New  Metal domes..  Try the one Lansche is using...  Audio Discussions  Forum     6  75768  11-08-2007
  »  New  The loudspeakers for a powerful SET..  Mission Accomplished?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     48  405600  04-11-2008
  »  New  Macondo’s MiniMe or about Pilot Acoustic Systems..  Injection Pilot?...  Audio Discussions  Forum     213  1912042  09-03-2008
  »  New  Tannoy Red or Gold monitors..  Tannoy Red or Gold monitors...  Audio Discussions  Forum     0  14991  03-16-2011
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