Howie,
We're on the same page just different sides, you are the artist looking at the process from the beginning, I'm the technician looking at the end of the process back. We are both leaning on our strengths and the areas we have developed the most.
We need each other, because your main focus is performance, mine is preservation of that performance. Without your perspective I cannot know the intentions of the artist, without me the intentions may be obscured.
I like you do not discount the importance of knowing (educated) music as well as knowing (educated) sound. Unfortunately they are two different things. I am not a musician but I can read music, but not as well as I can read a spectral decay plot.
As for "elevate", I was not implicating anyone specifically but from an objective stand point do I suit myself(inserting myself in the production) with the system I design or do I suit the artist (pursue absolute sound).
Since a perfect system may not exist, the line is blurred a bit.
Maybe I read Ayn Rand at too young an age? :)
But we are not in any disagreement, and my reaction was to the implication that I measure at the expense of listening. That is not the case. I listen, then record that experience with a snap shot of the performance of that system. A permanent record to compile with many many other experiences. Its not a complete record but its better than nothing. Like photo's from a vacation.
Believe it or not my degree is in film making, I am creative type with a technical curiosity and aptitude. |
I still wouldn't put it that way. Musicians doesn't NEED anybody really. Many musicians didn't get to where they are because they wanted to have a record out. Hell, many of them actually don't care whether or not there's an audience. Music is played for their own enjoyment. It's not played for anyone else or nothing else. Of course, many artists do enjoy having an audience appreciate their music. So some may feel the need for an audience. It's great that their music becomes recorded so others can enjoy their performances. It's great that their performance doesn't become lost. I don't mean to be ignorant but to say musicians NEED people like you is pushing it IMO. That's not to say all musicians don't need record engineers, but most of them really don't. The musicians themselves can take a page from Greg Osby and bring their own recording equipment such as a minidisc player and record themselves. And it's great that we have a lot of Charlie Parker and Dizzy performances. Okay so someone has to develop the recording equipment, but as bad as some of their recordings are, their musicality is NOT obscured. Their creativity is NOT obscured. You will never know the intention of many artists even if they told you. And don't dispute the word of mouth. Many great artists are still legends without having recorded a single album. Their influence and music still lives in some people. So even if I have the most inaccurate equipment, it wouldn't even matter. It brings happiness to one person: me. |
"Cinematic systems,let's just say that my "Buddies" really don't "guess" at anything.They are skilled and experienced hobbyists that have been at this longer than you,or myself,most likely.I believe that they would find your condescending comments humorous,as we are pretty adamant about how sensitive the "average" ear becomes,once you have been at this hobby awhile."
Yeah I know. I think pretty much everybody has mentioned that to me at one time or another.
" wide variety of "known" program material",
What exactly do you know about it? Can you tell me what Microphone/preamps/board/Mastering etc. What is your reference speaker, the one used by the studio? The only thing you know is that it sounds good to you, but what is that exactly? You have Avalons right? Why? Why did you buy them over all the other options? What makes them special, try to answer that question using a vocabulary that would allow me to apply it to my situation. Musical, accurate, revealing are not helpful. |
Mike, do you think you will be looking at the possibility of getting low powered amps like the LAMM ML2.1 for your new speakers or do you still feel that the Tenor 300s are the real deal? |
Sadeek; my plan is to compare the DarTZeel and Tenor 300 Hybrid Monos on the VR9's. i do have experience with the Tenor 75 watt OTL's and have heard the ML2's numerous times at shows. the VR9's would be just fine with either the Tenor OTL's or the ML2's......a matter of taste.
yes, the Tenor 300 watt monos are the real deal.....the best all-around amp i have yet heard (the DarTZeel may be better but too soon to say for sure).
the ML2's (or ML2.1's) are very nice but have never really 'engaged me' onto the music.....as both Tenor amps and the DarTZeel have.
maybe someday i'll get the chance to spend some quality time with the ML2's in my system and have a better feel for their magic. the VR9's would seem an ideal speaker for the ML2......then again the VR9's are likely ideal for about any amp with their efficiency and no need to provide deep bass drive. |
Howie, Thank you for your help in expressing one of the quintessential obstacles to allowing this hobby to move forward.
"Where did I give you the impression that I was trying to "elevate" myself into the creative process?"
"Musicians doesn't NEED anybody really."
"So even if I have the most inaccurate equipment, it wouldn't even matter. It brings happiness to one person: me."
Let me post this again so everyone understands the context.
"from an objective stand point do I suit myself(inserting myself in the production) with the system I design or do I suit the artist (pursue absolute sound)."
I guess the word is that I went over the top in response to your post but I was responding to what you were really going to say. Notice how you "elevated" this conversation up and out of my context and out of the context of this forum. Your attempt to make me irrelevant and belittle me. Good thing we're not playing chess?
See many people who would criticize me for being harsh with you didn't realize where you were going. You were going here. If you're not a musician you're irrelevant and even if we don't know what were doing. LOL! Gotta love "jazz".
Howie continues;
"I don't mean to be ignorant but to say musicians NEED people like you is pushing it IMO."
See this would be the arrogance I spoke of, not ignorance.
This is where you "elevate" yourself above the objective constraints of this conversation to persuade me that you're "enlightened" and I am not. How could a thug like me understand, its true for me it was football or music as a child and unfortunately I was instantly good at football, so it was the choice I made. So now I can hack away at the keyboard, but I'm slowly im proving. |
Cinematic Systems,truly I don't think I have the patience,though you wil most likely rationalize this to your egotistical benefit,to get as involved as I could with you in answering your questions.It's just not worth it to me.
One thing is obvious.You seem to be the type that invariably never doubts your own perceptions,and experiences.To me you cannot be reasoned with,though ,no doubt you must feel there is a way one can impact a thought, towards you.Truthfully, I don't want to work that hard!!
As to my "buddies",these are some of the few who literally wrote the book on listening to reproduced music.One of them wrote the esteemed Mercury Living Presence column for a number of years.
I think I'll stick with their methods!! |
|
Well, since i tried to be a "nice guy" and get back on track with my "calmer, more friendly" New Year's Resolution in previous attempts to reply to this thread, and they didn't make it through moderator approval, i guess i'll resort to the point by point response that i really didn't want to have to make. Jtinn: Jenna's cables are based on a woven pattern. While the cables may present a consistent nominal impedance when measured at one end, the design geometry consists of multitudes of impedance bumps along the entire path of the cabling. The multitude of impedance variations is what makes up that nominal impedance and increases the potential for rejecting RFI. That's because one consistent impedance is easier for an RF signal to propagate itself upon / within, hence the multitude of impedance bumps making it tougher to pass an RF signal. On top of that, impedance bumps create phase shifts, which in turn creates smearing. On top of that ( part II ), it is very difficult for all of the conductors within a mass produced multi-strand cable to remain the exact same length, giving the signal multiple length paths to choose from. This also increases smearing due to differences in arrival times. I could continue further with this, but no need to. As far as speaker or product design goes, i don't have to build or market anything to have a basic understanding of parts quality and / or design theory and / or understanding on how instruments work and / or understanding on the room / speaker interface and / or the audible perception of various radiation patterns. What products do you design / manufacture to think you know so much? What technical and / or electronics credentials do you have to question my credentials? As far as Solen's go, they are a great bang for the buck product. I don't think that anyone familiar with them would deny that. When compared to some other caps that shall remain nameless, the only reason that one would select the Solen's would be a matter of keeping production costs lower. The fact that the Von Schweikert website specifically mentions the use of Solen caps in the crossover led me to believe that they were the primary ingredient in terms of capacitors used, hence their trying to play up the use of a recognized "hi-fi" brand name. I didn't see any other brands of capacitors or inductors mentioned, so what would lead me to believe that others were used??? The fact that you said that there is ONE Solen used in the crossover circuit leads me to believe that this is either the only cap used, or that there are others used, but of lesser quality. If this were not true, i would think that they would have listed the names of the higher quality caps rather than settling for Solen as the "high end" buzzword. As far as one woofer goes, a speaker of this cost using one woofer seems rather cut-corner to me. Since output capacity is directly related to driver displacement, one would think that multiple drivers would be a natural here, especially at this price range. That is, unless the designer thinks that one large diameter, long excursion driver is sufficient. The problem with that is that it is common knowledge that the more excursion that a driver has to make, the more non-linear the output i.e. distortion starts to climb. Using multiple drivers of the same surface area reduces the amount of excursion necessary, lowers distortion, increases maximum sustainable spl's, increases dynamic headroom, lowers thermal stress on each of the individual drivers, etc... If designed properly, a multiple woofer system can also load the room more effectively, therefore producing more consistent response. As to the 80 Hz crossover, this is a bit high for use as a "subwoofer". The name "sub-woofer" implies output below the normal frequency range of a woofer. On top of that, 80 Hz is more easy to localize than if a lower crossover point were used. This has to do with the fact that a higher percentage of room nodes will be excited than if output were actually kept down low i.e. in the SUB-woofer frequency range. As to the rear placement of the driver, the length of the signal path from all of the other drivers to the seated listening position compared to that of the "subwoofer" aren't anywhere near the same length. On top of that, please name one instrument that produces low frequencies and radiates them in the opposite direction of that of the listener with NO direct radiation towards the listener at all. Even a kettle drum or pipe organ will radiate some of the sound forward off of the stage. Without this frontal wave, all of these instruments would produce completely different attack and decay characteristics to our ears and change the timbre of the instruments as we know them and hear them. Other than that, it is convenient of you to overlook some of the other things that i've said about you in a positive manner. Obviously, your attempt to portray me as being "anti-Jonathan Tinn" is a ruse to distract others from the real matters at hand. I don't care who you are or what you sell, so long as you represent yourself and the products that you push honestly. As i've said before, i try to call them as i see them. My comments in this thread, and all the others that i've contributed to, are simply my honest opinions. If you've got a problem with that, that's your problem. If i've stated incorrect information in this or other posts, that's OUR problem. Please feel free to correct my mistakes as you see fit and make me aware of the corrections. I want to learn from my mistakes. That's pretty much the only reason i know what i do i.e. i've made a LOT of mistakes and learned from them in the past. As i've stated before, my "mission" is to share, learn and educate, not mislead by posting misinformation. I've always tried to do my best and be as honest as i can, even if i've gone overboard on some points. I hope others can recognize my efforts for what they are. I'm not looking for praise, just mutual respect from my fellow audiophiles that take the time to learn and share with me as a group. We don't always have to agree to be friends or discuss matters in an open manner. Sean > PS... Mike, i'm still wondering about my question pertaining to the computer modeling / room simulations of various speakers & speaker placements in your room. Have you ever tried this and compared the results in terms of perceived sonics vs predicted results? |
Well, I guess it's safe to reenter the thread, since most of the bickering and sniping seems to have stopped. This has been said ad nauseum, but it bears repeating again here: we're in this hobby for one reason and one reason only--to connect with the music in the deepest, most spiritual sort of way. Whether some people prefer Kharma or not, DarTZeel or not, it's not for us to judge. Sound quality is so subjective that, really, NO choice is wrong, provided the person enjoys that equipment. What ruins it, here and on Audio Asylum, is when ego struggles get involved. Person A thinks Von Schweikert speakers are the best on the market; person B thinks Kharmas are. Neither one wants to back down, it soon turns personal, and the potential for truly meaningful discussion is ruined. I truly believe that individual ego destroys at least 25% of threads initiated here and on AA. People either can't let go of their agenda, or they refuse to lose an argument, and soon it turns into a spiraling bicker-fest. It happened here, which is a shame because I wanted this thread to be an amicable forum to discuss the wonderful DarTZeel amplifier. Oh well, I guess I should have expected it. It started out well, though. |
Sean; i've kinda got frustrated with this thread. i even sent Mr. Audiogon a post complaining (for the first time ever) about 'delays pending moderator approval'. if the 'gon' wants to slow down a thread, that is their business......but then i just lose interest. i never 'stir the s**t' and resent being treated as if i do. i suppose it is easier to simply filter threads instead of individual 'goners'.......but i don't like it.
end of rant.
yes, Rives Audio did 'do the math' on speaker and listeneing position placement......which turned up 2 'best spots' for my listening position and one ideal speaker position. i am sitting within 4 inches of the more near-field of the two listening positions. the speakers are about 6 inches closer together and 4 inches forward of the original suggestion.
i don't know exactly how Richard Bird did the math, but you could ask him.
i moved the speakers all over the place and the bass performance was essentially the same......so i ended up just focusing on the soundstage. since the speakers are so far away from room boundaries wherever i put them; there were no changes in the tonal balance as i moved them around. what is almost spooky is how balanced the room sounds as you move around......the soundstage resembles how live music sounds as you would move around a nightclub.
it will be interesting to see how the VR9's will do.
i'm no speaker designer and don't pretend to be. i'm not sure about just how extensive your experience is with the VR9......but your conjecture about how many if it's design choices MIGHT affect performance seems a little too 'all-knowing' in it's tone without some extensive personal auditioning.
after spending hours speaking to Kevin Malgrem, the primary designer of the VR9 and VR11, about how choices were made in it's design......my OPINION is that your theories may not be correct.....but i admit to not being an expert......although i do have a fair amount of high performance speaker listening experience.
i did spend 10 to 12 hours listening to the VR9 at CES. my perceptions are not consistent with your theories. you are guessing about how the crossover is actually designed and exactly how parts are used. you are guessing about how low the front mounted woofers go. many speakers use a rear mounted port for deep bass support (Kharma)......and yet there is no backwave discontinuity percieved......why would a rear mounted subwoofer be any different (unless you listened and identified the cause and effect)......or had experience with that issue on other speakers.
many designers don't disclose exactly what they are doing (Wilson, Kharma)......you gotta listen to judge.
you could be absolutely right.....or absolutely wrong......but only listening will tell that. |
Sean writes: Jtinn: Jenna's cables are based on a woven pattern. While the cables may present a consistent nominal impedance when measured at one end, the design geometry consists of multitudes of impedance bumps along the entire path of the cabling. That doesn't make much sense to me. How do you know these "impedance bumps" are there? How can you measure them? Regards, |
Hooper, why are you so surprised as to what happend? If you visit here regularly you had to have a clue that your dealer was going to chime in at even the slighest opinion against any product he sells. This invites others with a financial interest to counter, then the bikering.
I wonder why Duke never has this problem? I also think Sean has been very well behaved......an example for all |
Sirspeedy,
Where can I get a copy of this book?
Thanks |
Hey Andy I will be back in the game soon. Great post by the way...
Everything is sounding great, right?! |
Wow Sean, what a wealth of technical details. Thank you as there is always much to learn from your inputs.
As Sean mentions, we try to maintain our "more friendly" nature but sometimes things are written here that just fire us up. And no matter how hard we might try to get a point across, some people just don't get it. It's not the difference in viewpoints - it's the ability to listen to and understand other viewpoints. Only a few days ago I was told by someone here I needed a lesson in internet etiquette. Well at least in this thread I have behaved myself.
And yes Hooper, it's unfortunate that your attempts to share your amplifier experiences shifted to a speaker dogfight here. But I think it's very clear the amplifiers and speakers covered extensively in this thread have great merit to get so much praise from a number of highly respected Audiogon members.
John |
In a few months I'll be able to hear te Dartzeel in a system of a friend. He's very tube minded so we are both curious how it will sound. At this moment he's playing on some verity audio fidelio's. If it's realy that good, I try it also with my avalon arcus. Of course I'll report our findings.
I agree with Hooper. It would be nice if some ego's would be less impulsive. |
Cinematic Systems, do not twist everyone's statements out of context and use it to make broad sweeping statements about one's meaning. I can do the same and declare that your statement that seems to imply that jazz musicans don't know what they're doing, shows your lack of knowledge and ignorance. You used the label/term musicians broadly, while I almost clearly defined them. Explain to me, how a musician, who has no interest in putting out a record, NEEDs people like you? If you think I'm arrogant for saying that to musicians who simply enjoy playing music, people like you are irrelevant, than so be it.
In historiography, the "official scholar" and recorder of dynastic history is important because he has the power to "twist" history, not because he is "needed". Written history has made it easier for historians, but history has been passed along fine without being written down. Are recording engineers and such important? Yes to the recording process. Music has been played for many centuries without being "recorded". It's arrogant to think that people need you to record them in order to play music and be a musician.
There's a common belief that the best musician in the world, if there is one, is probably sitting at home practicing. It's certainly a lot merrier playing music with others, but again, you don't NEED anyone to play music.
If planet Earth is near extinction, you'll find people playing music and you'll find people who thinks music is important and inspiring. Good luck finding people who think your job is relevant. |
|
Mike: Speaker design is a science more-so than it is an "art". While many in the design / manufacturing / distribution / sales / reviewing industries of "high end" audio would have you believe otherwise i.e. "the talented and very secretive audio guru's working their black magic", etc..., without the science, formula's and consistencies noted amongst specific design parameters, speaker design would be more "guesswork" than "art". As such, applying the science, formula's and commonalities amongst operating parameters is what makes up about 90% of the speaker design. The other 10% is finessing the variables into place to achieve the specific voicing / electrical characteristics that are desired. Whether or not one agrees with the specific figures ( 90% / 10% ) i used, i don't think that anyone familiar with the nuts & bolts of speaker design will question the comments that i made to any great extent. That's because they've studied the science enough to know what to expect out of a product based on how repeatable design parameters are implimented, sometimes even before they hear the product itself. The only real "catch" here is the "10%" that is art / magic, which can take a poor design and make it listenable, a mediocre design and make it more enjoyable than expected i.e. "a world beater that is greater than the sum of the parts", a good design and make it into something truly enjoyable, etc... On the other hand, one can have all the "right parts" and a great circuit with a very poor implimentation. As such, that last 10% could kill what should have been at least a decent product. The point that i'm getting at is that 90% of the equation starts with the design i.e. the consistent and repeatable performance characteristics that are predictable based on science and math. The finesse factor / how it is implimented is what makes the difference once all of the science / math have been implimented. In this case, most of the "science" is pretty straight-forward, hence the ability to describe specific sonic attributes and electrical characteristics onto it as a product. As i mentioned, what instrument radiates 100% of the sound that it produces away from the listener? With that in mind, i'm not saying that you or someone else can't or won't like this speaker. What i am saying is that based on the money involved and the other design approaches that could have been taken, the end product seems to be questionable in both value and performance. Then again, most every "high end" speaker falls into that category to one degree or another with some being far more questionable than others. As a side note, this is a 94 dB speaker according to Von Schweikert's website. The rating of 96 dB's only applies if the bass and treble boost circuitry are engaged. In effect, it looks like the active equalization circuitry ( fancy tone controls ) not only increases the average sensitivity, but also delivers the "big & dynamic" ( bright and thumpy ) sound that so many "audiophiles" seem to like. The fact that Legacy voices their products in much the same fashion shows that personal preference may be a better selling tool than accuracy and linearity are. At least with Legacy products though, you do get a lot of driver surface area for the money. In that respect, they are a "bargain" amongst "high end" speakers, even if they aren't anything close to what "high end" audio USED to be about. Metralla: How do i know that this cable has impedance bumps? That's easy. I have eyes and know how to interpret what i see : ) Honestly though, much of the "science" discussed above that makes speaker design repeatable also applies to the conductivity and electric parameters of cable design too. I'll try to keep this simple. A conductor in free space presents a specific impedance / velocity of propogation. Placing other conductive objects in proximity close enough to disturb or "couple" to the field produced by the conductor passing signal will change both the impedance and velocity of the signal. Given that the cable design being discussed consists of a woven pattern, you'll have a conductor that is "somewhat" in free space and then that conductor is placed above / below / next to another conductor. It then hits an open gap in the weave and then is placed in close proximity to another conductor above / below / next to it. This produces a random yet repeated change in impedance until the end of the pattern. Think of the electrons in the cable as a car and the woven pattern as traffic on an expressway. In some spots, the car can pick up speed as there is no impediment to flow i.e. open space all around it. Once it hits a pack of cars ( enters an "intersection" in the weave ), the speed of travel ( velocity of propagation ) has to be altered. Once the car ( electron ) makes it through the congested intersection ( areas where conductor cross section comes in contact or closer proximity with each other ), it can now procede ahead at full speed as there is a open area i.e. another "gap" in the traffic before it has to weave in and out of the traffic, slowing down progress once again. When looking at the progress that the car ( electron ) made travelling from point A to point B, we can ascertain the "average speed" ( nominal impedance ) that it took. Only problem is, that average speed is a combo of both "open road" speeds and "heavily congested traffic" speeds, which equate to the different impedances, "electrical bumps" and velocities that the electrons encountered. As to my vantage point, i'm in a helicopter flying overhead going directly from point A to point B. Not only can i see all of the changes in traffic flow ( impedance alterations ), but i've got a much shorter path since i don't have to weave around other obstacles, which requires me to alter my speed. Once again, this is why the shortest and straightest path is typically the fastest and most consistent route. I also new what to expect in terms of traffic flow ( impedance and speed of conduction ) as i had observed these characteristics many times before with both my naked eyes ( visible traits ) and by studying traffic logging data ( test results ). Knowing what to expect on any adventure and how best to deal with the variables involved can be rewarding in both time and monetary expenses. This is why educating yourself on the subjects that you'll be dealing with is both wise and enjoyable i.e. it pays for itself. Hope this helps and made the explanation easy enough to follow. Sean > PS... That explanation is pretty rudimentary, but it gets the point across. |
Joperfi: Duke doesn't have this problem for very specific reasons. Duke plays his cards above the table for all to see in a most up-front and helpful manner.
Mike: I never said or meant to infer that you were a "stirrer of the pot". How you got that impression, i don't know. If you can point out how & what you interpreted in one of my posts as saying that, i'd love to see it so i can both correct it and learn where i made such a mistake.
To be quite honest, i meant what i said in your system thread. I also appreciate the amount of time and effort that you've invested in responding to questions about your room construction, system selection, listening comparisons, etc... I didn't know if you had seen my initial questions pertaining to room modeling, hence my bringing it up again. Then again, i also didnt' know if i was being blown off because i was publicly "lambasting" your dealer.
Jtinn: Since you called me to task on my lack of audio industry affiliations and design / product familiarity, i am looking forward to your expert and professional reply to the comments / explanations that i've offered above. I see that you've taken the time to respond to and applaud Howie's criticism of Cinematic Systems, yet you've failed to offer any further insight or technical commentaries as to other comments / criticisms being made in this thread.
If you wonder why others have commented on why you find yourself in the situations that you do, now might be a good time to reflect on the situation. Sean
> |
Joperfi:
I wasn't surprised at the bickering and sniping per se; I was kinda shocked at how quickly things degenerated into a dick-swinging contest between certain parties. As for my dealer, what he does is his business. I like, trust, and admire the guy, and unless something goes horribly awry, he'll have my business for a long time. Case closed. |
Sean writes: That explanation is pretty rudimentary, but it gets the point across. It explains why you think the way you do. I don't believe your analogy to cars moving on freeways is applicable to the conduction of electrical signals. Regards, |
Sean; my comments about Audiogon's moderation policey were not in any way directed at you (i was simply whineing); we have never had any acrimoney of any kind between us and there is none now. we do disagree on whether you have adaquate information to take such strong stands on the design of the VR9's......but that's in no way personal. i respect your obvious knowledge and many contributions to the community. |
Sean, perhaps you should take to heart your statement "now might be a good time to reflect on the situation". Read some of your grandiose comments, such as extrapolation of data and parts of an amplifier you're unfamiliar with and making statements on how it would/should sound. " I have eyes and know how to interpret what I see". What? And I guess you interpret correctly? Writing your not so unusual tome and then stating it is a rudimentary explanation. Such false pride. Making the comment the VSA would be "bright and thumpy" based on the equalization circuity and, I'll bet, no listening experience whatsoever to this speaker. Dogmatically stating speaker design is 90% science and 10% art. You got these figures from where? I mean if you're such a nuts and bolts figures guy who can ostensibly extrapolate reality from reading theory you certainly shed theory for subjectivity when it suits your needs. Really Sean, making comments such as these, that you can tell how an amp or speaker sounds based on parts and design, when you don't even know what parts are used in some circumstances, is ludicrous and disturbing at best, and dangerous at worst. You should really stop all the gibberish. It may impress some, the multi-paragraph quasi techno babble verbosity. But it just looks foolish. Personal resentments towards individuals notwithstanding.
Cinematic: Your intentions were obvious from the get-go, with your subtly denigrating comments to Andrew about the Jena's segueing into the smart ass comment along the lines of it being an advertisement. Nice. Infantile, but nice. And utterly transparent. And your statement as to Rick Gardner buying gear for Jtinn? Bovine excrement. Get your facts straight before making such assinine and erroneous comments. Discaimer: as a friend and customer of Jtinn, I don't necessarily own everything he sells. But I have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express. |
How did this thread get so far off topic? |
Actually, Hooper, I don't believe a word of what you're saying. You knew this would happen, didn't you, you cunning lad? Stop playing the innocent. |
Gladstone:
I've been found out! Yes, indeed, this really was a nefarious plan to see how many outright insults and subtle digs I could elicit in a week-long period. You see, I have something of a sadomasochistic streak. Years of therapy--electroshock, sensory deprivation . . . . But, oh, what was I saying? Right. Well, you've uncovered my scheme. Congratulations. You journalists are a tricky lot. |
Andrew- Jacob is suffering from post partum suppression :^) |
Hooper; i wanna know how you planned all this last summer......
it's always the quiet ones you gotta watch. |
Mes,
LOL!!!! What part of this thread wasn't transparent from the start? LOL!!!!!
My only question is how many times did JTinn call you before you had to post? 4-5? I've got a pool going let us know.
Mes, howie, hooper, any other JTinn buddies want to pile on? I'm bored with this thread. Just alot of whining and cliche slinging going on. I really didn't believe this whole "syndicate" thing but its true. Sorry I doubted those who had informed me. I had to see for myself....LOL!!! this has been great!
Howie; Musicians don't need me if they want to play with themselves. this is true and if they don't care how their music sounds in people's homes. Happy now I said it?
Bye Jonny, been fun. See you in NY. |
I think that God is trying to teach me something / tell me to get off of the computer. After typing out a detailed response to both Metralla and Mes, i ended up losing the post again. While this is a problem with "buggy software", i'm taking it as a hint that i need to be concentrating on other things.
Best wishes to all. I'm out of here until i can get things ( both my life and computer ) a little more organized. It's just too frustrating to spend the time that i do trying to explain things to have it all disappear in a matter of milliseconds. Then again, life can be like that if you're not prepared. Besides, the weather is starting to break and i need some exercise : ) Sean
> |
Mike:
Like the master tactician I am, I scoped out A-gon for a while first, looking for weak points and hot spots. I decided to focus my efforts on the discussion forums--which are generally more unstable than an African country. Then, like a (dead) cobra, I struck. This thread alone has bagged me at least one outright insult and several subtle digs. When you combine that with the I-Chip thread I started on AA, I'm having a banner year so far.
So, how are those Kharmas? The Tenors drive them very well--I remember when I had them in my system, they drove the Midi-Ex's pretty easily and had a lot of headroom. |
thats easy mike, hooper was mesmerized by the glowing red eyes of the dartzeel amp...the amp made him do it!!! |
I'm mesmerized (by a now) $19k 125 watt amp that weighs 50-60 lbs.
Connect it to some $22k+ Kharma Ref3.2s which don't go beneath 50hz.
That's over $40k for a non-full range sound.
Anyone else thinks some of what is being talked about is ridiculous, and why the hi-end gets silly?
Don't get me wrong--I appreciate hi end gear (and own some), but I think the consumer is getting totally roasted by these companies. That dart isn't near worth the money they are asking.
MikeL--did you try subwoofers btw? I believe you have, but couldn't remember. |
I'd respond further, but I'm afraid I'm tied up with trying to get the sequined "S" sewn back on my uniform. Then I must alter the cape. After all,when you're a member of "The Syndicate", you have to make sure the uniform looks good. Now if I can just get this rolled up sock into my tights and make sure it stays round front....... |
hi Keith, after hearing both the Midi Exquisite and the CRM 3.2 at CES with the Kharma sub.......i decided not to go the subwoofer direction. i never did try a sub in my room with my old Exqusites......i did seriously consider it however.
"That dart isn't near worth the money they are asking".....if that is true, then neither is the Lamm ML2.1 or ANY other amp i have heard. i might agree that no amp is WORTH $18k....but if ANY are then IMHO the Dart is....but that is only my opinion based on my listening for the last few months.
YMMV |
Mes--did you mean postpartum oppression, perhaps! Not a bit of it, I assure you. You may need to up your bench presses, though, if you want to make that cape look good.
By way, Mike, I wonder if that sub was properly set up--if they aren't integrated properly, it sounds horrendous. OTOH, I suspect that the only way to really integrate subs in time is through an external crossover, etc.
Hooper, I'm glad that you're audophile enough to begin fessing up to your sins. |
Still no posts concerning the VR7 and the Dartzeel NHB-108 Amplifier. How does this combination sound for those of us who are married and not THAT wealthy?? |
Keithr, the 3.2s are rated to go down to 35hz. And in my room has output below that. I don't know where you got the impression that the speakers only go down to 50hz. Howie; Musicians don't need me if they want to play with themselves. this is true and if they don't care how their music sounds in people's homes. Happy now I said it? Musicians don't need you if they want to play by themselves or with others. They don't need you with or without an audience. If they care about their music in people's homes then they'll probably need someone who's better than you. LOL! Jtinn: A pleasure to have surprised you. :D |
DBK--you're asking that Dartzeel to do a lot more when you take out the powered subs of the VR-9 and go to the VR-7. Why not look at the DB-99? |
DBK, the DarTZeel is quite wonderful in my fairly large room on the 90db, 4 ohm nominal Midi Exquisite. i would guess that in a more normal sized room that the Dart would be just fine on the 94db, 6 ohm nominal VR7.
any amp/speaker combo needs to be auditioned to be sure of compatibility.....but based on my experience with the DarT that could be a wonderful match. possibly other amps might offer more of some things but the refinement of the Dart is very special and is approached in my experience only by some tube amps. |
DBK:
I agree with Gladstone (scary, in't?). The DarTZeel is definitely helped out by the built-in sub of the VR-9. It takes a huge load off the amp's shoulders. I can get the 9 up to some wacky volumes, and it sounds like the amp is using maybe 25% of its power. Of course, the 96dB efficiency of the 9s helps out a lot too.
BTW, I didn't think the 7s had a powered sub. I fact, I'm pretty sure they don't. That would definitely change your purchasing decision. However, the 7s are 92 or 94dB efficient, and have a pretty friendly impedance curve, so a single Dart could handle that load pretty easily. |
Dbk: The VR9 while having it's sub powered, still has it's woofers driven by the same amplifier as the mids and tweets. No different than with the VR7SE's. Granted the woofers in the VR7's have to go down deeper, but the darTZeel will have no issue driving the VR7SE. |
Mike--perhaps the Dartzeel can handle the VR-7. But when you have the VR-9 with the powered sub, you are, in effect, biamping. The Dartzeel doesn't have to cope with those bass frequencies, which means it should play with even more refinement and ease in the midrange and treble. I am a total convert to the idea of powered subs and don't think I would in the future buy a speaker that didn't have a setup like the VR-9 or the DB-99. |
Would the DartZeel work with Merlins? |
Tab110:
From the look of it, any Merlin speaker should be a pretty benign load. The specs listed on their website indicate 89dB efficiency and an 8-ohm nominal impedance, with a minimum of 6.5. The Dart should be able to handle that load pretty easily. But, if I were you, I would call Merlin direct and see what they think. In my experience, Merlins have been somewhat finicky about the gear they're paired with. Hope this helps. |
The darTZeel in "Hi" impedance mode will easily handle the Merlins. I have heard them driven quite well with much less power.
The only time impedance is an issue for the darTZeel is if the speaker drops below 2.9 ohms. If so, the amplifier needs to be set to "low" impedance mode and there would be no issue. |
Wow, what a rush! I know of some of the gentlemen posting here, but I wouldn't mind some kind of audiogon Playbill "List of Characters" to keep up with things since it's been 2 1/2 years since my last post (note to all: the withdrawal/rhythm method really doesn't work).
Not to crash the party, but I imagine even casual and new readers to this and other forums as well as newbies to the High End would use some sense and reason before saying farewell to their loved ones (oops, I meant $$$) and purchasing rather expensive merchandise before doing some due diligence - with regard to the equipment AND the respective dealers. One might get those nice warm and fuzzy self-congratulatory feelings when "warning" others of what one perceives, but when the body count is over all that's left is a bunch of (cue violins.....now) hurt feelings.
OK, I'm stepping off my soap box. How about those Yankees? |
Howie- I said that based on the positive feedback review, where the reviewer notes, even though measured differently, he didn't find/hear anything appreciable below 50hz. The several times I've heard them, I would tend to agree.
It's still a 2-way speaker (the most expensive of its kind, I believe) and has limitations based on that 7" driver. Don't get me wrong--I've heard it and think it sounds great, just don't agree that 2 70lb 2-ways is worth anywhere near 22k, irrespective of sound. Merlins are 1/2 that price and obviously compete as well. And people dog Wilson on pricing :)
I would love to see measurements on the Kharma, I admit although I'm not sure they have been published.
MikeL- I agree that for me personally it's tough to justify any 18k amp. But that aside, just while I'm sure it sounds utterly amazing, it's tough to swallow an amp at that pricing point that a) isn't a monoblock and b) can't drive all speakers.
Of course, just my opinion.... |
