Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Furball on March 20, 2006, 02:11:27 PM
-
I am waiting for some to be delivered, any tips on locating them to best use the reflected sound? How are they?
I have a high ceiling, you think if i mount the speakers on wall brackets about 7 feet high it will be too high?
Thanks in advance!
-
I have 3 systems, my first was the acoustimass 10. I wall mounted them about 7", twisted & pointed slightly downward; my rears were on the ceiling, one pointed off center & the other half pointed at the rear wall. Some people line em up straight, but that takes away from the depth. Mainly, you don't want them all pointing directly at you (the center). Also, you'll have to use your receiver's volume adjust for each one (hopefully it has a noise level feature), so you can sit and adjust each one until they match up nicely. Or are you using the active bass module? Either way, they are great speakers, and I'm sure you'll hear from some that they aren't, usually people who like to spend 5 times as much on other speakers.
All in all, I love 'em, I still get complements on real they sound, instead of just 'perfect'.
For the ultimate, I bought a pair of 901's for my fronts, and I'm still astounded at how real the sound is....
A great film to see on any though is 'Red Flag', it's an airforce film about the training excersize at nellis AFB.
-
cool thanks!
yes i will run it through the amp then the active bass module. cant wait 'til they get here! trying to think up the best locations for them, i have read that you really need to experiment to find the best place.
Have wanted a Bose system for ages, finally had the opportunity to get one.
you have a link to red flag?
-
Originally posted by Furball
cool thanks!
yes i will run it through the amp then the active bass module. cant wait 'til they get here! trying to think up the best locations for them, i have read that you really need to experiment to find the best place.
Have wanted a Bose system for ages, finally had the opportunity to get one.
you have a link to red flag?
Bose Acoustimass have gaps in the Frequency Response. I move anyone I can away from them. For the performance you will get (not much) you can save money and get a better system. Feel free to PM me if you want. Home Theater is a hobby (Goth can tell you, if you wish to PM him and verify).
Bose is all about MARKETING, not Quality.
Karaya
-
Yep my thoughts exactly.
Try Martin Logan for home theater.
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Yep my thoughts exactly.
Try Martin Logan for home theater.
yummmmy. I like the Ascent subwoofer.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Bose Acoustimass have gaps in the Frequency Response. I move anyone I can away from them. For the performance you will get (not much) you can save money and get a better system. Feel free to PM me if you want. Home Theater is a hobby (Goth can tell you, if you wish to PM him and verify).
Bose is all about MARKETING, not Quality.
Karaya
See!! I told ya...Not many people can actually HEAR what frequencies are missing (blhablah), it's just written on paper. What matters it how it SOUNDS. Sorry to all you speaker salesmen, but my ears have made lots of money & Ive also done sound engineering, even when i was a kid i experimented with sound reflection (without knowing about bose), and it is not just marketing. When you close your eyes and listen naturally you'll hear the difference.
Red Flag I bought on ebay, but it's found on any dvd sales place. The actual title is "Fighter Pilot: Operation Red Flag" , and was first released on IMAX. Here's a link from History channel: Red Flag (http://shopping.discovery.com/product-59482.html?jzid=40587982-0-0)
-
I myself use Mirage speakers. I haven't had any problems with them.
However, they are at least 15 years old. Bought them a long time ago. I don't know how they are now but the ones I have are great.
-
Most speakers are at least decent nowadays. But to be spectacular, cost a bit more. Plus, Bose, to me, add more depth, not to mention in a tiny unseen package. I like to look at my picture instead of the speakers. But since I have a small room, it's like it adds another dimension to our little room; I can feel like Im part of the movie instead of looking at papers sayin my speakers sound better than so-&-so.
Id rather listen to my ears than a computer
-
Bose really sucks.
Unless it's free, then you make a good profit on resell.
-
Originally posted by moot
Bose really sucks.
Unless it's free, then you make a good profit on resell.
hm
that comment may be moot...
-
The fact is that Bose is aimed towards PA systems and the products reflect that on design ideology. They are designed to produce a pleasant overall sound on a large area without even trying to get Hifi or God forbid, High-End.
This design ideology works great in large crowds, noisy / unacustical enviroments such as cars etc. But for an enthusiast wanting the best sound reproduction they simply have too many design compromises.
Bose doesn't suck, it's just not designed for enthusiasts.
-
thank you for your input everyone.
but i dont want to hear "bose sucks! buy something else!" i was asking on how best to set them up.
if i dont like them (which i highly doubt) they will be going on ebay.
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Bose doesn't suck, it's just not designed for enthusiasts.
Not designed for Russians then? :lol
-
Originally posted by Furball
Not designed for Russians then? :lol
I'm not sure what you mean. I'm sure there are plenty of audiophiles down there too even though the soviet era loudspeakers were of questionable quality.
I did run into an electrostatic russian speaker once. Coarse but nevertheless impressive, hand wound coils and all. Also Priboy tube amplifiers are great after extensive modifications (just for electrical safety and all..) :D
Post-soviet era russian would be in third heaven with Bose, don't get me wrong.
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
The fact is that Bose is aimed towards PA systems and the products reflect that on design ideology. They are designed to produce a pleasant overall sound on a large area without even trying to get Hifi or God forbid, High-End.
This design ideology works great in large crowds, noisy / unacustical enviroments such as cars etc. But for an enthusiast wanting the best sound reproduction they simply have too many design compromises.
Bose doesn't suck, it's just not designed for enthusiasts.
LOL I know and have known alot of "enthusiasts" that would wholeheartedly dissagree with you.
But its been my experiance that it all comes down to personal prefrence.
and what type of room you are putting them in.
Now I myself am not quite in the enthusiast catagory but I do know that with the exception of that new Bose radio (which to me sounds pretty good but not GREAT)
Bose sounds better then most of the other stuff out there.
But that may be a Bias opinion as I was raised with Bose.
My Father who was an enthusiast bought a pair of the original Bose 901 series which I now have and still sound fantastic (as of two years ago )sitting in my attic.
Oh they are sitting in my attic because after 30+ years they are too ugly as the fabric on the covering is worn, stained and in need of replacement and require too much space to have sitting in my livingrooom.
-
Originally posted by Furball
thank you for your input everyone.
but i dont want to hear "bose sucks! buy something else!" i was asking on how best to set them up.
if i dont like them (which i highly doubt) they will be going on ebay.
My sister in law has a set, and knowing my brother in law they probably arent set up correctly.
That being said
You'll like them
-
Yes, the main thing is setting them up correctly; Which is probably why many don't like their sound. Ive never used their dedicated control unit, Ive always used mine with a seperate receiver, so i can adjust the EQ settings and volume for each speaker independently. It makes a world of difference.
Especially with the 901's, they have a lot of midrange naturally, and have to be cut a bit, and the low end I still added a powered bass module for them. But oh, are they sweet.
-
Are these computer speakers?
For the audiophiles...what is your take on Klipsch 5.1?
-
True Hifi systems lack tone control completely. If you need to use an EQ you're using a compromised system. :D
-
MrRipley-- I'd have to disagree on that last. The room can have a large impact on frequency response, and no speaker is flat outside an anechoic chamber. An EQ may be necessary to correct that.
As far as the Bose debate... they're fine for some tracks and suck for others. That's the problem with speakers that have gaps in the freq response...it's not just a graph on paper. If you want speakers that sound good with everything, you want to get something with a relatively flat FR. Anyway, I guess that's not in the cards for this thread.
Curval-- I've heard the Klipsh, wasn't too impressed. Horns in general suck IMO because they tend to be peaky in the FR. Horns were originially made as a method of amplifying sound, but these days there are much better ways of doing that (for home application, anyway). The salesman was saying things like "the klipsch has a 'live' sound", which I thought was a bunch of baloney.
Martin Logan electrostats sound awesome, but *only* if you are sitting in the sweet spot right in front of them. They beam terribly...so if you are not in the sweet spot, you will be missing a lot of the treble.
-
Furbie I was gonna post yesterday when I first saw this thread, but decided I had no real input since you had already bought the Bose and were looking for setup suggestions.
I'm not gonna put down Bose, but I sure love the suggestion Karaya gave me about the Defintives. Chances are high that my amatuer ears could not really distinguish too much difference between the 2 sets (maybe), and I truely think it all boils down to personal preference. I went with Karaya's opinion because I respected the fact that he knew more than I did, and given what was in the area and in my price range he made an excellent suggestion.
Oh yeah, took me about a week of experimentation to figure out what sounded best and readjusting the speakers tones and volume. Have fun with your Bose, once you get comfortable with the setup it will be enjoyable
-
I'd have to disagree on that last. The room can have a large impact on frequency response, and no speaker is flat outside an anechoic chamber. An EQ may be necessary to correct that.
Sorry but you can't correct room response with an EQ. Only way to do that is to use highly directional speakers such as electrostatic panels (Martin Logan, Innersound) or just magnetotstatic (Magnepan) or even horn loading (Acapella).
With enough directivity, good location of speakers and modified room acoustics, you get the best tonal results. Without having to resort to compromises as EQ is. The EQ only degrades the direct sound in effort of correcting room reflections which it fails to do regardless.
Directivity / acoustics produce clear path for direct sound which will take you _inside_ the soundstage of the recording. The 'beaming' you're talking about is a necessity for good reproduction of space.
-
If you want speakers...buy speakers:
here (http://www.mcintoshlabs.com/mcprod/shopdisplayproducts.asp?id=20&cat=Loudspeaker+Systems&prodid=1050&product=XRT30)
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
With enough directivity, good location of speakers and modified room acoustics, you get the best tonal results. Without having to resort to compromises as EQ is. The EQ only degrades the direct sound in effort of correcting room reflections which it fails to do regardless.
No, it doesn't fail. It isn't perfect either, but it helps. Direct beaming is a luxury that you don't have, if you want more than one person to be listening to the sound (or if you don't want to convert your living room into a foam-padded sound chamber).
-
Originally posted by phookat
Curval-- I've heard the Klipsh, wasn't too impressed. Horns in general suck IMO because they tend to be peaky in the FR. Horns were originially made as a method of amplifying sound, but these days there are much better ways of doing that (for home application, anyway). The salesman was saying things like "the klipsch has a 'live' sound", which I thought was a bunch of baloney.
What do you mean by horns?
-
A good EQ does not degrade anything (unless the user has no idea how to use the tool). Any good studio uses multiple EQ's for various reasons.
An EQ in combination with a good DSP can help restore the sound to what it was supposed to sound like when it was recorded, for various room configurations. In other words, the sound reaching your ears is the sound the engineer wanted you to hear. This can only be done, in a typical living room, by altering/attenuating the bands of frequencies which are being altered/absorbed/reflected by the various materials in the room.
You are not going to stop reflections/distortions from ocurring in a typical room no matter how focused the sound is from a speaker. A good surround sound speaker has near flat projection in the horizontal plane and a wide projection in the vertical plane. This type of design helps to remove many problems associated with the typical room design/layout.
Unless a lot of money has been spent to correctly configure the room's acoustics, you are pretty much stuck with other forms of altering the sound to try and get what your hear to be what was intended to be heard.
-
Originally posted by phookat
No, it doesn't fail. It isn't perfect either, but it helps. Direct beaming is a luxury that you don't have, if you want more than one person to be listening to the sound (or if you don't want to convert your living room into a foam-padded sound chamber).
It doesn't fail? Let's examine the basics of sound dispersion, early reflections and directivity in a typical room.
A typical loudspeaker radiates 360 degrees on lower spectrum with gradually raising directivity towards higher frequencies. The directivity is dictated by the physical size of the frontplate of the speaker as well as the size of the actual elements. The larger the element the lower frequency 'beaming' will occur. This means that a 1" tweeter has highly directional properties above 5-8 khz with steadily growing radiation field under that.
A typical two-way loudspeaker has a mid-bass of 6.5". A midbass of that size on the other hand is highly directional in the top range of the crossover frequency. This mismatch is one of the toughest problems in the simple two-way loudspeaker design. The mismatch not only affects off-axis sound quality but also creates bumps&gaps to the total power spectrum of the speaker (meaning the overall amount of sound per frequency). This mismatch is sometimes dealt with by using a smaller midrange cone or by increasing the lower spectrum directivity by a directional horn. An extreme example would be Amphion which extends the vocal range of its 2" tweeter all the way down to 800hz by using a huge 8" directional horn together with a Seas magnesium alloy 8" mid-bass.
A typical non-directional speakers sound is completely dominated by the power spectrum with only minimal amount of direct radiation involved. This means that when a speaker radiates sound, not only the direct and pure sound is broadcasted to the listener but also the first, second etc. radiations from walls, floor and the ceiling are bouncing about in the room and catching also the listening position. To make matters worse, the time delay between the direct sound and the reflected sound causes interference which human ear picks up like a comb filter. The result is an extremely distorted high frequency pickup in listening position.
When you look at an EQ and what it does (alter the direct sound output) you quickly see that an EQ is completely powerless in its presumed task of correcting room alterations. At most it can work in the bass regions where standing waves produce bumps and lows every octet in conjunction with the size of the room. A room width, height or lenght will cause bass interference with each matching quarter of frequency. 20hz sounds have a wavelenght of 17 meters so a room with 4,25 meters dimensions will cause that frequency to cancel out in the middle of the room and double in the corners of the room.
Even with this the EQ can't do much else except increase or decrease the overall amount of sound produced - the actual reasons and effects of the cancellation are not effected at all. The reason why EQ:s are used in studios is that they are used to shape the overall tone of the recording and microphone response alignment. They do not and can not fix anything outside the direct recorded sound i.e. reproduced sound from a speaker.
Planar speakers then again work around this problem by having a huge radiating surface (remember the surface/directivity equation) combined to a dipole operating method. A dipole speaker has no box so the front and back radiation can travel freely around the speaker. Since front and back radiations are at opposite phases, full cancellation on the side of the speaker happens even at bass frequencies. The result is a radiation field roughly the shape of figure 8 meaning the speaker will radiate sound mostly to back and front of the speaker.
This means that a planar speaker will have considerably less effects from all first radiations, the difference is especially big on floor radiation which typically creates most of the problems. And that my friend, is the key to having high quality sound reproduction in a room without 100" paddings on the walls. :aok
-
From my experience, it's the reflections which can define a sound. Anywhere you go, any natural sound reflects off of something.
Ive been using speakers & EQ's since my early teens, and was able to get even a crappy speaker to at least sound decent. Ive also never heard any system with no tone control sound good, unless it was in a milion dollar sound proof studio. Since noone (at least noone I know) can afford that, EQ's help shape the sound to what it supposed to sound like (like skuzzy mentioned). Every single studio Ive been in, seen, or heard of uses EQ's, even if it's just slight, for main recording & mastering, to get the sounds to mix well together, instead of just throwin them together and makin mud.
Using Bose's speakers helps spread the sound to sound more natural for several people in a room to enjoy, unlike directional speakers where you have to sit right in front of them and not move to get a good sound.
-
You made some assumptions about speaker design which leave out newer designs which do propagate like an oval cone, with the wider part of the cone being the in the horizontal plane.
Also, low frequency energy dissipates quickly, versus high frequencies which can carry far further. Multiple reflections of low frequencies are not likely in most rooms, but not so for high frequencies.
Of course, this is also assuming a relatively low power output of the typical home theatre amplifier.
Where an EQ helps, on its own, is where speakers are not placed exactly the same distance from source. Or the center of your room is not the center alignment point for the speakers.
Using a good DSP with an EQ, you can correct for phase alignment issues with the sound (these are manifested by feeling pressure in the ear, but not really hearing what is causing it; the overall effect is muddy sound in various frequency bands).
-
Yes seraphim, as I said Bose design ideology is aimed towards producing pleasant background music for a large area instead of producing the highest fidelity possible.
Suitable applications would be home theaters for more than 2-3 persons and public address systems (concerts etc).
Skuzzy:
The low frequency behaviour of a room is dictated by the physical size and most importantly building materials. Wooden structures are especially good for bass reproduction as they absorb and pass the sound. Brick or cement walls then again create a very high field of low frequency reflections and phase cancellation.
Typically the cancellation time of sound increases directly with lowering of the frequency (high frequencies are easily absorbed by soft materials where low frequencies are not) the absorption is again tied directly to the wavelenght of the sound. The higher the wavelenght (lower frequency) the larger mass is needed to absorb the sound.
-
Speakers aside, if you are on a budget. Spend more on the amplifier/receiver than the speakers. A good amp can make poor speakers sound ok, but no matter how good the speakers are, a bad amp will make them sound bad.
Also, try to match the wattage/output of the amp to the room you will be placing it. An under-powered amp for a room will sound terrible. Better to have a bit too much, than too little. I typically use the following equation.
square feet * 30W = total wattage
-
In any case, all the theory & money in the world goes out the window, because I use my ears to make my purchase decisions for speakers. In this case, to me, Bose sounded better than all the other speakers I tested. I guess a natural sound to me is different from what a speaker guru considers natural.
-
Speakers aside, if you are on a budget. Spend more on the amplifier/receiver than the speakers. A good amp can make poor speakers sound ok, but no matter how good the speakers are, a bad amp will make them sound bad.
Rofl here I again disagree with you. The speaker is the most important link in the sound reproduction chain.
Given that the amplifier is suitable for its task (it has enough power to match the sensitivity of the speaker, flat frequency range and can handle impedance changes) the quality of the amplifier is the least dominating factor in the sound.
Only if the amp is broken or underpowered it becomes a real problem. Most modern amps have a perfectly flat frequency response with distortion levels under 1%. Speakers then again have gigantic differences in both linearity and distortion levels. On bass frequencies it's common to see 10+% harmonic distortion.
Remember that a speaker with a sensitivity of 87db / 2.83V @ 8ohms (1 watt) will need ten times the wattage to play at 90db (double amount of sound). The grid is logarythmic, for each doubling of the sound you need ten times higher amp power. So overall wattage required is tied to the sensitivity of the speaker and naturally the maximum sound pressure wanted.
A typical hi-fi listener listening to a typical hi-fi loudspeaker will consume an average of 15 watts of amplifier power.
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
The low frequency behaviour of a room is dictated by the physical size and most importantly building materials. Wooden structures are especially good for bass reproduction as they absorb and pass the sound. Brick or cement walls then again create a very high field of low frequency reflections and phase cancellation.
That is true, to a degee. You and I realize there are many factors involved here and I will assume you are skimming a bit. The base of the sub-woofer should not sit on a wooden floor, which is not isolated from the rest of the room, for example.
Typically the cancellation time of sound increases directly with lowering of the frequency (high frequencies are easily absorbed by soft materials where low frequencies are not) the absorption is again tied directly to the wavelenght of the sound. The higher the wavelenght (lower frequency) the larger mass is needed to absorb the sound.
Depends on the amplitude of the frequency.
As far as room materials go. Most rooms are a grab bag of surface and hardness materials. And because of that, every room has to be tuned differently.
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Rofl here I again disagree with you. The speaker is the most important link in the sound reproduction chain.
Remember that a speaker with a
So you think spending $20,000 on a set of B&W speakers and hooking them to a $100 receiver is better?
You make asumptions here. Let's quantify something here. There are about 10 amplifiers in the world I call really good *home* amplifiers. Sound reproduction is absolutely accurate. When I say *cheap* speakers, I am thinking of those who costs less than $800 each (U.S.).
Specs mean diddly if the acoustic reproduction is not accurate. It is too easy to fudge frequency response and noise levels.
You can laugh all you like. I have heard the results of people buying high end speakers and hooking them to an Onkyo amp. It sounds bad. Yes, hooking up cheap speakers to a good ampis also bad. But not as bad as a bad amp makes any speaker sound.
-
So you think spending $20,000 on a set of B&W speakers and hooking them to a $100 receiver is better?
A $100 amplifier will not be up to the task of playing $20k speakers obviously. But having a second hand Mark Levinson @ $2.5k driving those $20k speakers is the ratio I'd like to see in my own set.
Given that the amplifier is one of hi-fi quality to start with, it's suitable for speakers up to 5-10x the price range usually. If you put equal amount of money to both speakers and amp and invest tenfold amount of money to replace the amp, you will get _less_ improvement to overall sound than only doubling your speaker price.
And this I can vouch on my grave. ;)
On home theater amps the situation is even worse because compared to a normal stereo amp they contain 5-8 power amps for the same price. So in order to get the same level of sound from a home theater amp you need to invest 5-8 times the money than you would compared to a stereo set. You won't get really hi-fi for $1000 on multichannel where that money will buy you a quality stereo amp.
-
True if you start with a Mark Levison amp. But if you start with an Onkyo, or some other low end amp, it may not be true.
Certainly there is a breaking point in where the money should be spent. But, when talking low end systems (Acoustimass is low end) then the speakers are all pretty much the same.
For the most part, if you only have $500 to spend, then spending $300 on the amp and $200 os speakers will yeild a better combination than vice-versa. I work from the premise of, low-end speakers are not nearly as bad as low-end amps.
And because the home theater amp has to drive 5 or 6 speakers, it is even more important to get a decent amp.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
True if you start with a Mark Levison amp. But if you start with an Onkyo, or some other low end amp, it may not be true.
Certainly there is a breaking point in where the money should be spent. But, when talking low end systems (Acoustimass is low end) then the speakers are all pretty much the same.
For the most part, if you only have $500 to spend, then spending $300 on the amp and $200 os speakers will yeild a better combination than vice-versa. I work from the premise of, low-end speakers are not nearly as bad as low-end amps.
On that I agree, a budget of $500 is not enough to begin with as it won't even buy you a decent multichannel amp. But when the price range goes to $1k+ (per item) it's advisable to invest more money to the speakers instead of the amp. IMO anyway.
-
Like I said, there is a breaking or break over point. I agree once you have a good budget, you should spend more equally, and as the budget increases, more should be spent on speakers.
By the way, my home setup is comprised of B&W speakers (the THX-8 system; 4 surrounds, 3 mains, 2 subs) driven by a Yamaha DSP-A1, and two MacIntosh amps (7502 drives the subs, 7503 drives the mains, and the surrounds driven by the Yamaha).
To me, it represents a decent home theatre configuration.
-
Your system sounds very nice Skuzzy even though the A-1 starts to age a bit already. I believe it only has support for 5.1 DD?
I have the AX-2 myself. Then again, I don't feel the slightest need for 7.1 audio. :rofl
I'm a DIY electrostatic speaker builder btw.
-
Yeah, the A1 only has support for 5.1 (7.1 using the Yamaha proprietary DSP feature which is not Dolby). The speakers are getting old as well. I have not decided about them yet. I may order some replacement drivers from B&W.
I am looking for a new amp for Christmas. I may go all separates on this next go-around (decoder, amps..). I really love the sound of the A1 though.
I build speakers as well. Not electrostatics though.
-
Curval-- Horns are the plastic things sometimes on speakers that look like air intakes. Ports also can look like this, but horns are often at the top of speakers and centered. Anyway, I think they sound bad.
MrRipley-- I know you can only change direct radiation with an EQ, but I maintain that changing the direct radiation has an impact on overall sound. Using a parametric EQ it is definitely possible to eliminate painful resonances and solve other similar problems caused by room structure or speaker non-flatness. Again it is not the perfect solution...but in a HT environment where you *cannot* rely on direct sound only, this is a better solution than electrostats. You've heard stats off-axis, and I'm sure you'll agree they sound pretty muffled.
Skuzzy-- Below clipping and operating within their design parameters, all amps are gonna sound about the same. I'll have to agree with MrRipley on this one. If you can actually hear amp differences under those conditions, there's a guy in North Carolina that will give you $10,000 to prove it in a double-blind level-matched test. No kidding. Now, of course, some amps are more powerful than others and they'll get louder, and that part is important. But other than that, speakers are electromechanical, and they are going to have a bigger effect. The room may have an even bigger effect than the speakers.
-
phookat, I would take him up on that one. If you ever get to this area, allow me to take you to my "toy" shop and let you listen to some amps. I have sold a fair number of high end amps and speakers due to the fact that people can hear the difference, quite easily. It can be very apparent.
Now, with that said, I will agree you would be hard pressed to hear the difference between a $2,000 amp and a $10,000 amp. Once you get to a certain level the differences become quite small. Same goes for speakers. The difference between a $10,000 speaker and a $2,000 speaker can be quite small.
But, it is quite easy to hear the differnce between an $1,000 amp and a $2,000 amp. And it is quite easy to hear the difference between a $1,000 speaker and a $10,000 speaker. The differences will depend on the material played through them, and the room acoustics. Some material just sucks no matter what. Some doesn't.
-
Seriously, Skuzzy, you can set up an appointment with this guy. His name is Richard Clark, and he is associated with Carsound magazine (as well as owning an audio engineering company of his own). If you go to the carsound.com forums, he has a forum there in which he posts...and you can contact him there and set it up. I should warn you though...he has had this challenge on for about 30 years or so, and he's been to audiophile conventions with his double-blind test rig. Literally thousands of audiophiles have tried, with all sorts of amps, and failed.
I do agree that speaker differences become marginal as you go up. There's a limit to how flat it can be, and if you are already +-2db 20-20K, then there's not really much room for improvement no matter how perfect the alternative.
Incidentally...if you are planning on building speakers soon, you should check out some of the stuff available in the car audio DIY market. Some of it is really very good, and relatively inexpensive. The Koda 6 driver from adireaudio.com is extremely smooth, and the 9kv2 from edesignaudio.com is an excellent 8" driver with a ton of xmax for an 8. For tweeters...I love my Raven ribbons. :)
Seraphim-- again, a speaker with an uneven FR will sound good with some things, and poor with others. This is the disadvantage of using only your ears and ignoring the graphs. Both ears and graphs should be used in selecting speakers.
-
If I get to pick the amps, speakers, and material, it is a no-brainer. Now I know diddly about car audio, other than it sucks, but I know home theatre well.
Again, if you ever get into town, give me a call. I bet I can surprise you (unless you are just flat out deaf). :)
-
skuzzy has to have a very loud system because all of the soundwaves get absorbed by the beard otherwise.
its like a black hole for soundwaves, food and small animals.
-
I do agree that speaker differences become marginal as you go up. There's a limit to how flat it can be, and if you are already +-2db 20-20K, then there's not really much room for improvement no matter how perfect the alternative.
Well that's the whole point. It's extremely easy to build a speaker that performs flatly from 20hz - 20khz in an anechoid chamber. In a room its sound will get distorted no matter how much you EQ it. The problems will be all the more apparent if directivity hasn't accounted for in design (which will lead into problems in power response).
Only highly directive speakers have a room response similar to the response in anechoid chamber. And even that is true only in nearfield where reflections will stay out of the envelope. And this is the big deal.
If you haven't heard Martin Logan or Magnepan for example, do yourself a favour and arrange a listening session. If it's not an eye opener for you, you probably won't need anything better than a boxed speaker anyway. ;)
Incidentally...if you are planning on building speakers soon, you should check out some of the stuff available in the car audio DIY market. Some of it is really very good, and relatively inexpensive. The Koda 6 driver from adireaudio.com is extremely smooth, and the 9kv2 from edesignaudio.com is an excellent 8" driver with a ton of xmax for an 8. For tweeters...I love my Raven ribbons.
There are dozens of labels offering true hi-fi quality parts. Labels that the speaker manufacturers use. Scan-Speak, Seas, Vifa, Peerless, Focal and Visaton to name a few. They all offer extremely high quality parts which make car audio products look like the toys they are.
-
Originally posted by Seraphim
See!! I told ya...Not many people can actually HEAR what frequencies are missing (blhablah), it's just written on paper. What matters it how it SOUNDS. Sorry to all you speaker salesmen, but my ears have made lots of money & Ive also done sound engineering, even when i was a kid i experimented with sound reflection (without knowing about bose), and it is not just marketing. When you close your eyes and listen naturally you'll hear the difference.
Red Flag I bought on ebay, but it's found on any dvd sales place. The actual title is "Fighter Pilot: Operation Red Flag" , and was first released on IMAX. Here's a link from History channel: Red Flag (http://shopping.discovery.com/product-59482.html?jzid=40587982-0-0)
I know my hobby. If Sound Engieering was your "job", you should know that a Flat Response is the goal of any Home Theater/Stereo System. You WILL NEVER get it with Bose.
Furthermore, the Equalizer is 99% of the time, used INCORRECTLY. I;m sure everyone that will respond to this statement "uses it correctly".
Bass Module: The Bose Acoustimass subwoofer, or "Bass Module" as they'd like to call it, consists of three 5.5-inch drivers in a seventh-order band pass configuration. The three-chamber band pass design is the worst of all major subwoofer enclosure types. Its only purpose is to boost decibel output at the expense of accuracy. It does this by burying all woofers within the cabinet in three separate chambers, and using them to drive air out of its port(s). First of all, 5.5-inch drivers are not intended to be used as bass drivers; they are clearly midrange drivers. In fact, Bose doesn't even claim that its "Bass Module" is in fact a subwoofer because they can't! True subwoofers start at 8 inches and taper off at 15 inches in diameter (sometimes you will find 6-inch subwoofers in multimedia computer systems and novelty 18-inch subwoofers, but those are largely non-conventional designs that do not have any advantage over others.). Chosen woofer size largely depends on the application, be it music playback and type of music or movies, SPL or accuracy, and other factors such as room dimensions. Smaller subwoofers move faster and thus have tighter bass response for improved clarity and accuracy, but larger subwoofers can reproduce lower frequencies and at louder volumes. Build quality, crossovers, amps, and driver design can magnify or nullify these traits. At a glance, you can tell the 5.5-inch Bose woofers are poorly crafted, from the questionable cone material to the frail spiders, coupled with cheap crossovers located near the amplifier section (harmonic distortion anyone?). And with this already low integrity build, Bose takes these drivers and uses them as a subwoofer unit! This contrived effort quickly reveals its weaknesses in a computer frequency sweep test.
The Cubes: The Bose Acoustimass system implements five dual-cubed, 2.5-inch, paper-cone satellite speakers. Incidentally, you can buy these exact same drivers for $35 a pair here. The material that is used to build these speakers may seem adequate to the unassuming novice; However, upon closer inspection, it is clear that they are built with little regard for performance. To start off, the cubed satellites are made of what Bose once claimed to be "revolutionary new space-aged paper", when in fact my own observations lead me to believe that they are nothing more than dyed Manila hemp. Paper grade is besides the point here, as any type of large paper driver has poor resonant properties in upper octave frequencies (2 KHz to 20+ KHz). When designing satellite speakers where size is the primary consideration, a conventional dome tweeter is ideal. In a cube speaker the size of the Acoustimass, a dome tweeter would perform much better than a cone tweeter. However, Bose disregards this fact because making paper cone tweeters is a much cheaper manufacturing process. You find this practice abundant in $200 Aiwa boom boxes and mini-systems.
There is also something to be said about the diameter of the drivers. The 2.5-inch paper cone Bose uses falls into the range where conventional tweeter and midrange drivers perform weakest. This incongruous selection of dual 2.5-inch drivers is plagued with substantial shortcomings in the high and mid-frequency range. Remember that sound is merely the rapid movement of air so there are very specific driver sizes that correspond to acoustic properties which allow for the magnet-coil structure to drive the speaker at its targeted frequency band with greater ease.
Frequency Response
SATELLITES
280 Hz to 13.3k Hz at ±10.5 dB
BASS MODULE
46Hz to 202Hz at ±2.3 dB
A gap THIS LARGE will be noticable to any person.
Final Comments: This six-speaker unit costs $1299.99 USD MSRP. From dissecting it, it costs $100, no more than $150 tops, to assemble. It performs similarly to a $500 Optimus-Radio Shack surround sound system and is very easily outperformed by a $350 Cambridge Soundworks system. For $1300, there are at least three dozen other configurations from companies such as KEF, PSB, NHT, Mission, Tannoy, Diva, Polk, B&W, Energy, Paradigm, M&K, Infinity, Mirage, Monitor, Jamo, Axiom, nOrh, Anthony Gallo, Dahlquist, Sound Dynamics, Acoustic Research, Phase Technology, Definitive Technology, Wharfdale, Boston Acoustics, and Klipsch that easily outperform all Bose speakers from the 151s to the 901s.
Again, I KNOW my hobby. Please, cease and desist.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by phookat
Curval-- Horns are the plastic things sometimes on speakers that look like air intakes. Ports also can look like this, but horns are often at the top of speakers and centered. Anyway, I think they sound bad.
MrRipley-- I know you can only change direct radiation with an EQ, but I maintain that changing the direct radiation has an impact on overall sound. Using a parametric EQ it is definitely possible to eliminate painful resonances and solve other similar problems caused by room structure or speaker non-flatness. Again it is not the perfect solution...but in a HT environment where you *cannot* rely on direct sound only, this is a better solution than electrostats. You've heard stats off-axis, and I'm sure you'll agree they sound pretty muffled.
Skuzzy-- Below clipping and operating within their design parameters, all amps are gonna sound about the same. I'll have to agree with MrRipley on this one. If you can actually hear amp differences under those conditions, there's a guy in North Carolina that will give you $10,000 to prove it in a double-blind level-matched test. No kidding. Now, of course, some amps are more powerful than others and they'll get louder, and that part is important. But other than that, speakers are electromechanical, and they are going to have a bigger effect. The room may have an even bigger effect than the speakers.
I'll double his bet. I'll make it simple. I have KEF Q1's. Put a Denon receiver and a Yamaha receiver to them, I'll tell which is which. Let him know, I'll drive my 2004 Explorer down to North Carolina and turn the payments over to him when "I lose". If amps DIDN'T have tonal separation or tonal differences, there would be NO NEED to have 300+ amplifier companies manufacturing them.
As for Horns, when done right, they sound great. If you think by going to Best Buy and listening to the Klipsch Synergy series you'll be floored, youve got another thing coming. They ARE the best speakers that they sell though. Here:
Horns sound great in corners because the have a carefully controlled dispersion pattern. The output from the Klipschorn mid and tweeter horns do not reflect off the side walls as they have a dispersion angle of about 85 degrees. Another reason horns kick butt. However, place them in the wrong areas, they sound fer chit.
Regular diaphram speakers have dispersion angles of 180 to 360 degrees (depending on the width of the baffle) and will reflect off any side wall or ceiling or floor near them. You need to avoid this by placing the speakers away from the reflective walls.
Klipsch: The Klipschorn has a large folded bass cabinet that makes it so spectacular, but the same midrange and tweeter are used in the La Scala and Belle. The Belle has a 15" woofer is smaller horn than the Klipschorn and the La Scala has a 12" woofer in an even smaller horn. For the best bass performance other than the Klipschorn, the Belle is the best choice. The La Scala is a smallest of the all horn loaded speakers Klipsch sells.
Again, I know my hobby. I'm not a "sound engineer" nor will I ever be. I'm quite simply well-versed in Home Theater.
Karaya
-
Geez Karaya, hehe,..Denon against Yamaha. I wasn't even thinking in terms that wide. I assume you are talking about the high end Yamaha, not the under $800 stuff they have.
Of course, you could go either way. High end Denon, versus low end Yamaha would be easy too.
-
Originally posted by Seraphim
From my experience, it's the reflections which can define a sound. Anywhere you go, any natural sound reflects off of something.
Ive been using speakers & EQ's since my early teens, and was able to get even a crappy speaker to at least sound decent. Ive also never heard any system with no tone control sound good, unless it was in a milion dollar sound proof studio. Since noone (at least noone I know) can afford that, EQ's help shape the sound to what it supposed to sound like (like skuzzy mentioned). Every single studio Ive been in, seen, or heard of uses EQ's, even if it's just slight, for main recording & mastering, to get the sounds to mix well together, instead of just throwin them together and makin mud.
Using Bose's speakers helps spread the sound to sound more natural for several people in a room to enjoy, unlike directional speakers where you have to sit right in front of them and not move to get a good sound.
With my KEF Uni-Q drivers I can move around the entire room and not "hear exactly which speaker the sound is coming from".
EQ's are a Home Theaters worst nightmare. A more EFFECTIVE but less used skill, is Acoustic Treatments. Heck, a 3x2 panel placed properly can flatten the response totally. I know many people who went the "EQ" route and went the Acoustical treatment route, and wonder why they even bothered with the EQ. EQ's are a double edged sword, with EVERY GAIN, there is a DRAWBACK. BTW, you cannot compare a Recording Studios EQ usage to "Home Theater EQ usage". Two whole, entirely different Sonic Realms.
Problem with Bose is, they focus on "Reflected Sound" rather than "Direct Sound". It's a Marketing Shell Game. Nothing more, nothing less. BTW, those Bose Headphones will not be on the market much longer, AKG, Shure, Sennheiser and Grado have already kicked them in the nuts, and proved those headphones being overpriced.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Geez Karaya, hehe,..Denon against Yamaha. I wasn't even thinking in terms that wide. I assume you are talking about the high end Yamaha, not the under $800 stuff they have.
Of course, you could go either way. High end Denon, versus low end Yamaha would be easy too.
Put it to you simply Skuzz, The Denon through my Q1's (will be moved to the rears on stands when we move) sound like a telephone receiver. The Yamaha has a VERY NOTICABLE headroom increase.
Finally, when I get down there, I'm inviting myself to your crib and bringing some music. The PD couldn't keep me out. :)
Karaya
-
You are more than welcome to come over (you already know what it sounds like, don't ya? :)). I'll take you to my 'toy' shop which has an incredible array of high end gear and a real audio/video room to play around in.
Heck, bring a DVD. I got a nice 60" Sony SXRD to play with as well. Just let me know when. We are remodeling parts of the house right now.
Yep, Yamaha definately kicks Denon in the privates. The highs are just sooooo right with the Yamaha and the mids are clean.
-
How does McIntosh equipment compare to the Martin Logan and other stuff in your opinion(s)? I'm a long time owner and fan of McIntosh line.
speakers (http://www.mcintoshlabs.com/mcprod/shopdisplayproducts.asp?id=20&cat=Loudspeaker+Systems&prodid=1114&product=XRT2K)
power amp (http://www.mcintoshlabs.com/mcprod/shopdisplayproducts.asp?id=14&cat=Power+Amplifiers&prodid=1028&product=MC602)
-
Originally posted by xrtoronto
How does McIntosh equipment compare to the Martin Logan and other stuff in your opinion(s)? I'm a long time owner and fan of McIntosh line.
speakers (http://www.mcintoshlabs.com/mcprod/shopdisplayproducts.asp?id=20&cat=Loudspeaker+Systems&prodid=1114&product=XRT2K)
power amp (http://www.mcintoshlabs.com/mcprod/shopdisplayproducts.asp?id=14&cat=Power+Amplifiers&prodid=1028&product=MC602)
McIntosh ranges from $3,000-$10,000 USD. it is a VERY RESPECTABLE brand. No negatives about em. You have Logan's?
I do not have my price guide in my bookbag (at work, supposed to be working), but I want to say that the MC602 is around $4,000.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Only highly directive speakers have a room response similar to the response in anechoid chamber. And even that is true only in nearfield where reflections will stay out of the envelope. And this is the big deal.
If you haven't heard Martin Logan or Magnepan for example, do yourself a favour and arrange a listening session. If it's not an eye opener for you, you probably won't need anything better than a boxed speaker anyway. ;)
Yes, I have heard the Logans. Had a friend who owned a pair of ML Arius speakers. And they sound great, as I mentioned before. But only in one place. ;) As I have been saying, this is not the ideal solution for a HT application where you have people in different locations.
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
There are dozens of labels offering true hi-fi quality parts. Labels that the speaker manufacturers use. Scan-Speak, Seas, Vifa, Peerless, Focal and Visaton to name a few. They all offer extremely high quality parts which make car audio products look like the toys they are.
I've used most of those brands in my DIY projects. Yes, they are good...but I maintain that there is some car audio gear out there that is actually better than those drivers in certain applications. For example, the Adire Koda has an extremely smooth roll-off, with unusually low breakup. Another example, JL and Adire subs have extremely linear motors with tons of excursion. Raven ribbons aren't car equipment, but they're some of the best tweeters I've heard.
I'm not talking about stuff you get at Best Buy in the "boom box car audio section".
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
McIntosh ranges from $3,000-$10,000 USD. it is a VERY RESPECTABLE brand. No negatives about em. You have Logan's?
I do not have my price guide in my bookbag (at work, supposed to be working), but I want to say that the MC602 is around $4,000.
Karaya
No...I don't have Logans...next time I'm uptown I'll make a point of stopping in for a demo
If they have them I'd love to hear a demo of the XRT30 speaker system from McIntosh ($30K) I've heard other less expensive Mac speakers over the years and this brand never fails to impress as it gets louder and louder Have you heard them?
-
Yes, they are capable, but if you shelling out that much coin. You can do better, IMO. Dynaudio, B&W, and KEF Reference have them bettered and are all cheaper. I myself have the KEF Q series of speakers, and find the Reference line overpriced.
Personally, I'm old fashioned. I prefer the "British sound". Which is why I settled on the KEF brand. If my wife wasn't such a pistol, I'd push for the B&W Nautilus 805's (bookshelf speaker) for all 5 channels. I would then mate it with an SVS subwoofer. I'm a follower of late Henry Kloss that "Bookshelves are the best example of a natural sounding speaker. The more crossovers you place between the signal and the ear, the worse is sounds."
Another side note. If you ever have that much to spend. Just make sure you a worthy room to put it in. Acoustic treatments will ALWAYS be needed. You do not need an EQ. Unless you know what you are doing, you will make the signal more harsh. The room is a big factor. Say you have a rectangular room (12' X 20'). Some product will perform better in the "short dimension" (speakers closer) and vice versa.
Any forum member is more than welcome to PM with questions.
Karaya
PS - I'll be in Toronto from April 8-9th (seeing David Gilmour on the 9th at Massey Hall).
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
I'll double his bet. I'll make it simple. I have KEF Q1's. Put a Denon receiver and a Yamaha receiver to them, I'll tell which is which. Let him know, I'll drive my 2004 Explorer down to North Carolina and turn the payments over to him when "I lose". If amps DIDN'T have tonal separation or tonal differences, there would be NO NEED to have 300+ amplifier companies manufacturing them.
Hey Masherbrum... I'm tellin ya, head out to the carsound.com forums and look up this Richard Clark guy. It's much better than a bet, actually...if you lose, you only lose the trip fare + $100. If you win, you get $10,000. He doesn't charge when he sets up a booth at a conference, but he started charging $100 for individual challenge applicants because so many people started trying it individually and failing, and it was costing him a lot of time to keep setting it up and making arrangements. You can give it a try, but I'll give you the same warning as I gave Skuzzy. ;)
Originally posted by Masherbrum
As for Horns, when done right, they sound great. If you think by going to Best Buy and listening to the Klipsch Synergy series you'll be floored, youve got another thing coming. They ARE the best speakers that they sell though.
Perhaps so, but I've never heard a good horn. Stats and ribbons are the way to go on the high end IMO...unless you've got a PA application where pure SPL is more important than quality. I've auditioned Klipsch in hi-end stores, and was not impressed (compared to the likes of Logan stats). I think the problem is the inherent distortion of compression drivers.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Speakers aside, if you are on a budget. Spend more on the amplifier/receiver than the speakers. A good amp can make poor speakers sound ok, but no matter how good the speakers are, a bad amp will make them sound bad.
Also, try to match the wattage/output of the amp to the room you will be placing it. An under-powered amp for a room will sound terrible. Better to have a bit too much, than too little. I typically use the following equation.
square feet * 30W = total wattage
Hey, I hate to take a step back here, but did you type this right? So for 100 SqFt room, you'd want a 3000 watt amp? Youch!
-
Originally posted by phookat
Hey Masherbrum... I'm tellin ya, head out to the carsound.com forums and look up this Richard Clark guy. It's much better than a bet, actually...if you lose, you only lose the trip fare + $100. If you win, you get $10,000. He doesn't charge when he sets up a booth at a conference, but he started charging $100 for individual challenge applicants because so many people started trying it individually and failing, and it was costing him a lot of time to keep setting it up and making arrangements. You can give it a try, but I'll give you the same warning as I gave Skuzzy. ;)
Perhaps so, but I've never heard a good horn. Stats and ribbons are the way to go on the high end IMO...unless you've got a PA application where pure SPL is more important than quality. I've auditioned Klipsch in hi-end stores, and was not impressed (compared to the likes of Logan stats). I think the problem is the inherent distortion of compression drivers.
Again, I'm a fixture in a few high end stores here in Michigan. To judge Klipsch Horn-loaded in a store, in unacceptable. Again, these NEED to be in a corner to MAXIMIZE their design.
You have two takers on the bet in the same thread. By exposing your forum buddy, you are naming him as incompetent. He's wrong, and "his years of service" sicken me, as I know more than he, but, he get's the easy job.
But purely going on a horn listened to in the store is pointless. If you HAVE the means to purchase them, take em home, and audition them for 30 days and if unsatisfied, return em. Again, they must be in a corner, if not, they'll sound horrible.
Karaya
-
Furthermore, this "proposed bet" is only damaging the character of "Richard". I'd really hope you stop referring to this amateur.
Back to the original point. Bose is all about marketing. Also, why on earth anyone would buy speakers from a Company who REFUSES to print Frequency Response numbers (I told you guys why THEY DO) defies not only any Home Theater rules, but mere Common Sense.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
You have two takers on the bet in the same thread. By exposing your forum buddy, you are naming him as incompetent. He's wrong, and "his years of service" sicken me, as I know more than he, but, he get's the easy job.
Woah there. We have zero takers on the bet so far. If you want to take the bet, contact him not me. I'm totally serious. $10,000 free for the taking. Well known. Let us know how it goes. He's not incompetent, I think you'll find. ;)
You might be surprised at what you really can and can't hear, is the test is truly double-blind.
Originally posted by Masherbrum
But purely going on a horn listened to in the store is pointless. If you HAVE the means to purchase them, take em home, and audition them for 30 days and if unsatisfied, return em. Again, they must be in a corner, if not, they'll sound horrible.
Do corners remove the effects of super-pressure-induced distortion?
-
Originally posted by SOB
Hey, I hate to take a step back here, but did you type this right? So for 100 SqFt room, you'd want a 3000 watt amp? Youch!
Oopsy, it was a typo. Try 3W per square foot. Thanks for calling it out SOB.
-
A hi-fi horn speaker should be placed with about 0.5-1 meter clearance to walls just as any other speaker. Corner placement will only help bass reproduction in volume but degrade the quality. Degradation happens because a corner placement maximises the effects of standing waves (dead or boomy spots in room).
Take Acapella for example of a quality horn speaker. As a curiosity it has a PLASMA tweeter. That's right, the sound comes from superheated gas trapped in an electric field. :D
(http://www.acapella.de/german/images/triolon_excalibur.jpg)
-
Originally posted by phookat
Woah there. We have zero takers on the bet so far. If you want to take the bet, contact him not me. I'm totally serious. $10,000 free for the taking. Well known. Let us know how it goes. He's not incompetent, I think you'll find. ;)
You might be surprised at what you really can and can't hear, is the test is truly double-blind.
Do corners remove the effects of super-pressure-induced distortion?
Horn LOADED drivers are unaffected by this. But, we'll assume I know nothing.
Karaya
PS - You're being played like Prometheus and you haven't figured it out yet. Please stop.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Horn LOADED drivers are unaffected by this.
...but compression drivers are.
Originally posted by Masherbrum
PS - You're being played like Prometheus and you haven't figured it out yet. Please stop.
I don't think so. Have you contacted Mr. Clark about your in-the-bag $10K yet? ;)
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Oopsy, it was a typo. Try 3W per square foot. Thanks for calling it out SOB.
Heh, no problem. I know >< much about home stereo equipment and was amazed at the thought. :D
-
Originally posted by phookat
...but compression drivers are.
Klipsch are Horn LOADED. They are NOT compression drivers, so I'm wondering why you are bring "compression drivers" into the "Klipsch Discussion". Let me know when you get back on the road from fish-tailing.
Karaya
-
Cool, thx for the info. Let me know when you take the amp challenge.