"Wally" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:

The tracks were as follows:
A = Denon/PM6C
B = 2A3/EX3
C = 2A3/PM6C
D = Denon/EX3

I also thought A had better bass - same speakers as my preference of C. I
felt C sounded a bit smoother than A. B and D lacked bottom end and
sounded
too bright.


But it's the *exact opposite* in real life...!!???

"Nick Gorham" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:


I don't - they bear virtually no relation to what I hear for real!!
(Despite the Behringer is a million % better than the little lapel mic!!)

I think I know what at least part of the problem is here - I aimed the
mic at the 'other' speakers and haven't moved throughout all the
recordings. I guess it was therefore well 'off axis' for B & D, although
I thought it probably wouldn't matter much. (How do you 'aim' a mic when
the bass is coming off the rear wall...??)


Ahh, just a mo, don't "aim" the mike at the speakers, AFAIK, its a omni,
but should be positioned pointing up. I may have misled you saying
position it in line with the drive unit. What I meant was have the end of
the mike in line with the axis of the speaker. Though given the size of
the room, it will be getting as much from the room as directly from the
speaker. Part of the reason its a thin pointy shape is to avoid having
surfaces near the capsule that will cause unwanted ripples in the
response. Idealy have it on the top of a mike stand, or as I suggested
suspend it from above by the cable.



OK, ballsed that up then! :-)

I'll knock up a little stand and line it up with the EX3s...

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 1 Oct 2006 21:30:26 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

So what is it with B and D? I'm actually surprised you can bear to
listen to them, they are just horrible.


I don't - they bear virtually no relation to what I hear for real!!
(Despite
the Behringer is a million % better than the little lapel mic!!)


Try an experiment. Stick a finger on one ear while you listen - it
turns off some of the brains compensation mechanisms. Does it sound a
little more like the recordings now?


:-)



Incidentally, you should never play a recording back in the room it
was made in - every unflatness multiplies, and the whole thing sounds
appalling.


Sure, bin there, heard that....


snip tale of woe


(I have listened to them all on cheapo Sennheiser HD 202 cans and don't
like
any of them, including the CD direct 'reference' track which sounds like
its
got a foghorn/wet fart blowing all the way through it!!)


Well, it was your choice ;-)


Since this exchange I have heaved stuff about and ended up *exactly* where I
started - totally the opposite of the recordings, asitappens!!!

No complete waste of time though, all part of the learning curve - if
nothing else it has utterly reinforced my preference for 300Bs (against SS,
2A3s and 6550 PP atm) and vinyl in *spades*!! And, believe it or not,
finalised my choice for the EX3/Fidelios!!

All very strange.....

Nick Gorham wrote:

Keith G wrote:

I don't - they bear virtually no relation to what I hear for real!! (Despite
the Behringer is a million % better than the little lapel mic!!)

I think I know what at least part of the problem is here - I aimed the mic
at the 'other' speakers and haven't moved throughout all the recordings. I
guess it was therefore well 'off axis' for B & D, although I thought it
probably wouldn't matter much. (How do you 'aim' a mic when the bass is
coming off the rear wall...??)

Ahh, just a mo, don't "aim" the mike at the speakers, AFAIK, its a omni,
but should be positioned pointing up. I may have misled you saying
position it in line with the drive unit. What I meant was have the end
of the mike in line with the axis of the speaker. Though given the size
of the room, it will be getting as much from the room as directly from
the speaker. Part of the reason its a thin pointy shape is to avoid
having surfaces near the capsule that will cause unwanted ripples in the
response. Idealy have it on the top of a mike stand, or as I suggested
suspend it from above by the cable.

If Keith wants to capture the sound he hears, the mic should be positioned in his
listening position.

Graham

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 23:06:40 +0100, Nick Gorham
wrote:

Keith G wrote:


I don't - they bear virtually no relation to what I hear for real!! (Despite
the Behringer is a million % better than the little lapel mic!!)

I think I know what at least part of the problem is here - I aimed the mic
at the 'other' speakers and haven't moved throughout all the recordings. I
guess it was therefore well 'off axis' for B & D, although I thought it
probably wouldn't matter much. (How do you 'aim' a mic when the bass is
coming off the rear wall...??)


Ahh, just a mo, don't "aim" the mike at the speakers, AFAIK, its a omni,
but should be positioned pointing up. I may have misled you saying
position it in line with the drive unit. What I meant was have the end
of the mike in line with the axis of the speaker. Though given the size
of the room, it will be getting as much from the room as directly from
the speaker. Part of the reason its a thin pointy shape is to avoid
having surfaces near the capsule that will cause unwanted ripples in the
response. Idealy have it on the top of a mike stand, or as I suggested
suspend it from above by the cable.

Or I could be wrong. Don?

Pointing at the speaker, in line with the drive unit should be exactly
right, although given the small diameter of the mic (as you say), it
shouldn't make much difference if it is pointed somewhere else. The
dead flat calibration curve is taken exactly front-on, though. And the
published response of the speaker will be in line with the driver's
centre too.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Eeyore wrote:

If Keith wants to capture the sound he hears, the mic should be positioned in his
listening position.

But if he wants to demonstrate the sound of the speakers rather than the room
he should do one channel at a time in an anechoic chamber, or at least at the
bottom of the garden on a still night.

--
Eiron

No good deed ever goes unpunished.

Don Pearce wrote:

Ok, I was wrong about that then :-).

I did try both ways myself, and it didn't seem to make that much of a
difference anyway.

--
Nick

On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 00:07:14 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Wally" wrote in message
...
Keith G wrote:

Of the four 'system sounds' I would pick 3. Best bottom end.

Wrong answer, Wally....

;-)

See my reply to Don for details...!!

Was I supposed to identify something? I was just picking the one I
preferred...



I'm only yanking yer chain - you (and a thousand others) were supposed to
pick track B or D with the EX3 drivers! Kinda ain't quite worked out the way
I wanted, so.....

...I've heaved a ton and a half of iron about tonight to end up EXACTLY
WHERE I STARTED!!!

I need to shift either of these pairs of speakers out:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/Lowther06.JPG

they are stealing each other's air!! (And reducing what bass is available!!)




Keith, I've put up another bit of stuff for you. There are three
frequency plots, one each for the reference, PM6 and EXE. They show
very clearly the response of each of these speakers, particularly the
horrifying top end of the EXEs; the PM6es are quite a bit better, but
still not at all nice - very toppy.

Are you absolutely sure about your choice?

http://81.174.169.10/odds/kspkr/

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 08:05:58 +0100, Nick Gorham
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:

Ok, I was wrong about that then :-).

I did try both ways myself, and it didn't seem to make that much of a
difference anyway.

Right - it would make a difference with an expensive large diaphragm
condensor because they have such a poor off-axis frequency response
compared to the Behringer.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

Eiron wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

If Keith wants to capture the sound he hears, the mic should be positioned in his
listening position.

But if he wants to demonstrate the sound of the speakers rather than the room

That's not what he's listening to is it ?

Graham