Jump to content

Quest for a better sound starts in May.


plasticpenguin
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, plasticpenguin said:

If the obvious one is you play Saving Private Ryan standard DVD, the first 15 minutes of the beach scene, assuming you don't live in a barn and with a decent 2 channel set-up, you'll hear crackles of machine gun fire coming from one part of the room and distant tank engines coming from the other side.

On another occasion, a few years ago, Mrs. P and I were watching Midsummer Murders. She decided to do some washing up. She asked me to turn the hi-fi up a little. A few scenes later when John Nettles ran from his car because it was raining in this episode. Mrs. P shouted, "can you get the washing in, it's starting to rain." When I told her that was on the TV she didn't believe it until I opened the front door and the ground was totally dry.

I have told this story before on here.

Machine gun fire from the left or right but not from behind you.It may be obvious but it's not surround sound.The sound of rain listening from in the kitchen sounding real hardly makes it surround sound. Surround sound is all enveloping, thus you need 2 fronts and a centre channels,preferable a sub and at least 2 rear channels speaker. No way will your Leema and 2 stand mount PMC speakers recreate surround sound. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Viven said:

It may be obvious but it's not surround sound.

You're right about that.  It's the gods damn giant horse about to run you down from behind or that ungodly babbling brook over the back of your left shoulder that just ruins the movie.  Ach.  I hate surround sound. Really. :)

I refuse to hook our TV up to a quality, two channel second system just because I'm so afraid of surround sound. Who needs all that sound unless, maybe, you are watching Springsteen in the barn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, lindsayt said:

92 to 95 dbs = medium efficiency

over 97 dbs = high efficency

So..... what happens at 96dbs? The Magic? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you considered Klipsch? At the moment I’m completely in love with their RP range. I bought a pair of RP51M that cost next to nothing but in my smaller room they sound every bit as good as the 4000€ Heresy in my living room.

If I was in your position I’d seriously consider the RP600M.

edit:

I just read Stereophile’s review on the RP-600M, they’re “super highly recommended”. A speaker this price shouldn’t be this good. 

Edited by Ceko
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nifkin said:

So..... what happens at 96dbs? The Magic? :D

Those darn fence-sitters...

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/04/2021 at 12:37, tuga said:

Moving on to the measurements you posted, there are two things that I dislike about the Dynaudios's: port resonance at 700Hz is only 10dB down and there's a very pronounced and surely audible peak-and-dip at 1kHz which is probably a mid-woofer resonance. This speaker uses a much larger mid-woofer and thus it will produce less distortion in the low frequencies than the Kef's but if you listen nearfield SPL will be lower and the advantage vanishes; in a larger room both speakers should be paired with subs.

All this in my opinion of course. :D

True, your opinion that is. I'd like to see you start a measurement thread as I just can't past you dismissing this little speaker out of hand without hearing it. That's not your problem though it's mine. :)
 

Here's another of your opinions.  I've surely taken this out of context as you are only, as far as I can tell, commenting on the idea of what a full range speaker is or is not:

 "There are many speakers that can do 30Hz or below, but only a few do it with high fidelity.
This (red trace) is an extreme example, the Dynaudio Special 40 with it's tiny 6.7" w
oofer and reflex port tuned to 51Hz in a 21.8 litre box. Wow!"

in reference to this set of measurements

image.png.caeb9387cb995fa0e07534b09e4e7dd9.png

The blue is a Wilson Alexia.

The point I'd like to make is, that after spending two full days reading and learning about all these curves and graphs, there are just too many exceptions and/or variables that come into play to just eliminate a speaker from audition that doesn't measure properly. The room, positioning and according to JA, even the music being played, can render his findings null and void.

Another poster from the same thread as above

"But that is "In room" response. The normal output is not nearly as good...." is referring to the first set of measurements I posted earlier.

To me this is an illustration of how JA's listening room sounds much different with the Special 40 than does his Quasi-anechoic measurement.  And regarding the bass measurement, in general, I don't like that idea the mic is just centimeters away from the driver. While that's clearly the best he can do, it doesn't really ring of an ideal experimental method, at least in my opinion.

Finally, I'm not attempting to call you out on anything. Measurements may very well be a tool and you use them in tandem with listening. Yet, I feel there is too much stock put into measurements. While I may not be trained to listen properly to a set of speakers, I can discern what I do and don't like, and as such put more faith in hearing is believing.  I don't think this (see below) is that bad of a measurement.   Graph is the Special 40 credited to National Research Council of Canada

867261595_ScreenShot2021-04-13at4_52_54PM.png.a9039eb03d44184deddd85c64900c234.png

Response curve is an average of five measurements: on-axis, 15 degrees left and right off-axis, 15 degrees up and down off-axis

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ChemMan said:

Here's another of your opinions.  I've surely taken this out of context as you are only, as far as I can tell, commenting on the idea of what a full range speaker is or is not:

 "There are many speakers that can do 30Hz or below, but only a few do it with high fidelity.
This (red trace) is an extreme example, the Dynaudio Special 40 with it's tiny 6.7" w
oofer and reflex port tuned to 51Hz in a 21.8 litre box. Wow!"

in reference to this set of measurements

That post obviously lacks clarity, I was being ironic... :oops:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ChemMan said:

in reference to this set of measurements

image.png.caeb9387cb995fa0e07534b09e4e7dd9.png

The blue is a Wilson Alexia.

Let's compare the 2-way Special 40 (36 x 20 x 31 cm) with "slightly" the larger TAD Micro Evolution 1 (41 x 25 x 40 cm) 3-way standmount:

218TADfig4.jpg

https://www.stereophile.com/content/tad-micro-evolution-one-loudspeaker-measurements

918DS40fig04.jpg

https://www.stereophile.com/content/dynaudio-special-forty-loudspeaker-measurements

.

As you can see the TAD's port is tuned to 40Hz and a dedicated 6.5" woofer handles the bass frequencies below 420Hz.

The Dyn's port is tuned to 51Hz and a 6.7" mid-woofer has to cover all frequencies from the low-bass (~100Hz) all the way up to 2kHz, which produces more harmonic distortion and more intermodulation distortion.

In comparison the Special 40 is pretending to be able to reproduce low- and sub-bass frequencies but that range is actually not covered by a driver, only a port passing wind.

A dedicated bass driver produces less harmonic distortion and less intermodulation distortion.

Ideally you'd wan't a 4th way for sub-bass duties (or a pair of subs) but both cabinets are too small (even standmounts are too small); however, most music recordings have little information below 30Hz so a port that is tuned to around or below that frequency in a 3-way speaker is a lesser evil that one has to accept. In my experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could I please request you stop using graphs. I've never used them and have no interest in graphs. The best graph is my ears. If you want to start a new thread on graphs, please feel free. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, plasticpenguin said:

Could I please request you stop using graphs. I've never used them and have no interest in graphs. The best graph is my ears. If you want to start a new thread on graphs, please feel free. 

They really get my goat too>:(

Frequency response curves tell you bugger all about a speaker's abilities, but then some people would rather pore over the measurements than go to all the trouble of actually listening... 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, HugoZ said:

Frequency response curves tell you bugger all about a speaker's abilities, but then some people would rather pore over the measurements than go to all the trouble of actually listening... 

Actually they can tell you a lot, but I for one know that they must seem like a distraction for those who don’t like, follow or wish to understand them. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't fully understand measurements - truth to tell, I truly struggle - but the more I do understand, the more I realise that it tells you a lot and helps explain what you hear.....but this always needs to be combined with listening.

Personally I welcome Tuga's input (I need it simplified further) - but respect that PP wants to keep his thread Graph free.

Edited by CnoEvil
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Nopiano said:

Actually they can tell you a lot, but I for one know that they must seem like a distraction for those who don’t like, follow or wish to understand them. 

Precisely what do they tell you?

Where music reproduction is concerned, timing anomalies are far more objectionable to the auditory system than frequency response errors. With the design of their Supernait 3 integrated amplifier, even Naim have come to realise that.

Edited by HugoZ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, HugoZ said:

They really get my goat too>:(

Frequency response curves tell you bugger all about a speaker's abilities, but then some people would rather pore over the measurements than go to all the trouble of actually listening... 

What you really mean is that Frequency response curves tell you bugger all about a speaker's abilities

I understand that people who can't interpret graphs have no use for them but for those who do graphs provide a lot of information, enough in fact for me to decide whether a speaker is worth going to all the trouble of actually listening...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...