|
Bronze Member Username: LovegasolineNYC Post Number: 86 Registered: Jul-05 | I'm getting closer to my goal of assembling a budget music audio system. In fact, I may already have succeeded in realizing it: Yamaha A-700 integrated amp (100wpc /8-Ohms) from the mid '80s [used]. Polk LSi9 speakers [lightly used]. Meridian 508 (20 bit) CDP [mint]. Philips DVP642 DVD Player [new, gift]. Gemini XLBD10 Belt Drive Turntable [new purchased 12 yrs ago(!) unused until now] with felt platter matt, & (new) Sanyo cartridge. Apple Macintosh G4 14" iBook, 1.33Ghz running iTunes v6.0 (+ Toast 6 Titanium Software for burning CDs) + RadioShack "Y" cable (gold plated) to connect w/amp: Functions as my Tuner (streamed Radio broadcasts), server for digital audio files, burns CDRs. Sony MDR-CD666 Headphones [used, contribution from friend, free]. Speaker Wire: Home Depot zip cord. Interconnects: the cheapest RCA cable freebies that come with consumer electronics that I had laying around. Portable System: 1st Generation Apple iPod, 5gig [used], new replacement Battery, & Sennheiser PX-100 Headphones [new]. DeToxit & ProGold (for service & maintenance) I've realized my initial goals: a.)being able to play my old LPs, b.) enjoying better quality sound then my 10 yr old Sony boombox delivered, and c.) enjoying listening to my music again. If I sell the Meridian, ALL the above (excluding the iBook but including the iPod) cost me approximately $500. To complete this phase of the system, I need to focus on 4 more things: -Interconnects (acceptable quality). -Better Headphones (I'm shooting for a used pair of Grado SR80s) -Speaker Stands: I'll look for a used pair (I have a decent woodshop so if I have the time, I may design/build a pair...or possibly go to the metal ...I sense that buying used will be less expensive). -attention given to setup. The system was assembled in the spirit of Jan's concept of 'free audio' (equipment purchased that can be resold for what one paid for it, or even for a profit). The Meridian CDP was purchased at a bargain with the intention of reselling it and putting the profit back into my system in the form of a Marantz CC4300 CDP. If this is done, I will have accomplished the task of building the system at or under my allotted budget (iBook not included) and with higher quality speakers to boot. Success! I spent (wasted?) an evening or two reading posts about cables (both here on Ecoustics and elsewhere). Oh dear. They all seem to degenerate into a pre-determined format: those that claim various cables make no audible difference and level charges against 'snake oil salesmen' vs. those that believe cables impact significantly on the sound of a system. I do not want to rehash that argument here. I'll take the middle road. Does anyone have any recommendations for interconnects (CDP-amp) that is commensurate with the level of my system ... or should I just continue using the el cheapos? I have a few questions regarding amplification. Since the Yamaha is the only amp I've ever owned, I really have no relative benchmark to use to evaluate it. Some said the Yamaha amp might be a little shy on power for the 4-Ohm (nominal) Polk LSi9 speakers: that the speakers are power hungry and in general will sound better with an amp that has more power to deliver. Is there truth to that concept? The Yammy doesn't get significantly hot driving the LSi9s, even at higher volumes. One thing I've noticed: with the volume knob at similar settings, the system plays LOUDER with the LSi9s vs the borrowed Bose #301 Series IIIs that the Polks replaced. I'll need to swap out amps to hear for myself, but I'd like to here what you all think ... will an amp upgrade improve the sound of the Lsi9s (and also the Meridian CDP)? I've not decided whether or not to sell the Meridian. Although that was my intention when purchasing it, I may hold onto it and by next spring, seek to upgrade my amp (and perhaps my speakers after that). If I go that route, any suggestions for an amp? I'm very curious to hear a McIntosh amp, they've captured my imagination ... I'm looking very hard at the MC2105, MC2125, MC2155 amps and will scour the earth for a bargain if I go that route. I'm also curious as to what a well integrated powered sub would do for the Lsi9s? Would I be able to hook up a powered sub with the amp I now have? I've decided to focus on digital as my primary media...I have more CDs than LPs, and a good selection of Lossless audio files archived on my hard drive/iTunes that I can easily burn CDs from. In fact I see hard drives being integrated as music servers (for ex., McIntosh has one) and that route interests me greatly, particularly if using a Lossless format will deliver an audio quality that is on par with CDs. ITunes on the Mac is by FAR the most convenient and flexible audio interface I've ever encountered ... it makes playing CDs seem cumbersome and awkward (and for me CDs lack the redeeming grace of the pleasure of manuality that LPs offer). After the next round of upgrades to my system, I'll consider integrating a better TT/cartridge ... unless, of course, I find a deal that I simply cannot refuse before then. You guys are partly to blame for what began as an innocuous purchase turning into a mild obsession (and a budgetary challenge). I'd love to hear any comments, opinions, and suggestions. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6381 Registered: May-04 | That's a lot of questions, gas. My first piece of advice would be do not upgrade for the sake of power only. As I indicated, into the four Ohm load of the Polks, the Yamaha is easily capable of 150 watts. Power shouldn't be an issue. The quality of the power could easily be an issue. If you upgrade the amplifier, make the move to a better quality amplifier even if it means going down in on paper wattage. Cables should be good quality but not extravagant for your system. At least get cables with connectors that actually connect and are not going to cause problems down the road. If you can find the information (most cables companies don't really want you to know the information), be careful not to use high capacitance interconnects or speaker cables. Inductance is not a problem usually in interconnects but can be in speaker cables. If the speaker cable is a twisted pair, you should be OK. The sources are the point where the music begins and will gain you the most in terms of dynamics, quality of both frequency extremes, soundstaging, long term listenability and lowering the noise floor. Any gains made at the front of the system will be passed on to the rest of the system. Spend some money and time on speaker placement and room treatment. After the source, that is where you will gain the most for the least amount of outlay. https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/home-theater/169742.html https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/accessories/1664.html https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/accessories/55.html https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/home-audio/168764.html The Polks play louder at the same volume control setting because they are more sensitive; also called more efficient. |
|
Bronze Member Username: LovegasolineNYC Post Number: 87 Registered: Jul-05 | Jan, Yes, allot of questions because in one fell swoop I've swapped out a large percentage of my system which opened up a can of worms. I figured to integrate it all into one post initially. Thanks for your answers and referenced materials. I'll read through those threads thoroughly when I have the time, but on first glance there's lots of meat for me to chew on. Room treatment is going to be my biggest challenge because of the space, layout, and objects in here. My amp questions are mainly two. Amp power is something that I'm unclear on: what role does a 200WPC amp serve (or even a 300 or 400WPC amp) vs. a 100WPC (or 50WPC) amp? What are the conditions that would dictate using one over the other? However, quality of sound produced by the amplifier is the topic that has really captured my audio curiosity now. I certainly do not have 'golden ears' as I'm just training myself to listen more carefully. How would an amp like the aforementioned McIntoshes change (improve?) the sound of my current system, i.e replacing the Yamaha? What would the improvements (differences) be? I'm using the Home Depot lamp cord (clear insulation, silver/copper conductors) but it is parallel in construction, the conductors are not twisted around each other. I assumed what I bought is what folks use and refer to as 'budget Home Depot speaker wire': I do not recall seeing twisted wire there when I purchased. The ends are unterminated, just stripped of insulation and twisted. Would it be beneficial to 'terminate' the wires ends by putting a dab of good solder on them to prevent fraying? "The sources are the point where the music begins and will gain you the most in terms of dynamics, quality of both frequency extremes, soundstaging, long term listenability and lowering the noise floor. Any gains made at the front of the system will be passed on to the rest of the system." On hooking up the Meridian CDP and the Lsi9s (vs. Bose and Philips DVD player), I was first struck by the bass: better and 'tighter', more musical information and details were reproduced across the entire frequency range, guitar plucking and strumming sounded clearer, I could hear deeper into the recording sounds emerged that previously I didn't hear, the silences between notes was greater and these silences became a dramatic element of the music (the silences made me wonder if the system was on and hearing notes emerge from it was shocking at first). I do not know which gains were made by the speakers and which by the CDP, and which by the combination. When I have the time, I'll A/B the CDP with my DVD player. I do not know how, if at all, the Yamaha amp is holding back the CDP and/or speakers. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6390 Registered: May-04 | Power is a fairly expensive way to get volume. If two amplifiers are equal in ability (which is unlikely), doubling the power will gain about 3dB of volume. That's enough to be noticeable when you are going from 10 watts to 20 watts, but hardly enough when going from 200 watts to 400 watts. Doubling the volume levels, which is what most people would like to achieve when they say they want more volume, requires the amplifiers to be equal and the power to increase ten fold. If volume is what you want, it is much easier to obtain in the sensitivity of the speakers. Which is why the Polks play louder that the Bose; the Polks are more sensitive. There is no simple way to explain what power and amplifier quality will do for you. It is not that uncommon for a separate amplifer of reasonable quality to sound much more powerful than an equal powered (on paper) receiver. The gains in dynamics and control over the music are justified by the purchase of a better amplifier. For most people. Not everyone listens in the same way or for the same things. Some people can listen to two amplifiers with obvious differences in quality and assume they hear no differences between the two amplifiers. Some people contend all amplifiers which measure the same will sound the same. I have problems with that idea since I've not seen two amplifiers that are identical unless they are identical. In other words, two amplifiers of the same make and model should be close enough to be called identical. Two amplifiers with each from a different manufacturer will probably not measure, nor sound, identical to one another. However, if you listen primarily for the frequency balance of the sound and not much else, you might conclude all amplifiers sound reasonably alike. For this reason, I would suggest you just stop by a Mac dealer and let them demonstrate what McIntosh does sound like. The answers to your cable questions should be found in the links I provided this morning. As to which component did what, you can find out by switching back to the old components and then back to the "new". I always hesitate somewhat to encourage anyone to listen for more musical information and details. Obviously that is what you want from a system, but some people find the smallest details rather addictive and begin to search out things which have nothing to do with the music. Also a component which has a small bump upward in its frequency response can present what at first would appear to be "great detail". Often it is simply the bumped repsonse you are hearing and the component's sound is something that colors all music with the same brush. Colorations are not intrinsically evil as long as you are aware of them and they do not detract form the individuality of the music. But for anyone who thinks a coloration is acceptable (the LS3/5a bass bump, for instance), you will find someone else who finds that same coloration unacceptable. |
|
Silver Member Username: CheapskatePost Number: 496 Registered: Mar-04 | if you want seriously hifi sounding amplification on the cheap... look into panasonic SA-XR class-d recievers. mine (sa-xr55) spanks the daylights out of my onkyo in every way. i was amazed at the ease, detail, speed, imaging and freedom from distortion it offered. i'll NEVER go back to old fashioned "class a/b" amps and recievers now. i bought mine PRECISELY because similar SA-XRs been been used sucessfully with the awesome magnepan MMGs that i wanted that the onkyo couldn't drive. the panny improved my sound so much though, that i no longer want the MMGs. if you want a cheap amp upgrade... those of us who own panasonics love em'. i've heard RUMORS of people trading $1000 amps and recievers for panasonics. after owning one, i'm more likely to believe it. if you have a DVD player, then you'll probably want to get into surround sound eventually. besides the great sonics and nice 100wpc ratings my SA-XR55 ALSO offers 2 back channels for just $240 delivered. i paid $299+ for my inferior onkyo with just 5 channels and 55wpc. a cheap video cable feeding a panasonic SA-XR (i'd get the 70 model for $50 more because it has HDMI) a digital signal from your DVD player would sound better than you feeding it analogue through $40 cables. it might even give the meridian some competition, but your CD player is definately high end. listen to it versus other gear before you get rid of it. as to cables, they do make some difference, especially speaker cables. my 10 guage monster cable speaker wire really improved my speakers bass and overall detail a little compared to the puny "lamp cord" that i used before. instead of buying a $200 pair of speaker cables, buy some 10 or 12 guage "sound king" oxygen free raw cable or get it at home depot and build your own cables. you can make great 10 guage cables for a fraction of the price of some 16 guage cables. (lower #s = larger cables) as to speaker stands, sand and/or lead filled ones are preferable over wood ones which resonate. knock on a piece of wood, and you'll get a *tock* sound. knock on a sand filled stand, and you'll get a slight thud sound. i had a pair that i had always intended to fill but never did for the better part of a year. when i finally DID go buy a bag of sand, it made a clear difference. bass tightened as did imaging. mass loading and resonance damping make speakers happy. before you get upgrade fever, get used to the sound of your system. you have a pretty good starter system now. use it to train your ears. find out what you do and don't like about it. once you familiarize yourself with it, then go out to a good stereo store (not a *vomit* mall store) and listen to a variety of properly setup gear to hear what it does that yours doesn't so that you have CLEAR upgrade goals. nothing's worse than upgrading gear that you aren't happy with (my mission M71s ended up being my PC speakers) by the way... the CHEAPEST upgrade you can make to ANY stereo system is decent speaker positioning! it can make a huge difference between bass that is muddy and boomy or an image with a hole in the center. even 1/2 an inch difference between your speakers' distance from the rear wall can affect imaging and clarity. $1 or so for a yardstick is a cheap upgrade for sure. you might not have "golden ears" now, because you're just starting your quest for true hi-fi. welcome to the club! now you just need to train your ears and get experience with different sounding gear. then, when you hear a new system, words such as warm, bright, one-note, imaging, extension, weight, dynamics, speed, resonance and compression etc. will make alot more sense. you never know the difference between an apple and an orange until you try them both. ;) p.s. you could do ALOT worse than the gear you already have. p.p.s. when JV talks about detail freaks... he might as well paste my picture on the statement. LOL to my ears... blurring details is unforgiveable. reality isn't slow and muffled, but some people prefer that sort of "warm, easy on the ears" sound too. that's where training your ears comes in. only you know what you like. otherwise... there wouldn't be seperate camps that argue bitterly. i don't get along with ported woofers and tubes one bit... JV doesn't much like my priorities either. oh well. the thing one person loves... another hates like poison and vice versus. find out what YOU like. i NEVER heard sound that made the hair stand up on the back of my neck (despite hearing a few $1000+ speakers in shops) until i heard a friend's tiny $120 acoustic suspension "infinity" minimonitors. for the first time, i heard speed, detail and imaging that larger speakers couldn't match. the bass wasn't deep or loud (4 1/2" woofers) but what was there was faster and clearer than anything i'd ever heard before. i knew my priorities once i heard them. to me... reality is crystal clear and detailed. to you... it could be a sweet midrange, deep bass scale, powerful dynamics or resonant bloom. train your ears... chose your camp(s)... and be prepared to argue. LOL |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 6398 Registered: May-04 | "JV doesn't much like my priorities either. oh well. the thing one person loves... " It's not a mtter of whether I like what you like. It is a matter of what you like being far outside of the norm in the overall frequency balance of the system. You have stated repeatedly that you "hate" warm sounding systems and you "love" ultrabright sound. So much so that I can only conclude you are well beyond the "average" listener's preference for an extreme high end frequency emphasis. I feel, while your advice is generally good, everyone reading your remarks should be aware of your stated preference for a "sound" that is not the norm. The same can be said of my advice; I obviously prefer my McIntosh tube amplifiers' sound to the majority of solid state receivers. To each their own, but the preference should be known before the advice is swallowed. As to ported speakers, I've never claimed to be a fan of ported speakers. I think sometimes people on the forum take my opposition to how they express their unswerving fealty or disgust at any particular technology as being my support for a particular item. It is not. I just feel there are times when some perspective should be brought to bear on some over the top comments. I feel the same regarding the idea there is only one way to build a speaker properly. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 2106 Registered: Feb-05 | Well said! |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 655 Registered: May-05 | Lovegasoline, Very impressive start on your system. It should be a considerable upgrade from where you started. The Meridian is a huge step up. Jan's initial comments were right on the mark. Keep listening and testing and find out what you like. I'm finding my listening tastes change as I hear different components and speakers. I like what I've got but there will always be something out them that sounds better. So, it's important that you do some listening before you just start upgrading. Ultimately, after a bunch of intelligent advice from the group on the forum and listening to several very high end stereo set-ups, I concluded I would never be able to get the musical sound I was looking for out of a combined HT/stereo system. So, I going to a separate system and when I upgrade in the future, it will be with the thought of improving on each of the systems separately. However, I just don't think I'll spend much more money on my HT system, except for a dedicated pre/pro in the future, and possibly a new set of fronts to go to a 7.1 system in the future. The stereo system I could see evolving continually over time. BUT, I plan to listen to my current components, when they finally come together, for some time before I consider starting that evolution process. Good luck and enjoy, Dave |
|
Bronze Member Username: Fps_deanPost Number: 36 Registered: Oct-05 | Hey that's no budget system. You want budget? Look at my system... Late 70s Philips receiver. Started with some Echman speakers my father gave to me (something like that) which one of them blew out and my uncle gave me Infinity Column IIs but the receiver didn't have enough power for them so my father got them and I got his Boston Acoustics. My setup just got improved a bit as I bought today a Mcintosh 1900 and I should be able to use my Infinity Column IIs with them. |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 212 Registered: Dec-04 | Your budget system looks very good from here. I might sugest that you begin your search again with the source. You cannot make sounds which do not exist with alchemy or good intentions. However, you may find some pleasing results along the way. Your approach looks good to me, as you are following 'quality' sound as opposed to, well, anything else. Your Yamaha will give you all the Polks will offer, I dont find those old units shy at 4 ohm. Borrow and trial all your ideas as much as possible, keeping the budget, and decide slowly. You may find your present system will keep you on budget for a long time. Cheers |
|
Anonymous | Isn't using watts as a guide to power a poor way of gauging the ability an amplifier has to drive a pair of speakers, especially if those speakers are a difficult load. We need to see their current output also, in the form of peak current capability per channel before clipping. Most manufacturers except some higher end brands and all publications bar I think stereophile don't give this information. The big question then is how much current is enough to drive different loads in either a theatre or stereo setup where volumes and dynamics tend to vary. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Fps_deanWilliamstown, MA USA Post Number: 50 Registered: Oct-05 | Anonymous - you are 100% correct. Wattage cannot necessarily determine power for multiple reasons. One of them being that all amps are rated at x watts, but they will actually put out a little more or less (+/- about 20% of the amps power seems to be normal). The older amps back when they used larger transformers tend to be the amps that put out more wattage, where most newer amps will put out less. Also watts may be rated by RMS (basically average ) or the minimum wattage (expect it to be a bit louder!) or the maximum possible output (which it may hit once every 10 years). The number of watts before clipping is what we want to know, but it usually does not tell us! Most the time the manual will say how it is rated, but it is not rare that they just say it puts out x watts. Also if you have a speaker that will handle up to say 250 watts RMS, it very well will be that it will handle it and not explode, but if you put a 250 watt per channel RMS amp through it and crank it, it will not remain clean. Some speakers can actually handle more than they say without exploding, but will start to break up at that point (like Paradigms... I am pretty sure that they can handle more than 120 watts for their large floorstanders without exploding, but they are designed for 120 or less!). |
|
Silver Member Username: NuckParkhill, Ontario Canada Post Number: 228 Registered: Dec-04 | Gas, you are on the right course. Ignore more power and persue clean sound. Follow the light..it wil lead you MORE MONEY! Just kidding..the best source will lead you to a next step, if there really is one! Your system sounnds like fun ..enjoy it! |
|
Silver Member Username: CheapskatePost Number: 500 Registered: Mar-04 | well i guess you don't understand what i intended to say then. no, i don't like overly bright sound at all. my mission M71s were downright painful to listen to on my onkyo. what i can't abide by is treble muffling. when i hear a cowbell, i can't stand if it sounds slow and loses it's transient attack. i don't like obscured or sluggish treble at all. i demand clear, fast and detailed treble. metallic percussion should sound metallic, not like soft plastic. by warm, i mean excessively warm as in ported speakers. again, i can't stand sluggish and/or resonant sound. reality doesn't *boooooooooooom* if gear rolls the treble off so much that the highs are obscured, it's unnatural. cowbells go *tunk tunk tunk*, not *blung blung* and bass drums go *boop boop* not *fooooooom fooooooom*. it isn't treble volume that i need, it's extension. if anything, i'd say that my beloved panasonic is what i'd call warmer and more treble polite than my onkyo, but it's also much faster, more detailed and grain free. maybe the more accurate way to describe my preferences is that i like resonance free resolution. what i was considering to be an extension issue was really a matter of insufficient treble resolution. my NAD does sound dull like it has a sleeping bag over the tweeters though. reality has no treble rolloff or obscuring. treble is needed to get an image too. i do probably like a degree of bass rolloff though. too much bass gives me a headache. my pinnae aren't what they used to be. i guess i was exaggerating my preferences. i prefer a totally FLAT sound. excessive warmth does sound unnatural to me. it might be pleasing to the ear, but it isn't real. reality has no psychoacoustic sweetening. ideally, nothing should be added (resonances or EQ bumps) or taken away (speed, detail and extension) to approach reality to me. |
|
Silver Member Username: CheapskatePost Number: 501 Registered: Mar-04 | by the way, one thing, other than sheer speed, that wowed me about magnepan MG12 sound was precisely because they sounded very flat to me. they didn't seem to emphasize any frequency. the only area where i thought they could use some improvement would have been a little more treble extension. i really liked the speed and detail of B&W nautilus tweeters, they really reveal alot of texture and low level detail and move fast. that's the best reference, for me, for what HF transients sound like. maybe it isn't the extension i hear, maybe it's the speed and detail. regardless of what it is, i hate it when a tweeter makes a hard percussion instrument sound softer. my superzeros still can't quite do that, but that's where metal domes excell. i chose soft domes for ease and because metal domes sounded like crap 10-15 years ago. they've gotten better to my ears though. |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 1182 Registered: Jun-05 | Where do you get that all ported speakers are warm bullsh1t from,you are just as worse as Bayless with his 1st order crossover garbage,you must have had some bad ported speakers,Ive heard sealed designs sound bloated and warm.Damn get off of that sh1t if you dont think Maggies can sound warm you have got another thing coming.As matter of fact the NHT SB 3s are a sealed design and my Epos M12.2s will leave them standing at the gate and out time them by a far margin.Avalon a company that was known for sealed designs,they came out with Eidilon and its one of the best speakers in the world and its ported.Do you know what their claim is that it times better than any sealed speaker they have designed. |
|
Silver Member Username: CheapskatePost Number: 510 Registered: Mar-04 | get off you sheeeeeeit tawaun. you don't seem to have the slightest clue to what "one note bass" is do you. i can tell without a doubt in my mind that my knucklehead basshead neighbor's speakers are ported and BOOMY beyond warm. EVERYTHING sounds like "wuh wuh wuh" on his junk. i never heard fast, detailed and clear bass until i heard it on a pair of acoustic suspension minimonitors. i also know that 8" sealed bostons spanked EVERY larger and ported speaker in the showroom where i heard them for the same reason. cling to your slow RESONANCES all you want. i'm not impressed with big sound. i'm impressed by fast and resonance free sound, sound that starts and stops on a dime. it's a good thing i'm not typing this through my knuckleheaded neighbor's 40Hz tuned speakers. you wouldn't be able to understand a thing i'm saying. *uhhh huhhhh wuhhhhh wuhhhhh uhhhh huhhhhhh wuhh wuuuuhh* acoustic suspension speakers NEVER do that. only ported echo boxes do. |
|
Gold Member Username: T_bomb25Dayton, Ohio United States Post Number: 1238 Registered: Jun-05 | All ported speakers dont boom you rock headed idiot.You are a NHT fan arent you? have heard the SB 3s?they are a sealed design and they are one of boomiest standmount speakers I have heard.If you have heard them even your biased,inacurate ideas would admit how slow and sluggish they are.We have disussed this several times on this forum their are more than one way to design a speaker.That $120 Infinity was a long time ago,get over it better yet stop trying to make people think your untrue biased claims are the only way to choose,its obvious you are unimformed if you still think the old way that all ported speaker are bloated and slow.Wake up from your dream good ported speakers have overcome those characteristics a long time ago. |
|
Silver Member Username: CheapskatePost Number: 520 Registered: Mar-04 | no they haven't and NEVER will. ported speakers add time delayed resonance to the original sound to renforce the lowest octaves. they use DISTORTION to compensate for bass rolloff. you only seem to want to talk about tone, but aren't addressing speed and distortion. the big bass you're hearing is a resonance. that is a fact. blow over the lid of a bottle or talk into an acoustic guitar and tell me you hear nothing that wasn't originally there, and i WILL call you a bold faced flat out lying sack of doodoo. you will hear the resonant frequency of the space which is EXACTLY the same thing as a ported speaker... EXACTLY. ported speakers are merely bass reenforcing echochambers. they might sound large, but they don't sound real. they are designed to add the sound of an airspace resonating (that isn't in the original signal) to make bass deeper and louder, but NOT more accurate. acoustic suspension speakers cancel WAY more backwave, and also snap much faster because of the air spring. try to lie about physics... by all means... show how ignorant YOU are. 8" sealed woofers spank the crap out of 12" ported for speed and resolution. embrace time delayed resonances and their overhang all you want to, but the fact of the matter is that ALL ported speakers are tuned to resonate at a specific frequency. before you attack me... read up on thiele small parameters and what they mean first. i wouldn't doubt that acoustic suspension speakers are capable of having poor bass curves and that ported speakers CAN be TONALLY flat, but you aren't talking one bit about TIME or distortion. ported speakers add the resonant signature of their enclosures and tunings. it sounds like crap TO ME. sealed designs CANCEL resonance. you only want to talk about one AS design that sounds bad. i'll admit that B&W ported speakers don't sound hideous, but they can't snap like a sealed speaker can. they blur the bass. i despise ANY resonance... if you like it... that's fine. to each their own. a planar panel would spank either a sealed OR ported speaker for speed and detail. it would have the sharpest waterfall plot by a mile. it would have the lowest distortion too. zero attack delay and zero decay is real bass to me. |