Jump to content

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, Peter_F said:

Well at least you're honest mate.  Yes, it is true, the Toppers were designed for the ML1 and maybe the ML2 speakers?  But back when the forum used to be entertaining, there were d*ckheads comparing the Toppers to placing a house brick or diving weights on top of their speakers, which they insisted would do the same thing because they didn't understand the science behind it.  

Very interesting  comment  Peter I was one of those who you mentioned ....as someone who listened with a very open mind to Kajaks system with the Toppers on and off......wow even used 6k usd CLIO 10 software to see if we could measure the difference between the topper and dive lead weight..... If anyone is actually interested in measurements  I did measure a difference from placing the toppers and dive weight on top of the speakers ........there was no  measured differences from the topper to the lead weight using CLIO. I think I have a reasonable understanding of the science/engineering and if the stand is engineered well and the speakers are attached well with enough mass not sure the toppers add much value at all......but hey just my humble opinion from listening and measuring on this tweak....

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Just now, Jones99 said:

Very interesting  comment  Peter I was one of those who you mentioned ....as someone who listened with a very open mind to Kajaks system with the Toppers on and off......wow even used 6k usd CLIO 10 software to see if we could measure the difference between the topper and dive lead weight..... If anyone is actually interested in measurements  I did measure a difference from placing the toppers and dive weight on top of the speakers ........there was no  measured differences from the topper to the lead weight using CLIO. I think I have a reasonable understanding of the science/engineering and if the stand is engineered well and the speakers are attached well with enough mass not sure the toppers add much value at all......but hey just my humble opinion from listening and measuring on this tweak....

 

 

But did you hear a difference Grant? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest scumbag
22 minutes ago, Jones99 said:

Very interesting  comment  Peter I was one of those who you mentioned ....as someone who listened with a very open mind to Kajaks system with the Toppers on and off......wow even used 6k usd CLIO 10 software to see if we could measure the difference between the topper and dive lead weight..... If anyone is actually interested in measurements  I did measure a difference from placing the toppers and dive weight on top of the speakers ........there was no  measured differences from the topper to the lead weight using CLIO. I think I have a reasonable understanding of the science/engineering and if the stand is engineered well and the speakers are attached well with enough mass not sure the toppers add much value at all......but hey just my humble opinion from listening and measuring on this tweak....

 

 

CLIO uses a FFT to isolate the speaker impulse from any reverberation. A better tool might be REW which takes measurements sans gating. 

Edited by scumbag
Link to comment
Share on other sites



It's fascinating that in this quest for the explanation of why these tweaks work, we seem to be able to discuss all sorts of cool physics but we can't discuss the bit of science that actually has the best shot at explaining it. 

Psychology. Well understood, sensible explanations for much of what is being discussed here. 

 

There's a chap called Bill who has a razor we should all be using. 

See, that's what I suggested, but not quite cat-footy enough I suppose.

 

I think most of us have had those amazing sessions where you sit down and your system just sounds amazing. The next day you come back and its flat. Its then you start lifting cables and checking polarity, forming theories about capacitance between speaker cable strands and trying out power cables and things. The answer is that the most fundamental thing about sound is your own physiology and psychology. If the stars align there, you are in heaven.

I'm not saying no tweak works, far from it, but it seems to me the whole point of the thread was that the tweak must not be rooted in accepted science. I suppose its then simply not somewhere I should be posting.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember that post where I said something to the tune of "what if we assume a tweak works and then try to explain how it could work".  That leaves psychology out right from the start I'm afraid.

 

If you wish to discus psychology go right ahead but please do so in another thread.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re the Toppers.

There is no magic or bull or whatever. 

  • Firstly - it was designed for Mike's speakers - standmounts.
  • Secondly - in my laymen's terms it is basically a weight sitting on some footers.
  • Thirdly - it was designed to remove something that he could not remove that was still there despite his best endeavours with his speakers and the stands  at that stage. 

I have heard them on Mike's speakers and they did make a difference as in an improvement. 

 

I see it in the same light when people fill their speaker stands with sand, or lead. If that makes a difference do we say that say the B & W book shelves were not designed stand mounts were not designed properly?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



1 hour ago, Jventer said:

Re the Toppers.

There is no magic or bull or whatever. 

  • Firstly - it was designed for Mike's speakers - standmounts.
  • Secondly - in my laymen's terms it is basically a weight sitting on some footers.
  • Thirdly - it was designed to remove something that he could not remove that was still there despite his best endeavours with his speakers and the stands  at that stage. 

I have heard them on Mike's speakers and they did make a difference as in an improvement. 

 

I see it in the same light when people fill their speaker stands with sand, or lead. If that makes a difference do we say that say the B & W book shelves were not designed stand mounts were not designed properly?

 

 

  • Secondly - in my laymen's terms it is basically a weight sitting on some footers.

Mike's explanation to me was that the toppers work like the pendulum in skyscrapers that counteract the movement when earthquakes or high winds that move the structure. The building moves one way and the pendulum moves in the opposite direction to stabilise the structure, thus stabilising the speaker box to enable the drivers to perform at their best.

That is my understanding, although others have stated the toppers remove resonances from the speaker case, either way the toppers certainly work on Lenehan speakers

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Peter_F said:

But did you hear a difference Grant? 

Peter Kajaks system was highly tuned but not for the type of music I like. From memory little to no difference for listening but that may be due to unfamiliar music and system.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Volunteer
3 hours ago, Cafad said:

Remember that post where I said something to the tune of "what if we assume a tweak works and then try to explain how it could work".  That leaves psychology out right from the start I'm afraid.

 

If you wish to discus psychology go right ahead but please do so in another thread.  

Apologies. I missed that post. 

I'll sit this one out then. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, davewantsmoore said:

 

10g with a travel of 3mm doesn't move the entire cabinet in any significant way.  (it's too heavy)

A  good explanation/demonstration of sky scraper damping here

http://practical.engineering/blog/2016/2/14/tuned-mass-dampers-in-skyscrapers

 

However, as Dave points out, the motion in the case of the speaker in the will be small.  It is best calculated by Conservation of Momentum (equivalent to Newton’s 3rd law of action and  reaction) that applies even in relativistic quantum mechanics so is unlike to be found wrong!

 

Assuming no external horizontal forces (eg speaker on a frictionless surface) then the total momentum (sum of massxvelocity) in the horizontal direction remains constant.  If the mass of the speaker is say 10 kg and that of the driver is 10 gm (ie 1/1000)  then the velocity of the speaker in the backward direction will be 1/1000 of that of the driver in the forward direction. It is these velocities (or changes thereof) that produce the changes of air pressures (sound).  Other things being equal the sound generated by the speaker will be 1/1000the of that generated by the cone ie -60 db down which is probably on the limits of discrimatory hearing (near the noise floor in most domestic environments).

 

And of course there assumption of the speaker being total free to move horizontally is unlikely unless its stand is extremely badly designed so the effects will be even less than the above calculation.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, legend said:

Other things being equal the sound generated by the speaker will be 1/1000the of that generated by the cone ie -60 db down which is probably on the limits of discrimatory hearing (near the noise floor in most domestic environments).

 

And of course there assumption of the speaker being total free to move horizontally is unlikely unless its stand is extremely badly designed so the effects will be even less than the above calculation.

 

:thumb: 

 

Even if we inflate the level of the sound produced by the box movement  (using the assumption that the box surface >> cone area) .... adding in friction is enormous, and puts this very much too far down in level to be audible  (for a relatively heavy cabinet, and light cone)

Link to comment
Share on other sites



The only relevant area of the box in this case of pendulum damping is the front and back surfaces ie in the horizontal direction (since we are not here considering the panel vibrations per se, only box movement).  This area will certainly be greater than the cone but probably not 'much' greater.  Besides the box in this case will effectively be a dipole radiator so front and back waves will start to cancel below a certain frequency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, soundbyte said:

Here is a link that some might find useful.

 

http://www.co-bw.com/Audio_Increase_Listening_Experience_Gear.htm

 

Hope someone gets something from it.

 

Russell.

You could spend the rest of your life going through that site and the links.  Very interesting.

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Eggcup The Daft
4 hours ago, soundbyte said:

Here is a link that some might find useful.

 

http://www.co-bw.com/Audio_Increase_Listening_Experience_Gear.htm

 

Hope someone gets something from it.

 

Russell.

Some of the tweaks on that page look positively dangerous - especially if you don't know what you are doing. And bypassing the suspension on a suspended turntable? Count me out on that (or if I still had a TT, anyway) - get it set up properly, instead, please!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much of the univesrse is made up of dark matter (weird stuff that takes  scientists out of their established comfort zone of "understanding") thats why we call it dark! 

One of the smartest engineers I ever met quit building speakers after designing my first real hi fi loudspeaker the VAF 151 lamenting "I know not enough to build loudspeakers properly"

He had likely forgotten more than I will ever know & I build studio monitors! Like I said one of the smartest people I ever met. He came to an epiphany of understanding of his own perceived lack it. Standing at the precipice of that abyss he sadly for the rest of us instead of embracing that with a sense of awe and wonder at the yet undiscovered shrunk back. I think there are more mysteries under heaven than any mere mortal man can hope to understand. The fact that we argue about it so passionately cements us in ignorance

Edited by Boris Karlof
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Just because we don't understand everything about hi-fi and loudspeakers doesn't mean we don't understand anything - I think we now understand quite a lot.  Humility is certainly required -  not capitulation - as we move forward slowly but surely using science, without having to resort to voodoo..

Edited by legend
clarification
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nicely said Gentlemen.  

 

I am of the opinion that audio voodoo is just science that we haven't managed to nut out yet (or at least that I haven't managed to nut out, obviously someone else has).  So I quite like reading about stuff that others call voodoo, it takes your thoughts in interesting directions.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest scumbag
4 hours ago, Boris Karlof said:

Much of the univesrse is made up of dark matter (weird stuff that takes  scientists out of their established comfort zone of "understanding") thats why we call it dark! 

One of the smartest engineers I ever met quit building speakers after designing my first real hi fi loudspeaker the VAF 151 lamenting "I know not enough to build loudspeakers properly"

He had likely forgotten more than I will ever know & I build studio monitors! Like I said one of the smartest people I ever met. He came to an epiphany of understanding of his own perceived lack it. Standing at the precipice of that abyss he sadly for the rest of us instead of embracing that with a sense of awe and wonder at the yet undiscovered shrunk back. I think there are more mysteries under heaven than any mere mortal man can hope to understand. The fact that we argue about it so passionately cements us in ignorance

Arguing doesn't entrench us in anything. By arguing, we might be forced to re-appraise our views on the world. Stone walling of course is another thing.

It's a shame your friend stopped designing speakers. Realising how much we don't know should never be a reason to stop learning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/26/2017 at 7:45 PM, Jones99 said:

Peter Kajaks system was highly tuned but not for the type of music I like. From memory little to no difference for listening but that may be due to unfamiliar music and system.

 

 

That's a fair comment Grant.  At that time I was running a similar type system so I was probably quite in tune with Mario's system.  I agree that its difficult to figure out what's doing what, and why, when you're not familiar with the system and not in tune with the music.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...
To Top