Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


davewantsmoore last won the day on April 22 2017

davewantsmoore had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

6,039 Superstar

About davewantsmoore

  • Rank
    Log! It's big, it's heavy, it's wood.
  • Birthday October 16

Profile Fields

  • Location
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Cheating in that a 2-way + subwoofer = a 3-way speaker.... so not really a 2-way any more.
  2. Your dinner parties suck. Sure those standards are implemented on copper. But only on short cables.
  3. Because distortion is only audible above a certain threshold .... what this means is that (generally) 3-way speaker can play louder than 2-ways (before distortion becomes audible). Yes, it's to do with the moving inductor, and mudulation of current and inductances when asked to play high and low at same time. That's about the strength of it. Trying to do it with a 2 way, means (unless you use a subwoofer, which I guess is cheating), high excursion.
  4. If there is "impact" or "tunefullness" on the recording .... then it was either the speaker, or the room, removing it. There's just whatever is on the recording. ...but you can see that with a speaker that has a -3dB at 40Hz .... then 40Hz tones are more than 90 degree (ie. significantly) out of phase with tones that are higher in Hz (eg. 120Hz+). If a speaker response is not flat to very LF if affects the phase response many ocatves above. You can use DSP to correct this (which is what some modern speakers, or systems use) ..... but it has the drawback of an overall time delay. Also, if a speaker can "only just" make it to some low frequency, then it probably starting to distort significantly at that frequency. Low distortion bass is a very important part of realistic reproduction.
  5. One would expect them to either use a shallower rolloff .... or to use linear phase filters .... so they don't cause the same outcome as the charts I posted.
  6. I wasn't trying to get hung up on smantics. I just would have said slighty different things depening on whether we were talking about box with a DAC inside.... or a box with just a digital audio outputs. It really depends. That it dispenses with any electrical noise that would otherwise be carried in on an ethernet cable? ..... No, that's a fine claim for them to make. I didn't say it was "complex" either. Indeed.... but it all depends on what type of jitter. When noise entering the system via ethernet is changing the analogue output .... then the streamer (or whaver) device is defective for passing that into the digital audio that it was so big that it materially affected the DAC ..... or (in the case the digital audio source was not terribly affected by the ethernet bourne noise) the DAC is defective for being affected by a (so small) error in the digital audio. The DAC will not be immune from any jitter (it depedns what). However a streamer should be immune from passing noise entering via ethernet into the digital audio signal in any relevant magnitude. I was talking about a steamer with (only) digital outputs .... and how it's digital audio output signal should be immune from noise carried in via ethernet. Moving the context to "a DAC that is completely immune to what is upstream of it" .... isn't the same.
  7. For example.... 50Hz, is ~60 degrees out of phase with 100Hz. Many people have argued that this phase distortion is not audible.... however the way I understand it, is that those arguments are flawed.
  8. There are many things which have a lot lower frequncy content than the "fundamental" tone. Short bursts of sound contain both very low and very high frequency content .... think of the "percussive" type sounds you can make hitting a string on a bass guitar. Lots lower than 42Hz. That being said, very low frequency tones themselves are not very audible. Here is a simulated response of a speaker which is -3dB at 40Hz .... If it weren't for the low frequency rolloff the phase would be zero at all frequencies. 👀
  9. In general. 1. More driver (total) area = lower driver movement for the same SPL. This means higher SPL before distortion becomes audible. This one is quite simple, as most people intuatively undersrand that "big speakers can play louder". 2. Shape of drivers, and positioning relative to each other, define the overall coverage pattern of the sound (also known as "polar response", or "directivity"). Different combinations of driver shapes and locations, have different coverage pattern. This mean even when equalised to an identical frequency response from a common measurement position, speakers with different coverage patterns all still sound different, as they have differening amounts of delayed/reflected sound, and that later arriving sound has a different peaks and dips in the frequency response. Consider that (for example) the peaks and dips in the frequncy response of the reflected (late arriving) sound, is why your bathroom sound like a bathroom .... or why you can tell things about your environment with your eyes closed and listening to sound.... speakers with different balance to their later arriving sound, are imparting their own "new information" to the later arriving sound (even when all speakers being compared are equalised to a common response on the direct listening axis) ..... like your bathroom does. 3. It's very difficult to say "better" in general. You can take advantage of a 3 or 4 or 5 or whatever way speaker to make for a "better" coverage pattern. ...... but the added complexity can also be a trap, and a poorly engineered speaker is a poor speaker, no matter how many drivers. It's usually hard to tell anything useful from this..... a higher number (w) is definitely not always better.
  10. Aside from safety, potentially (pardon the pun) transformer performance.
  11. Some have analogue outputs (ie. a DAC inside), but let's talk about digital outputs.... The amount of noise they generate and/or are suceptible to (note: these are different things) is quite variable. That depends... on the DAC, and everything inbetween. The digital signal output from the streamer, contains jitter ..... but it depends on how sucptible downstream stages are to it and/or if any downstream stages "reclock" the jitter away. Converting ethernet to optical "inside" (or at the edge) of a streamer device would be a dumb way to make the device immune from electrical noise carried in on the ethernet cable. It could.... it doesn't need to though. I assume you're referring to "noise generated in the power supplying the optical>electrical ethernet converter" .... in which case, just supply it with a very good quality power supply. It doesn't need to. This is just all engineering. I didn't say it was simple. What I said was that a good quality streamer will (should) be eginered with mechanisms to make it immune from a sensible amout of "noise" carried in on the ethernet cable. ie. I should be able to inject varying amount of noise, and have the device continue to work without any change in it's (digital signal output) performance. Audiophles often talk like better quality devices will be "more" suceptible.
  12. Forcing "sharp" peaks and dips flat to be flat will often sound quite unnatural, because the measurement you corrected doesn't correspond with what you are hearing.... so what you've done is ADD peaks and dips to the sound (whcih sounds unnatural/bad/exciting/different/etc.) You see people saying this a lot. It's more wrong that right. At the frequencies you are talking about.... there is very little other than EQ, which will change the sound. Other than placement of bass sources.... but if your bass sources are your L and R speakers, then you are limited in what you can do as they need to be placed appropriately for "imaging".
  • Classifieds Statistics

    Currently Active Ads

    Total Sales (Since 2018)

    Total Sales Value (Last 14 Days)

    Total Ads Value (Since March 2020)
  • Create New...