How to fix my detailed, accurate but BRIGHT system

TVAD:On the other hand, we can also not exclude the possibility that he is right. In the acknowledgments section of his book, Harley thanks several experts in specific fields of audio who provided technical review of his manuscript. I am going to take the viewpoint that they know their fields, and that therefore the information provided in the book has been determined to be correct.

TVAD,

Let's try an example, because I suspect that there is some misunderstanding somewhere in the path from what Harley meant to say, to the words he used, to your interpretation of his words, and to my interpretation of your words.

We have a speaker that is 4 ohms in the bass, 8 ohms in the treble, and an amplifier that we are assuming has an output impedance which is negligible in relation to 4 ohms, and which can put out 250 watts into 8 ohms. And we are assuming that the speaker, like most speakers (especially enclosed box type speakers) is designed based on voltage paradigm principles.

Let's say the amplifier is putting out a treble tone of amplitude 8.94 volts, which is 10 watts into the 8 ohm speaker impedance in the treble region. The corresponding current that will flow at that frequency is 10/8.94 = 1.12 amps.

Let's then say that the system is also called upon to put out an equal volume bass tone (either simultaneously or at a different time; it doesn't matter for purposes of this example).

My first contention is that the amplifier will then put out a bass tone which is also 8.94 volts in amplitude, which will correspond to a power delivery, into the 4 ohm impedance which the speaker has in the bass region, of 20 watts, and a current flow of 2.24 amps.

My second contention is that, everything else being equal, an amplifier that can provide 250 watts into 8 ohms but cannot double its maximum power into 4 ohms will handle that situation no differently than an amplifier that can provide 250 watts into 8 ohms but can double its maximum power into 4 ohms.

And my interpretation of your original post, based on your interpretation of Harley's book, is that in this situation you and/or he claim that the amplifier which can double its maximum power into 4 ohms will deliver the 20 watts, while the amplifier which cannot double its maximum power into 4 ohms will deliver something less than the 20 watts, thereby resulting in excessive brightness. Which I contend is wrong.

So am I correct in thinking that there is a misinterpretation somewhere, or do you in fact disagree with any of my contentions above?

Best,
-- Al

I have found the stock Wadia 170i to stock a little bit on the bright side for me. Granted, there are numerous listeners who like detailed sound. Ignoring all other components, the wadia may be part of your problem. Upgrading the Wadia or using a DIP to reclock and runing it into a smooth sounding Dac such as the Scott Nixon Tube DAC or a TADAC should help. Assuming it doesn't become too smooth sounding then.

You'll never get the results you seek because you are not willing to address the causes of the brightness and you reject the cures. You have a very large room and you use very inefficient speakers. Your room's surfaces are very reflective, yet you use a wide dispersion speaker. Acoustic rooms treatments - can't do! Equalizers - won't do that either! That leaves you with only one possible way out -- a preamp with built in EQ. Check out the various current and past model McIntoshs. But be warned, it's still a band-aid type solution. The mismatch between your room and your speaker is the real problem.

It would immensely help if you would post your system and include several pictures of your room.

Sage advice from Onhwy61..

Thank you for your posts. I will try to find some time to post some pics of my room. I think you will then see why I can't do treatments. I have tried a couple of experiments that have taught me alot about what sound I am looking for. First of all with TVADS advice, I tilted my speakers up by placing 3/4" footers under the front spikes. This mellowed out the harshness from the upper mids and highs alot, but still too bright for me. Second experiment was to by a Yaquin Tube buffer which I placed between my pre and dac. This completely changed the sound. The sound evened out with much more base, more lower midrange and a much warmer, smoothed out presentation with a nice amount of decay. Now, grant you this buffer rolls off the highs a bit, softens up the base and takes away some detail. But, it gets me much closer to the warmer more anolog sound I seek. The third thing I did, again as an inexpensive test is picked up a Play Station 1, $10.00. This was to take my dac out of the system which I believe may be, as someone suggested above a big part of the problem. I didn't expect the PS-1 to sound near as good as it did. I see why people like them. It does lack alot of detail, even more than adding the buffer, so it's ultimately not for me. My conclusion "so far" is that I like the sound much warmer and organic than what I have now, but I don't want to sacrifice the detail to get it. So, something I would like further input on is this. Should I replace my dac with a tube dac that has more detail than the low cost products I tested with, or should I replace my pre with a tube pre to get the sound I am looking for? What dac in the $1 to $1.5 thousand dollar range would fit the bill? Or should I look into a tube pre? Thanks for your help!

Greg