"Keith G" wrote in message


Anybody can make up a list of makes and models. Just
search google.

Call me naive, but who TF here is going *fake* a list of
anything...??

God knows.

"Arny Krueger" wrote


The truth is that I don't remember all of the makes and models of
projectors that I even own!

I don't own any, unless you count a 1950 vintage Decca 1000 projection TV
;-)

David.

On 20/07/2010 21:35, Keith G wrote:

"Just Another Lurker" wrote in message
...
On 20/07/2010 17:01, Keith G wrote:

"UnsteadyKen" wrote in message
...
Keith G said...

I still need to see a lot more posts from other people here....

OK, OK. My illustrated guide to bi-speakering is ready.

http://unsteadyken.posterous.com/



That's OK, Ken - you can just lurk if you want....

;-)



Hello Mr.Keith,



Hello Mr Just Another



well just for you, my listening space.


Very nice too with a nice high ceiling. The room treatment boyz would
have a fied day with the 'pent roof'!!

Kit is very impressive - Chord Electronics..??

What are the speakers?



The room still needs some attention to fine tune the sound, but doing
nothing until I get all the gear tidy and onto some sturdy and stylist
rack/stands.

Chord 3200E pre and 1200E power amps, Chord Blu CD transport and Chord
QBD76 DAC. I also store (backup) my CD collection as 44.1kHz/16bit audio
Wave files to external LaCie Hard Drives playback via the USB input (or
Bluetooth) on the DAC using a Samsung laptop.

The speakers are a pair of (yes just one pair ) ProAc Response D28.


--
Still Lurking

Keith G said...

Once again: where's the soundstage on the mono disks I play where the sax
player, for example, is sounding he 'is in the room' - ie 'solid/real'...??

Aha! A fellow bi-loudspeakering fan.

After all, that is what you are doing when playing a mono recording
through a stereo setup.

I wonder how much of this solidness and presence which I also have
experienced with mono is due to the increased apparent spl and better
(perhaps) room loading etc when two speakers are playing an identical
signal.

I've half heartedly tried true single speaker mono in the past by
moving 1 speaker into a central position but it didn't have the same
impact, but then again the original speaker positions were chosen
through much experiment for the best sound and the single central was
just put in the most convenient place.

Another thing which has often intrigued me is the mention in many
reviews of apparent depth in mono recordings, I wonder if this effect
may be caused by slight speaker distance misalignment which is not
apparent in stereo reproduction.

Has anyone here ever experimented with 3 identical speakers ideally
positioned and compared true mono vs bi-speakering?


--
Ken O'Meara
http://www.btinternet.com/~unsteadyken/

"Just Another Lurker" wrote



The room still needs some attention to fine tune the sound, but doing
nothing until I get all the gear tidy and onto some sturdy and stylist
rack/stands.

Chord 3200E pre and 1200E power amps, Chord Blu CD transport and Chord
QBD76 DAC. I also store (backup) my CD collection as 44.1kHz/16bit audio
Wave files to external LaCie Hard Drives playback via the USB input (or
Bluetooth) on the DAC using a Samsung laptop.


+1 (as they say) on the LaCie USBs abd Samsung Netbook!



The brands may differ but I suspect that most people's kit is becoming very
similar in functionality and scope once again!




The speakers are a pair of (yes just one pair ) ProAc Response D28.



OK. It's not quite as daft as it might appear: if you look at the movie of
my room:

http://www.moirac.adsl24.co.uk/showntell/My%20Room.wmv


You will see the vinyl setup (valves and the black speakers) and then it
pans through my 'digitising deck', my Denon SS amp which handles the deck,
the telly and USB recording device (secondary setup only - I record little
myself), the BD player, the FM tuner and the computer from the PJ - all into
the pink speakers via the Yamaha sub which I believe I have remembered to
use twice! The TV, BD player and computer all play via the PJ and the
computer can also play through the TV!!

.....so you can see why I usually just put a record on!! ;-)


Still Lurking


Time for a reveal I think! ;-)

"UnsteadyKen" wrote in message
m...
Keith G said...

Once again: where's the soundstage on the mono disks I play where the sax
player, for example, is sounding he 'is in the room' - ie
'solid/real'...??

Aha! A fellow bi-loudspeakering fan.

After all, that is what you are doing when playing a mono recording
through a stereo setup.


Indeed you are.



I wonder how much of this solidness and presence which I also have
experienced with mono is due to the increased apparent spl and better
(perhaps) room loading etc when two speakers are playing an identical
signal.


Well, I'm glad at least one person seems to know what I was referring to!

The single vs. dual mono thing intrigues me both with speakers and at the
recording stage. I have tried both afew times and conclude that dual mono
is better and is far more convenient (settings changing to and fro) 90% of
the time.



I've half heartedly tried true single speaker mono in the past by
moving 1 speaker into a central position but it didn't have the same
impact,


Yes, I have found this but single mono quite simply isn't as loud as with
two speakers, so you need to wick it up to compensate!



but then again the original speaker positions were chosen
through much experiment for the best sound and the single central was
just put in the most convenient place.

Another thing which has often intrigued me is the mention in many
reviews of apparent depth in mono recordings, I wonder if this effect
may be caused by slight speaker distance misalignment which is not
apparent in stereo reproduction.



Oh yes - very intriguing. No quicker (faux) stereo/reverb effect than
switching on digital and FM radios at the same time if the timings are
slightly different and they usually are. Do that using a portable FM radio
and walk round with it for some very interesting effects!




Has anyone here ever experimented with 3 identical speakers ideally
positioned and compared true mono vs bi-speakering?



Three speakers (L+C+R) are/were considered by some to be the best way of
delivirng a stereo sound for *presumably* a better soundstage!??

(So what is on the centre channel I wonder...??)

Now, yesterday's new gadget turned up as promised (about 27 hours from order
to delivery on *free delivery*) - let's see if my new (secondhand) pop-pop
delivers itself today!!

(Fekk'n Christmas every day here!! ;-)

On 20/07/2010 12:04, Laurence Payne wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 11:53:03 +0100, "Keith G"
wrote:

Well it most definitely makes you a Dumpty - I suspect you know what I mean
but, like one or two others here, like to continue the debate...??

Once again: where's the soundstage on the mono disks I play where the sax
player, for example, is sounding he 'is in the room' - ie 'solid/real'...??
Eh? Eh? Anyway, enough about me, what do you have for the pot, Lozzer?
Anything of interest? - It hasn't taken long to get into this 'Attack Pack
chasing after lil' ole me' situation again and I'm actually the one who
don't give a fart in a paper bag what people think of what I do, my kit or
my preferences!


Well yes...where IS the soundstage on a mono disk?

I can establish that, all the time, mono, stereo. Sounds different
between speakers and rooms, and is the big difference between Dynaudio
speakers I have of a similar size.

I wonder if you have your own definition of the word 'soundstage'? Mine
is much as:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_stage

Rob

On 20/07/2010 19:15, Fed Up Lurker wrote:
"Keith wrote in message

Hi Keith
I took a look at your uploaded footage and the subsequent group
froopiness about your set-up, is it OK if I throw my ha'penny worth
into the fray?

snip tweakery


As for your costly vynyl replay set up, I think you bought into the
magazine pro reviewer caper. There was an awful lot of looking after
pals going on. I know Scotland is a nice place, but....
There was some worrying molly coddling. As for narrow bandwidth
unstable shoe boxes, don't try SACD or filterless with them into nasty
ohm's.
I think you were engulfed by the mag review game, there is a couple
of tech journo's I do have faith in, but the majority get it wrong or are
misleading. You Keith went up the wrong garden path.


Is this serious? Seriously? If it is, could you say where you get your
information?

Rob

In article ,
UnsteadyKen wrote:
I've half heartedly tried true single speaker mono in the past by
moving 1 speaker into a central position but it didn't have the same
impact, but then again the original speaker positions were chosen
through much experiment for the best sound and the single central was
just put in the most convenient place.

I work in TV and of course control room monitoring is stereo. But the sort
of progs I usually work on - drama - are purely mono as regards the
dialogue. Music and effects added later in stereo.

And I always switch off one speaker.

You need superb acoustic treatment to get a perfect mono signal from
between two speakers.

At home watching TV, I prefer to use two speakers so any mono sound
'comes' from the screen. With mono music (rare) I'll again use one speaker.

--
*It ain't the size, it's... er... no, it IS ..the size.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Keith G" wrote

Three speakers (L+C+R) are/were considered by some to be the best way of
delivirng a stereo sound for *presumably* a better soundstage!??


There were two very different philosophies involved in the early work on
stereo reproduction. One was the Blumlein approach, he was interested in the
sound field at the listeners ears, and the fact that we have two ears was
significant to him.

The other approach was that of Bell labs, who also did a lot of work on
stereo in the 1930s. They thought in terms of an acoustically transparent
curtain between the sound source and the listener. If this curtain could be
replaced by electrical transmission channels then, in theory at least, the
listener would not know whether the sound source was immediately behind the
curtain, or hundreds of miles away. For this to work convincingly they
decided that the larger the number of channels the better, their listening
test suggested that 5 was good, 3 acceptable but 2 not really good enough.

It does make a huge difference, though, how big the listening space is and
how the listeners are disposed within it. For a small listening room and
with the listeners reasonably equidistant between two speakers a third
speaker is unnecessary. However for larger spaces and particularly when some
listeners are well off-centre two isn't enough and 3 or more speakers become
necessary. This is why cinema stereo has always used at least three speakers
behind the screen. The original Todd-AO 70mm system allocated 5 of the 6
available channels to screen speakers, with the sixth providing a single
surround channel.

(So what is on the centre channel I wonder...??)

The output of the centre mic! (or more accurately the output of the centre
channel of the mixing desk)

David.