Best speakers $1000.00 can buy
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page| Thread | Last Poster | Posts | Last Post | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Archive through September 28, 2009 | David Mitchell | 100 |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 292 Registered: Dec-06 | You're not always going to be able to audition everything that you are interested in. And some auditions just aren't that telling. If it's not with your own gear in your own home then there will always be some unknown variables. Even then you may only learn whether you like a piece or not after spending lots of time with it. I'll be the first to admit that putting together my system has been a haphazard process for sure. Not the right way to go about it. But if someone is willing to take the risk then that's their right. If you want to be prudent (some might say smart) it makes sense to deal with one dealer where you can stop in and listen to various recommended combinations, or only deal with stores that offer in-home trials or can provide a good demonstration. I'm sure everyone here has made a mistake or two. It's easier to avoid this when you own or work at your own audio store, so let's keep that in mind.  |
|
Silver Member Username: QuinnPost Number: 177 Registered: Aug-05 | Maris' questions have come up and been answered before. The Ascend tweeter while similar in looks to the one linked is proprietary. This can be verified through SEAS. The woofer is proprietary too. Yes, the 4.5 ears is a bit of hype since I know Dave developed 2 other woofers and 1 other tweeter that he hasn't happy with in the end and changed. He also developed another cabinet that didn't make the cut during that time. Then he changed cabinet makers because he wasn't happy with his original one for the Sierra's quality. All that fickleness added many months onto the Sierra's development time. But that fickleness is why the Sierra almost always gets mentioned for best value under $1K. He didn't just put it out there to have a speaker higher up the line that he could charge more for. The RBR should be nice with $400 of parts before cabinet costs. A speaker company would need to charge $1500 or more to make money on that. |
|
Platinum Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 10738 Registered: Feb-05 | Dan, I don't think anyone here cares if Maris takes his money and flushes it down the toilet. I certainly don't. He has the right to do what he wishes with his money. He can buy anyway he wants. We only took exception to the way he approached how we spend our money. |
|
Gold Member Username: ExerciseguyFort Hamilton, NY United States Post Number: 2935 Registered: Oct-04 | For those that might be intrigued by the Madisound RBR Kit, Stein Audio is great resource for custom cabinets http://www.steinaudio.com/MADISOUNDRECESSIONBUSTER.html . Also, the Parts Express .75 sq.ft Curved Cabinet would seem to be a nice choice for the ported design http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=302-733 , although the Box version will save you a couple of bucks http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=302-742 . For around $700 and a little elbow grease, they should be nice, but that does begin to approach the retail price of some of some heavy-hitters, and exceeds the discounted price of several others. |
|
Gold Member Username: ExerciseguyFort Hamilton, NY United States Post Number: 2936 Registered: Oct-04 | By the way, that pic from Stein Audio does not seem to be of the RBR, I'm not sure why? Just curious, in the plans for the RBR, the tweeter is offset to one side, why? |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 678 Registered: Jul-07 | I usually refrain from recommending gear that I own (unless someone specifically asks) but I have to say I love my Sierra's. I've heard a lot of speakers since I bought them, and nothing I've heard makes me regret the investment. One interesting thing about the Sierra's is that I don't like them nearly so much with solid state gear as with the tube gear I have, and others I have tried. In the right room with the right gear behind them, they're pretty amazing. Most people that come into my listening room are floored by them. And believe it or not they have some of the SDFR magic in the midrange. I think I remember a reviewer mentioned this and I thought at the time he was overstating his case. Not so much. I think the key in this hobby is to get the most out of what you've got, before thinking about moving on. I think we've all sold some gear that we hadn't heard the best of. I've been working on a few issues in my system, and all have been worked out without changing anything other than room config, bass trapping, and a wire change or two. |
|
Gold Member Username: ExerciseguyFort Hamilton, NY United States Post Number: 2937 Registered: Oct-04 | You can spend an arm and a leg on a system, and tweak until you're blue in the face, but without the right room, I'm afraid it's all an exercise in futility. This is kind of where I've been stuck since I've revived my interest in this thing of ours. I'm content to swap out budget items from time to time, tinker with some stuff here & there, but I am locked into my present situation, and a pair of cables, a new pair of stands, or spending 2-3X as much on my gear isn't going to help, IMHO. I stumbled across an article which more or less struck a cord regarding my situation. . http://www.twochannelaudio.com/Infinityprimus360loudspeaker.html |
|
Gold Member Username: ExerciseguyFort Hamilton, NY United States Post Number: 2938 Registered: Oct-04 | Hey, am I the only one having a problem posting longer messages in the eCoustic's Post Box? If my message exceeds a certain length, the box will not scroll down to accommodate the text, I need to either type blind, or cut & paste my message. It's been like this for a while. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13948 Registered: May-04 | . "It's a bit condecending to assume those of us here are akin to trendzoids chasing after designer labels." Yeah, Maris is a PITA but I don't see him being condescending- condescension is virtually never in the thoughts of someone so kock sure of what they know. Is Maris the first guy you've come across who wants to trash talk? "Yeah, my d*ck's bigger than your d*ck and my gal's hotter than your gal." You let that sort of sh*t bother you, CM? "I'm sure the Madisound Kit will be a fine sounding speaker if & when it is assembled properly, perhaps the best of the lot, who knows, but to put the cart before the horse to the degree that Maris has been the crux of this matter." Sorry, CM, I don't know what you mean. What cart? And what horse? Maris is being a PITA in case you didn't notice. If you want to shut him up, throw some facts at him, opinions are just what these guys eat up and spit back out at you. "What originally got me PO'd was the contention that you could tell sound thru measurements. Even I know that doesnt' work." Well, Leo, how do you suppose we "tell" sound? You really don't think measurements play no part in this, do you? Did you ever look at the frequency response of your speakers in a review or write up? Measurements are where things start and for some people it's where they end. Maris would appear to be one of those people who believes all he needs is a piece of paper and he can decide what is "best" - at least for speakers. How did you go about deciding which kit to suggest, Leo? You looked at information, right? "Yes, you can find many systems sharing drivers, but the associated works is what counts. Give me a nice pair of matched drivers from a reputable manuf. and I'm sure I could make a mediocre speaker system, if it worked at all." Once again I don't have a clue what "the associated work" means. You mean the design work? OK, what makes one designer worthy of having the name Rega on his design? Didn't Roy Gandy have to start somewhere? Or Frank McIntosh? Or those guys named Conrad and Johnson? Maybe the person who designed the kit Maris bought will be the next Jim Thiele. You seem to be writing off something you know nothing about just because you don't know something about it. What makes some anynomous designer in the employ of a large corporation any better than any other designer who prefers to work on his own designs? If they all are using many of the same parts, why is the design by committee within a corporation any better than the design with one person's name on the badge? The entire "cottage" industry of high end audio began with people doing this in their basements and in their garages. It thrives with those same sort of people. Little guys and gals who think they can do something better without the constraints of an industry or a corporation. It remains alive because of people like Maris even if he is a PITA. And I suppose I don't have to tell you that "matched drivers" don't come into play in this price range. If you want them, you might actually find them in the DIY community where someone is willing to build something just a bit better than the corporations can just because they really care about their product. There seems to be some confusion about what is mass market and what is mass market high end. Corporations cut corners to make things easily manufactured, or to get something into a price range or in response to a compettior's product. There are dozens of reasons why a corporation builds what it builds but the DIY business is still a subset of the audio market and is the cottage industry within the cottage industry. More often than not these are the real mom and pop type businesses that built this hobby. "If I were to go the 'kit' route and become a screwdriver guy, I'd consider something like this:: http://www.seas.no/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=210&Itemid=202 which is a nice 2-way design of low complication and should provide good sound in the appropriate sized room w/suitable electronics. The documentation is reasonable and you may even be able to buy the enclosures ala carte from Madisound or equiv. My neighbor could cobble them together in a weekend and they'd be rock solid." How'd you pick that model? I suspect you did the exact same thing Maris did except it sounds like Maris might have done a lot more research before he bought something. Aren't you now just arguing you would buy this while Maris bought that? " ... and they'd be rock solid" sounds like your pretty sure of what you say, Leo. But you're objecting to Maris being just as certain of his opinions. "but the original suggestion that you could tell by the numbers and that by implication systems using the same drivers sound basically alike, is a little off." I must have missed where Maris said that. Maybe you haven't looked through some of the DIY sites that describe the sound of individual drivers and caps and so forth. If you read five reviews that say a particular driver, or a wide baffle or a cap has "X" sound, wouldn't you begin to think that driver, baffle, cap has that sound? Yes, a speaker system is more than its parts but designers select specific drivers and components for their recognized sound just like you pick your speaker systems for what you consider to be their sound. Buy a Rega, you get Rega sound not Magnepan sound. Six speaker systems that all use the Revelator drivers will have very similar sound when compared to six speakers that use VIFA components. That's the basics of designing a speaker, you start buy using drivers with the inherent sound you want to achieve. This is not some magic potion where any driver can be made to sound not like its inherent nature. You're not turning a rock into a chicken. "Do all Wolfson DAC equipped CD players sound alike? didn't think so." No, neither do I but I do think all "X" brand chips do "sound" alike and that is due to the stated specifications of the original design and the measured performance of the final product. Now extend that to specific drivers and you have the same type of specifications being listed and the same measured performance being culled out of the production line. I'm not sure where you're headed with this, Leo. "I'm certainly willing to go the cost of R/D by a known concern who have the resources to try a bunch of changes and market the 'best' of 'em." Most of us are when it comes to certain pieces of our system. I wouldn't even think myself capable of cobbling together a digital transport. However, Maris' point, if I understand it correctly has been stated here; "The cabinet design has already been done by Clearwave Loudspeaker Design. FYI, that's the whole point of buying a K-I-T, all your cabinet specs are given for that particular design", Posted on Saturday, September 26, 2009 - 07:12 pm. The crossover has been designed for the drivers according to a specific designer's goals and ears. Maris is simply screwing together the parts that came from a designer he decided to agree with. We all do the same only we don't always screw the components together. Look at Maris' point as this; if you are going to suggest the best bang for the buck speaker (which is how this thread began), you would be negligent to not include some kits that only require a bit of assembly. When Tim was in business I did my fair share of recommending with a product I had heard and knew the designer had an ear somewhat akin to my own. Why limit your recommendations only to products that have the higher cost of mass distribution channels built into their pricing? Isn't that a fair way to interpret Maris' suggestion? Whether this or that kit will blow away any other speakers is of course up to the listeners tastes just as it would be if Maris had said the Jamo blows away the Naim speaker. But just because Maris does this trash talk to get you all started doesn't mean you have to take the bait and run with it. You know what you like and Maris knows what he's willing to pay for. What's the problem with that? "I think a DIY corner would be a good idea. What, after all, is the REAL difference between a tweak and DIY? not much." There's quite a bit of difference actually. Designing the speaker or amplifier kit from scratch parts is DIY and screwing it together amount to different levels of DIY. Me looking at a sand box isolation device and thinking I can do the same for less money is a DIY tweak. Buying the sand box from the company that thought up the idea is just a tweak. "Harsh? yes, a little, but I got off the boat when somebody drug Italian Food into the discussion." Speaking as someone whose ancestors actually got off the boat and looked for something familar to eat, garlic bread is not "Italian food" any more than a Tex-Mex taco is what a Hispanic eats when they have their native cuisine. Let's keep this in perspective, eh? . |
|
Gold Member Username: ExerciseguyFort Hamilton, NY United States Post Number: 2939 Registered: Oct-04 | "Sorry, CM, I don't know what you mean. What cart? And what horse? Maris is being a PITA in case you didn't notice. If you want to shut him up, throw some facts at him, opinions are just what these guys eat up and spit back out at you." Fact: Maris has not heard one solitary note from the RBR kit. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13949 Registered: May-04 | . "I was never PO'd. His DIY thing didn't bother me a bit. Different strokes and all that good stuff. I just didn't understand his Mauimusicman approach(Green Mountain Audio, ya'll remember, right) that his way is the only way. Other than that I'd look forward to seeing his speakers." "You're running around in circles Maris. Pick up your Lego's and go home."  Right, Art, you're never what anyone says you are, even when they can quote you. \i["No IMHO, or even IMO?"} Not for some people, CM. What's it matter? If someone says something factually wrong, then do your best to prove they don't generally have a clue like a few of the whazzoos who've been on this forum. Someone wants to p!ss up a tree, you don't have show them how high you can p!ss. "Everyone argued their bashing everything else, especially stuff they haven't heard. Your boy Maris said a speaker that he bought and hadn't recieved yet sounds better than anything we have. That's the problem.' Maris is not "my boy". I am guessing Maris wouldn't want anything more to do with me than I do with him. I'm not defending Maris, he's a PITA. I'm defending what he has said that I can't totally disagree with. So Maris trash talks an opinion that gets in your face. So what? "You gonna defend Rod Porter too?" I don't remember Rod Porter so, no, I am not going to say anything about him. If he said something totally ignorant like some people on this forum have done, then I would probably prove just how stupid he was. I can research facts and I know what I'm talking about, I don't post BS like, "I use my best measuring device on speakers...my ears." I know the difference between facts and in your face opinions and I know trash talk when I see it. Everyone here has witnessed that and a few of you hold a grudge from when I did it to you.  "Complementing MR's Xindak gear's looks has nothing to do with this." Well, sure it does! You compliment something you know nothing about and get p!ssed when someone says something about a piece of gear you know nothing about. And you know nothing about Maris other than we all agree he's a PITA. How do you know what he likes and doesn't like? Is it possible in your world that someone might not like exactly what you like? I would think it is. If Maris thinks what he has read tells him this is the best speaker ever and he can screw it together for $1k, how do you know it isn't the best speaker Maris could own? Just because he tells you it is you get this upset? I do think you guys are all missing the issue of telling people where they can get the best values. Value is not yours to decide so, if someone says this is a better value, what's the difference between that and you guys all injecting another brand into the mix? You're all expressing an opinion. If someone can screw together a few parts and have a speaker that will satisfy them at a few hundred $'s less, why not mention it? Have you never dealt with someone who holds an opinion unlike your own? "A brochure and/or other advertising and reviews will get me in the door to hear something. Nothing more than that." That's great but I repeat there has been an awful lot of gear purchased here without an audition. "Also, I'm pretty sure just about every regular here auditions everything for their main system before buying. A few guys may make an impulse purchase that's not a lot of money to try something new out and have fun with it or for a secondary type system." You and I are reading different forums. You and I have different opinions on this issue. "If they're buying stuff unheard for a primary system, its either second hand and can be sold at little to no loss, or it has a no loss return policy." That's not the issue and you should know that. Anything can be resold or returned, even speaker kits. The issue is most everyone has purchased a piece of gear for their system(s) without an audition - and they announce it on this forum and get all kinds of oohs and ahhhs and "good job" just because they spent money. Most people make those non-audition decisions based on what they read and hear from others. How is that any different than what Maris has done? Just that he says he found something better that what you got? "TW is the exception, not the rule." How many of us congratulate TW on his frequent purchases? Are you really, really certain TW is the only one who is in constant flux with their systems? I have a different opinion on that issue. It sure seems like there's been a lot of gear flying around this forum. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13950 Registered: May-04 | . "Fact: Maris has not heard one solitary note from the RBR kit." How do you know that? . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13951 Registered: May-04 | . "Well, if your'e talking about me again Vigne ... " I wasn't talking about you. I'd stopped talking about you a long time ago. I don't discuss what you post because you know nothing about what you post. You are an idiot who gets their pantees in a twist every time someone looks at you! And I've had to put up with your BS for how many years? It's just when you become such as insulting SOB who just can't let go of a grudge that I even think about you. Why dont you head back in, recess is over and you'll miss your Graham Crackers and milk. FO!, Rantz. . |
|
Silver Member Username: NmytreePost Number: 284 Registered: Aug-04 | Oh sheesh. Looks like I missed another one of "those guys". I love "those guys". Been having a few debates with these typse, lately. Maris falls into a very arrogant, pompus and self-absorbed group of science-obsessed loonys (or he's the very same guy), who spend much of their times on several forums; telling everyone they're idiots and that their gear sucks. Because he apparently spends much of his time measuring and analyzing the resulting measurements. As well as DIYing. Typically these kooks love to claim their their gear sounds better than everyone else's, even though most of these kooks have never spent more than a few minutes with the gear they are denigrating (if even that). All in the name....of Science. Well, you can measure all you want and build it yourself......all you want. But not everyone puts their complete faith in measurements. And not everyone has the time, ability or desire to become a DIYer. Some of us like to trust our ears. Yeah, I know...I know " Our Ears Can Not Be Trusted" ...blah...blah...blah  Here's the problem. Many DO trust their ears to get the sound they want and love. I've tried the all so scientific, measured down to a fly's testticles approach. Tried it and tried to live with it for over two months. And you know what? It sounded like poo poo. If measurements are supposed to be the ultimate in judging a system/speakers. Then I' ll gladly put my trust in my ears and in my ability to set a room up for good acoustics. My ears never fail me. Measurements left me hearing flat, thin, weak and rather sterile sounding music; void of any real musicality and emotion. It was like trying to make love to a leather couch. Do people like Maris really believe that we don't know that our audio companies use marketing copy to try and sway customers? Does he really think we don't know that there are a lot of designs and approachs to audio gear? Does he really think we're all duped or brainwashed? Give me a break!! We buy what we like. What appeals to us as individuals. We all don't care to go around building our own speakers. What's next, build our own washing machines? Shall we measure the efficiency of all our washing machines? How about our coffee makers?  And let me tell you something, I've heard several DIY speakers, that were supposedly the ultimate in measurements and science. Let's just say that I wasn't all that impressed. DIYing and measurements don't gaurantee musicality or that everyone will like what they hear coming from them. Listen, I do respect everyone's individual preferences and tastes. May it be science-based preferences or ear-based listening. But don't go around blabbering about how everyone not involved in science-based audio and measurements, is an idiot. And don't go around slamming other people's gear, that you've never even given a real listen; by matching components for the system, adjusting room acoustics and living with the gear for at least two weeks. Gear you know nothing about, but speculate and guess about. Because you think you know everything. But you don't. That's is truely ignorant. One more thing. Room acoustics are extremely important. And I think most people do the best they can with it. And there are a lot of inexpensive and aesthetically pleasing ways to do it. But not everyone can have a room completely and perfectly covered with bass traps, diffusers, absorbers and etc. Most people share their homes with spouses, friends or relatives. No one wants their living room looking like a sponge and foam cave. Nor do most people want to spend $5,000-$10,000 on it. When you could get wonderful results with decorative options. |
|
Platinum Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 10739 Registered: Feb-05 | As usual Jan, you're wrong relative to me. Also as usual, you're not worth the argument. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13952 Registered: May-04 | . "But why the hell would you bust in newby and open with that stuff if nothing but a troll?!?" Because he's a PITA? And he likes being a PITA? Is screaming at a troll the best thing to do? Particularly if all you have is rhetoric on your side? "Again, pedestrian or widely available drivers are fine to use, and are used regularly. However, I would be remiss if I fail to point out that speaker manufacturers of repute do in house testing and verification/matching of drivers (let alone crossover componants) and usually test the system against some known standard." Sorry, Nuck, that's not an argument that stands up to scrutiny. I would be remiss if I did not point out Madisound is not a fly by night operation and it doesn't take much nowdays to design a pretty good speaker with a few computer programs. A company like Madisound can have a few designers on staff because their staff enjoys design. I get the impression a lot of you think this stuff is only good if it has a name brand label on it. You don't need an anechoic chamber and I'm certain you know most speaker companies never had anechoic chambers until a short few years ago and most still do not have an anechoic chamber. I still have pictures of the BBC/KEF techs designing speakers by placing them on a tall pole out in a field, real "free field" response curves. You buy "speaker in a box" or whatever the hot program is this month and do the CAD math and you can have a pretty decent speaker - like a Ling maybe? 95% of speaker design can be done before you even order a driver or box. That last 5% is the art but art is not confined to corporations. "If Maris gets a half crapped out tweeter, is the design to blame? The room? The scanspeak? Will he, or we, ever know?" You don't think Madisound stands behind their product? You're yelling just to hear yourself yell, Nuck. Why not just let Maris blow and go and not bother? And, if you don't mind, tell me why you recommended the Lings and Tim's other designs if you didn't think you could buy a good speaker for less money by buying from other than a big company and paying for the name and their advertising and distribution network? Maris may have been "indelicate" when he made the remark about you guys paying for name brands but his point remains valid. Look, I'm not arguing for Maris or against your recommendations. But Maris's point IMO is you can buy a lot for less by looking at simple to screw together kits. I can't argue with that. It's not for everyone but that's for anyone to decide on their own. Not mentioning kits leaves some people at the mercy of stores like Best Buy. Madisound is waaaaaay more helpful than the joker at the big box who's only working there until he can afford a hot car stereo at employee discount. . . |
|
Silver Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 516 Registered: Oct-07 | I am on record, more than once as having said. 'specs are advisory, at best'. Yes, I read the freq. response of my panels once and even a review from Stereophile. Forgot specs, remember some of the measured data and noted the review was positive. Of course Garlic Bread is Italian. I can't get it at the local Chinese Bistro, can I now? As for Taco's being TexMex, I don't know where they started. I do know that I live in a place where there are literally dozens of mom+pop taco stands all selling good stuff. Mi esposa really enjoys the occasional fish taco. I doubt that there is any 'pure cuisine' remaining on the planet. You can get anything anywhere and all are influenced by everything else. Macdonalds is part of the decline of civilization. On the 'big map' tweaks are cousins to DIY. Both appeal to the same instincts, maybe, to put it together or modify it oneself. The opposite side of the pool are buy it and run it types who don't even think 2x about cables, stands, or in some cases even advanced setup. It is perfectly OK to migrate to the other side and try out anything you want. ALL our ancestors got off the boat at one time or another. Even native American's came here from somewhere. Once all the smoke has blown away, I will be curious. Will Maris like the new speakers, as yet apparently, unheard? Will he begin tweaks/mods sooner or later? Would he admit if once bought and assembled he DIDN'T like them? Where I was headed with the Wolfson remark:: You can buy the same drivers as a name brand, well regarded speaker and end up with a bad result. A speaker, as has been noted by yourself and others, is more than the sum of its parts. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13953 Registered: May-04 | . "As usual Jan, you're wrong relative to me. Also as usual, you're not worth the argument." Stop it, Art, everyone here knows you. . |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzI come from ... Post Number: 2521 Registered: Nov-05 | He's just a poor miserable old man Art that needs to get his rocks off insulting others. He's not worth a rat's crap. |
|
Silver Member Username: NmytreePost Number: 285 Registered: Aug-04 | Meatball sandwhich....mmmmmmm.... Now I'm hungry. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 679 Registered: Jul-07 | Maris is long gone. And mission accomplished I'd say. |
|
Platinum Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 10741 Registered: Feb-05 | Everyone but you Jan. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13954 Registered: May-04 | . "I am on record, more than once as having said. 'specs are advisory, at best'' Leo, I have always maintained the average consumer of audio gear only needs to know H X W X D and weight. That's the advice I would give any mass market consumer and most in the high end. I would not, however, give that same advice to someone who is interested in being more deeply involved in this hobby. This hobby we enjoy is a business for many and a science to most. You cannot separate out the science from audio by merely saying, "My ears tell me everything I need to know". A designer or a company who wants to produce consistent products and possibly move the science and art of audio forward cannot just wing it with ears alone. No more than you can just wing it and expect to have good food cooked by someone who takes the knobs on the oven as nothing more than advisories. "Of course Garlic Bread is Italian." No, no it's not. Bruschetta is originally an Italian antipasta, "garlic bread" is from some misguided soul in Hoboken. Also, there is no such thing as "garlic salt" or "garlic powder", both of which have been used to make "garlic bread". "I doubt that there is any 'pure cuisine' remaining on the planet." If you go to Italy, you'll find Italian food. They are very proud of their traditions and they have been known to disallow any "foreign" food in certain areas of the country, mostly small towns where they do not want the cuisine watered down. They do not want their towns and cities infiltrated by other palates. It's somewhat a tourist thing and somewhat a pride of nation thing but Italy and several other countries are very strict about their food as it appears in their restaraunts in their country. Italy is the birthplace of the Slow Food concept, a reaction to McDonalds moving into the larger, metropolitan cities such as Rome, Milan and Turin. Slow Food is what we know as Alice Waters tradition here in the US, eat locally and seasonally. It is a microbiotic approach to eating. In Itally and in those areas where it is practiced it takes you back to four hour dinners with a half dozen courses all served with fresh ingredients and home cooking. If you don't know about the Slow Food movement, check it out. There's no "garlic bread". "Once all the smoke has blown away, I will be curious. Will Maris like the new speakers, as yet apparently, unheard? Will he begin tweaks/mods sooner or later? Would he admit if once bought and assembled he DIDN'T like them?" One of my other beliefs is that most people love what they have selected (no matter how big a piece of crap it is) until they are ready to change, then it becomes crap until they get to the dealer where it once again becomes a wonderful thing worth far more than the dealer is willing to give on trade. As with most things, there is a bit of pride of ownership that comes along with building something yourself, even if all you do is screw together pieces. Maris is keeping his earlier kit so I suspect he'll be quite happy with the new pair, he's already convinced himself they are better than anything with a name brand label on it and that he is very smart going this route. "You can buy the same drivers as a name brand, well regarded speaker and end up with a bad result. A speaker, as has been noted by yourself and others, is more than the sum of its parts." Only if you ignore all advice otherwise. In this case Maris stands a good chance of putting together a kit where all the design work has been done for him. You and I think a speaker is more than the sum of its parts but I don't think Maris was saying anything different. He believes he is buying a speaker that has that last 5% applied, it just doesn't have a Jamo name tag on it. He believes most speaker measurements can be codified into understandable concepts. I would say for the most part he's right. Speaker designers know what results when they increase the Xmax or decrease the Qts. They know what to expect when the accellerometer tells them there is a problem between 240-243Hz. Dispersion can be mapped out on a computer, add the filters and you'll know most everything you need to know about how a driver will respond on a specific baffle. If a designer doesn't know this stuff, a computer program will feed them the information. This is a science to those who treat it as such. That you know no more about the science part of it isn't the issue. You may not know how to order from a menu in Chinese or Italian but you can get by if you know what you like or you can open a can of Spaghettios. However, if you want to get into the language and culture of the meal and you learn Italian and how the food is produced (the value of a single estate extra v!rgin olive oil for example or the difference between Parmessano and Padano), you get a different result when you understand how one word in Italian gets translated into something more palatable or saleable in English. You don't need to know about Xmax and Qts to buy from a manufacturer and it shouldn't bother you that you don't, buy what you like and learn what you can about what you buy. Maris strikes me as nothing more than someone whose life is set around measurements and predictability in all things. Different strokes for different folks. It was you guys who started challenging at him if I remember correctly. He was a PITA but I think he didn't do much to deserve the response he got other than tweak your noses a bit. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13955 Registered: May-04 | . "Do people like Maris really believe that we don't know that our audio companies use marketing copy to try and sway customers?" No, I think that was supposed to be his point, get rid of the labels. The problem with that is he was just trading one set of labels for another. "Does he really think we don't know that there are a lot of designs and approachs to audio gear?" Seems a lot of people forget that. But in my experience folks like Maris insist everyone think just as they do. They don't suggest it, they insist upon it. It's what that sort of person does. This forum has been very fortunate not to have more of the objectivist A'holes get started here. "Does he really think we're all duped or brainwashed?" Generally, yes, that sort does think that. "We all don't care to go around building our own speakers. What's next, build our own washing machines?" I think you've wandered off the path again. . |
|
Silver Member Username: NmytreePost Number: 286 Registered: Aug-04 | I'm always off the path |
|
Gold Member Username: DmitchellOttawa, Ontario Canada Post Number: 3084 Registered: Feb-07 | We love that about you Tree. One thing I've learned from this forum is that we shouldn't get too hung up on specs, and instead ask the question "does it sound good?". The only problem I had with Maris' approach was that he believed, or wanted us to believe, that the specs on his as of yet unbuilt speakers were good, so his speakers were gonna be as good, or better than our name brand speakers. In Italy, do they call it "Italian Food", or just "food"? |
|
Gold Member Username: DmitchellOttawa, Ontario Canada Post Number: 3085 Registered: Feb-07 | Oh yeah .... Nothing like a troll that stirs the pot, gets us all hitting each other over the head, then disappears. |
|
Silver Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 517 Registered: Oct-07 | Gasp and Surprise! A further hopefully last thought on this subject. 1st, The original poster was ill served by the last series of exchanges. If I understand correctly, all he wanted was the best guess at what was the 'best' his 1k$ could buy. No mention was made of his skillset and ability to purchase / construct a speaker let alone his ability to evaluate one such kit based on never hearing it! While a kit may be a viable alternative, I would interpret his OP as limiting himself to pre-built, factory issue speakers. 2nd And this is a more esoteric point, which is that there is a substantial grey scale between DIY and Tweak. I believe the scale starts (far end, L or R, you choose) at pre made and goes all the way to DIY at the other end, the extreme example would be mining your own copper ore to make your own wire. a little extreme, I know. So, IMO, the grey area is well to the middle, where you may build stuff to modify your system. DIY or Tweak? see link below for a REAL DIY guy. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl-QMuUQhVM and for partII, (yep there's more!) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S5OwqOXen8 Is this DIY or Tweak? He didn't make the wire or glass. Has this been posted here before? Is building a speaker from a 'kit' DIY or a Tweak? What if you have to fabricate your own enclosure and x-over? Poor execution here will result in a bad end. Even choice of caps in the X-over will change things. I don't have an answer to this and don't really have a horse in the race, but I do feel strongly that it is pretty grey. I won't beat this semantic horse any longer. I can't cover all the cases, but I think it is clear that DIY and Tweak are related and in some cases substantially overlap. Again, cuisine is a scale. Go to rural anywhere and you get what the locals eat and have eaten for generations. Very little penetration of new ingredients or techniques. Go urban anywhere and you will find an amazing variety. I had both Thai and Chinese in London. Regular English fare is awful. Bangers and Mash? Deep Fried Mars Bar? Boiled-to-death Turnips? yik I ate Pizza in Genoa.....not bad, either. A 'Rice Table' feast in Brugge. (Indonesian / Dutch). Here is SoCal, you can get anything. I have an amazing variety within minutes. 'Two Guys From Italy' ran by 2 sisters from Brooklyn. A Vietnamese PHO (noodles) restaurant 100 feet down the mall, located right next to a Mexican place. I've eaten at all of 'em, But in this day and age, you really have to travel to get 'pure' cuisine anywhere. When I went to CanCun, I went into town to avoid the tourist places and eat where the locals eat. Strange looks, but wonderful paella. I had the BEST tomato soup ever over in Europe, too, at a 'fixed price' dinner. |
|
Silver Member Username: NmytreePost Number: 287 Registered: Aug-04 | Like I said, the only problem I have with these guys; is that he insist that everyone has to think and see things as they do. As if their perspective is the only valid perspective....for everyone. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 3492 Registered: May-05 | Absolutely, NMT. My Bryston B60 and Audio Physic Yara monitors are all the amp and speaker I need. I couldn't be happier with them. Unless they break down or I have a drastic room change, they're the last amp and speakers I'll need to buy for a very, very long time. That doesn't mean they're all the amp and speaker you or anyone else need to buy. People forget that sometimes. |
|
Gold Member Username: DmitchellOttawa, Ontario Canada Post Number: 3091 Registered: Feb-07 | Good point. |
|
Platinum Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 10746 Registered: Feb-05 | I feel the same about my Sonneteer and DeVore's Stu. Find the happy place that suits you while understanding that it may not work for someone else. Good advice. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 13596 Registered: Dec-04 | You know that Maris hit the troll's jackpot, right? |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 13597 Registered: Dec-04 | Madisound stands behind their product ok, so I get a crapper out of the box, and Madisound sends me another one in the mail. What is the warranty on DIY speaker parts, I wonder? |
|
Silver Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 518 Registered: Oct-07 | Nuck, There is actually a better point here than 'the troll jackpot' award for September. I think there should be an entire category of DIY. Make it the broadest definition possible and include Tweaks and simple modifications. People who had successful DIY projects could post, get some constructive feedback and compare notes. As for Madisound sending you 'a crapper out of the box', it happens even with factory build stuff. I had not 1 but 2 CA players delivered DOA. The diff, I suppose is that the dealer was 110% there and was easily as baffled as I. It was CA that seemed......not to care. Truth be told, stuff broken right out of the box....'infant mortality' is a fact of life. PIA? yep. As for what is the warranty? As long as it has not been subjected to electrical or mechanical abuse, why not 1 year? though I don't really know. They (Madisound) can't not be held liable for a lightning strike, a kick down a flight of stairs or a rampaging housepet with a dislike for hifi. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13956 Registered: May-04 | . Drivers are warranted by their manufacturer just as they would be if your Ascend speaker with a proprietary SEAS driver went kaflooie. In most cases this would be a five year warranty against manufacturing defects. Why are you huffing and puffing about this, Nuck? Why create BS when there's none there? Madisound is a reputable company, they stand behind their product and deal with other companies who honor their liabilities. If they hadn't, they wouldn't have been in business for over thirty years. If they didn't, they'd risk being out of business tomorrow. Maris is gone for now, and your "arguments" against him are pretty lame so lay off the let's rag on DIY stuff, OK? . |
|
Silver Member Username: NmytreePost Number: 288 Registered: Aug-04 | Oh let's not be silly, now. There was no one in this thread unaware that Maris was trolling,, instigating and looking to get a rise out people. But his context is a common point of debate, in this hobby. So people wanted to chime in. If you really look at most of the responses and shove aside all the tit-for-tat, people were really trying to take Maris's attempt and turn into a positive or productive debate. Whether you agree with the context, points and approach. |
|
Gold Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 1414 Registered: Apr-05 | PSB T65 http://www.psbspeakers.com/products/Image-Series/Image-T65-Tower Demo gear at Saturday audio for $729. No direct link, but use www.saturdayaudio.com and click on Demo Gear. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13957 Registered: May-04 | . I don't understand that post. Let's not be silly, shall we? If Maris is a troll to you guys, then you have lived very sheltered on line lives. Maris was here for a half dozen posts in which he stated his case. He did so with what was perceived as a disrespectful attitude towards a few of you and your buying habits. So what? A few of you need some daylight let in. Read the first part of this thread and it reads like a clique-ish little group of very opinionated middle aged guys discussing what speakers they've heard or not heard and the relative merits of each. Maris came along and knocked over your sand castle. Boofuckin'hoo! Of course he was trying to get a rise out of you, it's so easy when all you need to do is look at you sideways and everyone starts crying about how their ears are their best measuring tool. Really, guys, if you don't know how dumb that line truly is, especially to someone like Maris, you need to get out more. Whether you want to realize them or not what Maris stated are mostly real facts mixed with his opinion that his new speakers would blow away your speakers. How many of you have stated, "This is the best I've ever heard", when you bought a new component? Guys, Maris' claim is no different. It's an opinion just like, "That's pretty impressive ... ", and, " ... they should match well with NAD", is an opinion. Trash talk mixed with some truth and as the saying goes you can't handle the truth. You don't even want to hear the truth. I haven't seen one person take on Maris on his facts. Not a one of you has tried to say he's wrong about 2nd order distortions or floor bounce. Is there anyone here who can do that and make it sound like you know what you're talking about? Or is this just a forum full of shouters when things don't go your way? Have you guys managed to close yourself of from the real world of audio so much that any new opinion is greeted with shouts of insult? That's sad, guys, real sad. Every last one of you have cried about how Maris insulted you or you took the stupidly high ground of you don'need no stinkin'measurements. The former is gradeschool playground stuff and the latter is just plain dumb. I can't even tell you how dumb it is. Most of you misquoted Maris because you weren't interested in a discussion, you just wanted a shouting match. Maris, to his small amount of credit, stated what he had to say and left. You guys look like the idiots for continuing to insult him with misqouted shouts. You look like a fire ant mound that's been kicked over and you're all running around looking to get even with a few bites on someone's ankle. You don't even care whose ankle you bite. And then there are the couple of you who took the opportunity to say something rude to me.  Tell me who you're arguing with now, me or Maris? I'm not defending Maris' style, he is what he is and there are plenty of them out there on the audio forums and most would eat you guys up like salsa on chips. But he does have facts on his side when it comes to the science of speaker building and not one of you can argue that with him. I dare say not one of you knows how to argue the facts with him as evidenced by your responses; "Pick up your Lego's and go home". I bet that cut him to the quick! No wonder he crept away in the night. Yeah, yeah, you only do this for entertainment, I know. Well then, expect more Maris' to show up and you can all run around some more. Yeah, your ears never let you down. But they probably never told you anything other than what you wanted to hear either. Get real, guys, get some real knowledge before you start shouting. "But his context is a common point of debate, in this hobby. So people wanted to chime in." Just what is this "context" that you say Maris had? Why not just say what you mean and all of you stop dancing around words? If people had just "chimed in", I wouldn't have been so amused at first. But people didn't chime in, they got rude and insulting when they had no reason to. You did exactly what Maris wanted. If that don't make you slap your head with a "Dohhh!", then you deserve what you got and there will be more. Maris knows where you guys hang out. He'll come around some night and knock over your row of big, bad Harleys with their leather saddle bags and the fringe. Maybe you're actually lucky and Maris isn't a troll at all. He just got tired of dealing with you and your knee jerk reactions. You can hope. "If you really look at most of the responses and shove aside all the tit-for-tat, people were really trying to take Maris's attempt and turn into a positive or productive debate." I must have missed that part. Got any examples of what you thought was a "productive debate"? The suggestion Maris roll his own caps or build his own anechoic chamber maybe? Possibly that building your own washing machine is the same as screwing in 24 wood screws? When Maris became "my boy",hmmm, is that it? Or it might be when it was decided Maris had never heard a note on these speakers when that is not a proven fact. Please, provide some supporting evidence to what you state. Otherwise, I'm not seeing what you see. "Whether you agree with the context, points and approach." I still have no idea about this "context" thing. What context? Points? He made some good points that went unanswered in all the spitting and shouting. Approach? Look at how long this has gone on since he left. What would you say is a bad approach if you get the discussion moving? If you guys had made anything coming close to a decent debate out of this, I wouldn't even be here right now. But you didn't. You got up on your rears and shouted, "I AM RIGHT BECAUSE I SAY SO!!!!" That should be written on the headstone of every audiophool who ever disgraced a forum. Well, I'm here to tell you you're not right and saying so doesn't make you right. Offhand I can't find anything "right" that any of you posted. And guess what, Maris is right because he says so and he had enough facts that are right to make his argument and make you guys look like a bunch of subjective shouters, the audiophoools every objectivist measurement type expects to run into on these forums. Congrats, guys, you did just what Maris wanted and now you're sitting around here acting like you chased off the bad guy. Maris just got bored. And though I consider Nuck a friend his constant blathering about how unreliable DIY is just stupid and insulting in its own right. If Maris were still here he'd be rolling on the floor. No, you did not do this forum proud. You made @sses out of yourself. You're a bunch of little kings trying to find your crowns after the storm blows through. Good job, Brownie! What problem do you guys have with actually learning some of this stuff? . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13960 Registered: May-04 | . "What if you have to fabricate your own enclosure and x-over? Poor execution here will result in a bad end. Even choice of caps in the X-over will change things." Why don't we start with something like this? "Change things"? Change what? What would be an example of a bad choice of caps in this situation? Wrong value? How do you predict what value is correct? Wrong type? What's going to change with type? Wrong brand? What's going to change with the brand? If you don't know, you're just talkin' out your backside. You're spouting audiophool mumbo-jumbo that won't convice anyone of anything other than you don't know what you're talking about. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13961 Registered: May-04 | . Or maybe this pithy little comeback? "Dan, I don't think anyone here cares if Maris takes his money and flushes it down the toilet." What makes what Maris is doing flushing his money down the toilet? . |
|
Silver Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 519 Registered: Oct-07 | If using a x-over of known design you can change it in unknown or unpredictable ways thru choice of parts. The 'thing' being changed is the sound of the result. From nearly imperceptible to obvious, each part will effect the final result. aircore or iron core inductor? Caps go from .50$ to hundreds of $. I'm sure there are designer resistors, too. Point being that in DIY, execution is very important. A good design can be ruined by poor parts selection. If you are working from your own designs, than than all bets are off. Even if you start with 'cook book' style directions. The choices in just x-over are huge. 2nd order? Cap manuf? It goes on and each choice will have greater or lesser effect on this sound. This is NOT a DIS on DIY, but a simple fact of DIY life. If I had even sort of deep pockets and the urge, it could be fun. I'd love to rebuild my panel's x-overs. Start with an aircore inductor and a better selection of caps than the stock Solon units. Stands? New frames? All on the DIY list of recommended panel upgrades. One of the main things you get from any reputable manufacturer is consistency, I hope. A speaker line will be targeted, perhaps, at the house sound. They will be a known quantity and have a reputation to protect and maybe improve. I don't see how what I said was the least controversial. Poor execution will result in a bad end. What's to argue about? seems obvious. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13962 Registered: May-04 | . I didn't say it was controversial. Why claim that I did? I do think what you said was very broad and filled with lots of audiophile myth in a very few words. "If using a x-over of known design you can change it in unknown or unpredictable ways thru choice of parts. The 'thing' being changed is the sound of the result. From nearly imperceptible to obvious, each part will effect the final result." How can you change things in "unpredictable" ways unless you have no idea what you're doing? If you have no idea, then you deserve what you get. But even the simplest of computer programs can tell you about results. Even the cookbook gets you headed down the right path. There is no "unpredictable" result with knowledge. Is that what you think Maris was buying? Really?! I don't see any point being made here. Your statement regarding house sound is exactly proof that this is a science and almost everything that is done is done for a reason and not out of whim or fancy or merely by accident. If this were all unpredictable, there would be no such thing as house sound, it would all be a mishmosh of whatevers. House sound occurs for many reasons but one of them is knowing exactly how to manipulate the components to arrive at a desired end. You can't do that on a whim, you must have knowledge and then you apply the knowledge with experience. I still see no point being made in your words. You're trying to feed me audiophile BS and I'm not going to accept it. "aircore or iron core inductor? Caps go from .50$ to hundreds of $. I'm sure there are designer resistors, too." What's that say, Leo? Why are there those wide variances when there will be no measurable differences in the result? More myth doesn't get to the point of the debate. Say something substantial. Say something that suggests you know what you're talking about other than you have this vague concept that parts matter. What does a designer resistor get you? Why use one cap instead of another? If you don't know, then why mention it? If that's all you have and someone says measurements tell them what they need to know, is that your answer? Parts matter?! Do you see what I'm getting at? None of this means anything to someone interested in specs and measurements and you cannot design anything without specs, measurements and goals. The goals are reached by knowledge of how to use the parts and have the sum become more than a bunch of parts. Just saying that means nothing unless you can spell out how those parts are used to reach goals when measurements do not indicate any difference between a Clarity and a Mundorf cap of the same value. Most objective types would tell you using a paper in oil cap is stepping backwards to the days of colorations and that if you want to accept colorations then you are not after fidelity and all they seek is, as Maris stated, getting closer to the music as it was recorded while you wish to get farther away. "Point being that in DIY, execution is very important. A good design can be ruined by poor parts selection." That says nothing. Are you trying to get us to believe Madisound would hire stupid designers who pick lousy parts? What in your estimation is poor parts selection? Talking around the words isn't getting us an answer. You wax on about parts selection but it would seem you aren't that keen on Maris indexing a speaker with excellent parts selection which results in excellent measured performance. " If you are working from your own designs, than than all bets are off. Even if you start with 'cook book' style directions. The choices in just x-over are huge. 2nd order? Cap manuf? It goes on and each choice will have greater or lesser effect on this sound." More "parts matter", eh? That's all you got? Parts matter? That still tells me nothing other than you can gather words together and then reject what doesn't fit your beliefs. Why do you suppose a designer chooses those values? How do you think a designer learns to use those parts? What part will measurements play in all of this? Don't you think a designer has some concept of what they are after when they sit down to start a new design? They want to work with a particular driver and play with different crossover types and baffle dimensions perhaps? You make this sound like it's impossible to do unless you work for some big company that has a recognized name in high end audio and they can buy up all the good parts. I suppose you realize in the under $1k price range, most speaker design is about cutting costs not increasing parts count or cost. Most designers have to cut corners if they work for a big company and they want to make a compettive product in this price range. The "art" of corporate speaker design becomes getting the most from the lowest cost parts. So how does that fit into your concept of "parts matter"? Honest to god, Leo, all of this design work can be done in a computer and it will spit out a design, tell you the good and the bad and even make recommendations for changes. You can change the position of a driver or a port by 1/4" and the computer will tell you what has changed. Then there's this thing called education, it's how you learn what a 2nd order Xo does and why you might want to use it. You learn why a Bessel filter gives different results than a Butterworth filter and when you would want to use one and not the other. A Butterworth filter is not a part, it's an idea! People deal in ideas and the parts just support those ideas!!! Will the computer tell you whether to use a Mundorf cap? No, because to the computer a cap is a cap. But maybe you don't want a Mundorf cap in the first place. You want the cap you think works best for the sound you want to arrive at. Now is that chosen by cutting costs to suit the corporation's billing sheet or to get the best sound from your own design? This is not difficult stuff to know and they are not difficult answers to get, there are people doing this all the time. "One of the main things you get from any reputable manufacturer is consistency, I hope. A speaker line will be targeted, perhaps, at the house sound. They will be a known quantity and have a reputation to protect and maybe improve." And you don't consider Madisound or Parts Express companies that want to protect their reputation? You don't assume that SEAS, Fostex, VIFA, Usher, etc, have their own house sound and their own reputation? You're either not understanding how this works or you're being purposefully obtuse or you really are just not willing to say simple DIY of the sort Maris is buying is worth the effort. Which is it, Leo? Tell me in a few words what you think you've said in that post because I see nothing really. "Poor execution will result in a bad end. What's to argue about? seems obvious." Explain to me how this has anything to do with buying a speaker kit that requires you screw two drivers, a crossover board, a port and an input cup to a pre-cut and pre-assembled cabinet. No one has asked anyone to design a speaker from zero without any prior knowledge or the ability to find information. So what are you saying, Leo? What have you proven in that post? I see nothing other than more mumbo-jumbo. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 13598 Registered: Dec-04 | I only asked about warranty.  |
|
Gold Member Username: DmitchellOttawa, Ontario Canada Post Number: 3095 Registered: Feb-07 | Man, talk about DIY... now we're supposed to drill our own holes in our LPs? |
|
Platinum Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 10750 Registered: Feb-05 | I'm not sure I have the right tool David... |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 13600 Registered: Dec-04 | A byke? |
|
Silver Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 520 Registered: Oct-07 | Jan, You didn't use the word controversial, but in answering at some length assumed the mantle of controversy. The subject is DIY, not assembling a kit. If you get a complete kit, you will get about 99% of the design intent sound. Unless you really screw it up. I don't consider assembly of a kit to be very DIY, on the edge but not really saving much money, either. If you (or Maris, for that matter) think you will get 1000$ speakers for 500$, and just have to screw them together, IMO, you're sadly mistook. Even here in the US, the land of expensive labor, how much do you think it would cost to assemble a 3 or 4 driver small tower? Could it take a pro with all the tools and proper setup more than 90 minutes per pair? I'll be generous and call it 50$ @ 30$/hr. Maris if he gets the complete kit, every fastener, wire, assembled enclosures, stuffing and crossovers will be OK. Nothing here is left to the imagination. But he won't get the massive savings he envisions though. Even if he assigns no value to his time and does it strictly for therapy, which ain't a bad idea! Yep, parts matter. And execution, too. But, if you do anything else, like come up with your own x-over, even a duplicate of the design listed, you will change the sound. Constructing your own enclosure? Even various amounts of damping will change things, not to mention wood type, moisture content and type of glue if using plywood. You can't have it both ways. You are on record as not liking Radio Shack RCAs or bananas. I can't remember which. The comment was about how bad they sounded. Does this mean that caps, with various measurable differences, not just the ufd / tolerance measures don't sound different or have an effect? Or that you don't think they do? What does a commercial builder do to earn his money, if not voice his gear for desired sound? Part of that starts on a clean sheet of paper, of course, but ends in a listening room, being able to change stuff until the desired result is achieved. The 'stuff' changed can be anything from gross changes to more subtle, like maybe adding a bypass cap to the tweeter. A confuser will without doubt yield a good, or even very good starting point. We have not yet, however, gotten to the point where everything is known and you can just put together whatever HAL tells you to put together. A.I., no, expert, yes. Of course, every seller/manuf. of stereo gear/parts and accessories has a warranty and a reputation to protect. Read what I said. I never once diss'd Madisound. There reputation is good as far as I know. It is when you go off the reservation that problems CAN occur. Bad results from good parts. Audiophile Myth? Is that a joke? This is the most technical and at the same time religious hobby on the planet. People put there equipment on racks to either couple or isolate gear. 'I had to stop my transistors from vibrating'. Nobody has yet been able to explain how a fuse in an AC circuit can be 'polar' and prefer one direction of insertion over another. voodoo? At least the capacitor guys have some working theories. Start an entire DIY heading. Let those so inclined contribute and compare notes. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13963 Registered: May-04 | . "I only asked about warranty." OK, what does warranty have to do with Maris being a "troll, troll, troll"? You guys are having a difficult time deciding just what it is about Maris that you so disliked. You deny any of you have ever done anything similar to his purchase and you are throwing everything you can against the wall to see what sticks. Everything except an argument with some factual or in some cases even reasonable idea that is. If your question had been an innocent one regarding warranty, Nuck, I wouldn't mind. However, it came after this, "Again, pedestrian or widely available drivers are fine to use, and are used regularly. However, I would be remiss if I fail to point out that speaker manufacturers of repute do in house testing and verification/matching of drivers (let alone crossover componants) and usually test the system against some known standard. If Maris gets a half crapped out tweeter, is the design to blame? The room? The scanspeak? Will he, or we, ever know? There is more to putting a hard earned name and reputation on a wooden box than guts, it takes brains, too... " And that is a real stretch if your only issue is DIY warranty. No designer who wishes to establish his or her name in the DIY community will present a design that has not been tested, you should know that. Most have gone through several revisions and they have been discussed and debated on the DIY forums. The better and more prolific designers and modifiers - like Kegger, remember Kegger from this forum? and Tim - have a reputation and their designs are discussed and debated throughout the design process. Just because most of the members here don't go over to the DIY forums and wouldn't know what was being disussed on the DIY forums is no reason to assume these designs (backed by companies such as Madisound in this case) are done by hacks and nothing is verified before the kits are offered for sale or in many cases open use. There are lectures and presentations being done by and for the DIY community at any small audio show around the world. At the Lone Star show the past two years probably half the attendees were at the lectures on speaker design. Most of the rooms were filled with DIY speaker builders. Because speakers are much easier to design nowdays using all the inexpensive tools, internet communities and computer software/freeware available, DIY is a big market and there are some very good designers who operate stricty in the DIY market. To suggest these people who dedicate their time to this portion of the audio hobby have any less commitment to the betterment of audio than any of you guys is insulting. What "known standard" would you have designers work with, Nuck? Another speaker? Live music? Symphonic music? Vintage rock? Or should the designer take meaurements to check for bass alignment? Lobing of the crossover? Check to see if the Qs is correct? The Fs? Check for any resonances? Just what is it you want a designer to use as a standard? And why would you think a serious DIY designer wouldn't use those same standards? Check the same figures and listen to the same music? Don't you think any serious speaker designer has their own set of standards and measuring tools to work with? Go to the DIY forums and read about what some of these guys use and buy for their designs. DIY is not always some 14 year old hacking together a dual 15" cabinet for the back of his Neon. There are sophisticated programs and tools that are sold to the DIY market. http://www.parts-express.com/wizards/searchResults.cfm?srchExt=CAT&srchCat=360 http://www.parts-express.com/wizards/searchResults.cfm?srchExt=CAT&srchCat=428&C FID=2630025&CFTOKEN=69541118 http://www.creativesound.ca/index.html http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6 http://www.quarter-wave.com/ C'mon, Nuck, this is serious stuff that people like Tim and Kegger do as their part of this hobby and they devote just as much to what they do as anybody who goes to a store or buys off the interent and just unboxes components does for their system. To think there are no "brains" behind DIY is very insulting. What takes more brains, to unbox a Rega speaker or to design something from the ground up? And what does that have to do with Maris? . |
|
Gold Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 1415 Registered: Apr-05 | Jan how do you know equate Maris with Tim? Do you know of his expertise personally? I don't know about much about DIY speakers at all, but you asked "OK, what does warranty have to do with Maris being a "troll, troll, troll"?" I'm not sure it does either, but as I read through his writing which starts out with "People, get real and stop paying for the name ))", that the high(er) prices of speakers are due to nothing else except overcharging and a "load of crap", that he will (not has, but will) put together a speaker system that will "blow the doors" off of anything in the market, it just does not give me a load of confidence into anything he says. I don't accuse people of being a troll, I let their comments slide, but the premise of your long postings here is that people are being challenged and they don't like it. You are judging everyone's behavior en-masse as: "clique-ish little group of very opinionated middle aged guys discussing what speakers they've heard or not heard and the relative merits of each. Maris came along and knocked over your sand castle. Boofuckin'hoo!" is not exactly fair assessment either. Did you not just get through calling out Steve Bruzonsky because you didn't like how he posted his opinions questioning higher end equipment? I can read that discussion and think the exact same thoughts as you have expressed above about Maris and everybody else's reaction "Sound better how?" How much of a PITA are you going to be? Better yet, why don't you tell me what is important to you in reproduced sound and I'll try to tell you whether a "high end" product would "sound better"? That should be sufficiently vague to satisfy this game's ground rules. How is there a difference between the two? I don't agree with calling names and dismissing anyone or their opinion because there is collective understanding here from a bunch of long timers, but I can't agree with your method of challenging this group based on this particular instance. In the immortal words of Michael Corleone "You and I Senator are part of the same Hypocrisy" |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13964 Registered: May-04 | . "You didn't use the word controversial, but in answering at some length assumed the mantle of controversy." How? How did I assume the mantle of controversy? Tell me. "The subject is DIY, not assembling a kit." Well, then, I have to ask why the subject is DIY and it is not about assembling a kit. Maris was assembling a kit. That's what got all of you started. Maris had less than 24 screws to put into a cabinet and he had a finished product. So why introduce all this BS about stupid, uneducated "designers" who come up with unpredictable results when changing parts in a known crossover? You're really reaching for this, Leo. And that's what happens with most of these subjective/objective arguments. The first thing that some fool hauls out is the $15k speaker cable as an example of how ridiculous audiophools are. And that's where you've dragged this discussion. We've gone from Maris buying a kit that uses excellent parts and delivers excellent measurements supplied by a reputable dealer with a reputation for service that exceeds most consumer audio retailers and only requires the buyer to solder or twist a half dozen connections and screw in 20 wood screws to you now wanting to debate the most extreme made up examples of how to "F" up a bunch of parts. "If you get a complete kit, you will get about 99% of the design intent sound. Unless you really screw it up. I don't consider assembly of a kit to be very DIY, on the edge but not really saving much money, either." Why only 99%? What accounts for the loss of the 1%? Please tell me as this is IMO a totally unsubstantiated conclusion that ranks right up there with the $15k cables. Why would you not get 100% of the design intent? How ham fisted and palsied do you suppose someone would have to be to screw up the kit Maris is buying? Maris' kit is not ground up DIY, no one ever said it was. The point was here is mentioning a good value that you guys have not only totally ignored but when it is mentioned you run the guy off for suggesting it. That is the point! "If you (or Maris, for that matter) think you will get 1000$ speakers for 500$, and just have to screw them together, IMO, you're sadly mistook." No one said we could save $500 by buying this kit. This is exactly what you guys did to Maris, you misquoted and exagerated what was posted and didn't give a fig if what you argued was correct or not. But you don't think you can save much money doing the sort of kit that Maris is buying, eh? "Even here in the US, the land of expensive labor, how much do you think it would cost to assemble a 3 or 4 driver small tower? Could it take a pro with all the tools and proper setup more than 90 minutes per pair? I'll be generous and call it 50$ @ 30$/hr. Maris if he gets the complete kit, every fastener, wire, assembled enclosures, stuffing and crossovers will be OK. Nothing here is left to the imagination. But he won't get the massive savings he envisions though. Even if he assigns no value to his time and does it strictly for therapy, which ain't a bad idea!" This is another one of those exagerated arguments that always occur when the idiot sees the review of the $75k amplifier, the $150k speaker, etc, and posts, "There can't be more than $1500 worth of parts in that thing. I could build that in my garage for $2k and have the rest as savings. This is a rip off!!!" You think it all comes down to parts and cheap labor, whatever you can buy the parts for should be what it sells for. Tell you what, here's Michael Elloitt, the founder of Counterpoint discussing costs and figures in audio; http://www.altavistaaudio.com/why_upgrade.html Since I know most of you won't take the time to read a linked article, here's one of his points; "Do the math. Let's say you pop over to your local high-end audio dealer's salon and after careful consideration, drop $4,000 on a new preamp. As someone who is familiar with the pricing structure of high-end audio equipment (as you will be after you finish reading this exercise) you start to do the math while you're driving home. First, half of your $4,000 went to the dealer. The manufacturer gets the other half, or $2,000. In reality, very little of the money given to the retailer is spent on the the parts that actually handle the signal. The most costly items are the retailer and manufacturer's overhead including advertising and high-end audio shows. Of that, roughly 2/3rds goes to costs not associated with the actual product's materials (the rule of thumb is to wholesale the product for three times the parts cost). That means that your $4,000 preamp has $660 worth of parts in it. Of those parts, more than half the money is spent on non-electronic parts, like the pretty new chassis, the product's shipping carton, the owner's manual, the knobs, the feet, the front panel, transformers, good-quality connectors, an AC cord and the circuit board. What's left is less than $340 for the parts that actually handle the signal -- the parts that make the music. Now, open the top cover and count all the parts. How many $100 capacitors and $7.00 resistors do you think are in there? Now, if you're the sort of person that just loves having shiny new gear, and is concerned about resale value over good value for money, then this sort of math isn't important -- you're valuing things differently and that's perfectly fine. But if you're trying to get as much music for as little money as possible, getting an existing product upgraded makes a lot of sense. Or in this case buying a kit makes a lot of sense. No additional manufacturer who has to pay the overhead of additional employees, no health insurance and no liability insurance, no workers' comp. No rent and no utilities to pay. There is no distribution network for the kit other than the internet and we know what the internet is good for when it comes to pricing. This may or may not be the designer's full time job so the need to make full profit is sometimes lower than a manufacturer who competes in the larger world of high end audio and has to pay those additinal expenses; http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue20/alegrialing.htm "There's nothing particularly remarkable about the Lings. Tim Forman applied a proven formula--high-quality drivers, solid cabinets, and a simple crossover. The magic results more from his blood and sweat than the parts themselves. These speakers weren't designed by committee, and they're better for it. In a marketplace full of hi-fi bargains, the Alegria Audio Lings emerge as one of the most intriguing I've run across. They're smooth, refined, and involving in a way that belies their price. With some added polish, I'd expect to pay three times that ... Get to the nearest phone and order a pair of these right away, before Timothy Forman either raises his prices or gets sick of working for peanuts." There are no dealers to whoo with freebies and reps to hand out dinners and presents to the sales staff and that means there are no travel cost for the company bigwigs and the reps to go from city to city and show to show. There isn't even travel cost for the little guy starting up his company who has to go from town to town hitting every likely dealer in the area trying to get his foot in the door. There is no factory and there need not be any warehouse other than in this case Madisound's. No one expects you to have a line of products, one is sufficient. There need not be next year's line to concern yourself with, you work at your leisure and on your own schedule. Returns are dealt with without a middle man just as are sales. You don't have to figure in the cost of toilet paper and light bulbs or go broke. "You used the term "rip-off," yet you have not supplied anything to support that word, other than your pre-existing dissatisfaction with a Musical Fidelity product you once owned. You have also demonstrated your lack of knowledge regarding costing of an audio product. I have first-hand experience of this when I started the Hi-Fi News Accessories Club in the early 1980s. We wanted to manufacture products for which there was not a commercially available equivalent and sell them by mail-order and at Shows. Out target was to keep price below 50 pounds sterling, which was then around equivalent to around $120, ie, around $500 today in inflation-affected dollars. Our first product, for which I did the pcb design and specified parts, was a simple unity-gain, single-input preamp, based on a single board and op-amps. Designed by my then deputy Ivor Humphreys, its output polarity could be inverted with a wired remote. In order of cost, the most expensive parts were 1) the enclosure, 2) the shipping carton, and 3, the AC transformer. We managed to bring the preamp to market for the intended price, but unfortunately had neglected to include in the pricing a significant cost that I had overlooked: the 5% charged the magazine by the credit-card company. This wiped out ony profit we would have made. (And had we accepted Amex payments, that company charged 8%, which would have led to a loss on every sale.) And that is with all overhead covered by the magazine. So please, before you use a word like "rip-off," please do some research and base your comments on the actual costs, not just guesses. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile" Are you getting the picture here, Leo? Do you have any idea what I'm saying? Get rid of all the typical overhead associated with a typial high end loudspeaker company such as PSB and you do save money. You just haven't imagined how the costs are accounted for, and that has been a consistent problem with your posts. Many of the dedicated DIY designers can modify drivers to get what they want out them just as PSB, Paradigm, Thiele or dozens of others have done over the years. A company the size of Madisound can have specific models built for them by SEAS, Usher or whoever. These are facts. I'm not making this up just for argument's sake. I am not misquoting anyone and I'm not reaching for something totally ridiculous to make the points I make. Something ridicuous? How about this? "But, if you do anything else, like come up with your own x-over, even a duplicate of the design listed, you will change the sound." How, Leo? Tell me how a duplicate of the design listed will change the sound. Stop feeding me BS and let's discuss this rationally. How can you change the sound by using identical parts with the identical layout? Don't expect me to just accept BS when you put it out there. "Constructing your own enclosure? Even various amounts of damping will change things, not to mention wood type, moisture content and type of glue if using plywood." Do I really have to show everyone just how ludicrous that is? You are truly reaching for anything you can think of, Leo. And what does any of this have to do with Maris? " You can't have it both ways. You are on record as not liking Radio Shack RCAs or bananas. I can't remember which. The comment was about how bad they sounded. Does this mean that caps, with various measurable differences, not just the ufd / tolerance measures don't sound different or have an effect? Or that you don't think they do?" You are not arguing this very well, Leo. Does all of this mean caps do not sound different? Actually, no, caps do not sound different. The circuit you use a cap in will possibly affect the final SQ. It also might not affect the SQ. But the cap itself has no sound. You need to understand that, it's quite important in this sort of a debate. Is there a reason to use better caps in some applications? Certainly, you wouldn't want an electrolytic cap in the high frequency portion of a loudspeaker filter. But would there be a difference between a polyester and a polypropolene cap in that filter? None that most objectivists would find to be measurable. So where does that leave you? Screaming that all you need are your ears? Screaming measurements don't matter because your ears tell you all you need to know? Screaming when you don't even understand how a cap might affect the final circuit and how that might - just might - affect the final product. Am I an objectivist? Not in a million years. But Maris would appear to be an objectivist. And Maris is who we are discussing here. The strangeness of this is I find myself defending an objectivist because you guys don't have a clue about anything other than, "My ears tell me everything I need to know." If there is one thing that you found grating in Maris' posts is that he stated, "Of course, speaker preferences are subjective, but speaker performance isn't ... With speakers ... it is clear cut as far as the objective goes." You haven't proven him wrong, Leo. And I dare say you can't. Because for the most part he's right. Have you even attempted to disprove this statement? "Practically everything that has to do with speaker performance can be objectively measured and determined and test results like that are available. If that is not enough then when you have speakers that cost tens of thousands of dollars utilizing the Scan Speak Revelator drivers then you can be sure that there is something pretty good about Scan Speak products." No, because you can't. Even if you really knew what you were talking about technically, Leo, you could not disprove that statement. How about this one? "You don't need to listen to Scan Speak Revelator series drivers (used in the RBR kit) to know that they are some of the very best midrange drivers available in the world right now. A little bit of Google research will confirm that." The response was as if no one here had ever heard of Google. No one took the time to actually do a Google search of the Revelator series drivers. It would seem no one here is familiar enough with the actual components used in the products you discuss as having this sound or that sound to know what the Revelator series is all about and what products in the high end do use the drivers. You are all too lazy to do some research and gain some knowledge but you sure like insulting someone who does. That is what this is all about. From Maris, "Sorry, but when people don't want to read and understand yet want to be critical of my suggestions then that's what it comes down to. Has anyone got a suggestion in regards to a speaker set under a $1000 that in distortion levels, accuracy, driver reliability and output range will beat the Madisound's SS RBR set? No. So David, you can keep thinking about who is barking and who is not, but the point has been made." Posted on Saturday, September 26, 2009 - 08:02 pm Back to you, Leo, "What does a commercial builder do to earn his money, if not voice his gear for desired sound? Part of that starts on a clean sheet of paper, of course, but ends in a listening room, being able to change stuff until the desired result is achieved. The 'stuff' changed can be anything from gross changes to more subtle, like maybe adding a bypass cap to the tweeter. A confuser will without doubt yield a good, or even very good starting point. We have not yet, however, gotten to the point where everything is known and you can just put together whatever HAL tells you to put together. A.I., no, expert, yes." Why is the "commercial builder" any different than someone working for Madisound? Is Madisound not a commercial enterprise? Would you expect Madisound to have different standards that, say, Jamo, when it comes voicing a product? You can't truly answer no to that, can you? Why would you add a bypass cap to a tweeter? And what does that have to do with Maris? And all I can say about your belief that computers cannot provide the information you need to design a good speaker is that what most commerical speaker designers have available to them is available to the DIY designer. You don't need to roll you own caps, most every speaker designer in the high end uses similar caps that are purchased off the shelf, no proprietary caps in most designs and certainly not in the under $1k range. You don't need an anechoic chamber. All you need is a consistent space that the computer knows about and can figure into the calculations. And a DIY'er doesn't need a committee to weigh in on what's right and wrong about the design and suggest a cheaper cap to save $0.10 on every speaker they intend to build. Madisound, like most DIY suppliers, has a list of alternative build sheets that can take the quality of the product up or down depending on the buyer's desires. Can you do that with a Rega? "I never once diss'd Madisound. There reputation is good as far as I know." I suppose this was not a suggestion that Madisound wasn't quite up to the standards of your favorite high end mass marketer? ""One of the main things you get from any reputable manufacturer is consistency, I hope. A speaker line will be targeted, perhaps, at the house sound. They will be a known quantity and have a reputation to protect and maybe improve." Don't play these games with me, Leo. "It is when you go off the reservation that problems CAN occur. Bad results from good parts." We're back to the stupid idiot how cannot manage 20 screws again, eh? Or are we off on that favorite of yours, the totally ground up design done by the stupid idiot who couldn't manage 20 wood screws let alone follow a computer program? Leo, you are not going to get any traction with me by making these absurd statements. The disussion is about Maris' kit and nothing else. So haul yourass back to the reservation and let's discuss just why he recieved the ignorant reception and insults when not one of you can make a cogent, informed argument about anything he actually said. That is my point, you don't know sh!t but you insult someone who has a bit of knowledge. You insist your ears are all you need and that is just plain dumb. Anyone who says something you don't like is labelled a "troll, troll, troll"! "Nobody has yet been able to explain how a fuse in an AC circuit can be 'polar' and prefer one direction of insertion over another. voodoo? At least the capacitor guys have some working theories." Actually, there is an explanation suggested for the polarity of fuses. No objectivist accepts it but the explanation is out there. That you guys don't know it is not the fault of anyone but yourself. Tell me, Leo, do you know what the theories are for the "sound" of capacitors? Would you know how to find that information? I do. I'm not bragging, as Will Sonnett used to say, "No brag, just fact." And that's the point I'm trying to make. When someone comes along and they have facts to back up what they say, you guys start howling at them and running them off the forum. But not one of you can provide any facts to back up your brag. DIY doesn't have enough backing on this forum for a heading. Projects have been mentioned but no one here is interested in them and they die. Everyone here is all about telling each other what they've heard and saying when they heard such and such it didn't sound like what so and so heard. There really isn't a large enough group to bother with DIY here. There are plenty of very good DIY forums that you can get on. If you want more than a DIY thread that will quickly die, you'll have to go to Brian and ask that he begin one. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13965 Registered: May-04 | . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQm_8vX3sYU&feature=player_embedded# In the immortal words of Peanut, "Phhhhhhhhhhhhhttttt!" Right over your head, Stof, right over your head. You got nothin'! "Jan how do you know equate Maris with Tim? Do you know of his expertise personally?" I did not equate Maris to Tim. What I did was to compare the quality of Tim's product - which several of us are familiar with - to the potential quality of the designer of the kit Maris was buying. The idea is that DIY is a very high quality business today and is practiced by more than a few very smart and very talented individuals. Writing of DIY for any reason and particularly for some stupid reason like "all I need is my ears" is very, very dumb. Now that it has been explained to you, I think if you go back and read what I actually said, you'll make the connection. As to Maris, is there anyone here who actually doubts the ability of the average schmoe to manage 20 wood screws? So what's your point with all that, Stof? "I'm not sure it does either, but as I read through his writing which starts out with "People, get real and stop paying for the name ))", that the high(er) prices of speakers are due to nothing else except overcharging and a "load of crap", that he will (not has, but will) put together a speaker system that will "blow the doors" off of anything in the market, it just does not give me a load of confidence into anything he says." You kind of got that all bolixed up so I'll try to make the best of it. Because Maris says a kit he will put together will blow the doors off anything in the market ... Let's just stop here and take a look at what Maris actually said, "Hold on a minute, you totally misunderstood me. I AM NO WRITING OFF THE SPEAKER. It's a great speaker, I'm sure. All I am saying is - YOU CAN GET A BETTER ONE FOR LESS MONEY OUT OF POCKET. Yes, they are darn good speakers, but dude, my Scan Speak RBR set will blow your Sierras out of the water by all means." OK, so now you've taken his trash talking of the one Sierra model and misquoted him into saying his kit "will 'blow the doors' off of anything in the market".  Is that it, Stof? I'm suppose to debate what you make up rather than what actually exists? Yeah, well, I don't think so. As to confidence, why not look at what Maris said in the rest of his posts? Why not debate this ... " ... the enclosure and x-over design is no rocket science, I study Applied Physics and Instrumentation. With proper design software and testing equipment (like good old Zaph) it's all doable in a relatively short period of time. The main engineering and design work is required in the actual driver development." Can you do that, Stof? Maris has the facts on his side here. Why doesn't that give you some confidence in what he says? Just because PITA Maris trash talks a bit you guys jump him. No one debates what he has to say with facts. Most of the time you guys can't even get his quotes copied correctly - even when he tells you you're not reading what he has actually posted. You tell him you don't need measurements because you got your ears. You call him a troll. You act like you've never heard of Google. I'll say it one more time, I'm not here to defend Maris. But when it comes down to who I have confidence in for factual information and information that isn't just pulled out of someone's backside or intentionally distorted or, worse, intentionally stupid, I'll take Maris over you guys any day. "I don't accuse people of being a troll, I let their comments slide, but the premise of your long postings here is that people are being challenged and they don't like it." Yeah, that's part of it but you forgot the part about not having any facts to back up what you accused Maris of saying and not actually quoting Maris correctly and a few other issues that I have with how Maris was treated in this thread. "You are judging everyone's behavior en-masse as: "clique-ish little group of very opinionated middle aged guys discussing what speakers they've heard or not heard and the relative merits of each. Maris came along and knocked over your sand castle. Boofuckin'hoo!" is not exactly fair assessment either." Why not? Tell me and don't just say it. Prove it. I happen to think it is more than fair. I don't say things I don't mean and I mean things I say. Prove me wrong, Stof, that's all you have to do. I can read the thread. Can you? "Did you not just get through calling out Steve Bruzonsky because you didn't like how he posted his opinions questioning higher end equipment? I can read that discussion and think the exact same thoughts as you have expressed above about Maris and everybody else's reaction" No, I said I had no interest in a p!ssing match that was based on looking at photographs. Before I was certain where the thread was headed I gave reasons for why the high end is worth value. I answered Steve-o's question not one but twice. But I'm not interested in what he wants to do. What he wants to do is in no way similar to what Maris posted. Maris provided information to support the quality of his kit. He never claimed everything sounds the same because the photographs look the same. If you didn't take the time to follow his links and read the information about the speakers and the designer, then who would be to blame for that? Read something, learn something, at least have the ability to understand what is being said. Know what is fact and what is BS. Realize just how little you know and how stupid you sound when you try to beat up someone like Maris. ""Sound better how?" How much of a PITA are you going to be?" No idea what that means? I assume you mean the word "better". That's usually what I want defined because it gets tossed around as if everyone should know what "better" means. And when it's used by people who can't get their facts straight, I seldom understand what it is meant to say. " Better yet, why don't you tell me what is important to you in reproduced sound and I'll try to tell you whether a "high end" product would "sound better"? That should be sufficiently vague to satisfy this game's ground rules. How is there a difference between the two?" You have driven this so far into the ditch I have no idea what you're getting at. What I consider to be my priorities has nothing to do with this thread. I'll remind you once again, what I have a problem with is the way Maris was treated when not one of you could respond to him with any sense of reality or factual debate. Is that clear enough for you? Those are the basic ground rules now. "I don't agree with calling names and dismissing anyone or their opinion because there is collective understanding here from a bunch of long timers, but I can't agree with your method of challenging this group based on this particular instance." Fine, then prove me wrong. Why does everyone have such a difficult f'ing time just doing that?! I don't care about your opinions. Prove me wrong with facts or shut the he!! up! "In the immortal words of Michael Corleone "You and I Senator are part of the same Hypocrisy" In the immortal words of Peanut, "Phhhhhhhhttt!!!!" Prove my hypocrisy or don't continue to just accuse me of things you suspect or prefer to think for your own comfort. Use facts to bring me down or leave me the he!! alone. Get smart or get out.  Even the Corleone family would agree to that. . |
|
Gold Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 1416 Registered: Apr-05 | "I don't agree with calling names and dismissing anyone or their opinion because there is collective understanding here from a bunch of long timers, but I can't agree with your method of challenging this group based on this particular instance." Fine, then prove me wrong. Why does everyone have such a difficult f'ing time just doing that?! I don't care about your opinions. Prove me wrong with facts or shut the he!! up! I don't have to prove you wrong. It's not the facts of DIY that I'm debating. I'm stating that your comments about how people treat Maris are hypocritical because you are doing it yourself not only to Steve Bruzonsky, but to everyone else on this post as well. If you want to argue that there is a decorum that needs to be followed in this forum, then lead by example instead of trashing everybody for trashing Maris. You can be left alone when you leave others alone. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13966 Registered: May-04 | . I left the Steve-o thread. I haven't had anything to do with that troll. Get your facts straight, it's not that difficult to muster. https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/home-audio/581691.html I am upset however at the treatment dished out to someone with actual facts that no one here has made an attempt to refute. Maris might actually have had something to say that would help educate someone here. But you guys decided it was better to run him off than to deal with his personality - it was better to run him off with insults rather than pay attention to the real facts he had to offer or open a real debate about those facts. "If you want to argue that there is a decorum that needs to be followed in this forum, then lead by example instead of trashing everybody for trashing Maris." Stof, if you don't see the absurdity of that sentence, then I can't hope to explain it to you. "You can be left alone when you leave others alone." Let's see, I'm responding to your post so, that makes leaving someone alone whose responsibility? Stof, I'm not angry with you and I see no reason for you to be angry with me. This is afterall nothing other than a f'ing audio forum. But look at how you responded, you are obviously PO'ed. Why? Because I had facts and you got everything wrong? You know how to fix that, Stof? Get the facts. Learn something. Know how to not spew BS. I seriously doubt even one of you will make use of that advice. I don't hold grudges and I would urge you to do the same. Unfortunately, there are a few individuals on this forum who cannot be considered adult enough to just move on and not come back to the forum with animosities intact. I know who those individuals are and my relationship with them goes back years. As long as they continue to be who they are and cannot get over the past, nothing will change between us. I am, as I have stated on numerous occasions, upset with how this forum responded to a relative new comer (Maris has 700+ posts somewhere on this forum) with some knowledge this group did not possess. This has become the norm for this forum, a small clique of middle aged guys who want to talk about what stuff sounds like but have no time for learning anything about this hobby. Whether you learn or not is not an issue with me until a situation such as Maris arises and this forum turns into an angry mob who cannot discuss facts because they do not recognize facts when those facts are laid in their lap. There exists on this forum a group who would rather think their ears are all that is required to understand audio. That no one even appeared to take the time to read any of the information provided by Maris is an indictment in its own right. That no one could even correctly quote Maris - not even you, Stof - is a poor recommendation for this forum. Believing all you need is ears is ridiculous and shows the lazy nature of too many on this forum. Running someone off who had information to offer is near immoral and shows the adolescent immatuurity of all who particpated. If I get just one of you p!ssed off enough to realize you need more than a set of ears, then I'll have served a purpose here. More than what you guys did with Maris that's for sure. . |
|
Gold Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 1417 Registered: Apr-05 | Quoting is not science Jan. They are as you say a part of an Audio Forum where people we don't know come out and write things. You may have the ability to say exactly what you mean and mean what you say, but I can't say that everybody else in this. To me Maris saying his RBR will "blow the Sierra's out of water" is nothing but trash talk seemingly from a young adult at best, but you can't "quote" that as saying he doesn't mean every other speaker. You don't know that from a trash talker. When David answers "I've never heard the Madisounds, so I can't comment.", he is delicately pointing to this young chap with some potentials to moderate his posts so that he can be listened to. Age, sometimes does come with wisdom. Just like this: "But you guys decided it was better to run him off than to deal with his personality - it was better to run him off with insults rather than pay attention to the real facts he had to offer or open a real debate about those facts." Your "you" = "Some people", I hope. I certainly did not insult him. Did you mean to say some people? I certainly don't think David did either, but your statement is all encompassing. I posted something to the original user without reading the rest of the post. I thought may be helpful and by that I got involved. Your statement could include me and David as well. You see what I mean. "This has become the norm for this forum, a small clique of middle aged guys who want to talk about what stuff sounds like but have no time for learning anything about this hobby." "There exists on this forum a group who would rather think their ears are all that is required to understand audio." I agree with you. There certainly is a lot fewer people contributing to this forum than there were 4 years ago when I joined. Is that caused by what you are mentioning above? It's certainly worth examining. I don't know Maris and I don't know Steve Bruzonsky, but the jest of what they are saying is not about DIY or rebadging. They are both speaking to the markups of various brands because of overhead, distribution channels and advertising etc. Granted Steve didn't have much else to add to that (where at least Maris has some positive pitch with DIY or kit) but did that merit googling this guy, connecting him to an AZ hit and run attorney and all those attacks? I would say people who disagree should just walk away as well. "If you want to argue that there is a decorum that needs to be followed in this forum, then lead by example instead of trashing everybody for trashing Maris." "Stof, if you don't see the absurdity of that sentence, then I can't hope to explain it to you." No, I really don't see any absurdity in that statement. I really do hope you do lead by example. You have been in this forum for quite a number of years and have been very helpful to myself and many other. You can set the example. |
|
Platinum Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 10752 Registered: Feb-05 | Keep trying Jan, I'm sure you'll get someone pissed. Just won't be me. You're far too pitiful for me to get pissed at. I feel sorry for you because you really are too ignorant to know how you are viewed by most, including your friends. If I'm viewed as someone who doesn't take audio gear seriously and is just playing around here on this forum that is A-OK with me. Compared to you that's a very good place to be. It's interesting how everyone is always wrong but you...probably not. Enjoy your thread Jan. |
|
Gold Member Username: DmitchellOttawa, Ontario Canada Post Number: 3100 Registered: Feb-07 | So what say Bugs? Learned anything from this thread? What speakers did you decide on? The Sierras? Cool man. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13968 Registered: May-04 | . "Quoting is not science Jan." Uh, how about quoting is clicking a mouse a few times? How about quoting is fair to everyone involved? How about I cannot respond to what you claim was said when in fact what was said is not what you posted? How about there is no discussion to be had let alone debate to foster when one of the participants is dishonest? Or intentionally stupid? How about Maris informed David that David had misquoted him? How about you cannot just make up this sh!t to suit yourself, Stof? Quoting is a science, and it is fair. If you doubt that, there will be no further discussion. I promise you that, Stof, if you continue to just make up sh!t, I just will not respond to illogical pablum. They are as you say a part of an Audio Forum where people we don't know come out and write things." Well, we have enough of that going on here - people who don't come out and write things. Indeed we do! We have an even bigger problem with people who don't write what they mean and an even larger problem with people who cannot read what was posted. But I see no problem anyone should have had responding to factual statements that Maris - or I - have made. There was a statement about 2nd order distortions. No one could have possibly misquoted the post if they had read it with any care. Leo's got himself stuck on improbable DIY sistuations when none of that has anything to do with what Maris was suggesting. Nuck has latched onto warranties and brains while most of the rest can't even decide what it was that Maris did to p!ss them off. It seems everyone has a reason for what got them upset but no one agrees what that reason was, they just know they didn't do what I say they did. "To me Maris saying his RBR will "blow the Sierra's out of water" is nothing but trash talk seemingly from a young adult at best, but you can't "quote" that as saying he doesn't mean every other speaker." Goddf'inglord, Stof! Of course I can! I did! I quoted exactly what Maris posted. How is that not quoting what he said for chrissake? Explain to me how a quote is not a quote. This is another one of your made up rules that allows anything to happen as long as it excuses who you want excused. It doesn't work like that, guy. What cannot happen is you cannot quote Maris saying what you want to believe he said. You cannot tell me what Maris was thinking. You cannot say he said something unless you can produce proof that he said it. Those are the basic rules of logic, Stof, we can't suspend them just so you can have your way. And you can't in this case. It can't be done because it doesn't exist so stop with this absurd notion that you get to make up whatever it takes to condemn someone and excuse another. Haven't you paid any attention to what I've said, Stof? Is the idea of a fact so foreign to you that you don't even recognize it at this point? Learn something, Stof, learn some kind of logic. You cannot just make this stuff up. I know Maris was a PITA trash talker but I know he also had some facts on his side. Now you can go 'round and 'round about his trash talk, if you think you need to respond to, "My speaker is better than your speaker", then you just go right ahead. But you have neglected to mention Maris' facts. I don't care about his trash talk because I don't care about Maris' opinions. So trash talk taken care of. Now tell me why no one responded with any intelligence regarding the facts Maris has on his side. My "you guys" in this matter is whoever needs to be made aware of their lack of knowledge or their ingracious response to Maris. Don't get illogical again by suggesting I am condemning everyone, I am talking to those who made an effort to discredit Maris by attacking him personally and those who responded by calling him a troll or telling him to take his Legos and go away. I am disappointed in those who could not open a debate with Maris on his facts. Don't try to make this more than it is, Stof. If you or anyone else did not participate, then you have nothing to do but learn from what I am saying. What I am saying is for everyone and to those who need it. Those who failed to be good representatives of this forum know who they are, whether they admit it or not is another matter. This issue with Steve and Maris still has you confused. Steve is a troll, there is no doubt about that. It has been proven he has posted the exact same thread on multiple forums and he has used more than one name to do so. That qualifies him as a troll plain and simple. I don't have a lot of patience for trolls of Steve-o's type. I identified him as a troll and I left the thread. You still haven't gone back to see how long I stayed, have you? Show me what makes Maris a troll. Prove something for once! Just this one time. Just prove you can. Show me his multiple posts of identical threads. Show me his various aliases and I will call him a troll also. Until and unless you can do that, do not make false accusations against either Maris or me and do not equate someone with facts to a troll with photos. "No, I really don't see any absurdity in that statement. I really do hope you do lead by example. You have been in this forum for quite a number of years and have been very helpful to myself and many other. You can set the example." Here's the example; Zen Koan 45. Right & Wrong When Bankei held his seclusion-weeks of meditation, pupils from many parts of Japan came to attend. During one of these gatherings a pupil was caught stealing. The matter was reported to Bankei with the request that the culprit be expelled. Bankei ignored the case. Later the pupil was caught in a similar act, and again bankei disregarded the matter. this angered the other pupils, who drew up a petition asking for the dismissal of the thief, stating that otherwise they would leave in a body. When bankei had read the petition he called everyone before him. "You are wise brothers," he told them. "You know what is right and what is not right. You may go somewhere else to study if you wish, but this poor brother does not even know right from wrong. Who will teach him if I do not?" You decide what is being taught. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13969 Registered: May-04 | . I expect nothing honorable from you, Art, and you never disappoint in that respect. 97. Teaching the Ultimate In early times in Japan, bamboo-and-paper lanterns were used with candles inside. A blind man, visiting a friend one night, was offered a lantern to carry home with him. "I do not need a lantern," he said. "Darkness or light is all the same to me." "I know you do not need a lantern to find your way," his friend replied, "but if you don't have one, someone else may run into you. So you must take it." The blind man started off with the lantern and before he had walked very far someone ran squarely into him. "Look out where you are going!" he exclaimed to the stranger. "Can't you see this lantern?" "Your candle has burned out, brother," replied the stranger. . |
|
Gold Member Username: My_rantzI come from ... Post Number: 2533 Registered: Nov-05 | And I always thought 'full' was an absolute. However it is interesting to note that some people who are full of themselves can actually get more full. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13970 Registered: May-04 | . I knew you couldn't be far behind. Ok, now that the kids are in bed ... |
|
Silver Member Username: NmytreePost Number: 289 Registered: Aug-04 | "I'll trust my ears" ...Thank you very much. That's right, Jan. I trust my ears. And Jan...Maris...whoever can kiss my azz. Once on Monday and twice on Friday. Gosh darnit' Nellie Sue, that Jan sure is learning me something new Dat' Jan learned me good, today. I'z learned that speaker designers use measurements and dem dang darn 'puter thingy-mah-jigs to make dem there speakers. Who would of thunk it? Guess what, Jan? I like coloration!! I know it ruins your cold, steely world of measurements. But ....I LIKE IT. Give Me Coloration or Give Me Death!! Guess what you obnoxious twit, 99.99999% of your ramblings are nothing new learned. Even Maris was more educational, than you ever are. Being an obnoxious, patronizing, condenscending, self-righteous, superiority complex-riddled jerk........is never a solid platform for "educating " anyone. 99.9999999999999% of your posts are always written in an obnoxious, demeaning, rude and belittling manner. No one listens or cares what you say, because of your approach and your attitude. And before you go about getting all full of yourself, I'm not mad. I'm just speaking my mind. I'm good friends with a guy here in NC who has been building his own speakers for 36 years. He knows more about the science of audio, then you dare pretend to know. And he doesn't need to treat people like you do. He doesn't need to talk to people ....like you do. He understands and respects the people who do not want to get into the measurement/science route. He has the education, the knowledge, the experience, the manners, the respect and humility to understand that it takes all kinds in this hobby. And that everyone has their own tastes. I will trust my ears!! Bite me! |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13971 Registered: May-04 | . "He has the education, the knowledge, the experience, the manners, the respect and humility to understand that it takes all kinds in this hobby. And that everyone has their own tastes." That's what we need more hypocrisy from another twit who couldn't debate Maris on facts. The truth hurts when you prefer to remain stupid and rude like this. I want to thank the three of you for proving me right about "you guys". LOL! . |
|
Silver Member Username: NmytreePost Number: 290 Registered: Aug-04 | Oh, you're so wrong. So very wrong. And I don't need you to admit or acknowledge it, to make it so. You're just another internet loudmouth, trying to boost your own ego. Who are you trying to convince, Jan? Us, or yourself? People like you are an embarrassment to the good people of science. |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 302 Registered: Dec-06 | I am of two minds. I've always sort of fancied myself an objectivist kind of person. I am usually inclined to believe that most things have a scientific explanation underpinning them. This is why, in the Evo2 thread, I believed the harshness in those speakers was caused by their Kevlar driver (as discussed in an article on speaker design that I found). Turns out I don't really think that now, but I do think that driver is a little harder sounding than a paper one. I can hear that in my Evo2's, and I can hear it in the Quad's that I had for a little while. Ultimately, break-in may alleviate this to a large degree but I don't think all the way. Nevertheless, this is also a positive. The rigidity of the driver gives it advantages in some aspects of sound that a paper driver would not have. I'd actually love to try a speaker kit like the one Maris is buying, but then again I've never used a solder before. So it's probably not a good idea. Maybe one day. Still, I think a solid case has been made for buying this kind of kit. Of course there's room for everyone to buy whatever they want. I guess it's only logical that a well designed kit will outperform a similarly priced finished speaker; though that gap surely narrows if one buys speakers on demo/clearance or used. There are some fantastic deals out there if one is patient enough. I've tried to understand how speakers, CDPs, and amps work. I've learned some but I think the learning curve is pretty steep. I know things in a very casual way. A lot of it goes over my head when explanations get detailed. Like, it makes sense to me, I sort of understand it, but I don't truly get it. Maybe it takes time, and maybe I need a real fundamental understanding of physics and electronics first to truly get it. Kind of hard to be an objectivist with these limitations. On the other hand, I think listening is the ultimate test. I understand those who say their ears are all they need. If a system isn't sounding right to you then nothing else really matters, does it? And if it does then what do you care? Understanding why things sound the way they do, however, probably makes getting there easier because you aren't relying as much on trial and error. Sometimes I get frustrating reading about this hobby. There are lots of little tweaks that people espouse, talk of synergy, try this and try that, don't match this with that; all with very little rhyme or reason provided as to why. And I can't help but think that a system is going to have a certain sound and that sound is dictated by basic things like quality of power, speaker drivers, enclosure design, etc. And sometimes this is lost among all the gimmicks espoused by audiophiles. Yes, you may be able to tweak the sound this way or that, but the vast majority of that sound is inherent in the speakers and amp that you've chosen, and you'll never tweak away every imperfection until you get rid of at least one of those components. Anyhow, I hope no one takes this the wrong way. Just being honest with how I feel sometimes. |
|
Platinum Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 10760 Registered: Feb-05 | Nothing wrong with what you said Dan. Have you considered trying some kind of small scale DIY project. There are a number of forums dedicated to either DIY or restoration of vintage audio. |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 305 Registered: Dec-06 | I haven't though of it until now, to be honest. It's not something I'm really itching to do right away. Perhaps it's something to try one day though. As for the tweaks that a lot of audiophiles are into trying, I don't mean to write them off entirely. I am interested in these things as well. I just wonder sometimes is all, do people get a little too carried away with this stuff. A forest for the trees kind of thing. |
|
Platinum Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 10762 Registered: Feb-05 | There are certainly times where folks are listening for the trumpet player licking his lips when they should be listening to the trumpet. A good number of tweaks I've tried over the years enhanced one part of the music at the expense of another...just have to be careful and keep your eyes on the prize...famous last words. |
|
Gold Member Username: Stu_pittIrvington, New York USA Post Number: 3497 Registered: May-05 | I agree with Art here. There are very few across the board tweaks IMO. And most of them are ridiculously over-priced crap. The main problem with this stuff and the hobby in general is too many people want to tell you what you hear. They either want to tell you you're imagining things, or they want to tell you you're deaf. Then there's the crowd that over thinks it. They need to know exactly why something works. I say as long as it works, who cares? I'll do a little homework on the fundamentals of why, but I won't get consumed with it in order to prove to myself that it actually works. Its not like I'm trying to design the next tweak. If you graphs, charts, and scientific theory to justify what you're hearing and/or buying, you've lost the whole intention of music IMO. Most people over think it way too much. Too many people listen way too critically. How many times have you sang out loud or really got into a groove while listening to your main system? I'd be willing to bet not nearly as many times as you have in your car. Why? You're not over thinking it in your car. |
|
Gold Member Username: ExerciseguyFort Hamilton, NY United States Post Number: 2940 Registered: Oct-04 | Speaker stands & placement are not tweaks, they're essential to a fair assessment. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13972 Registered: May-04 | . "You're just another internet loudmouth, trying to boost your own ego. Who are you trying to convince, Jan? Us, or yourself? People like you are an embarrassment to the good people of science." I feel like I've just been called a "s-o-c-i-a-l-i-t-e" by Glenn Beck! "Guess what, Jan? I like coloration!! I know it ruins your cold, steely world of measurements. But ....I LIKE IT." I never said I liked a cold, steely world and anyone who knows me knows I am about as far from an objectivist as you can get. But it makes it easier to insult someone if you don't have to think or respect them, doesn't it. You are speaking either from complete ignorance of the subject or with yet another knee jerk reaction to someone with facts. Because facts are what I have presented here. And I haven't seen you take on any facts. Just hyperbole and shouting and insults. That's so easy even a child could do it. Dispute the facts if that's what you're capable of doing but don't just insult the person who has the facts. That shout-first-think-never approach really does just display your total ignorance and inmmaturity, tree. That's what I have objected to in this thread. " You're just another internet loudmouth, trying to boost your own ego. Who are you trying to convince, Jan? Us, or yourself? People like you are an embarrassment to the good people of science." I'm smart enough to realize there is more than a bit that I have no idea how to find yet alone learn. But unless you can dispute that facts I have presented here, you have nothing to say. You are just another person shouting about how proud they are of their own ignorance. What I know is not really the issue here, just something someone who prefers to remain ignorant can shout at. I am always amazed when Andre comes to the forum and a 14 year old kid knows more than a couple dozen regular members put together. Andre wants to learn while most of you prefer to be dumb becuase you can just relay on your ears. And you aren't even smart enough to realize your ears are as dumb as the rest of you. You have once again either gravely mistaken what I have said now and over the years or you are just being a GB jerk for the sake of being a GB jerk. There's a lot of that going around. People like to insult other people now days. Defending your own ignorance and that of the group you associate with has become a favorite passtime of too many of late. So, tell me, tree, why are you so proud not only of your lack of knowledge but of wishing to remain utterly ignorant of how audio works? Why be proud of not knowing a damnthing? Tell me why you guys want to insult someone like Maris who presents facts rather than take on Maris and his facts. Try this without the insults, eh? I'm kind of betting you can't do that based on what I've seen from you so far. I've seen how your type goes about this on internet forums and I am just as disgusted with the shouters on one side as the other. Surprise me. You say you love taking on science types, well, I'm not a science type but I am still appalled at how Maris was treated when no one could give him an honest debate on his facts. We all agree Maris was a PITA, that's not the issue. He trash talked one speaker. He didn't deserve the BS dished out by you guys. And, "I rely on the best measureing devices - my ears", remains one of the stupidest defenses of those who wish to remain to stupid of all time. So, it's all yours, tree, tell me why you like being ignorant about audio and why insulting someone with facts is so much fun for you guys. Maris didn't insult any of you, he just trash talked a single speaker. So why not take him on with facts and not ignorance? Don't be a knee jerk reactionary and don't sling insults at me and let's see what you got. I'm betting not much once the insults are gone. I'm betting all I get are more insults because that's all you can maange. Prove me wrong with some facts we can debate. . |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassIRL Post Number: 744 Registered: May-06 | LOL, Jan Vigne seems like one of the very few guys here that can actually read and understand what they are reading  I am not trying to write off anybody's gear, I am not saying that it's crap. I am sure all of you got nice gear that sounds great. My point is very simple - I really don't think that there is any reasonable probability that you can beat the RBR kit's sound quality with anything that is commercially available for under $1000. Some of you seem to think that my Scan-Speaks will jump out of the box and start cooking breakfast for me instead of sounding great I got some quotes for the ported cabinets for my RBR, it's a bit more than I expected, but you got to pay for quality. The cabinets will come to about 400-500 USD. So the complete kit will be about $1000. Here is a pic of what the cabinets will look like: http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j146/s7horton/2-2.jpg All of those here that think that they are hearing something that can not be measured, I want you to tell me what it is you are hearing. Is it not a soundwave? Some of you might say, well, room this and room that, but how the hell do you know what your room will do to a speaker that you are listening to in some audio dealer's room? Of course there are variables, of course we all have different in-room response, however, to have a good start you must isolate a speakers performance as such and measure it, and that dear friends is objective, cause with any reputable measurements you'll have the methods listed as well. At the end of the day you must have a good sounding speaker as such to have a workable in-room response. And if you think that Clearwave Loudspeaker Design totally f*cked up and my Scans will sound like a pair of Bose junk (I own a Bose set, so I am allowed to bash it) then Madisound totally f*cked up too, cause they missed all that f*ck up by Clearvawe. And maybe Scan-Speak f*cked up on my particular drivers? Maybe my MDF will be from the wrong forest with the wrong trees? Well, then maybe I even have an invisible tooth fairy in my listening room that will mess up my sound quality. Yes, you do have to evaluate probabilities, however, you also have to use some reason when doing it Some of you are trying to get speakers that they "like", I am simply trying to get speakers that have as flat of a response as possible with as little distortion as possible. Speaker is a transducer so all that it has to achieve is convert an electrical signal into a mechanical motion that produces soundwaves and it has to do that as accurately as possible. Yes, you might "like" this sound or that sound, but who cares? You might also "like" a certain notch in the response that is not an accurate representation of the original signal. I received the kit today and I am already admiring the build quality of these fine drivers |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 504 Registered: Mar-04 | Maris did you get the recession buster reference kit? If so it looks nice, keep us informed as you go along. |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassIRL Post Number: 745 Registered: May-06 | Oh I totally forgot. Some of you actually might get a commercially available set that your ears "like" better then the RBR set, well, but on the other hand - some of you might also "like" a d*ck up their as* as well |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassIRL Post Number: 746 Registered: May-06 | Yes unbridled, I got the latest RBR kit from Madisound I will post the pics when I get it all built. I might have to wait a little for the cabinets cause they are a bit pricier than I expected  |
|
Silver Member Username: NmytreePost Number: 291 Registered: Aug-04 | I'll tell you one thing Stu, there's a lot of singing and boogie woogie at my house. while I definitely love to lay back, relax and just enjoy the music........and go into a nice dreamy...euphoric ...almost meditative state. We also dance around the house on a regular basis. My kids love to jump around and shake their booties And singing....oh there's a lot of singing. Not exactly good, quality ....accurate singing (from me); but there's a lot of singing Once I get my system setup and get all the placement/positioning right. It's all about just enjoying the music. I don't care to hear the drummer farrt during the bridge. I just love music. |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassIRL Post Number: 747 Registered: May-06 | See, for my other RBR kit with the Vifa drivers (the cheaper RBR kit) I had cabinets built by a local car audio shop for 60 EUR (plain MDF) and I veneered them myself. They don't look too bad, however, for this Scan Speak kit I want a very nice pair of cabinets to reflect the level of performance |
|
Silver Member Username: Unbridled_idChicagoUsa Post Number: 505 Registered: Mar-04 | "I don't care to hear the drummer farrt during the bridge. I just love music." Tell that to the drummer! You could very well be stealing their moment of glory... "I might have to wait a little for the cabinets cause they are a bit pricier than I expected:-(" Which cabinet are you getting? The tweeter has a dimple in it, I have never seen that before. |
|
Gold Member Username: ChitownPost Number: 1418 Registered: Apr-05 | "Try this without the insults, eh? I'm kind of betting you can't do that" Yep |
|
Silver Member Username: NmytreePost Number: 293 Registered: Aug-04 | " Try this without the insults, eh? I'm kind of betting you can't do that based on what I've seen from you so far "- Queen Genius Almighty Jan Are you kidding me? Do you ever read what you write on a regular basis? Post in, post out. That's some funny stuff coming from you. |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 3814 Registered: Sep-04 | And FYI, Jan is a female. Err...what?! Please correct me if I'm wrong but I've always been under the impression Jan is a man. Maris, Picasso is a great artist but I wouldn't have most of his work in my house - I don't like it. It doesn't mean he wasn't a great artist though. In a similar vein, there are (all too many) speakers which I would not like to have in my house since they don't engage me. They may be more accurate, but if they don't engage me, I'm not going to want to live with them, no matter how accurate they are. I would like to pick up on one thing though. I appreciate that using anechoic chambers helps by measuring a speaker's response. The problem with this kind of measurement is that it does not take into account dispersive radiation since the anechoic nature of the chamber ensures that the radiation is absorbed. Therefore you are measuring a very restricted aspect of the speaker's performance and - crucially in my view - you are ignoring its real world performance since all rooms have boundaries which impact directly on the speaker's performance. This is why in-room response is so important. All rooms are different but they are more similar to each other than they are to an anechoic chamber! So although the basic measurement principle that is so common is the easiest, it's also the least applicable. In fact, one could argue that the only reason for its use is that it's the easiest most consistently measurable approach to take. This is a bit like throwing the baby out with the bathwater, since now the only measure you're interested in as a designer is the only one which doesn't actually matter. Also note that in the past, speakers were designed with wide baffles and relatively narrow dispersion in mind. The idea was that the speakers would be toed in sharply so their axes crossed at or in front of the listener. With narrow dispersion and heavy toe-in, your speaker will act more closely to your anechoic results since 1st and 2nd reflections are much further out of phase in a typical room. However, nowadays most speakers are designed for very wide dispersion with almost no toe-in when used in-room. This means that a) listeners are listening off-axis to the speaker (which is something you haven't measured) and b) 1st and 2nd reflections are much closer in (destructive) phase than before. It's one reason why so many people are experiencing much better behaviour from their systems if they fire across a long room rather than down it nowadays. Finally, when it comes to off-the-shelf speakers, there is obviously the markup of all the middlemen between manufacturer and consumer, but the off-the-shelf items also benefit from much higher volume with the lowered prices that entails so although you may be able to achieve better value for money from a DIY speaker it's not that easy to work out the relative gain - and since you can't hear the speaker before buying, it's a very poor result if the speaker is not to your taste (accurate or not). Just some observations, not meant unkindly. Personally, I admire people who go the DIY route. It shows a certain dedication and ballsiness which I have always wished I had. Frank. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13973 Registered: May-04 | . tree, let's remind ourself between the two of us just who insulted whom first in this thread. I take your response to be you got nothing but proudful, willful shouter style ignorance on your side when you can't insult the person. . |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassIRL Post Number: 748 Registered: May-06 | Cabinets for the RBR SS will be hand-built to order. I'll check some local Irish builders, but there is a high chance that I will have to get them built in the U.S., I'll see how the quotes work out. Here are some pics of my current RBR (Vifa) kit and the SS RBR drivers that arrived today  The current RBR (Vifa) set, as you can see I don't even have proper speaker stands for them.  The tweet recess wasn't done to spec, I had to overlap it with veneer by about 1mm, the veneer was cut by hand, that's what you get for 60 EUR cabinets  My NAD 304, got it used on ebay, more than 10 years old I think, but it's a great amp.  RBR x-over vs A4   Scan Speak vs Vifa    SB Acoustics vs Vifa    |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassIRL Post Number: 749 Registered: May-06 | Frank, FYI, Zaph doesn't use an anechoic chamber when performing driver distortion measurements. BTW, accurate sound reproduction has nothing to do with art. And if you don't want a highly accurate music reproduction then it is your loss. I was under the impression that audiophiles wanted to achieve a reproduction that is as close as possible to the original recording. |
|
Platinum Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 10763 Registered: Feb-05 | Though I'm sure no one here meant any harm, there is an edge to the g ay/l esbian humor that I don't like and would ask that it please end. Again, I'm sure no one meant any harm and appreciate all of your cooperation. Hopefully s exuality will play no role in the ongoing discussion (loosely speaking). NMT, I just looked at your profile. Very impressive gear. Love to give your systems a listen. |
|
Platinum Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 10764 Registered: Feb-05 | Nice pics Maris. |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassIRL Post Number: 750 Registered: May-06 | Dear Frank, Get your tale straight. No off axis measurement for my RBR kit??? http://www.clearwaveloudspeaker.com/RBR/buildRBR.html The front baffle is only 7.5" wide. These speakers should not be toed in, but fired straight. Zaph also looks at off axis response and tells you if his designs need to be toed in or not. I don't think you realize how far the DIY has gone |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13974 Registered: May-04 | . "I am of two minds. I've always sort of fancied myself an objectivist kind of person. I am usually inclined to believe that most things have a scientific explanation underpinning them." Most things do have a scientific explanation, you just have to be careful whose science you believe. Bertrand Russel spent four years researching and writing a thesis which sought to establish a unified concept of mathematics which would prove infallible. He did this because until that time most mathematical theories (and there were several) could not be proven in every case. It took roughly ten years for Russell's theory to be sucessfully challenged and his concepts to be questioned. Science is not set in stone and its greatest benefit is its fluidity. The more we know, the more we realize how little we know. Lots of objectivists would love to argue that point. IMO the best you can hope for is not to be an objectivst or a subjectivist but to realize when one is succesful and the other is to be considered - . constant questioning. There is little black or white in many of the decisions we make in audio, that is why audio remains an art for many practitioners. Science, measurements and cold objectivity can get you that first 95%, the art is in the last 5%. Most of what we use as the groundrules for audio today were established over 70 years ago by people who relied on both their sliderules and their ears but mostly their curiousity. Even today's most modern digital media are the result of theories proposed and accepted in the 1930's long before they could be implemented in real working models. Dan, if you want to learn about audio and find it difficult to know where to begin, tell us about another area where you have knowledge. Consider how you went about learning the basics of what was needed to intelligently converse in that area. That's how you learn audio, not all at once but a bit at a time. Stay away from the shouters, the willfully ignorant on both sides. It's common today to rely on "what I know" or in audio "on my ears" and never have any more knowledge that a stump. It's also common for the science-is-all objectivist to not want to learn anything outside of their own pervue. The have stopped learning and accepting new information years ago. That is not how audio was built by the engineers at Bell Labs and RCA when audio was young. Stay away from anyone who isn't curious and stay curious yourself. As to the Kevlar woofer, don't believe what you read. Or, at least, don't believe everything you read because there is more than a drab of uninformed opinion in this hobby and most things can easily have more than one explanation - sometimes that explanation can be rather improbable. Learn enough to recognize BS when it is fed to you. It's possible the problem is not in the driver which is, as you say, stiffer and therefore more pistonic in its motion which is the ideal for any driver. Have you considered the problem might exist in the crossover? "I'd actually love to try a speaker kit like the one Maris is buying, but then again I've never used a solder before. So it's probably not a good idea." Kits can be assembled with push on/crimp on/twist on devices. Soldering is mostly skill which anyone can develop. A bad solder joint is worse than no solder joint so practice your skills before you use them on anything important. I can usually promise someone they will learn more from assembling their own components - even with push on speaker clips - than you will by opening a box and connecting speaker cables. In a kit such as Maris is buying you'll probably learn something about Qts and Fs and crossover points and other things that won't be all that useful in a normal converstaion but will give you the ability to be smarter about what audio you might want to own. "Maybe it takes time, and maybe I need a real fundamental understanding of physics and electronics first to truly get it." Not really, a good grounding in basic electronics will do you a lot of good. The problem most people face is learning what at what time. When you try to learn anything on your own you tend to be scattered and you flit from one shiny thing to the next. Having someone who has done this before will give your learning structure and you'll learn what to learn. Pick up a book on basic electronics and read through it. You don't need to know everything just have a good enough foundation to know how to find anything. You'll never know everything so know at least something about many things. Just to have a good discussion of cables you would have to have a grounding in metalurgy, filter theory, transmission line theory, dielectric and plastics manufacture, mathmetics and physics to start. And then it's quite possible you'll have missed the most important part of cables, the person doing the listening. Do not become dogmatic. "On the other hand, I think listening is the ultimate test. I understand those who say their ears are all they need." Some one who says their ears are all they need is being dogmatic. I know no one who I respect in this hobby who thinks their ears are all they need. It is the lazy person's way out of having any knowledge and the shouter's recluse. "Sometimes I get frustrating reading about this hobby. There are lots of little tweaks that people espouse, talk of synergy, try this and try that, don't match this with that; all with very little rhyme or reason provided as to why." If you want to know why, why don't you ask? There are people here who are willing to help and there are people here who are more interested in keeping everyone as dumb as they are. That's how life has become in the last few decades. Those willing to help will provide answers when they can. Learn enough to know when to think you might need another answer. Don't be afraid to ask. Read! read everything you think will move your education forward. The most important thing is the will to learn, take a cue from Andre. Most audio magazines don't provide an audio education any longer which is too bad. Of the few good ones that are out there I would suggest Stereophile as one of the best for a good mix of objective information mixed with subjective opinion. Even it has its limitations but is for the most part on honest arbitter between the two camps IMO. "And sometimes this is lost among all the gimmicks espoused by audiophiles. Yes, you may be able to tweak the sound this way or that, but the vast majority of that sound is inherent in the speakers and amp that you've chosen, and you'll never tweak away every imperfection until you get rid of at least one of those components." Yes and no. It's easy and therefore preferable because they don't have to think as much for most people to buy new gear without ever solving basic underlaying problems. When the issues still exist the problems still exist and all you've managed is a BandAid over the real concern. More often than not I will suggest someone get what they already own to the best performance they feel they can achive by way of set up and what many people call "tweaks" and then live with that for quite awhile before they decide new gear is the best answer. More often than not what I've seen is a system put together without any idea of synergy and no tweaking will solve the underlaying problem of pieces of equipment that just aren't suited for one another. Synergy is both basic electronic compatibility and essential sonic personality of the components. High end is about following a concept of what you hear at a live event. This is where "my ears are all I need" gets most people in trouble, they are too lazy to think this through to a logical conclusion. Your ear/brain must have a concept that is stable and though it might become more educated over time remains stable enough to not get you into trouble. Without a set of priorities IMO you will spend a great deal of money without ever achieving synergy with or without tweaks. . |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 306 Registered: Dec-06 | Speaker stands & placement are not tweaks, they're essential to a fair assessment. Chris, the only problem I have with the speaker stand suggestion (and keep in mind I am getting stands) is the assumption that if speakers aren't on a stand they must be on some flimsy piece of furniture that makes them sound horrible. That and the fact out of the five speakers I've tried, four sounded great. Only one sounds poor. Given that, I have to suspect the speaker, not what it's sitting on. I'm convinced that the sound I'm getting, 95% is down to the speaker. A good pair of stands will help I'm sure, ideally with a speaker that already sounds good. If it doesn't I really doubt stands are going to change the whole character of the speaker's sound, especially if they are already on a very heavy and stable piece of furniture. Just what I think, but I will still go to stands (after fixing my speaker problem). |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassIRL Post Number: 751 Registered: May-06 | Thanks Art |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassIRL Post Number: 752 Registered: May-06 | By the way, those 5.5" Scans will give me an F3 in the mid 30's (ported). There are not many 5.5 drivers out there that would give you that kind of range |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13975 Registered: May-04 | . "I just wonder sometimes is all, do people get a little too carried away with this stuff. A forest for the trees kind of thing." "There are very few across the board tweaks IMO. And most of them are ridiculously over-priced crap." If you prefer to think of any one particular "tweak" as crap, that's you're business. I would however urge you to remain open-minded about any device or treatment, even those you've tried and found unsuccessful in your specific system and particularly those you have not tried. Pricing sould have nothing to do with your consideration of the effectiveness of any alternative treatment, the question is whether it operates on the system or the listener as claimed or not. If something is overpriced for you, it might be underpriced for another. Pricing of these devidces is quite often relative to the level of system they are intended for. Will a $300 set of cable lifters be good value in a $1k system? Probably not. Will those cable lifters even be able to work through the obscurities imposed by a $1k system or a $10k system? Still, probably not. If your system doesn't have sufficient transparency to let the benefits of a device work through the system, then the device isn't worth your money. That doesn't mean it is a worthless, overpriced piece of crap. Will freezing a CD improve it's sound quality you preceive? Probably, even on very modest players. Will you perceive the improvement if the alterations are not within your set of priorities? No, not on any system. http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/822/ If a dozen or more well respected audio journalists report improvements when a particular device is in place - or out of place in some cases -, should this not suggest there is something to be investigated no matter the price? . |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassIRL Post Number: 753 Registered: May-06 | Yep Jan, The blind ABX tests tell it all. That's why all the "golden ear" owners always magically disappear from audio expo's when the blind tests start taking place |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13976 Registered: May-04 | . First, Maris, cut the crap! It's very difficult to even want to be associated with a PITA who is intentionally a PITA. I'll defend what I find factual in your posts and I'll tweak the noses of thsoe who dismiss facts but I am not in the mood for your crap. No more of the "up your *ss" sh!t, got it? No more trash talk. If you wish to discuss facts, fine. If you wish to be a PITA, I'll leave you to the guys and go do something more productive. You can play your games and talk your trash and I don't care. I'm here to discuss audio and nothing more. "BTW, accurate sound reproduction has nothing to do with art." Of course, accurate sound reproduction has everything to do with art, if it did not, we would all have the same component because we would have an agreed upon a baseline for "accurate" and we would know it when we see it on paper. We do not have this baseline any more than we have a baseline for what is "blue" no matter how your attitude wants to adopt the opinion we do. If you wish to argue accuracy, argue blue as if you were describing it to a blind person. Even in live music there is substantial disagreement about what is accurate based on what we as individuals hear and perceive and what we do not or cannot. Science says as much. We can agree when a speaker has low distortion or flat frequency response since those are static measurements but they are not measurements that ensure total accuracy, just low distortion and flat frequency response which most of us would agree are more desirable than high distortion and widely varying frequency response. There is, however, more to it than a few numbers taken without regard to the perception of the listener. Most of us who have been around audio for awhile can remember hearing a speaker with flat response that left us "flat" - not due to its frequency response but due to other factors the speaker system lacked. You may have gushed over its response curves while I may have longed for something more in the listening room. To each our own and do not insist you can tell me what I am seeking. Our understanding of what contributes to a "good" speaker has increased by unimaginable degrees in the last few years but the last bit of design is still in the art of design, the creativity of the designer and the ability to, as they say, think outside of the box. That's not to say what we measure isn't the basis for an excellent design but what we measure must be interpreted by the designer. The art is the intrepretation and then the ability to implement with a perceived goal in mind. Without both we have just another piece of componentry. With it we have the classics of audio, none of which I can think of have been brought to market without a designer's ear and a concept of what is musical melded to what is accurate. "And if you don't want a highly accurate music reproduction then it is your loss. I was under the impression that audiophiles wanted to achieve a reproduction that is as close as possible to the original recording." This is the classic put down used by the objectivist who prefers numbers over music. Please don't go down this rabbit hole. First of all, "your impression" of what audiophiles want is apparently derived from what you have conjured up in your skull as a good put down line when you run into someone who disputes your flat statements of "what audiophiles want". I would posit from my years of experience with audiophiles of all stripes that thinking, reasoning audiophiles want music that does not draw attention to the mechanics of the reproduction chain. You claim audiophiles want "accuracy" while I know most audiophiles I respect want transparency. Flat frequency response and low distortion are not guarantees of transparency. So, let's not play this what-audiophiles-want game, eh? Particularly if you are not a person who wants to get closer to the music but rather closer to specific measurements. If those measurements assure you of accuracy, that is your business and you have the ability to pursue what you prefer. But don't play the argument from authority game here when it is nothing more than a logical fallacy you are employing in an attempt to win some challenge you suppose we should all want to engage in. "We" don't and you will find resistance to your continued insistence you know better than I do what I should want. . |
|
Gold Member Username: ExerciseguyFort Hamilton, NY United States Post Number: 2941 Registered: Oct-04 | Dan, you keep describing the EVO2 as "harsh", which for the life of me I can't figure out? "Harsh" is just too harsh IMHO a description of any Wharfedale speaker I've ever heard; it reminds me of when Monitor Audio is described as "bright", another inexplicable description that seems to have stuck over the years. But you certainly are entitled to your opinion, and I'm sure you'll eventually settle on something that's right for you. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13977 Registered: May-04 | . I also will not go down the DBT/ABX hole. Take it elsewhere. And don't think I agree with you on much. I'm not interested in an unending back and forth which is what you seem headed towards. You can quickly become the troll everyone claimed you wanted to be. I am not going to deal with trolls. You can respect everyone on this forum or not, I don't care but I won't be here if you persist. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13978 Registered: May-04 | . "FYI, Zaph doesn't use an anechoic chamber when performing driver distortion measurements." Why would they when distortion measurements can be taken in the near field? . |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 307 Registered: Dec-06 | Dan, you keep describing the EVO2 as "harsh", which for the life of me I can't figure out? "Harsh" is just too harsh IMHO a description of any Wharfedale speaker I've ever heard; it reminds me of when Monitor Audio is described as "bright", another inexplicable description that seems to have stuck over the years. Well, this is why I think there may be a problem with my pair. That and the fact that when I knock on top of one of them I can hear some thing inside the speaker. It's like a metallic echo sound. I tend to think Wharfedale speakers do not usually sound like the pair I have. As I said, I'll be calling IAG to resolve the issue. If I still don't like the sound after that I'll be going back to my Tannoys, which I do like. |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassIRL Post Number: 754 Registered: May-06 | Yes Jan, the near field was my point. |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassIRL Post Number: 755 Registered: May-06 | Of course, accurate sound reproduction has everything to do with art, if it did not, we would all have the same component because we would have an agreed upon a baseline for "accurate" and we would know it when we see it on paper. We do not have this baseline any more than we have a baseline for what is "blue" no matter how your attitude wants to adopt the opinion we do. If you wish to argue accuracy, argue blue as if you were describing it to a blind person. Sorry Jan, but that's a load of crap. There is a baseline - a perfect transducer will covert the electrical energy (AC signal) into a soundwave that is an exact representation of that electrical energy only in different terms. The baseline is very clear, the only problem is - currently there is no perfect transducer available. However, any transducer's performance weaknesses can be detected, determined and analyzed with instruments. Can you understand, that any soundwave can be detected? If you are hearing something harsh, not harsh, transparent, not transparent, airy or not airy, it all can be detected and measured. A perfect speaker doesn't give anything and doesn't take anything it simply converts. How much clearer can it be? Yes of course, the reproduction will also depend on the environment, but the whole point is - you need a highly accurate speaker first and only then you work around the environment, not the other way around. There is no darker blue or lighter blue when it comes to the definition of a perfect transducer. |
|
Gold Member Username: ExerciseguyFort Hamilton, NY United States Post Number: 2942 Registered: Oct-04 | Dan, that speaker would have gone back the same day if it were me, have you contacted STO? A rattling speaker is a defective speaker and should be replaced or fixed ASAP, to go on about harshness and kevlar vs. paper, etc. makes absolutly no sense to me. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13979 Registered: May-04 | . "Sorry Jan, but that's a load of crap." Only to someone who has made up their mind and doesn't care to be challenged. " ... any transducer's performance weaknesses can be detected, determined and analyzed with instruments." True, but the interpretation of the instruments' feedback is still a human art with some being much better at it than others; some looking for a specific this/that and others trading away what they consider non-essentials for more perfect essentials. The perfect driver is still, to my knowledge, considered to be a pistonic sphere of infinitely tiny dimensions which can reproduce all frequencies from just above 0Hz to a minimum of five times above 20kHz with absolute fidelity to dynamic range out to 120dB+. Is there anything in the current catalogs that even approaches that ideal? If not, we must deal with trade offs. Just as some radiologists are better than others at reading films some designers are better at interpreting the results of a machine's output. A machine lacks the intuition of a human, a human makes decisions and those decisions influence the final product. And those decisons make a SAES design sound not like an USHER design. Which you choose as closer to your ideal driver is based upon subjective opinion which can be influenced by objective data but it is still a subjective opinion of which trade offs suit your tastes and which do not. "Can you understand, that any soundwave can be detected?" Don't patronize me, Maris. "If you are hearing something harsh, not harsh, transparent, not transparent, airy or not airy, it all can be detected and measured." No one is disputing that most all speaker measurements can be tied to a corresponding sound quality. A few here aren't going to know that or admit that, but no one can honestly dispute that. You've said nothing with that mumbo-jumbo. "A perfect speaker doesn't give anything and doesn't take anything it simply converts. How much clearer can it be?" Again, don't patronize. The answer to your question is what you provided ... " The baseline is very clear, the only problem is - currently there is no perfect transducer available." Agreed! And that is the stopping block to accuracy and transparency wedding one another. Everything I can think of in audio is a trade off and we cannot defeat the general laws of physics. If we desire one quality, we will more often than not be forced to give up one or two others that would be required in the perfect driver, amplifier, cable, etc. What I consider important is unlikely to be what others consider important and so we must rely on our preferences and find those designers who think as much like ourself as posible. We stiil choose which trade offs are acceptable to our perceptions. Want wide dispersion, you give up power handling and broadband frequency response. Want phase accuracy, you give up power handling and possibly timbral accuracy. Want power handling, then you'll probably give up timbral accuracy, phase accuracy, flat frequency response and detail retrieval to name a few. And so on and so on and so on. At this point in time it is still the convicing that counts and that is just as much a personal reaction as a favorite color. Are we getting better at using measurements and technology to minimze tradeoffs? Certainly, but we do not have a perfect anything yet unless you count Michaelangelo's David and it was created 500 years ago. Can you look through a catalog and choose the trade offs that are more important to your priorities? Yes, but that doesn't mean I accept the same trade offs and should not be expected to. When the day comes that we all can agree the perfect speaker system - not just the perfect driver - has been achieved, then we can all listen and decide whether we like perfect. Some will and some will not - but that's another discussion. "There is no darker blue or lighter blue when it comes to the definition of a perfect transducer." No more than there is any deviation from primary blue in color mixing. That however is just a measurement and not a reaction to the color. Describing how colors are mixed to a blind person it would be impossible to convey the intricacies of arriving at the "perfect" color. No? . |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 308 Registered: Dec-06 | Chris, the speaker already went back and STO put in a new woofer. The sound is a lot quieter now, and you have to knock in a more specific spot (whereas before it was over a large area of the top of the speaker). But it's still there is the bottom line. I'd rather deal with IAG directly this time, which is why I'm opting to go that route. |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassIRL Post Number: 756 Registered: May-06 | "Agreed! And that is the stopping block to accuracy and transparency wedding one another. Everything I can think of in audio is a trade off and we cannot defeat the general laws of physics. If we desire one quality, we will more often than not be forced to give up one or two others that would be required in the perfect driver, amplifier, cable, etc." But of course. However, if you have some highly limited person here telling me that some whatever Sierra speaker with a Seas Prestige line tweeter and an Adire Audio woofer will questionably sound better (more accurate by any means) than a pair of drivers that are in a class above that (by any means and any sound worthy criteria)? Then what in holy jesus' name you want me to say??? When that "smart guy" is trying to say that I first have to try out a Wolksvagen Golf before I say that a BMW M3 is faster than the Golf. WTF? We got 2 sets of drivers that are in 2 different classes. Of course, the Golf is not a bad car, but can you see the huge difference? It's like comparing a finger with a d*ck |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassIRL Post Number: 757 Registered: May-06 | Can you understand that I would never try to argue on what is better - Scan-Speak Revelator or Seas Excel. That's because both are an extremely well engineered drivers. Both have trade-offs, however, it would be very hard to say which one is better by any semi-objective means. But when somebody is trying to tell me that a driver that does not even come close to the SS performance could actually be better, then tough, but I'll say it how it is. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13980 Registered: May-04 | . "I appreciate that using anechoic chambers helps by measuring a speaker's response. The problem with this kind of measurement is that it does not take into account dispersive radiation since the anechoic nature of the chamber ensures that the radiation is absorbed. Therefore you are measuring a very restricted aspect of the speaker's performance and - crucially in my view - you are ignoring its real world performance since all rooms have boundaries which impact directly on the speaker's performance. This is why in-room response is so important." Frank, I'm going to tell you that you are missing a few points here. First, anechoic measurements do take into account dispersive energy. Why would they not? What they lack is the variable of a constantly changing environment which provides the designer less information rather than more. Look at anechoic chambers as providing the designer/engineer the advantage of one more constant in any measurement or any formula for further changes. You could take the exact same measurements in free field but there would be more variables to contend with though they would be a different set of variables than in a semi-anechoic environment. The a.c. simply provides a consistent platform for measurements, nothing more. You can take any measurement in an a.c. that you could in a semi-anechoic environment - a controlled room. However, most are unnecessary once you have the measurement in the a.c. With today's measuring devices it is not even that neccesary to have the semi-anechoic environment and it is more often quoted by manufacturers for its better looking response figures to put on a spec sheet - an in room boost for those sensitivity specs, eh? As long as the room is a known, constant enviroment most of today's tools can eliminate most of the room from the results. The largest issues remain in the mid-bass and lower due to factors which are difficult to control due to the changing driver locations of one speaker after another. This becomes less of a factor further up since most high frequency drivers will be situated at what is considered average ear level for a seated listener. If you can measure the nearfield output of, say, a tweeter in the a.c., which you certainly can, it is nothing more than a mathematical formula to determine how that driver will respond in an "average" real room. The issue, of course, is the designer cannot guess what the real and live domestic room will be like in every situation and so a known, consistent environment is desired and ideal - the a.c. Finally, I know of no designer of first rate speakers who won't check their systems in a group of known rooms just to be certain. "So although the basic measurement principle that is so common is the easiest, it's also the least applicable." Assuming an a.c. measurement ignores the real room performance is misguided. "Also note that in the past, speakers were designed with wide baffles and relatively narrow dispersion in mind. The idea was that the speakers would be toed in sharply so their axes crossed at or in front of the listener." Not entirely true, Frank, I think for one thing you are only going back about three decades into speaker history. Wide baffles were a result of the introduction of multi-way speaker systems and a general lack of an understanding of how much the baffle affected the resulting sound. Not much of this mattered in the days of mono but once H.P. and Holt began discussing "soundstage" with stereo recordings, everyone else started paying attention. Cabinets of the early stereo speaker days were typically constructed with raised front edges which also was the result not of ignoring how high frequency energy dispersed but by making acceptable trade offs for the time. Most people didn't even consider toe in until much later in speaker development. If you had a corner loaded speaker, toe in was pre-determined. Otherwise, speaker palcement was more often than not a function of domestic bliss. What we now call wide dispersion tweeters came about with the introduction of the soft dome tweeter in the late 1960's. It's purpose was originally to broaden the sweet spot for mulitple listeners who sat off axis, nothing more. Remember, there were still plenty of horn loaded and cone drivers back then. "With narrow dispersion and heavy toe-in, your speaker will act more closely to your anechoic results since 1st and 2nd reflections are much further out of phase in a typical room." I suppose I could agree in broad terms with that but I wouldn't consider that a prime reason for toe in. And the issue with reflections is not phase but time, the longer the time between arrivals of direct and reflected sound, the more your ear separates the two sounds and one becomes "ambient" information most commonly implying a wider, deeper soundstage when applied to stereo reproduction. Distance travelled also reduces amplitude which provides a welcome reduction in what your brain must process. "However, nowadays most speakers are designed for very wide dispersion with almost no toe-in when used in-room." I guess that depends on the drivers selected. Most dome type tweeters will have their highest distortion components on axis. The trade off is typically a far more ragged and less accurate frequency response at the listening sweet spot. "This means that a) listeners are listening off-axis to the speaker (which is something you haven't measured) and b) 1st and 2nd reflections are much closer in (destructive) phase than before.' Anyone has the choice to use the amount of toe in they prefer. You are incorrect when you say off axis performance hasn't been measured. And, actually, if the first and second reflections are close enough in time arrival, your ear will link them together as one single sound. The trade off would be much higher energy levels than should they be further spaced apart. A smart designer can use a wide front baffle to create an apparent infinite baffle for the high frequency driver. This places the driver in an environment which has fewer response deviations that what is supported by the now common WAF narrow baffled enclosure. Infinite baffles both smooth and extend both the lower and upper frequency response of the driver, allowing lower crossover points and higher power handling overall - both desirable traits in a high frequency driver. The trade off is where do you put the lower frequency driver(s). Only one speaker I've yet seen has dealt with that issue in an truly unique fashion and that would be the now discontinued Spica Angelus which had a wide baffle for the tweeter (three times the width of its lowest frequency) and then narrowed to a bow-tie shape for the woofer which operated in close to a free field environment. Other solutions have been to use a low frequency driver as a near subwoofer in the lower portion of a tall cabinet and employ a mid/bass driver close to the tweeter. Not a bad solution over all if the crossover points are correctly aligned but it does make for an unconventional three way design with many of the same performance and cost issues of any other 3 way system. But, recognize that a narrow front baffle is not the best solution for over all response from a multi-way system and it has only gained acceptance due to the integration of more speakers into the living environment of most dometic situations. The Audio Note speakers still employ wide baffles and are most often meant for corner placement, they are to my ears one of the most transparent speakers on the market today. As far as phase is concerned, a first order crossover filter will do more damage to absolute phase arrival at the listening seat than will most driver/baffle placement issues. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13981 Registered: May-04 | . "Can you understand that I would never try to argue on what is better - Scan-Speak Revelator or Seas Excel." Christallmighty, Maris! You argued about the perfect driver and how you could select it! So, yeah, I think you'd argue one over the other. "But when somebody is trying to tell me that a driver that does not even come close to the SS performance could actually be better, then tough, but I'll say it how it is." Who are you arguing with, Maris? I thought the question was directed at me? Don't go trash talking anyone's speaker if the question is hypothetical. I take it you admit we all have subjective decisions to make and they will influence how close we come to possessing the "perfect" speaker system. Objectivity is trumped by subjectivity. That's all I have to say. . |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassIRL Post Number: 758 Registered: May-06 | Jan, Would please be so kind and get an RBR set, they are giving it away for less than a regular price of just 2 SS Revelator woofers, it's as good as it gets. And the SB Acoustics (SS engineers) tweeters are regarded (by Madisound) as some of the best tweeters for under a $100 (each). Then you can give these uniformed people a "true audiophile" review with "sparkly this" and "airy that". |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13982 Registered: May-04 | . Why would I want to do that, Maris? Tell you what, send me your set and I'll do a review.  But you might want to consider that I'm not a fan of multi-way speakers in the first place. All that timbral BS and phase shift, you know? Most of the stuff under a few $k turns me cold other than, yeah, if those are the trade offs you want ... And then add in that ported enclosure in a two way and it's not looking good for the RBR and me. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 13610 Registered: Dec-04 | Let me know how the kit turns out for SQ and quality of appearance, fit/finish. And how the grilles fit. |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassIRL Post Number: 759 Registered: May-06 | Jan, "All single driver crossoverless systems sound terrible. They exist because people fear crossovers." John Krutke (also known as Zaph) Nuck, I'll post the pics when the set is ready, it might be a few weeks since the lead time for the cabinet building alone is 2-3 weeks, I got to get some more quotes to get the best bang for the buck. There will be no grills, well, unless I order the cabinets from Lee Taylor & Co. (www.taylorspeakers.com) cause they can get the grills sorted if needed (for a bit of extra money). Most likely there will be no grills. This will be a true reference set so I just want to make sure I do it justice in terms of it's appearance so I'll have to shop around a bit. I'll post the pics for sure! |
|
Gold Member Username: ExerciseguyFort Hamilton, NY United States Post Number: 2945 Registered: Oct-04 | Some nice pics of a finished RBR kit here: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=152001 And here: http://techtalk.parts-express.com/showthread.php?p=1589067 |
|
Silver Member Username: MagfanUSA Post Number: 521 Registered: Oct-07 | Sheesh! I blinked and there were 50 additional posts. Can you spell h-o-t b-u-t-t-o-n ?? Good pics Maris. Doesn't look like a 'million', but certainly not cheesy, either. Good value, perhaps for <100$us. Your next project for more $$ should look and sound even better. Maris, if you can 'measure' everything needed, why would you need DBT? to confirm someone has poor hearing? Jan, I know you are not a big fan of panels, but don't they at least come close in some regards to single driver speakers? After all, the sound at least has a single plain of origin and no 'box' or TL or whatever enclosure the single driver guy is using. BTW, what ever happened to Rogers LS 3/5s?? Anachoic for system eval? Not for me. Anachoic ignores reflected, not dispersive sound. All rooms are reflective to one extent or another. I'd rather a designer optimize his design for a real room response, which opens up the can of worms of 'what is average room'????? My panels sound so much better sitting 3 feet in front of them it's not even funny. My room sucks and I don't have the money to experiment. (Full circle back to DIY!) One other point. In a MUCH earlier post, Jan said something about computer design and optimization. Well, a couple things about computer programs and programming. First, I have made several Excel spreadsheets using the known math of the TS equations. They spit out data and measurements / enclosure volumes. I than used PHI to come up with the ratio of lengths to satisfy that vol. This is all known / simple stuff and 'cookbook' in nature. So, #1, a program is only as good as the knowledge base. #2, A program can't tell you how something will sound. A program is able to determine MUCH more than just the TS parameters and measures, but that is when the ART (Jan has already stipulated the art point) begins. Than, it's all about choices. Computers and there programs are NOT intelligent. Expert, when so programmed, yes, but NOT intelligent. It takes intelligence and experience to separate out the good from bad designs that a computer can spit out. After all, if you reduce even a 2-way speaker to a set of equations, there are hundreds of solutions, if not more for any pair of drivers. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13985 Registered: May-04 | . "All single driver crossoverless systems sound terrible. They exist because people fear crossovers." John Krutke (also known as Zaph) Dogma is dogma no matter who spouts it. Just because you buy this guy's line doesn't mean he's right about everything. I am just not very interested in anyone who makes such sweeping statements. I can give you more than enough points against crossovers, multi-drivers. etc. and their effects as can anyone who dislikes SDFR's. What's that prove? That we all accept trade offs. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13986 Registered: May-04 | . "Sheesh! I blinked and there were 50 additional posts. Can you spell h-o-t b-u-t-t-o-n ??" I hope you skipped over that one section. Insults shouted from people who enjoy being stupid can rot your brain. "Anachoic for system eval? Not for me. Anachoic ignores reflected, not dispersive sound. All rooms are reflective to one extent or another." Read my comments to Frank. "Jan, I know you are not a big fan of panels, but don't they at least come close in some regards to single driver speakers? After all, the sound at least has a single plain of origin and no 'box' or TL or whatever enclosure the single driver guy is using." It's not than I'm not a fan of panels, Leo, one of my favorite speakers remains the Quad panels. I just don't have the room for them and I'm not going to buy the amplifiers they require. There are panels and there are panels IMO. I have no problem with most panels, the huge Dayton Wrights way back in the '70's still remain in my memory. On less friendly terms I remember the Apogees destroying amplifiers with their 0.5 Ohm load. I remember most Martin Logans sounding like they were a not too bad electrostat with a dynamic woofer box attached - which they are. Some of the Magnepans are terrific speakers - more so today than just a few years ago when tweeters didn't quite match mid/bass panels. They have always been seductive no matter what. Most panels are not easy loads for any amplifier. I haven't resolved my admiration of the Quads with what they do to an amplifier. My next move, if I were to make one, would probably be to try the MMG's. "BTW, what ever happened to Rogers LS 3/5s??" They are in my closet right now. I doubt I'll ever get rid of the 3/5a's until I need to get rid of all of my hifi (particularly now that they have a chunk out of their veneers due to an accident while out on loan). They are musical and their midrange is still among the best ever. However, I am somewhat enamored with dipoles and TL's and I saw no reason to clooge together another pair of 3/5a's to make a poor resemblance of a dipole. Afterall they are a nearly forty year old speaker design and the pair I own were manufactured around 1977. Despite their virtues speaker design has moved on. I went the DIY SDFR quarter wave line route which finally got me away from crossovers and all that phasey stuff. And CM was kind enough to sell me a second set of Merrill drivers. A little bit of figuring and a new blade for the table saw and before I knew it I had my DIY dipoles. I'm quite happy and I no longer use 82dB sensitivity speakers. But, if I need them, the 3/5a's are there. . |
|
Silver Member Username: JohammbassIRL Post Number: 760 Registered: May-06 | Christallmighty, Maris! You argued about the perfect driver and how you could select it! So, yeah, I think you'd argue one over the other. LOL, Jan, Excel and Revelator both are great drivers and both have trade-offs, however, it is a very hard call, since their trade-offs would be in different areas. Yes we can find out exactly where they are lacking when we compare them to a theoretical "perfect driver", but it's too close to call since the trade-offs will vary. What's there to not understand? And as far as the single driver systems go. Why do you think there are 2 way systems at all if the single ones are so great? Just so the speaker companies can sell more drivers? Maybe you are willing to go so far as to say that there is already technology out there to harvest the Sun's energy with a 100% efficiency, but there is this group of people (the world rulers) that are not releasing that information so the oil and gas companies can get richer? Come on, give me a single driver system that would be considered a true reference speaker set. Get real. |
|
Gold Member Username: ExerciseguyFort Hamilton, NY United States Post Number: 2948 Registered: Oct-04 | http://www.tektondesign.com/seas.htm |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 681 Registered: Jul-07 | "Come on, give me a single driver system that would be considered a true reference speaker set. Get real." I think the point's been made that any speaker design involves compromises. SDFR's have compromises, sure, but 2-way bookshelf speakers have them as well. As do open-baffle, as do electrostats, and on we go. Based on the designers (and ultimately purchasers) priorities they choose their compromises and protect what's most important to them. It's not just the drivers that make the finished product, it's the entire implementation. Jan, have you seen Ed's M3's ? http://www.thehornshoppe.com/model3.html |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 682 Registered: Jul-07 | Bob Brines is now offering these as an option in some of his models. http://www.planet10-hifi.com/fostex.html |
|
Platinum Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 10779 Registered: Feb-05 | "I think the point's been made that any speaker design involves compromises." And that's the best point of the whole mess. It's the same point I use to make to Maui when he was here. There are compromises inherent in all designs. You have to pick the flavor that meets your needs or expectations. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13987 Registered: May-04 | . Sorry, Maris, I'm not interested in the game. If you are so closed minded that you see no value to a single driver doing all frequencies, all signals propogating from the same point source, near constant high-ish impedance with minimal inductive or capactive reactance, yada yada ... then I'm not going to even attempt to educate someone who has already shut the door and thrown away the key to protect themself from new ideas. You're sounding very much like the typical objectivist who just doesn't want any new information that might contradict what has already fixed itself in the hardened concrete inside your skull. All you're doing is making subjective judgements over which trade offs you prefer. I know which ones I prefer and which ones I find irritating. Go back to that ideal, "perfect" driver model, a single driver reproducing all frequencies which approximates a point source in space. Which one of us has the speaker closest to that ideal model, Maris? I never said it was perfect but it suits my needs and doesn't offend. Try going to a few shows, Maris, see what rooms the crowds are gathered in. My bet is they will be hanging around the SDFR rooms and not the rooms with yet another ported two way. And, the "sell more drivers" analogy is old and doesn't cut it. Do your research, learn the history of how speakers and audio evolved into what we have now - idiotic multi-way, multi-element crossovers presenting loads that require an amplifier be capable of arc welding just to drive most of what's on the audiophile market. Phase anamolies that put the heart of the music, the midrange, in a Humpty Dumpty after the fall condition. I prefer not to be part of what that market is trying to sell more of. Whether Zaph designs like this or not is not the issue, what I have described is the predominant design approach in the prevailing market. And that is far less intelligent than any restriction a SDFR places on the system. If Zaph doesn't do the typical design, he's trying to emulate the benefits of a single driver - not the other way around. No matter what, it's very difficult for me to get my heart pumping peanut butter over yet another ported two way. Tim Forman did have a design a few years back that I thought was innovative, a SDFR that was crossed to a Fostex tweeter at 10kHz with a first order filter only on the high pass side. It was far from perfect and I didn't need another speaker at the time but it did make more sense than all these speakers that slice the human voice in two and push it out of phase and allow two distinctly different size and composition drivers to try to make a whole out of several mashed up bits. You do know the countless limitations of two way systems, don't you, Maris? Don't you find port noise to be boring? Voices coming from the low frequency driver, the tweeter and the port doesn't bother you? It sure does me. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13988 Registered: May-04 | . CH - Nope, hadn't seen them yet. I imagine they will cause quite a stir in the DIY community and at the shows. That's probably about a 96dB sensitivity speaker. I would guess now that Dave Merrill has passed away there will be a few companies taking up his designs as goals for modified drivers. That would appear to be the direction the Brines drivers are headed in. The times I've heard Bob's designs I've come away thinking he has the best in the group no matter how many drivers anyone else shoves in a box. Last time I looked there hadn't been any replacements for Merrill's business as of yet though agreements had been set before his death. I'll be interested to see whether the new company does more heavy duty marketing of the drivers and designs or whether they are in this for the love of the sound as Dave was. I think I saw a new, higher pricing on what will replace the old product. "There are compromises inherent in all designs. You have to pick the flavor that meets your needs or expectations." A litttle bit of knowledge about the how's and why's of the trade offs and advantages/disadvantages might help you select better gear. Nawwww, what am I thinking?! You got your ears. . |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13989 Registered: May-04 | . CM - Still, one of my favorites; http://www.passdiy.com/pdf/KleinHorn.pdf And I hope Maris isn't going to argue with Nelson Pass. You do know who Nelson Pass, is, don't you, Maris? . |
|
Silver Member Username: NmytreePost Number: 294 Registered: Aug-04 | By The way...... Thanks Art. I made some changes (updates) to my systems and I have edited/updated my profile. As you can see I recently bought the McIntosh C220 Pre Amp and I'm saving for the Mac mc252 and mc352 amps. After a two week trial run ( thanks to my buddy) of those amps and his C220 with my speakers and source gear, I want to go with that whole McIntosh pre amp and amp synergy. Absolutely love it!! And you know how I know I love it? Because I trust my ears and I love what my ears tell me Do I care what the cold and frigid Medusa thinks? Not a bit  That Mac combo with my speakers, is pure romance  |
|
Gold Member Username: ExerciseguyFort Hamilton, NY United States Post Number: 2949 Registered: Oct-04 | Cute. I came across these, http://www.creationaudio.com.au/C-horn.html |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13990 Registered: May-04 | . tree - Even a blind monkey can find a banana when someone puts it in his hand. Enjoying Mac gear? Who woulda thunk? I've been enjoying my own for almost thirty years now. So much for the cold and frigid Medusa, eh? And, guess what? I can talk about mine and not just go, "My ears tell me I like the blue lights." Wharfedales, eh? You do know the countless limitations of multi-way systems, don't you, tree? Of course you don't. Don't you find port noise to be boring? You wouldn't have a clue. Voices coming from the low frequency driver, the tweeter and the port doesn't bother you? It sure does me. But then, you got your ears and they tell you everything's Okey-Dokey. ROTFLMF'ing AO!!!!! at the fool who is proud of being eternally stupid. . . |
|
Silver Member Username: NmytreePost Number: 295 Registered: Aug-04 | liar, liar pants of fire. you're a Krell girl and you know it |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13991 Registered: May-04 | . Even your insults are terminally stupid. And as we've proven, you got nothing without insults, mr. shitforbrains. |
|
Silver Member Username: NmytreePost Number: 296 Registered: Aug-04 | Wait, in this scenario...I'm the squirrel and you're the nut, right? I would have thought such a superior genius, would have realized there's limitations, weaknesses and flaws in all designs. They're all a compromise and trade-off. Pretty much Audio Science 101. Krell Girl not only seems arrogantly oblivious to that fact, but she's also clearly obvlivious to the Wharfedale Opus 2. It's nice to talk like you know something about the Opus 2. But come talk to me when you've actually lived with the Opus 2 for a few weeks. Krell Girl is so funny. Highly entertaining. Like Bozo The Clown Oh wait....could I be as good as Krell Girl? Let me try....... Well lookey there....I too can post like Krell Girl Just click the tumbling laughing smiley and you too can post like Krell Girl. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13993 Registered: May-04 | . Hey, fella, you might not have anything better to do than act tough on an internet forum but I actually have better things to do than sit here and trade insults with a mentally handicapped ignoramus like you. FO! and you're on "ignore" now. And there you were calling Maris a troll when you fit the description to a "T". . |
|
Silver Member Username: NmytreePost Number: 297 Registered: Aug-04 | Oh no. Medusa thinks my insults lack intellectual sophistication. Oh dear me, what shall I do with my life, now? Is this a dagger which I see before me, The handle toward my hand? Come, let me clutch thee; I have thee not, and yet I see thee still. Art thou not, fatal vision, sensible To feeling as to sight? or art thou but A dagger of the mind, a false creation, Proceeding from the heat-oppressed brain? I see thee yet, in form as palpable As this which now I draw. Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player That struts and frets his hour upon the stage, And then is heard no more. It is a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing. How deep Medusa's daggers through my aching heart. I bleed upon the blind monkey and his banana |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 13617 Registered: Dec-04 | Is this a dagger which I see before me, The handle toward my hand? Come, let me clutch thee; I have thee not, and yet I see thee still. Art thou not, fatal vision, sensible To feeling as to sight? or art thou but A dagger of the mind, a false creation, Proceeding from the heat-oppressed brain? I see thee yet, in form as palpable As this which now I draw. Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player That struts and frets his hour upon the stage, And then is heard no more. It is a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing. Blue Oyster Cult? |
|
Silver Member Username: NmytreePost Number: 298 Registered: Aug-04 | PeeWee Herman |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 13618 Registered: Dec-04 | Ahhh... I rather appreciate Tim's ling speakers with the 4-1/2" Fostex driver. I would have liked to hear the 2-way version, just because I tend towards hotter sound than others. The Ling SDFR cab is a nice one, and driven nearfield with a 10W tube amp and Apollo, it was very very enticing. I still have the parts. |
|
Silver Member Username: HawkbillyNova Scotia Canada Post Number: 683 Registered: Jul-07 | "CH - Nope, hadn't seen them yet. I imagine they will cause quite a stir in the DIY community and at the shows. That's probably about a 96dB sensitivity speaker. " Yep, two kinds of stir actually. The folks who listened to them and LOVED them although they couldn't quite figure out why they worked. And those that never listened to them, claimed it was stupid to do what he did and got on their computer and talked about how it was impossible for that design to work even though they never listened to them. You know, the usual. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 13620 Registered: Dec-04 | I might just order a pair of those Fostex babies and plop them in the Ling cabs... |
|
Silver Member Username: NmytreePost Number: 299 Registered: Aug-04 | " And those that never listened to them, claimed it was stupid to do what he did and got on their computer and talked about how it was impossible for that design to work even though they never listened to them. " - Chris H. Hmmmm......that sounds so familiar. Where did I just se a prefect example of that? Hmmmmmmm..... |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 315 Registered: Dec-06 | Thanks for posting that Tekton link, Chris. I'm going to have to listen to one of these single driver solutions one day (not necessarily Tekton's). However, Tekton's speakers seem quite affordable. This is the model that jumps out at me: http://www.tektondesign.com/model81.htm I suppose one could get a supertweeter with it and that wouldn't really negate the benefits of a single driver, since it is handling frequencies in excess of 20kHz. I don't know too many single driver speaker brands, I believe Audio Note is another one. |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 13622 Registered: Dec-04 | Beware the whizzer cone! |
|
Silver Member Username: KbearCanada Post Number: 317 Registered: Dec-06 | I've been reading about some single driver speakers, and I guess the criticism centers around how difficult it is for a single driver to reproduce bass frequencies and treble frequencies all at the same time, which I take it leads to frequencies being mixed together and causing distortion, also a compromise of overall frequency response. I wonder if Tannoy's dual concentric driver (KEF uses the same kind of technology), a tweeter sitting in the middle of the woofer, provides the best of both worlds, at least to some degree (you still need a crossover of course). |
|
Platinum Member Username: NuckPost Number: 13628 Registered: Dec-04 | Thats what a whizzer is for Dan. Full range drivers, the better ones, would amaze you. Absolute extension is sacrificed, granted, but a sub will fill the bottom, and treble can be enhanced/cancelled in the room. Tim's ling's are a very fine speaker, but in smaller spaces, and with harder surfaces and an amp that uses the sweetest part of the EL34 tube, around 3 watts in my configuration. |
|
Platinum Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 13994 Registered: May-04 | . The Ling uses a CSS SDFR. A similar speaker is sold here; http://www.planet10-hifi.com/css.html You'll also find reviews of the original Ling (with an "extend" range driver for the first nine octaves) at this site. The two way Ling was discontinued after the introduction of the full range CSS driver, Tim just didn't feel there was sufficient reason to continue the two way when the SDFR did so well, cut overall costs and offer the value of the single driver. I wouldn't be concerned about whizzer cones unless you're buying car stereo. Don't short change a SDFR until you've heard one, DL, and don't go planning on b@stardizing one. Audio Note is based on the Snell E series. No SDFR in their line. Dual concentrics still aren't SDFR's. They will be point source systems but that's still a long way from SDFR. http://www.pvconsultants.com/audio/frdgroup.htm http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=22 . |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics