|
|
Romy the Cat
Boston, MA
Posts 10,155
Joined on 05-28-2004
|
Post #:
|
1
|
|
Post ID:
|
2628
|
|
Reply to:
|
2628
|
|
|
|
Dream Hi-Eff Speakers for an “inmate”.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Morons™ at AA’s between selling to each other what they did not like and topping each other on their shoulders came up with a subject what horn installation would be if price would be no object. The question is semi-foolish as price is never an object in archiving ultimate results. The Morons who infected AA site substitute conditions, objectives and no-compromise solution juts with word “price” witch is quite incorrect. Knowing the people out there is very obviously that they are not equipped to think abut the subject… Anyhow, among a couple dozen or so replies (each of them more primitive then another) there was a Steve Schell’s reply that has some seeds of rational although I do not particularly agree with his rational. Since my site is horns-centric I decided to follow up on the Steve comment
 Steve Schell wrote: | | …To me, the ultimate systems we seek have probably not been built yet, although those who have made the trek to Kevin's in Provo have surely heard a glimpse! The ultimate system would surely offer very smooth amplitude and phase response over the full audio bandwidth of 20Hz. to 20kHz. Some would offer that these limits are still too narrow. When I read posts that say "I don't need response below 60Hz." I want to holler "Yes, you do!" With a system that is flat to around 20Hz., endless subtle LF details abound that can suspend the listener's disbelief, even when listening to supposedly narrow band material like acoustic guitar. Such response needs to match the rest of the system in dynamic capabilities and low distortion, a tall order. |
|
It is ironic that some people even wiling to discuss a necessity of any serious playback to go for near 20 Hz regions. However, instead of advocating the importance of bass (that is self-evident) it makes more sense to talk about the METHODS to accomplishing that bass and with advocating the METHODS and MEANS it is worthless to talk about bass. To talk about bass with referring to the methods of bass redaction is like preaching to humans that inhale oxidant is a useful thing to do.
| Steve Schell wrote: | | …I have been experimenting with fully front loaded horn and compression driver systems for years because (to my ear) no other technology offers such low distortion and lifelike dynamic capability from very soft to very loud. We wacky experimenter types have mostly been limited to new or old prosound drivers, built to a different set of priorities, due to issues of availability. I have found that it is possible to assemble a system of these drivers and carefully thought out horns that will trounce nearly all commercial offerings at any price…. Horns bring with them the difficult problems of colorations and time arrival errors. I have found that choosing the best driver and horn type for each frequency range can lower the colorations greatly. |
|
Yes, I would agree that a league of compression driver is way more interesting the direct radiators. I do dot fill that it is only because low distortion and high dynamic. Also there are some other important factors: lower compression rate, lover flux modulations, higher sensitivity, better tonal contrast, higher transistors and few others.
| Steve Schell wrote: | | …We are entering the age where digital technology is attaining the resolution to correct the arrival time, amplitude and phase errors without introducing worse problems than it solves. The Australian-made DEQX unit is our current salvation here, and I have been very pleased with the unique improvements it provides. |
|
I very much disagree. The DEQX-like solutions are OK in context of mid-hi-fi inhalations but absolutely not acceptable for any more or less serious demands. To recognize “Dream Hi-Eff Speakers” for any person who knows how the “dream systems” work it is imposable to look only as the speakers but rather at the composite assembly of loudspeakers, rooms, amplification and crossovering solution. The digital solution is not working for the “dream systems”.
http://www.goodsoundclub.com/TreeItem.aspx?postID=775#775
Anyone who wishes to learn it is would be easy to bring a D-filter home, connecting it in playback chain in unity gain without applying any DSP and see if the unit in “buffer mode” would be transparent enough. If you feel that those Behringers-like, or DEQX-like are absolutely transparent in “buffer mode” then you have a LONG way to go to get more transparency of your entire playback. Also, Steve said: “We are entering the age where digital technology is attaining the resolution…” Did the digital technology attain the necessary resolution? Well, let presume that it does but it would be at 24Bit. However what you begin to use a crossover at digital domain then the crossover (any crossover – it is the fundamental principle, no mater what was said in the marketing booklets) begins to toss away bytes down the decay slope. Suddenly we get a satiation that at a couple dozens dB down we are in 4-8 bit resolution. Make an experiment – find for yourself 8-bit DAC and listen HOW it sounds! Someone would argue that 8Bit resolution at minus 40-60dB is un-auditable. Wrong. It is VERY much auditable if to know what to listen and THIS is something that completely incinerates the entire concept of crossovering at digital domain. What is left”? The “correct the arrival time”. Show me a transparent enough AD-time delay-DA processor and we will talk. If you run juts digital source then it is not big deal to put a time delay in the DAC. Would you do it for each channel of your “Dream Hi-Eff Speakers” running 4-5 DACs in parallel? What would you do if you play analog?
| Steve Schell wrote: | | Part of the problem is one of limited exposure to the best available equipment; such exposure can fuel further progress. |
|
Absolutely, an average audio person has no opportunity to learn what is available out there. However, this is exactly how the industry set itself up. The industry intentionally put the selected hugely idiotic individuals in a position of setting artificial hierarchy of consumption and then trained the consumers’ brain to operate only in this precompiled amplitude-hierarchy. As the result, a consumer has no access to learning randomness and any person who do anything in audio does it AGAINST another party instead of doing the things together.
| Steve Schell wrote: | | One has to experience something better to become intolerant of lesser results. Watershed experiences for me include listening to Bruce Edgar's subwoofer about ten years ago, and to Kevin Brooks' ALE bass compression drivers and mid bass horns about three years ago. Seems to me that if more of today's best speaker designers could hear what these products can do then we'd have fewer high dollar horn systems with direct radiator low frequency systems. |
|
Well, this is controversial. What Brooks and Edgar do are fine but is it how it might be? Kevin’s bass horns made from tuna-cans and Bruce’s light wooden horns? I personally do not believe in horn loaded bass solution. 40-50Hz is the lowest frequency what horn should operate in context of a “Dream Hi-Eff Speakers”. For lower octave there are much more result-full solutions that produce more practical, integrated and more musical sound.| Steve Schell wrote: | | Another somewhat off-topic observation is that truly natural sounding recordings, useful for evaluating a system's transparency to the source, are very scarce indeed. The recordings made by David Manley years ago on his Vital label are pretty darn good, being made with a single stereo condenser mic. I have discovered lately that, armed with an Alesis Masterlink hard disk recorder and a pair of good figure 8 ribbon mics, one can make recordings that sound more real than those available commercially. My efforts have been limited to birds in the backyard and such so far, but I plan to keep at it. Making one's own recordings is really the other half of the audiophile experience, and a very satisfying pursuit. |
|
Absently false position! The evaluating a system's transparency to the source makes possible TO EVALUATE THE INDIVIDUAL SOUNDS of playback but not real music capacity of a playback (not to mention that Alesis Masterlink is notoriously poor recorder). If a person feel that the wealth of have recorded music is insufficient to evaluate capacity of playback then it bring a question if person uses correct evaluation techniques.
http://www.goodsoundclub.com/TreeItem.aspx?postID=50#50
Charles Ives said in 30s that if a person listens how Music sounds then the person loosing all purpose of musicality. Interesting that Charles Ives did not mean audio at all but was talking about a listener who went to a Symphony Hall to listen a performance of live orchestra.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
|
|
|