On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:04:04 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


I'm wary of terms like 'true bass' given that, at best, 'hifi' is a
*depiction* of 'real sound' - but, surely it doesn't need to be repeated
that nobody in his right mind would seek 'true bass' from horns or
bookshelf
speakers....???


It does sound a lot nicer, though. And it certainly doesn't sound like
"a lot of bass". And why do you think that nobody in his right mind
would seek true bass from *any* speaker? It is an entirely reasonable
thing to seek.



No, try it this way round - why would people seeking 'true bass' from a
speaker choose the wrong tool for the job...??


That I can see. I do want true bass though - I'm different, I suppose.



OK, just for you ( I know how much you like them) I've recorded the track
that immediately springs to mind for 'isolated' treble. It has been posted
before but I think you will find it is better miked now:

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

- than it was before, on the poor little lapel mic! There's a lot less
'room' in the equation (almost none) which, of course, means the bass is
less than I get to hear for real as my bass comes off the walls, but there
is at least some indication of it. See below for the relevance....

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


This is really hard to judge, because the track is entirely synthetic
- I have no internal sound picture to compare it with. It does seem to
me though that the bottom end of the bass just isn't there.

I do not ordinarily like to hear 'treble' or 'bass', I like a sound which
Swim describes as *balanced* - that is 'cohesive' in audio terms, I
believe...?? The only exception to that is a 'proper organ' when I like to
*feel* the bass and, as I have said 28,000 times now, I don't expect to get
that from horns the size I have in the room the size mine is. (Later on, if
I get time, I'm going to hook up to the Ruarks and 'revisit' a couple of my
organ discs!!)


Balance is everything - you should be unaware of all parts of the
spectrum. If you are noticing treble or bass, they are simply wrong.
That is all part of my advice to people buying speakers - if they make
you go "wow", just walk on by - they are crap.

In fact, as I have said before, I quickly accomodate the various sounds from
my system and various radios (car/bathroom/garage) very quickly and tend not
to be listening to the kit. Best example of this is out in my garage where I
frequently enjoy R3 of an afternoon from a decent little Roberts radio - I
hear the music only and never give a thought to the radio itself..!!

I have a couple of Roberts of my own for exactly those purposes, and
they are great. But if I am sitting down of an evening to actually
listen to some music, they simply don't do the job.

KEF
Tannoy
Wharfedale
Quad
Dynaudio
Ruark
JM-Labs
B&W
Jamo (Concert 8s)
Rogers

plus probably others I can't recall...??


Yup, some good names there.



Yes, all the same but different with skightly different strengths and
weaknesses - all of which I could live with if I had to, all of which I have
rejected...

Well, from my point of view it is a shame you didn't persevere.




You'll get away with that - if I had posted it, I'd damn soon have a couple
of hot little faces telling me that it's probably 'builders's blindness' or
somesuch....


I know all too well about builder's blindness. But there is slightly
more to it than that. I built a design that simply isn't available to
the manufacturer, and guarantees a smooth response with no honking
humps.


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.

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!

d

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

"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?? :-)

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

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.

"Serge Auckland" wrote


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.



You are not alone, others have made the same choice but the 'horns' have
come on a bit since you were here - I finally gave up on the Jerichos only a
few days ago and am settling on the (In)Fidelios with Lowther drivers for
the time being. Lowthers themselves being a definite 'cut above' the drivers
you heard also....

(The Pinkies still do sterling service on CD, the radio and TV... :-)

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

"Don Pearce" wrote


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



OK, got those - thanks!

Bass - yes, top end - yes maybe in the pix, no in real life I would say.
Unless a harder, more 'brittle' bass is what is generally considered to be
better?

I'll play both the recordings back to back a bit later and see if I can get
a clearer picture, but I don't think I would pick the Paladin's treble from
what I've heard here....??

(Bear in mind, the Paladins are my *pick of the bunch* from the long stream
of speakers that have been through here during the last few years and are
definite keepers....)

On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 13:59:14 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote


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



OK, got those - thanks!

Bass - yes, top end - yes maybe in the pix, no in real life I would say.
Unless a harder, more 'brittle' bass is what is generally considered to be
better?


Not sure what you mean - extending the bottom end will result in the
opposite of brittle.

d

I'll play both the recordings back to back a bit later and see if I can get
a clearer picture, but I don't think I would pick the Paladin's treble from
what I've heard here....??


Do play 'em through the Paladins though - you won't hear the
difference through the horns.

(Bear in mind, the Paladins are my *pick of the bunch* from the long stream
of speakers that have been through here during the last few years and are
definite keepers....)


Quite right.

d

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

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 20 Nov 2006 13:59:14 -0000, "Keith G"
wrote:


"Don Pearce" wrote


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



OK, got those - thanks!

Bass - yes, top end - yes maybe in the pix, no in real life I would say.
Unless a harder, more 'brittle' bass is what is generally considered to be
better?


Not sure what you mean - extending the bottom end will result in the
opposite of brittle.



That's an 'oops' - I meant brittle treble! (Is how they seemed to me...??)



d

I'll play both the recordings back to back a bit later and see if I can
get
a clearer picture, but I don't think I would pick the Paladin's treble
from
what I've heard here....??


Do play 'em through the Paladins though - you won't hear the
difference through the horns.

(Bear in mind, the Paladins are my *pick of the bunch* from the long
stream
of speakers that have been through here during the last few years and are
definite keepers....)


Quite right.


:-)

Glad you approve - can I send you some colour swatches through and we'll get
next year's decor plan sorted out while we're on? ;-)

I'm in the poop - I just had a call from the dentist! (Apparently I should
have been in for a checkup at 2 o' clock....!!)

"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!! ;-)