What's your view of speaker crossovers?
 

On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 12:20:43 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:04:04 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


OK, here's one for you and for 'someone else' to throw rocks at: Last
week,
quite out of the blue, I bumped into an old friend I hadn't seen for about
TWENTY years!! And, yes, he lives only a couple of miles from here, which
would have been a tragedy (as we have been here ourselves for getting for
10
years) *if* we had a lot more in common than we appear now to do!! (??)
(I'm
getting a little too old for ****-ups and skirt-chasing now!! ;-)

Naturally, he got a demo of my kit (for at least 20 seconds - no interest
in
it whatsoever) of the track posted above when I got the standard 'Woah,
that's nice and clear!' immediate reaction and then 'Here's comes a bit of
'bottom end!' a few moments later. Then switch off and no further
reference
to it.


That is exactly the response I would expect. The initial reaction to
any system with an exaggeration of any particular part of the
frequency range is fairly predictable. That is well known to recording
engineers who use the fact to inject the right mood into their
product.



No....

The truth is the speakers are so *clear and direct* it's quite breathtaking.
They are 'stunning' in a totally *non spectacular* way - ie they are so
comfortable to listen to....



Indicate when you have got/heard that track and I'll post it again
recorded
from my Ruarks a little later on, for comparison....



Bring 'em on!


OK, here we go - this is the setup:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...Setup%2001.JPG

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...Setup%2002.JPG

and here is the track:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...,%20SE1As).mp3

...and here's the Lowther track again for direct comparison (if anyone else
is interested):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/Track10.mp3


Now, before you tell me there's no bass on the Ruark track either - when I
started it off I went over to the back door for a fag (as I do) and rested
my elbow on the (patio door) pull handle. At about 1 minute in, the fekking
door started thrumming and I was getting the bass through my elbow as well
as hearing it!! (The Paladins quote 38 Hz at the bottom end...)

As it's ****ing with rain here (on and off) I don't feel too guilty about
this sort of dicking around - while I'm set up on the Ruarks what else would
you rather hear? Gimme a slot and I'll see what I've got that best fits it!
(Sorry if it's a bit sad, but I enjoy it and it's good practice for me!! ;-)

Now, if nothing else, the recordings *look* a lot better these days, don't
they?? :-)



Plenty of bass on the Ruarks; in fact for smoothness and generally
nice sound they have it by a mile from the other two. There is a
series of low bass notes at about 35Hz. They are there quite nicely on
the Ruarks, while on the other two they have simply vanished, although
there is something there at 70Hz that seems to have replaced them

For me that is a non-contest. The Ruarks have it by miles.

The recordings are much better, too :-)

d

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

What's your view of speaker crossovers?
 

Don Pearce wrote:
On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 12:20:43 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:04:04 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:

OK, here's one for you and for 'someone else' to throw rocks at: Last
week,
quite out of the blue, I bumped into an old friend I hadn't seen for about
TWENTY years!! And, yes, he lives only a couple of miles from here, which
would have been a tragedy (as we have been here ourselves for getting for
10
years) *if* we had a lot more in common than we appear now to do!! (??)
(I'm
getting a little too old for ****-ups and skirt-chasing now!! ;-)

Naturally, he got a demo of my kit (for at least 20 seconds - no interest
in
it whatsoever) of the track posted above when I got the standard 'Woah,
that's nice and clear!' immediate reaction and then 'Here's comes a bit of
'bottom end!' a few moments later. Then switch off and no further
reference
to it.

That is exactly the response I would expect. The initial reaction to
any system with an exaggeration of any particular part of the
frequency range is fairly predictable. That is well known to recording
engineers who use the fact to inject the right mood into their
product.


No....

The truth is the speakers are so *clear and direct* it's quite breathtaking.
They are 'stunning' in a totally *non spectacular* way - ie they are so
comfortable to listen to....


Indicate when you have got/heard that track and I'll post it again
recorded
from my Ruarks a little later on, for comparison....

Bring 'em on!

OK, here we go - this is the setup:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...Setup%2001.JPG

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...Setup%2002.JPG

and here is the track:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...,%20SE1As).mp3

...and here's the Lowther track again for direct comparison (if anyone else
is interested):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/Track10.mp3


Now, before you tell me there's no bass on the Ruark track either - when I
started it off I went over to the back door for a fag (as I do) and rested
my elbow on the (patio door) pull handle. At about 1 minute in, the fekking
door started thrumming and I was getting the bass through my elbow as well
as hearing it!! (The Paladins quote 38 Hz at the bottom end...)

As it's ****ing with rain here (on and off) I don't feel too guilty about
this sort of dicking around - while I'm set up on the Ruarks what else would
you rather hear? Gimme a slot and I'll see what I've got that best fits it!
(Sorry if it's a bit sad, but I enjoy it and it's good practice for me!! ;-)

Now, if nothing else, the recordings *look* a lot better these days, don't
they?? :-)



Plenty of bass on the Ruarks; in fact for smoothness and generally
nice sound they have it by a mile from the other two. There is a
series of low bass notes at about 35Hz. They are there quite nicely on
the Ruarks, while on the other two they have simply vanished, although
there is something there at 70Hz that seems to have replaced them

For me that is a non-contest. The Ruarks have it by miles.

The recordings are much better, too :-)

d


When I heard the Ruarks myself at Keith's, they were clearly better to
my ears than the horns, much more what I'm used to. Not as "exciting"
perhaps, but a lot less coloured, and with properly extended bass and
good treble.

S.

What's your view of speaker crossovers?
 

"Keith G" wrote in message


OK, here we go - this is the setup:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...Setup%2001.JPG

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...Setup%2002.JPG

and here is the track:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...,%20SE1As).mp3

...and here's the Lowther track again for direct
comparison (if anyone else is interested):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/Track10.mp3

Missing - track10 from the original source.

What's your view of speaker crossovers?
 

On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 12:46:06 GMT, (Don Pearce)
wrote:

On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 12:20:43 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:04:04 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


OK, here's one for you and for 'someone else' to throw rocks at: Last
week,
quite out of the blue, I bumped into an old friend I hadn't seen for about
TWENTY years!! And, yes, he lives only a couple of miles from here, which
would have been a tragedy (as we have been here ourselves for getting for
10
years) *if* we had a lot more in common than we appear now to do!! (??)
(I'm
getting a little too old for ****-ups and skirt-chasing now!! ;-)

Naturally, he got a demo of my kit (for at least 20 seconds - no interest
in
it whatsoever) of the track posted above when I got the standard 'Woah,
that's nice and clear!' immediate reaction and then 'Here's comes a bit of
'bottom end!' a few moments later. Then switch off and no further
reference
to it.


That is exactly the response I would expect. The initial reaction to
any system with an exaggeration of any particular part of the
frequency range is fairly predictable. That is well known to recording
engineers who use the fact to inject the right mood into their
product.



No....

The truth is the speakers are so *clear and direct* it's quite breathtaking.
They are 'stunning' in a totally *non spectacular* way - ie they are so
comfortable to listen to....



Indicate when you have got/heard that track and I'll post it again
recorded
from my Ruarks a little later on, for comparison....



Bring 'em on!


OK, here we go - this is the setup:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...Setup%2001.JPG

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...Setup%2002.JPG

and here is the track:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...,%20SE1As).mp3

...and here's the Lowther track again for direct comparison (if anyone else
is interested):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/Track10.mp3


Now, before you tell me there's no bass on the Ruark track either - when I
started it off I went over to the back door for a fag (as I do) and rested
my elbow on the (patio door) pull handle. At about 1 minute in, the fekking
door started thrumming and I was getting the bass through my elbow as well
as hearing it!! (The Paladins quote 38 Hz at the bottom end...)

As it's ****ing with rain here (on and off) I don't feel too guilty about
this sort of dicking around - while I'm set up on the Ruarks what else would
you rather hear? Gimme a slot and I'll see what I've got that best fits it!
(Sorry if it's a bit sad, but I enjoy it and it's good practice for me!! ;-)

Now, if nothing else, the recordings *look* a lot better these days, don't
they?? :-)



Plenty of bass on the Ruarks; in fact for smoothness and generally
nice sound they have it by a mile from the other two. There is a
series of low bass notes at about 35Hz. They are there quite nicely on
the Ruarks, while on the other two they have simply vanished, although
there is something there at 70Hz that seems to have replaced them

For me that is a non-contest. The Ruarks have it by miles.

The recordings are much better, too :-)

d

Here's my frequency analysis of the Paladin and the other speaker
(Lowther?). It scans the whole file, so it isn't just a snapshot. The
difference is clear - top end as well as bass.

http://81.174.169.10/odds/kspkr/paladin.gif
http://81.174.169.10/odds/kspkr/other.gif

d

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

What's your view of speaker crossovers?
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Keith G" wrote in message


OK, here we go - this is the setup:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...Setup%2001.JPG

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...Setup%2002.JPG

and here is the track:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...,%20SE1As).mp3

...and here's the Lowther track again for direct
comparison (if anyone else is interested):

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show/Track10.mp3

Missing - track10 from the original source.



Here you go:

http://www.apah69.dsl.pipex.com/show...0In%20Love.mp3

....seein's as how ya arst so nice like....

(Straining my webspace to the limits here.....)

What's your view of speaker crossovers?
 

My impression is that making a single driver speaker imposes such
demanding
constraints on the design and use as to be rather limiting. But then my

reaction is to prefer (phased array) electrostatics to cone-and-box
speakers, anyway. JL

Hi Jim. Yes, I agree about panel speakers - if I had more room I'd
probably use Apogees. But, yes, I'm talking all sorts of compromises.
First being a small speaker easy to locate (panels are wide and have to
be away from walls)

I try to get over cone-and-box problems with ultra stiff massy boxes.
My front panel is a large thick aluminium U shape extrusion with the
speaker unit bolted on it, and the sides (three layers MDF with damping
beween) are then bolted to the sides of the U section.

I just about get away with the frequency response - 40hz is there, and
it goes up to 13k or so. The unit may well work better when it's not
supplying the bass frequencies, but then I'd need a crossover and I am
very wary of capacitors in the signal path - I really don't like them.
I could go active - that would be a solution (though complex) - but I
find I can live with the sound I have. It's not perfect but it's
extremely clear and detailed and the tone is fine. I don't know what
the term is for a single driver - coherent maybe?

What's your view of speaker crossovers?
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Don Pearce" wrote in message

On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:22:47 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:

Also, what do you reckon to this little bugger:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.d...0656&rd=1&rd=1

Seems to be a convenient package. It looks neat.

Self-noise is actually high enough to be of concern.

For half the price I'd have a pair of Rhode NT1A, which I indeed already
have. Quieter, and probably smoother.



Hmm, my favourite supplier has them listed:

http://www.nusystems.co.uk/product/R...A.Matched.Pair


Very appealing - noted, bookmarked and *targetted*....

(So much stuff needed, so little money....!! :-(



I have a mount for coincident micing that cost about $15.


I got one in the 'flight case' with my 'factory pair' of SE1As....

http://www.nusystems.co.uk/product/S...ed.Stereo.Pair

What's your view of speaker crossovers?
 

On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 13:16:43 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Don Pearce" wrote in message

On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:22:47 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:

Also, what do you reckon to this little bugger:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.d...0656&rd=1&rd=1

Seems to be a convenient package. It looks neat.

Self-noise is actually high enough to be of concern.

For half the price I'd have a pair of Rhode NT1A, which I indeed already
have. Quieter, and probably smoother.



Hmm, my favourite supplier has them listed:

http://www.nusystems.co.uk/product/R...A.Matched.Pair


Very appealing - noted, bookmarked and *targetted*....

(So much stuff needed, so little money....!! :-(


Dolphin have them at £119 each. Forget matched pairs - they are all
plenty well matched.

d

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

What's your view of speaker crossovers?
 

"Don Pearce" wrote


Plenty of bass on the Ruarks; in fact for smoothness and generally
nice sound they have it by a mile from the other two. There is a
series of low bass notes at about 35Hz. They are there quite nicely on
the Ruarks, while on the other two they have simply vanished, although
there is something there at 70Hz that seems to have replaced them

For me that is a non-contest. The Ruarks have it by miles.



Gor blimey, guvnah - yer could of knocked me dahn wiv a fevver!! I wuz
*certain* you choose the others!!

(Only kidding, of course!! :-)

But let's get back on track here - it's the *treble* we're interested in,
no-one's claimimg horns can match (or even compete) with speakers like the
Paladins on bass!! What do say about the *treble*...??? (It's 'extremes'
both ends that started this little lot off!!)

Anyway, so what do I do now - drag the Ruarks back into my pokey little room
(back to where I was 5 years ago) lose all my clarity and depth and start
*wading* through the bass again...?? (Not to mention how they'll slop around
hanging off my triodes.....!! ;-)



The recordings are much better, too :-)


Yes, I thought so - easier to control levels with proper pre's than on the
computer only, as in the early days!!

(I need all the encouragement I can get - there's one or two here got
absolutely nothing better to do than hang around with their dicks out,
waiting to give me a good *hosing*, it seems!! ;-)

What's your view of speaker crossovers?
 

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message

In article ,
Keith G wrote:
Frankly, the numbers don't mean very much at all in the
real world, other than to a designer or manufacturer -
for example, the frequency range of a full orchestra is
only about 40-14k and the *dink dink* 'Top C' on a piano
is only about 4096 Hz with only weak (inaudible for most
purposes) harmonics extending beyond 10 kHz....

If the harmonics were inaudible it would sound like a
sine wave. So nothing like a piano at all.

I'm amazed at you. You go on and on about the subtle
differences you claim to hear then come up with rubbish
like this...

More to the point, is the lack of quality of reproduction that we get at
high frequencies by single-way drivers.

There are hard physical laws that say you can't have deep bass and high
efficiency and small size at the same time. If you add good dynamic range,
then things get that much more difficult.

In a similar fashion, you can't have deep bass, extended treble, smooth
response, and broad dispersion at the same time.

I still remember doing some frequency response measurements on a "full
range" JBL 15" driver in engineerings school in the middlee 1960s. Believe
it or not, it had response at 13 KHz. But only on-axis. And only after a
number of audible dips and peaks at lower frequencies.



You could set fire to vintage JBLs (horn tweeter models?) and there's one or
two around these parts would *still* buy them while they burned, but I'm not
so sure about the new stuff....???