Magnepan.
Speakers as the principle component/other components are servants
Speakers hold the Kingship in our overall audio systems.
I think my recent posts have substaniated this thesis, well at least my opinion of sorts.
This OP came to me after reading through some of (most of what is too deep for my understanding)
pedro's
topic
**Why is science a starting point, yet not the end point?*
Meaning science gives us all sorts of parimeters, specs, graphs and such. Most of which we have no clue how to interpret,
All we ae concerned is , **how does the speaker actually sound**.
Pedro suggests science has let us down, that science, if it was so intelligent, why can't science tell us which speaker is the superior and which the inferior sound???
Obvioulsy science is not the end all /be all.
Its only a tool, human sensibilities come in at the very end to say
Yea
or worse
Nay
I say nay
to all/eversy xover design in the fq's ,,ohh say 800hz = 15khz.
Yeah I know thats a massive chuck of our music.
As many of you know i make very long winded posts
But actually I reduce them to make them more readable and so folks don't lose interest.
~~~So cut to the chase.
We accept high tech in every aspect of our lives.
You name it, super high tech is there,. Had you told us back in 1965, folks would be walking around with telephones, sending pics/videos,,we'd all laugh you at your face as scifi fantasy.
~~~Long story short.
The new wide band /high sensitivity speaker technology. What gives?
Why the denial it exists?
Why the fear to inquisite?
Why the lack of interest?
Why the rejection?
Speakers will crown your system with beauty Or else render it as distortion/low fidelity.
Tweak/,od/upgrade all you want, at how much you care to spend $$$$$ ($40K!!!) on cables etc.
Ain;'t going to make hardly even a miniscle gain in sonics, if the speakers are ~~faulty~~ due to low sensitivity.
Bass woofers, I'll grant low sens Seas and Scaspeaks high end woofers a stunning succcess.
Above 800hz, I have issues with any driver neededing a xover.
I tag these fq's with xovers. The Wet Blanket sound. Sounds mechanical, like compressed music,, comming from a box.
Squeezed, contorted, tiny soundstage, strained fq's if vol is over 10 oclock. = fatigue/Coloration in abundance.
Many fq's of the source, missing in action.
I am not suggesting these new wide band is for everyones taste. Not at all. Only that we should at least give these wide band a consideration as a possible alternative to our old traditional ideas.
Inqusisitiveness is a good thing in all things audio.
Without a healthy curiousity, we putrefy , stagnate.
Even Worse
we might miss out on the super high fidelty we all hope to hear one day in our systems by this neglect of the new high technology in speaker design. .
.
I think my recent posts have substaniated this thesis, well at least my opinion of sorts.
This OP came to me after reading through some of (most of what is too deep for my understanding)
pedro's
topic
**Why is science a starting point, yet not the end point?*
Meaning science gives us all sorts of parimeters, specs, graphs and such. Most of which we have no clue how to interpret,
All we ae concerned is , **how does the speaker actually sound**.
Pedro suggests science has let us down, that science, if it was so intelligent, why can't science tell us which speaker is the superior and which the inferior sound???
Obvioulsy science is not the end all /be all.
Its only a tool, human sensibilities come in at the very end to say
Yea
or worse
Nay
I say nay
to all/eversy xover design in the fq's ,,ohh say 800hz = 15khz.
Yeah I know thats a massive chuck of our music.
As many of you know i make very long winded posts
But actually I reduce them to make them more readable and so folks don't lose interest.
~~~So cut to the chase.
We accept high tech in every aspect of our lives.
You name it, super high tech is there,. Had you told us back in 1965, folks would be walking around with telephones, sending pics/videos,,we'd all laugh you at your face as scifi fantasy.
~~~Long story short.
The new wide band /high sensitivity speaker technology. What gives?
Why the denial it exists?
Why the fear to inquisite?
Why the lack of interest?
Why the rejection?
Speakers will crown your system with beauty Or else render it as distortion/low fidelity.
Tweak/,od/upgrade all you want, at how much you care to spend $$$$$ ($40K!!!) on cables etc.
Ain;'t going to make hardly even a miniscle gain in sonics, if the speakers are ~~faulty~~ due to low sensitivity.
Bass woofers, I'll grant low sens Seas and Scaspeaks high end woofers a stunning succcess.
Above 800hz, I have issues with any driver neededing a xover.
I tag these fq's with xovers. The Wet Blanket sound. Sounds mechanical, like compressed music,, comming from a box.
Squeezed, contorted, tiny soundstage, strained fq's if vol is over 10 oclock. = fatigue/Coloration in abundance.
Many fq's of the source, missing in action.
I am not suggesting these new wide band is for everyones taste. Not at all. Only that we should at least give these wide band a consideration as a possible alternative to our old traditional ideas.
Inqusisitiveness is a good thing in all things audio.
Without a healthy curiousity, we putrefy , stagnate.
Even Worse
we might miss out on the super high fidelty we all hope to hear one day in our systems by this neglect of the new high technology in speaker design. .
.
- ...
- 51 posts total
Mozartfan, Can you list, without acronyms, the specific speaker systems you are referring to as being state of the art, particularly ones that have no crossovers at all? Aside from a small handful of cone driver speakers with just a single driver (Charney and Voxativ), I have not heard any that, given my taste and priorities, I would consider an acceptable set of compromises. The other acceptable single driver systems were panel speakers (electrostatics), like the big Soundlab speakers (the biggest compromise with these speakers being the need to play them at somewhat high volume levels). I like systems with wide range drivers handling a big part of the upper bass through most of the treble range, probably because they minimize the negative effects of a crossover, but, a crossover is almost always a necessary item in a decent full range system. Some of the systems I like employing such drivers include very old drivers (like the Jensen M10 fieldcoil driver) as well as modern drivers, including exotic drivers like the Feastrix field coil drivers, and Voxativ drivers. There are a number of manufacturers using wide range drivers in multi-way systems that sound good to me, such as systems from Soundkaos and Trenner and Friedl. I happen to like very much systems employing compression/horn midrange drivers, particularly vintage drivers, like those by Western Electric and the International Projector Company. Modern fieldcoil drivers from the likes of G.I.P. Laboratories (Japan) sound terrific too. If you heard just one example of a crossover "upgrade" that disappointed you, I don't think that there is enough data to generalize about crossovers in general. If a speaker is not very good, or if a speaker IS very good (including the crossover supplied by the manufacturer), attempts at an upgrade may not work out. If the "upgrade" consisted of simply putting in a more expensive part with the same electrical value, it will often be the case that the result is hardly a difference or even a negative result. A local builder whose speakers I really like, totally HATES the sound of the expensive Mundorf caps; for his designs and particular taste, these are bad caps. A good design is one that is voiced properly and that does not necessarily mean using more expensive parts. |
richopp443 posts07-07-2021 7:30amMagnepan. My tech geek LOVES his Maggies. I am sure they are quite special. If you need/want what they offer. I agree for some, this Pannel design still holds value. I am not saying wide band should be *one size fits all*. That everyone should dump their xover designs and get a wide band. Not at all. (hush off to the side,,,if they did, then they would be as the poet wrote *Have you ever been experienced,,welll I haveaaa* Hendrix) |
larryi2,541 posts07-07-2021 8:03amMozartfan, Can you list, without acronyms, the specific speaker systems you are referring to as being state of the art, particularly ones that have no crossovers at all? Aside from a small handful of cone driver speakers with just a single driver (Charney and Voxativ), I have not heard any that, given my taste and priorities, I would consider an acceptable set of compromises. The other acceptable single driver systems were panel speakers (electrostatics), like the big Soundlab speakers (the biggest compromise with these speakers being the need to play them at somewhat high volume levels). I like systems with wide range drivers handling a big part of the upper bass through most of the treble range, probably because they minimize the negative effects of a crossover, but, a crossover is almost always a necessary item in a decent full range system. Some of the systems I like employing such drivers include very old drivers (like the Jensen M10 fieldcoil driver) as well as modern drivers, including exotic drivers like the Feastrix field coil drivers, and Voxativ drivers. There are a number of manufacturers using wide range drivers in multi-way systems that sound good to me, such as systems from Soundkaos and Trenner and Friedl. I happen to like very much systems employing compression/horn midrange drivers, particularly vintage drivers, like those by Western Electric and the International Projector Company. Modern fieldcoil drivers from the likes of G.I.P. Laboratories (Japan) sound terrific too. If you heard just one example of a crossover "upgrade" that disappointed you, I don't think that there is enough data to generalize about crossovers in general. If a speaker is not very good, or if a speaker IS very good (including the crossover supplied by the manufacturer), attempts at an upgrade may not work out. If the "upgrade" consisted of simply putting in a more expensive part with the same electrical value, it will often be the case that the result is hardly a difference or even a negative result. A local builder whose speakers I really like, totally HATES the sound of the expensive Mundorf caps; for his designs and particular taste, these are bad caps. A good design is one that is voiced properly and that does not necessarily mean using more expensive parts. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Larryi This is a fair and well present post. I appreciate your contributions to this discussion, of **Where do we go from here??* Long story short. I really can not say I've heard a better xover design that beats Seas. We all have to agree Seas makes the best sounding drivers, with Scanspeak as a twin brother in this regard. The main issue here is the low db spec. I simply can not will not accept that sensitivity for my music. can't won't. Those days are over. Been there done that. Theils, Wilson's etc, all will have the same issues of low sensitivity = Read *INefficient = IJNeffective*. Others can argue, their case these xover designs continue to hold value. Pre new high tech wide band (AER/Voxativ) , yeah, ok, the xover designs with Scan and Seas, had value. But now with newer , superior technology in these single drivers, the *older* xover designs have been rendered of less value. All due to the Sensitivity factor. Which is EVERYTHING ina speakers performance. The xover fanatics will not embrace the new wide band. They say its not their cup of tea, Yet w/o having even heard a quality wide band = Pure biased prejudice. I am writing for all the nwbies who will come into this hobby over the next few decades. All my hundreds of posts, ranting and raving over wide band speakers,,may at least give newbies some ideas that xovers are NOT the ONLY speaker to hear true high fidelity. Your Jensen and Western Electric i am sure sound better than most xover types from the 70's and 80's. Those great high sens designs got pushed under the bus, all due to commercialISM, This is my point. I see xover designs as inefficient thus not really qualified to voice true fidelity. Here, 1929 THis was true fidelity. We are about to go full circle, What began as high efficient speakers, now will go full circle back to wide band high sensivity speakers, In 20 years from now, xover types, Theils, etc, all these will be cast away at garage sales, cheaply priced on Ebay, stuck in the dusty attic. The next generation audiophile is moving away from xover styles and going wide band cone speakers. Its just a matter of time. This is my i blast my mantra all over the Inet To get the word out, Get the ball rolling. Take the spot light off xover designs and put the light where it truly deservedly belongs, Wide Band /High sensitivity speakers. I am The Iconclyst. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpsPGnvIfFA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qrqv5nOjLuw WE have to get back to the very beginnings, where it all started. We have forgotten what true high fidelity is all about, Seas Millennium,,,give me a break, Wet blankets = un-musical. |
So like I was listening to Schnittke and thinking, thinking things over,,, what if,. I take a slightly dampen the DavidLouis 4 inch Wide band/sens 91db This was will cut ever so slightly the stress she shows at certain complex passages, + I get to make a slight gain on the Jadis DPL linestage (due to less blare comming from the DL 4 at certain high gain passages) + this way the china paper 3.5 inch tweet/Double magnet/91db and the dual W18E001's both get a pinch more power to do their thing. So i took a old Tshirt,,and thought a minute,,,hummm, lets try a single side of cotton, so cut the T in half and laid a single easy to pass the DL's fq,s yet slightly dampen at ceryain high volt passages. WORKED!!! Now i get a pinch more gain going to the incredible W18E001's/Mundorf Supreme caps/Gertz super duty copper coil, and also to the KASUN $50/pair 3.5 inch paper cone tweeters/DOUBLE MAGNET,, /91db!!!. WORKED!!! Honestly Truthfully Straight up. I could easily live with this Frankenstein, not needing at all the Voxativ, I am quite happy with waht is going on here with this 3 way Frankenstein. Its more than i could ever imagined that i would ever own. IOW, after having struggled over trying to find a 3 way that would bring my music to life, spending hour after hour searching seas's web site for possible solutions. All along the secret to answering my problem, was ~~~~~~~~~~WIDE BAND~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ As Midrange = 800hz-12khz. BINGO I win. Just beat out the xover disaster, complete total failure. I'm running a Mundorf 2.2 cap to the china paper tweeter. Just as good, actually better than any dome tweet from ScanSpeak and Seas. Did you hear that Troels?? My $50 china paper tweet beats out your Scan/Seas dome tweeters.. The Voxativ is really going to have a tough shootout with my Frankenstein. Gonna be bloody, |
- 51 posts total