Jump to content

aechmea

Members
  • Content Count

    1,837
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

aechmea last won the day on January 22 2014

aechmea had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,005 Excellent

About aechmea

  • Rank
    Aechmea recurvata

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Hunter Valley
  • Country
    Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I suspect that all of these "measurements" from almost everyone are either dodgy or are the best possible figure under the most conducive of conditions. Most nominal 4-ohm speaker manufacturers use 2.83volts because that secretly equates to 2 watts not 1, thus giving an inflated (better) sensitivity number. The corresponding 1 watt @ 1 metre is 3 dB less. Then, of course, is how and where they have been measured. My 4-ohm mains are advertised as 86 for 2.83v, but that is really 83 for 1 watt. Compare that with a German magazine that measured them at 77dB. What's going on there; sumpin' just ain't right. I can't believe either number. In the OP, the 92dB speaker is much more sensitive ... 92 - 81 = 11dB = approx 10 times more sensitive (dB is a logarithmic ratio; dB = 10 log(p1/p0)).
  2. My biggest bass problem was that there was a SBIR cancellation between the first back wall reflection and the direct wave. Solved with positioning the subs; particularly with one on the back wall. One wouldn't know that there were subs in operation.
  3. An older image when I had bi-amped 3.6R Factory T feet riveted to square tube. Cones on bottom of tube thru carpet to concrete. Tabbed across an inch or so to align vertical tube with existing screw holes Verticals attached with existing Screws Total cost = the cost of 8 fat rivets, thanks to father-in-law who had the tube, tools and the expertise. ------------------------------------------ And just in case one is curious about absorption here is the rear wall. Following the Linkwitz idea that sound should pass your ears once and never return. 4 x tube traps, 2m high x 450mm diam (2 out of frame) 2 x 2400 x 1200 x 100 semi rigid fibreglass sheets 2 x 2000 x 1200 x 100mm fitted into window alcoves 2 x 2 seater lounge chairs 2 x 1200 x1200 x 100 leaning against lounges All removable in a few minutes ie no permanent damage to room.
  4. Absolute necessity, IME. In my case, home-made tubular steel triangular buttress frame coupled using spikes to the concrete slab floor. Made a hellava difference.
  5. Forget the 2000 remaster (DR7), it has been severely compressed; find yourself the original 1985 CD (DR14) or the 1994 version (DR13) Like a lot of early CDs there are a multitude of pressings made/issued in various parts of the world. Mine happens to be one made in Japan (Sanyo ) for Germany and has a catalogue number of 610 195-222 CID 101 Apparently one of the original CID 101 versions has different tracks on the CD making it close to the LPs, but the booklet/cover lists the normal CD tracks and then to confound it further a couple of other tracks are missing and one is shortened. The problem is that the normal CD tracks already run for 72 minutes so something had to be left out to retain a single CD. Now look what you've gone and done. I'm off to find the other CID 101 with the other couple of LP tracks on it! ----------- Edit; it appears that the CD with alternative tracks may be easier to find than I first thought. Some French, US and Canadian CDs have that particular set of tracks.
  6. Pretty much what everyone else has said, but I will add my comments in support ... The L and R are so different that the room must be (almost) all of the problem. The combined response has a broad shallow dip from 120 to 450Hz. There is a lot of info in this range. Think voices, both male and female, left hand of the piano and probably stuff like cello ... You are missing the richness but as a consequence you are still hearing the brash bits at higher frequencies. The dip is very prominent in the L channel compounded by the lump at 50 and another at 500. If you can fix the L then you might be getting close. Trial and error is required. Lift them, twist them, move them, get the lounge out of the way (at least temporarily). At the moment both L and R are pointing straight ahead. You are actually listening off-axis. Not many speakers are "good" off-axis. Like others have rightly said, rotate them to point roughly at the listening chair. This also changes the reflection angles off the front and side walls which could be of benefit. Positioning is a powerful tool and even though an in-room response will never look perfect, it could be all that you need. When you have exhausted "positioning" improvements then a few dollops of EQ (done with a gentle hand) to lop off the remaining peaks and boost the shallow wide troughs will help a bit more. [I reckon that it's the lounge that did it! Blunt instrument trauma.]
  7. It's important to have an amp that can cope with your speakers. Many speakers have low sensitivity and/or low impedance and/or have wildly fluctuating impedance. Most people underestimate the grunt needed to reproduce music at realistic levels via naughty speakers. Choice of amp is dictated by your speakers. It may take several iterations to find a suitable amp. If your choice is between two amps that are both "suitable" then they should both be operating within their safe limits and should be pretty much indistinguishable. Amps pushed beyond their comfort zone don't sound nice. That's when they really start to sound different. In my experience the differences between DACs is also pretty minimal. Lets not forget the elephant of hifi. Positioning within the room of speakers and chair, and the room geometry and its acoustics are even more important to get right than equipment. Easier to buy a bright new shiny box though.
  8. Yep; mastered for train/bus/car travel Mine is the 24/88 download, which I bought due to hirezedness and because of the rave reviews. I may have played it twice. [Edit; it has the same DR values as the CD]
  9. I have the Windows paid version of dBPoweramp CD Ripper (so I can do HDCD expansion). I have had a look at the Options. There is nothing there that would cause a resample. However, the encoder settings box has the option to add DSP to the encoder, one of which is "Resample". No idea about Kodi or any of the audio layers/drivers.
  10. Welcome Willem. We hope that you enjoy the site. Plenty of interesting topics to get involved with.
  11. dBs are a ratio expressed as logarithmic not linear. For power units dB = 10 log(p1/p0) so 3dB = approx double 10dB = 10 times 15dB = approx 31.6 times 20dB = 100 times 30dB = 1000 times The ear is non linear too. 10dB sounds about double loudness but needs 10 times the power.
  12. Speaking of Mt Pleasant In addition to the current vintage Elizabeth, Mount Pleasant release a "Cellar Aged" Elizabeth from time to time (currently 2010 I think). Dan has a "Blue Label" Elizabeth of similar age, so maybe even the same wines. In addition, I like "8 Acre Semillon" which is a selection from Lovedale vineyard. Cheaper too?? The Lovedale is about $60, the others about $30. Need to buy "Cellar Aged" and "8 acre" and some of the other bibs and bobs from the cellar or online. Check prices though; often Dan is cheaper for the main lines even if you are a member at Mt Pleasant.
  13. 768k has been mentioned. It is too much for the DEQX digital inputs and won't work. 192k is max input, which would then be resampled to 96k anyway. That's why any M-scaling and DAC would seem (to me) to be best positioned after the DEQX.
  14. I don't think that there will ever be a graph. I read once that Magnepan won't let a review proceed if the reviewer wants to post measurements. It was on the internet so must be right. Never been any graphs/measurements of the 20.7 that I know of. A German magazine published that the 20.7s were 77dB/W/m. Hmmmmm. No wonder you need a monster amp, if that is true. My 3.6R had a review in Stereophile in 2000? and if I remember correctly there was plenty of discussion re the measurements as a result. That may have been the straw that broke the camel's back so to speak. Addicted to music has found an impedance plot of his 1.7s That's about it as far as I know.
  15. Thanks S, Bugger. Never tried No2 configuration. Analogue inputs on the DEQX; who would have thought. That means if I wanted to experiment, I will need re-configuring of cabling to put my PSAudio DAC (yes, its not a Chord, but one never knows) in front of the DEQX, which means different source selection on remotes. (the family will be thrilled to bits. Haha) And then there is my MSB transport that also does re-sampling (the same as Ittaku's DAC). Resampling and/or un-harshness filter on or off? Another variable. And here was me thinking things were as good as they could be. Well, recabling is not that bad really, and FOMO is kicking in.
×
×
  • Create New...