Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Engineers

Expand Messages
  • Robert
    I teach the future engineers a lot--especially in the summer when I do some extra teaching to make money for my rescue dogs. I teach them complex analysis as
    Message 1 of 19 , Aug 9, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      I teach the future engineers a lot--especially in the summer
      when I do some extra teaching to make money
      for my rescue dogs. I teach them complex analysis
      as prep for linear systems. Poles and zeroes
      and determining a meromorphic function from its
      modulus on a circle(i.ee., to what extent that can be done
      and what the degrees of freedom are for the process).

      They are really good students. (UCLA has
      an excellent engineering school).

      And almost all of them are studying digital electronics.

      A veritable army of people is appearing who
      know digital signal processing.
      But one in a hunded, maybe one in a thousand,
      of them would have any
      idea at all how to make an analogue electro-mechanical
      device like a microphone or speaker.

      Is it any surprise in this scene that there can be
      a big burst of digital electronics for consumer
      purposes? Of course not. There is demand and
      there is supply of engineers--in addition to the
      fact that digital is just what is "hot".

      But notice also that the abundance of people
      who know digital will open up the likelihood
      of marketing of digital devices for audio--
      whether these devices need to exist or not.

      Some of these devices are really useful.
      The DSPeaker Dual Core is inexpensive, works
      like crazy, and is altogether really good and useful.
      A remarkable device that makes a big improvement
      in audio really accessible.

      But make an army of people who know how
      to make DACs and you are going to have
      a huge collection of DACs produced ,each
      claiming to be better than the other
      but likely none fundamentally superior.
      Everyone wants to make a buck!

      The consumer would be well advised to think
      about these points before putting up much cash.


      One spinoff of the army of digital engineers
      is that there are going to be quite a few
      of them who try to pick up some bucks in audio.
      The stuff they make will be good--they are good.
      But it won't be better in ways that matter to music,
      most likely. It may not be better at all. It is just
      there because they are there.

      Think about it.

      REG
    • Roscoe "Trey" Nicholson
      A very interesting observations about how the educational training recieved by students in the applied sciences is affecting the audio landscape. The last two
      Message 2 of 19 , Aug 9, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        A very interesting observations about how the educational training recieved by students in the applied sciences is affecting the audio landscape.

        The last two posts you made remind me of the observation that the points at which physical energy is converted to electricity and vice versa are the most important points to pay attention to in the audio chain. So attention to the turntable/cart/tonearm and speakers should have have a bigger payoff than attending to electronics (as long as fundamentals like impedance matching and power matching are taken into consideration).
        On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Robert <regtas43@...> wrote:
         

        I teach the future engineers a lot--especially in the summer
        when I do some extra teaching to make money
        for my rescue dogs. I teach them complex analysis
        as prep for linear systems. Poles and zeroes
        and determining a meromorphic function from its
        modulus on a circle(i.ee., to what extent that can be done
        and what the degrees of freedom are for the process).

        They are really good students. (UCLA has
        an excellent engineering school).

        And almost all of them are studying digital electronics.

        A veritable army of people is appearing who
        know digital signal processing.
        But one in a hunded, maybe one in a thousand,
        of them would have any
        idea at all how to make an analogue electro-mechanical
        device like a microphone or speaker.

        Is it any surprise in this scene that there can be
        a big burst of digital electronics for consumer
        purposes? Of course not. There is demand and
        there is supply of engineers--in addition to the
        fact that digital is just what is "hot".

        But notice also that the abundance of people
        who know digital will open up the likelihood
        of marketing of digital devices for audio--
        whether these devices need to exist or not.

        Some of these devices are really useful.
        The DSPeaker Dual Core is inexpensive, works
        like crazy, and is altogether really good and useful.
        A remarkable device that makes a big improvement
        in audio really accessible.

        But make an army of people who know how
        to make DACs and you are going to have
        a huge collection of DACs produced ,each
        claiming to be better than the other
        but likely none fundamentally superior.
        Everyone wants to make a buck!

        The consumer would be well advised to think
        about these points before putting up much cash.

        One spinoff of the army of digital engineers
        is that there are going to be quite a few
        of them who try to pick up some bucks in audio.
        The stuff they make will be good--they are good.
        But it won't be better in ways that matter to music,
        most likely. It may not be better at all. It is just
        there because they are there.

        Think about it.

        REG


      • Roscoe "Trey" Nicholson
        Not sure if you have written about it elsewhere, but I am very interested in your impressions of the DSPeaker Dual Core. Both as a DAC and a room correction
        Message 3 of 19 , Aug 9, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          Not sure if you have written about it elsewhere, but I am very interested in your impressions of the DSPeaker Dual Core. Both as a DAC and a room correction device. Something you would even run your analog through in order to get room correction benefits?

          On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Roscoe "Trey" Nicholson <roscoeiii@...> wrote:
          A very interesting observations about how the educational training recieved by students in the applied sciences is affecting the audio landscape.

          The last two posts you made remind me of the observation that the points at which physical energy is converted to electricity and vice versa are the most important points to pay attention to in the audio chain. So attention to the turntable/cart/tonearm and speakers should have have a bigger payoff than attending to electronics (as long as fundamentals like impedance matching and power matching are taken into consideration).
          On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Robert <regtas43@...> wrote:
           

          I teach the future engineers a lot--especially in the summer
          when I do some extra teaching to make money
          for my rescue dogs. I teach them complex analysis
          as prep for linear systems. Poles and zeroes
          and determining a meromorphic function from its
          modulus on a circle(i.ee., to what extent that can be done
          and what the degrees of freedom are for the process).

          They are really good students. (UCLA has
          an excellent engineering school).

          And almost all of them are studying digital electronics.

          A veritable army of people is appearing who
          know digital signal processing.
          But one in a hunded, maybe one in a thousand,
          of them would have any
          idea at all how to make an analogue electro-mechanical
          device like a microphone or speaker.

          Is it any surprise in this scene that there can be
          a big burst of digital electronics for consumer
          purposes? Of course not. There is demand and
          there is supply of engineers--in addition to the
          fact that digital is just what is "hot".

          But notice also that the abundance of people
          who know digital will open up the likelihood
          of marketing of digital devices for audio--
          whether these devices need to exist or not.

          Some of these devices are really useful.
          The DSPeaker Dual Core is inexpensive, works
          like crazy, and is altogether really good and useful.
          A remarkable device that makes a big improvement
          in audio really accessible.

          But make an army of people who know how
          to make DACs and you are going to have
          a huge collection of DACs produced ,each
          claiming to be better than the other
          but likely none fundamentally superior.
          Everyone wants to make a buck!

          The consumer would be well advised to think
          about these points before putting up much cash.

          One spinoff of the army of digital engineers
          is that there are going to be quite a few
          of them who try to pick up some bucks in audio.
          The stuff they make will be good--they are good.
          But it won't be better in ways that matter to music,
          most likely. It may not be better at all. It is just
          there because they are there.

          Think about it.

          REG



        • Robert
          I definitely think that for many room and most speakers in them, correction is so worthwhile that running analgoue through it is worthwhile. But with some
          Message 4 of 19 , Aug 9, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            I definitely think that for many room and most speakers in them,
            correction is so worthwhile that running analgoue through
            it is worthwhile. But with some systems, analogue EQ is enough--
            this happens reasonably often--and with some one does not really need anything.

            Contemporary A to D to A does effectively no harm. One is not losing much if anything. But whether you want to do correction and how much...

            This is a complex issue because one hears both the speaker itself and its relationship to the room, and the extent to which each counts and how they interact depends on frequency.

            Fortunately, the lower frequencies are where the room and the speaker are most nearly combined --and that is also where one is most likely to need correction. The DSPeaker quits correcting about 500 Hz
            max but you can pull the upper limit down, too, eg correct only the deep bass. And
            you can do parametric EQ higher up to fix whatever is wrong with your speakers to your ears(it will also measure for you if you want it to).

            This is a very elegant system, and to my mind it does what one
            wants. And it is easy to use and not very expensive and it
            is optimized in all directions. I did not give it a Golden Ear
            award for nothing!

            A full review will be along eventually.

            It may not be all things to all people. If you want more aggressive correction--bottom to top, phase manipulation, then you might
            want to look elsewhere. But for most purposes, I think this will
            be enough. And trying to erase the room entirely by pushing phase around and so on is not
            necessarily something that sounds good , no matter how appealing it may be in engineering terms.

            The ear/brain is hard to fool --above the bass anyway.

            REG

            --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Roscoe \"Trey\" Nicholson" <roscoeiii@...> wrote:
            >
            > Not sure if you have written about it elsewhere, but I am very interested
            > in your impressions of the DSPeaker Dual Core. Both as a DAC and a room
            > correction device. Something you would even run your analog through in
            > order to get room correction benefits?
            >
            > On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Roscoe "Trey" Nicholson <roscoeiii@...
            > > wrote:
            >
            > > A very interesting observations about how the educational training
            > > recieved by students in the applied sciences is affecting the audio
            > > landscape.
            > >
            > > The last two posts you made remind me of the observation that the points
            > > at which physical energy is converted to electricity and vice versa are the
            > > most important points to pay attention to in the audio chain. So attention
            > > to the turntable/cart/tonearm and speakers should have have a bigger payoff
            > > than attending to electronics (as long as fundamentals like impedance
            > > matching and power matching are taken into consideration).
            > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Robert <regtas43@...> wrote:
            > >
            > >> **
            > >>
            > >>
            > >> I teach the future engineers a lot--especially in the summer
            > >> when I do some extra teaching to make money
            > >> for my rescue dogs. I teach them complex analysis
            > >> as prep for linear systems. Poles and zeroes
            > >> and determining a meromorphic function from its
            > >> modulus on a circle(i.ee., to what extent that can be done
            > >> and what the degrees of freedom are for the process).
            > >>
            > >> They are really good students. (UCLA has
            > >> an excellent engineering school).
            > >>
            > >> And almost all of them are studying digital electronics.
            > >>
            > >> A veritable army of people is appearing who
            > >> know digital signal processing.
            > >> But one in a hunded, maybe one in a thousand,
            > >> of them would have any
            > >> idea at all how to make an analogue electro-mechanical
            > >> device like a microphone or speaker.
            > >>
            > >> Is it any surprise in this scene that there can be
            > >> a big burst of digital electronics for consumer
            > >> purposes? Of course not. There is demand and
            > >> there is supply of engineers--in addition to the
            > >> fact that digital is just what is "hot".
            > >>
            > >> But notice also that the abundance of people
            > >> who know digital will open up the likelihood
            > >> of marketing of digital devices for audio--
            > >> whether these devices need to exist or not.
            > >>
            > >> Some of these devices are really useful.
            > >> The DSPeaker Dual Core is inexpensive, works
            > >> like crazy, and is altogether really good and useful.
            > >> A remarkable device that makes a big improvement
            > >> in audio really accessible.
            > >>
            > >> But make an army of people who know how
            > >> to make DACs and you are going to have
            > >> a huge collection of DACs produced ,each
            > >> claiming to be better than the other
            > >> but likely none fundamentally superior.
            > >> Everyone wants to make a buck!
            > >>
            > >> The consumer would be well advised to think
            > >> about these points before putting up much cash.
            > >>
            > >> One spinoff of the army of digital engineers
            > >> is that there are going to be quite a few
            > >> of them who try to pick up some bucks in audio.
            > >> The stuff they make will be good--they are good.
            > >> But it won't be better in ways that matter to music,
            > >> most likely. It may not be better at all. It is just
            > >> there because they are there.
            > >>
            > >> Think about it.
            > >>
            > >> REG
            > >>
            > >>
            > >>
            > >
            > >
            >
          • laurie483000
            Stereophile were impressed too with the DSPeaker dual core at a recent show, using Gradient loudspeakers and a sub - best bass of the show they said.
            Message 5 of 19 , Aug 10, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              Stereophile were impressed too with the DSPeaker dual core at a recent show, using Gradient loudspeakers and a sub - best bass of the show they said.

              http://www.stereophile.com/content/dspeaker-does-it-all-1099/

              I'll await the reviews, but it would seem in a CD / digital source only system, to obviate the need for a separate preamp and DAC as well as providing the (mainly bass) EQ. It incorporates a volume control, sub x-over and they stress the low jitter performance of the DAC. My wife would appreciate a reduction in the number of 'hifi' boxes, which might then enable her to understand how to play music, all by herself.

              I wonder if the DAC side is as good as the Benchmark. It would be nice if some more EQ control higher up were available, as I do find my M30s just a touch midrangy in my room, but maybe fine tuning the bass would ameliorate this. I'm interested @ 850 euros and so will have to investigate UK dealers. I'd have to do other things for my SACDs, satellite radio plus future hi-res downloads, though - so not a complete answer. I think it copes with web sourced music channels, not quite sure, but I want to get into this soon. I don't bother with records these days - well not at the moment.


              Laurie


              --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@...> wrote:
              >
              > I definitely think that for many room and most speakers in them,
              > correction is so worthwhile that running analgoue through
              > it is worthwhile. But with some systems, analogue EQ is enough--
              > this happens reasonably often--and with some one does not really need anything.
              >
              > Contemporary A to D to A does effectively no harm. One is not losing much if anything. But whether you want to do correction and how much...
              >
              > This is a complex issue because one hears both the speaker itself and its relationship to the room, and the extent to which each counts and how they interact depends on frequency.
              >
              > Fortunately, the lower frequencies are where the room and the speaker are most nearly combined --and that is also where one is most likely to need correction. The DSPeaker quits correcting about 500 Hz
              > max but you can pull the upper limit down, too, eg correct only the deep bass. And
              > you can do parametric EQ higher up to fix whatever is wrong with your speakers to your ears(it will also measure for you if you want it to).
              >
              > This is a very elegant system, and to my mind it does what one
              > wants. And it is easy to use and not very expensive and it
              > is optimized in all directions. I did not give it a Golden Ear
              > award for nothing!
              >
              > A full review will be along eventually.
              >
              > It may not be all things to all people. If you want more aggressive correction--bottom to top, phase manipulation, then you might
              > want to look elsewhere. But for most purposes, I think this will
              > be enough. And trying to erase the room entirely by pushing phase around and so on is not
              > necessarily something that sounds good , no matter how appealing it may be in engineering terms.
              >
              > The ear/brain is hard to fool --above the bass anyway.
            • Robert
              There is EQ available above 500 Hz--it is just not automated(which is probably all to the good since you want to fine tune the higher frequencies by ear
              Message 6 of 19 , Aug 10, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                There is EQ available above 500 Hz--it is just
                not automated(which is probably all to the
                good since you want to fine tune the higher
                frequencies by ear anyway--or at least you
                ought to want to!)
                REG

                --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "laurie483000" <laurie483000@...> wrote:
                >
                > Stereophile were impressed too with the DSPeaker dual core at a recent show, using Gradient loudspeakers and a sub - best bass of the show they said.
                >
                > http://www.stereophile.com/content/dspeaker-does-it-all-1099/
                >
                > I'll await the reviews, but it would seem in a CD / digital source only system, to obviate the need for a separate preamp and DAC as well as providing the (mainly bass) EQ. It incorporates a volume control, sub x-over and they stress the low jitter performance of the DAC. My wife would appreciate a reduction in the number of 'hifi' boxes, which might then enable her to understand how to play music, all by herself.
                >
                > I wonder if the DAC side is as good as the Benchmark. It would be nice if some more EQ control higher up were available, as I do find my M30s just a touch midrangy in my room, but maybe fine tuning the bass would ameliorate this. I'm interested @ 850 euros and so will have to investigate UK dealers. I'd have to do other things for my SACDs, satellite radio plus future hi-res downloads, though - so not a complete answer. I think it copes with web sourced music channels, not quite sure, but I want to get into this soon. I don't bother with records these days - well not at the moment.
                >
                >
                > Laurie
                >
                >
                > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@> wrote:
                > >
                > > I definitely think that for many room and most speakers in them,
                > > correction is so worthwhile that running analgoue through
                > > it is worthwhile. But with some systems, analogue EQ is enough--
                > > this happens reasonably often--and with some one does not really need anything.
                > >
                > > Contemporary A to D to A does effectively no harm. One is not losing much if anything. But whether you want to do correction and how much...
                > >
                > > This is a complex issue because one hears both the speaker itself and its relationship to the room, and the extent to which each counts and how they interact depends on frequency.
                > >
                > > Fortunately, the lower frequencies are where the room and the speaker are most nearly combined --and that is also where one is most likely to need correction. The DSPeaker quits correcting about 500 Hz
                > > max but you can pull the upper limit down, too, eg correct only the deep bass. And
                > > you can do parametric EQ higher up to fix whatever is wrong with your speakers to your ears(it will also measure for you if you want it to).
                > >
                > > This is a very elegant system, and to my mind it does what one
                > > wants. And it is easy to use and not very expensive and it
                > > is optimized in all directions. I did not give it a Golden Ear
                > > award for nothing!
                > >
                > > A full review will be along eventually.
                > >
                > > It may not be all things to all people. If you want more aggressive correction--bottom to top, phase manipulation, then you might
                > > want to look elsewhere. But for most purposes, I think this will
                > > be enough. And trying to erase the room entirely by pushing phase around and so on is not
                > > necessarily something that sounds good , no matter how appealing it may be in engineering terms.
                > >
                > > The ear/brain is hard to fool --above the bass anyway.
                >
              • laurie483000
                Useful to know and makes the unit even more attractive. I had formed the impression that there was some control of the treble possible, but I was more
                Message 7 of 19 , Aug 11, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  Useful to know and makes the unit even more attractive. I had formed the impression that there was some control of the treble possible, but I was more thinking of being able to adjust maybe the upper mid without necessarily affecting the treble. Will investigate more and await the reviews.


                  Laurie


                  --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > There is EQ available above 500 Hz--it is just
                  > not automated(which is probably all to the
                  > good since you want to fine tune the higher
                  > frequencies by ear anyway--or at least you
                  > ought to want to!)
                  > REG
                  >
                  > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "laurie483000" <laurie483000@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Stereophile were impressed too with the DSPeaker dual core at a recent show, using Gradient loudspeakers and a sub - best bass of the show they said.
                  > >
                  > > http://www.stereophile.com/content/dspeaker-does-it-all-1099/
                  > >
                  > > I'll await the reviews, but it would seem in a CD / digital source only system, to obviate the need for a separate preamp and DAC as well as providing the (mainly bass) EQ. It incorporates a volume control, sub x-over and they stress the low jitter performance of the DAC. My wife would appreciate a reduction in the number of 'hifi' boxes, which might then enable her to understand how to play music, all by herself.
                  > >
                  > > I wonder if the DAC side is as good as the Benchmark. It would be nice if some more EQ control higher up were available, as I do find my M30s just a touch midrangy in my room, but maybe fine tuning the bass would ameliorate this. I'm interested @ 850 euros and so will have to investigate UK dealers. I'd have to do other things for my SACDs, satellite radio plus future hi-res downloads, though - so not a complete answer. I think it copes with web sourced music channels, not quite sure, but I want to get into this soon. I don't bother with records these days - well not at the moment.
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Laurie
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@> wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > I definitely think that for many room and most speakers in them,
                  > > > correction is so worthwhile that running analgoue through
                  > > > it is worthwhile. But with some systems, analogue EQ is enough--
                  > > > this happens reasonably often--and with some one does not really need anything.
                  > > >
                  > > > Contemporary A to D to A does effectively no harm. One is not losing much if anything. But whether you want to do correction and how much...
                  > > >
                  > > > This is a complex issue because one hears both the speaker itself and its relationship to the room, and the extent to which each counts and how they interact depends on frequency.
                  > > >
                  > > > Fortunately, the lower frequencies are where the room and the speaker are most nearly combined --and that is also where one is most likely to need correction. The DSPeaker quits correcting about 500 Hz
                  > > > max but you can pull the upper limit down, too, eg correct only the deep bass. And
                  > > > you can do parametric EQ higher up to fix whatever is wrong with your speakers to your ears(it will also measure for you if you want it to).
                  > > >
                  > > > This is a very elegant system, and to my mind it does what one
                  > > > wants. And it is easy to use and not very expensive and it
                  > > > is optimized in all directions. I did not give it a Golden Ear
                  > > > award for nothing!
                  > > >
                  > > > A full review will be along eventually.
                  > > >
                  > > > It may not be all things to all people. If you want more aggressive correction--bottom to top, phase manipulation, then you might
                  > > > want to look elsewhere. But for most purposes, I think this will
                  > > > be enough. And trying to erase the room entirely by pushing phase around and so on is not
                  > > > necessarily something that sounds good , no matter how appealing it may be in engineering terms.
                  > > >
                  > > > The ear/brain is hard to fool --above the bass anyway.
                  > >
                  >
                • Tom Mallin
                  I looked at this unit awhile back. Make sure it has enough inputs for your system
                  Message 8 of 19 , Aug 11, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I looked at this unit awhile back.  Make sure it has enough inputs for your system



                    On Aug 11, 2012, at 10:55 AM, "laurie483000" <laurie483000@...> wrote:

                     

                    Useful to know and makes the unit even more attractive. I had formed the impression that there was some control of the treble possible, but I was more thinking of being able to adjust maybe the upper mid without necessarily affecting the treble. Will investigate more and await the reviews.

                    Laurie

                    --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > There is EQ available above 500 Hz--it is just
                    > not automated(which is probably all to the
                    > good since you want to fine tune the higher
                    > frequencies by ear anyway--or at least you
                    > ought to want to!)
                    > REG
                    >
                    > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "laurie483000" <laurie483000@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > Stereophile were impressed too with the DSPeaker dual core at a recent show, using Gradient loudspeakers and a sub - best bass of the show they said.
                    > >
                    > > http://www.stereophile.com/content/dspeaker-does-it-all-1099/
                    > >
                    > > I'll await the reviews, but it would seem in a CD / digital source only system, to obviate the need for a separate preamp and DAC as well as providing the (mainly bass) EQ. It incorporates a volume control, sub x-over and they stress the low jitter performance of the DAC. My wife would appreciate a reduction in the number of 'hifi' boxes, which might then enable her to understand how to play music, all by herself.
                    > >
                    > > I wonder if the DAC side is as good as the Benchmark. It would be nice if some more EQ control higher up were available, as I do find my M30s just a touch midrangy in my room, but maybe fine tuning the bass would ameliorate this. I'm interested @ 850 euros and so will have to investigate UK dealers. I'd have to do other things for my SACDs, satellite radio plus future hi-res downloads, though - so not a complete answer. I think it copes with web sourced music channels, not quite sure, but I want to get into this soon. I don't bother with records these days - well not at the moment.
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > Laurie
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@> wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > I definitely think that for many room and most speakers in them,
                    > > > correction is so worthwhile that running analgoue through
                    > > > it is worthwhile. But with some systems, analogue EQ is enough--
                    > > > this happens reasonably often--and with some one does not really need anything.
                    > > >
                    > > > Contemporary A to D to A does effectively no harm. One is not losing much if anything. But whether you want to do correction and how much...
                    > > >
                    > > > This is a complex issue because one hears both the speaker itself and its relationship to the room, and the extent to which each counts and how they interact depends on frequency.
                    > > >
                    > > > Fortunately, the lower frequencies are where the room and the speaker are most nearly combined --and that is also where one is most likely to need correction. The DSPeaker quits correcting about 500 Hz
                    > > > max but you can pull the upper limit down, too, eg correct only the deep bass. And
                    > > > you can do parametric EQ higher up to fix whatever is wrong with your speakers to your ears(it will also measure for you if you want it to).
                    > > >
                    > > > This is a very elegant system, and to my mind it does what one
                    > > > wants. And it is easy to use and not very expensive and it
                    > > > is optimized in all directions. I did not give it a Golden Ear
                    > > > award for nothing!
                    > > >
                    > > > A full review will be along eventually.
                    > > >
                    > > > It may not be all things to all people. If you want more aggressive correction--bottom to top, phase manipulation, then you might
                    > > > want to look elsewhere. But for most purposes, I think this will
                    > > > be enough. And trying to erase the room entirely by pushing phase around and so on is not
                    > > > necessarily something that sounds good , no matter how appealing it may be in engineering terms.
                    > > >
                    > > > The ear/brain is hard to fool --above the bass anyway.
                    > >
                    >

                  • HM
                    The range between 250 - 800 Hz is much affected by sidewall reflection cancelling or boosting(3dB) frequencies, Automated devices cannot decide between either
                    Message 9 of 19 , Aug 11, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment
                      The range between 250 - 800 Hz is much affected by sidewall reflection cancelling or boosting(3dB) frequencies,
                      Automated devices cannot decide between either good focus by making the dips appear equal at both channels or smoothing either channel as good as possible in the frequency response domain. This leaves the cancellations in the time domain as they were but with boosted level close to the phase shifts. A male singer is torn apart between the speakers then.
                      I decided to go for strict symmetry regarding the speakers in room and the listening position with 2 different corrections (memory positions of my RoomCorrectionSystem)to cover both aspects and I switch between them depending on the demands of the music I listen to.

                      The human hearing localizes all frequencies below 700Hz by ITD interchannel time differences. This covers the basic range of voices and instruments without the overtones in the region above 1kHz where ILD (interchannel level differences) take over.
                      I agree that Blumlein recording gives a neutral balance but the speaker setup definitely does not support a sharp picture once the ITDs are stolen from the live envent by the recording technique with coincident microphones.
                      Once the ITDs are lost you are free to go for EQ without compromises to meet your personal taste and compensate all audible frequency response issues to your personal satisfaction. You can never achieve good focus.

                      But what if your recording has an a natural content of ITD or you have shuffled overtones to meet the fundamentals of the original instrument? One gets a different timbre impression that asks for readjusting the EQ.

                      What if wide spaced omnis create wild combfiltereffects individual for each instrument? No chance to EQ that out.

                      A standardized mic arrangement would help a lot to allow the user to fix problems at the replay chain. But actually the equilateral triangle is a standard at home well known by recording engineers and they seem to be very different about the result (or should I say indifferent?).
                      BR HM

                      >
                      > There is EQ available above 500 Hz--it is just
                      > not automated(which is probably all to the
                      > good since you want to fine tune the higher
                      > frequencies by ear anyway--or at least you
                      > ought to want to!)
                      > REG
                      >
                      > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "laurie483000" <laurie483000@> wrote:
                      > >
                      > > Stereophile were impressed too with the DSPeaker dual core at a recent show, using Gradient loudspeakers and a sub - best bass of the show they said.
                      > >
                      > > http://www.stereophile.com/content/dspeaker-does-it-all-1099/
                      > >
                      > > I'll await the reviews, but it would seem in a CD / digital source only system, to obviate the need for a separate preamp and DAC as well as providing the (mainly bass) EQ. It incorporates a volume control, sub x-over and they stress the low jitter performance of the DAC. My wife would appreciate a reduction in the number of 'hifi' boxes, which might then enable her to understand how to play music, all by herself.
                      > >
                      > > I wonder if the DAC side is as good as the Benchmark. It would be nice if some more EQ control higher up were available, as I do find my M30s just a touch midrangy in my room, but maybe fine tuning the bass would ameliorate this. I'm interested @ 850 euros and so will have to investigate UK dealers. I'd have to do other things for my SACDs, satellite radio plus future hi-res downloads, though - so not a complete answer. I think it copes with web sourced music channels, not quite sure, but I want to get into this soon. I don't bother with records these days - well not at the moment.
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > Laurie
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@> wrote:
                      > > >
                      > > > I definitely think that for many room and most speakers in them,
                      > > > correction is so worthwhile that running analgoue through
                      > > > it is worthwhile. But with some systems, analogue EQ is enough--
                      > > > this happens reasonably often--and with some one does not really need anything.
                      > > >
                      > > > Contemporary A to D to A does effectively no harm. One is not losing much if anything. But whether you want to do correction and how much...
                      > > >
                      > > > This is a complex issue because one hears both the speaker itself and its relationship to the room, and the extent to which each counts and how they interact depends on frequency.
                      > > >
                      > > > Fortunately, the lower frequencies are where the room and the speaker are most nearly combined --and that is also where one is most likely to need correction. The DSPeaker quits correcting about 500 Hz
                      > > > max but you can pull the upper limit down, too, eg correct only the deep bass. And
                      > > > you can do parametric EQ higher up to fix whatever is wrong with your speakers to your ears(it will also measure for you if you want it to).
                      > > >
                      > > > This is a very elegant system, and to my mind it does what one
                      > > > wants. And it is easy to use and not very expensive and it
                      > > > is optimized in all directions. I did not give it a Golden Ear
                      > > > award for nothing!
                      > > >
                      > > > A full review will be along eventually.
                      > > >
                      > > > It may not be all things to all people. If you want more aggressive correction--bottom to top, phase manipulation, then you might
                      > > > want to look elsewhere. But for most purposes, I think this will
                      > > > be enough. And trying to erase the room entirely by pushing phase around and so on is not
                      > > > necessarily something that sounds good , no matter how appealing it may be in engineering terms.
                      > > >
                      > > > The ear/brain is hard to fool --above the bass anyway.
                      > >
                      >
                    • Robert
                      This contains a number of things that are at best half truths. First of all, below 700 Hz it is actually phase not time as such that is detected. And Blumlein
                      Message 10 of 19 , Aug 11, 2012
                      • 0 Attachment
                        This contains a number of things that are
                        at best half truths. First of all,
                        below 700 Hz it is actually phase not
                        time as such that is detected. And Blumlein
                        stereo gets this right, cf. Stanley Lipshitz's
                        famous paper on the mathematics of this.
                        It is reconstructed by the mixing around the head.
                        It would be wrong on headphones but is right on
                        speakers.

                        Transient interaural time differences
                        are what is suppressed by Blumlein(of the unshuffled
                        sort). These are carried by the high frequencies.
                        It is entirely wrong that interaural amplitude differences
                        are the only mechanism in high frequency signals.
                        The arrival times of the wave packet--as opposed to
                        the phase of the signal--is definitely part of
                        the mechanism.

                        People really ought to get this straight.

                        What bothers JJ (if I may put words in his mouth)
                        is that Blumlein does not preserve these
                        transient time of arrival cues. This results
                        in a separation of the amplitude sensed position
                        and the actual position, which is influenced
                        both by amplitude and by transient time of arrival.
                        Hence what one probably ought to do is Blumlein
                        up to around 700 Hz and a transition to ORTF above
                        that(ORTF having the transient time of arrival cues).

                        But it is completely wrong that Blumlein does not
                        get phase correct below 700 Hz--that is in fact
                        exactly where it works correctly.

                        I do agree completely that recording engineers do
                        not care--because the customers apparently do not
                        care and that is what they are mostly aiming at,
                        pleasing the customers! (and why not-it is their job
                        in one view of the matter).
                        REG



                        --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "HM" <hmartinburm@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > The range between 250 - 800 Hz is much affected by sidewall reflection cancelling or boosting(3dB) frequencies,
                        > Automated devices cannot decide between either good focus by making the dips appear equal at both channels or smoothing either channel as good as possible in the frequency response domain. This leaves the cancellations in the time domain as they were but with boosted level close to the phase shifts. A male singer is torn apart between the speakers then.
                        > I decided to go for strict symmetry regarding the speakers in room and the listening position with 2 different corrections (memory positions of my RoomCorrectionSystem)to cover both aspects and I switch between them depending on the demands of the music I listen to.
                        >
                        > The human hearing localizes all frequencies below 700Hz by ITD interchannel time differences. This covers the basic range of voices and instruments without the overtones in the region above 1kHz where ILD (interchannel level differences) take over.
                        > I agree that Blumlein recording gives a neutral balance but the speaker setup definitely does not support a sharp picture once the ITDs are stolen from the live envent by the recording technique with coincident microphones.
                        > Once the ITDs are lost you are free to go for EQ without compromises to meet your personal taste and compensate all audible frequency response issues to your personal satisfaction. You can never achieve good focus.
                        >
                        > But what if your recording has an a natural content of ITD or you have shuffled overtones to meet the fundamentals of the original instrument? One gets a different timbre impression that asks for readjusting the EQ.
                        >
                        > What if wide spaced omnis create wild combfiltereffects individual for each instrument? No chance to EQ that out.
                        >
                        > A standardized mic arrangement would help a lot to allow the user to fix problems at the replay chain. But actually the equilateral triangle is a standard at home well known by recording engineers and they seem to be very different about the result (or should I say indifferent?).
                        > BR HM
                        >
                        > >
                        > > There is EQ available above 500 Hz--it is just
                        > > not automated(which is probably all to the
                        > > good since you want to fine tune the higher
                        > > frequencies by ear anyway--or at least you
                        > > ought to want to!)
                        > > REG
                        > >
                        > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "laurie483000" <laurie483000@> wrote:
                        > > >
                        > > > Stereophile were impressed too with the DSPeaker dual core at a recent show, using Gradient loudspeakers and a sub - best bass of the show they said.
                        > > >
                        > > > http://www.stereophile.com/content/dspeaker-does-it-all-1099/
                        > > >
                        > > > I'll await the reviews, but it would seem in a CD / digital source only system, to obviate the need for a separate preamp and DAC as well as providing the (mainly bass) EQ. It incorporates a volume control, sub x-over and they stress the low jitter performance of the DAC. My wife would appreciate a reduction in the number of 'hifi' boxes, which might then enable her to understand how to play music, all by herself.
                        > > >
                        > > > I wonder if the DAC side is as good as the Benchmark. It would be nice if some more EQ control higher up were available, as I do find my M30s just a touch midrangy in my room, but maybe fine tuning the bass would ameliorate this. I'm interested @ 850 euros and so will have to investigate UK dealers. I'd have to do other things for my SACDs, satellite radio plus future hi-res downloads, though - so not a complete answer. I think it copes with web sourced music channels, not quite sure, but I want to get into this soon. I don't bother with records these days - well not at the moment.
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > Laurie
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@> wrote:
                        > > > >
                        > > > > I definitely think that for many room and most speakers in them,
                        > > > > correction is so worthwhile that running analgoue through
                        > > > > it is worthwhile. But with some systems, analogue EQ is enough--
                        > > > > this happens reasonably often--and with some one does not really need anything.
                        > > > >
                        > > > > Contemporary A to D to A does effectively no harm. One is not losing much if anything. But whether you want to do correction and how much...
                        > > > >
                        > > > > This is a complex issue because one hears both the speaker itself and its relationship to the room, and the extent to which each counts and how they interact depends on frequency.
                        > > > >
                        > > > > Fortunately, the lower frequencies are where the room and the speaker are most nearly combined --and that is also where one is most likely to need correction. The DSPeaker quits correcting about 500 Hz
                        > > > > max but you can pull the upper limit down, too, eg correct only the deep bass. And
                        > > > > you can do parametric EQ higher up to fix whatever is wrong with your speakers to your ears(it will also measure for you if you want it to).
                        > > > >
                        > > > > This is a very elegant system, and to my mind it does what one
                        > > > > wants. And it is easy to use and not very expensive and it
                        > > > > is optimized in all directions. I did not give it a Golden Ear
                        > > > > award for nothing!
                        > > > >
                        > > > > A full review will be along eventually.
                        > > > >
                        > > > > It may not be all things to all people. If you want more aggressive correction--bottom to top, phase manipulation, then you might
                        > > > > want to look elsewhere. But for most purposes, I think this will
                        > > > > be enough. And trying to erase the room entirely by pushing phase around and so on is not
                        > > > > necessarily something that sounds good , no matter how appealing it may be in engineering terms.
                        > > > >
                        > > > > The ear/brain is hard to fool --above the bass anyway.
                        > > >
                        > >
                        >
                      • thomasmallin
                        P.S.: To elaborate on my sketchy comment about checking the number of available inputs and outputs: I ve looked at the description and manual for this unit
                        Message 11 of 19 , Aug 15, 2012
                        • 0 Attachment
                          P.S.: To elaborate on my sketchy comment about checking the number of available inputs and outputs:

                          I've looked at the description and manual for this unit and one thing I don't understand is how you would use it to create a fully digitally crossed over sub/satellite system. It appears to be able to do either a low pass crossover or a high pass crossover, but not both at the same time. You would somehow have to use two of these together to do that, as far as I can tell. Thus, as is, you'd have to use the low pass controls on your subwoofers and let the DualCore do the high-pass crossover for the main speakers, a less than ideal arrangement, I 'd say.

                          Also, if you want to use this as a digital preamp, the only digital inputs it has are a single USB and a single toslink. There are no coax or AES digital ins or outs. What's with that? The unit might be okay for single-source systems, computer-based audio, or for those who believe toslink sounds better, but most of us would miss the digital coax and AES inputs.

                          For my system, in which I need three non-USB digital inputs (tuner, Squeezebox, and CD), I think the only reasonable way I could use this would be to use an analog preamp and that would involve an additional A/D - D/A conversion in the signal path.

                          I think this unit is best suited for use in an otherwise analog system, such as in the tape loop of an analog preamp.

                          What the audio world needs now is a full-sized unit with the real estate to provide all the analog and digital input/output flexibility and functionality of my TacT RCS 2.2XP--for less money and with much better customer service. In one box that unit does all the preamp switching, sub/sat crossovering and time alignment, DSP room correction with cut-off frequency anywhere from 40 Hz to 10 kHz, lots of bands of parametric EQ, plus crosstalk cancellation if you want to use it. In the Maui-modded version, it even sounds wonderful.

                          --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Tom Mallin <tmallin4@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > I looked at this unit awhile back. Make sure it has enough inputs for your system
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > On Aug 11, 2012, at 10:55 AM, "laurie483000" <laurie483000@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > > Useful to know and makes the unit even more attractive. I had formed the impression that there was some control of the treble possible, but I was more thinking of being able to adjust maybe the upper mid without necessarily affecting the treble. Will investigate more and await the reviews.
                          > >
                          > > Laurie
                          > >
                          > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@> wrote:
                          > > >
                          > > > There is EQ available above 500 Hz--it is just
                          > > > not automated(which is probably all to the
                          > > > good since you want to fine tune the higher
                          > > > frequencies by ear anyway--or at least you
                          > > > ought to want to!)
                          > > > REG
                          > > >
                          > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "laurie483000" <laurie483000@> wrote:
                          > > > >
                          > > > > Stereophile were impressed too with the DSPeaker dual core at a recent show, using Gradient loudspeakers and a sub - best bass of the show they said.
                          > > > >
                          > > > > http://www.stereophile.com/content/dspeaker-does-it-all-1099/
                          > > > >
                          > > > > I'll await the reviews, but it would seem in a CD / digital source only system, to obviate the need for a separate preamp and DAC as well as providing the (mainly bass) EQ. It incorporates a volume control, sub x-over and they stress the low jitter performance of the DAC. My wife would appreciate a reduction in the number of 'hifi' boxes, which might then enable her to understand how to play music, all by herself.
                          > > > >
                          > > > > I wonder if the DAC side is as good as the Benchmark. It would be nice if some more EQ control higher up were available, as I do find my M30s just a touch midrangy in my room, but maybe fine tuning the bass would ameliorate this. I'm interested @ 850 euros and so will have to investigate UK dealers. I'd have to do other things for my SACDs, satellite radio plus future hi-res downloads, though - so not a complete answer. I think it copes with web sourced music channels, not quite sure, but I want to get into this soon. I don't bother with records these days - well not at the moment.
                          > > > >
                          > > > >
                          > > > > Laurie
                          > > > >
                          > > > >
                          > > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@> wrote:
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > I definitely think that for many room and most speakers in them,
                          > > > > > correction is so worthwhile that running analgoue through
                          > > > > > it is worthwhile. But with some systems, analogue EQ is enough--
                          > > > > > this happens reasonably often--and with some one does not really need anything.
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > Contemporary A to D to A does effectively no harm. One is not losing much if anything. But whether you want to do correction and how much...
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > This is a complex issue because one hears both the speaker itself and its relationship to the room, and the extent to which each counts and how they interact depends on frequency.
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > Fortunately, the lower frequencies are where the room and the speaker are most nearly combined --and that is also where one is most likely to need correction. The DSPeaker quits correcting about 500 Hz
                          > > > > > max but you can pull the upper limit down, too, eg correct only the deep bass. And
                          > > > > > you can do parametric EQ higher up to fix whatever is wrong with your speakers to your ears(it will also measure for you if you want it to).
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > This is a very elegant system, and to my mind it does what one
                          > > > > > wants. And it is easy to use and not very expensive and it
                          > > > > > is optimized in all directions. I did not give it a Golden Ear
                          > > > > > award for nothing!
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > A full review will be along eventually.
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > It may not be all things to all people. If you want more aggressive correction--bottom to top, phase manipulation, then you might
                          > > > > > want to look elsewhere. But for most purposes, I think this will
                          > > > > > be enough. And trying to erase the room entirely by pushing phase around and so on is not
                          > > > > > necessarily something that sounds good , no matter how appealing it may be in engineering terms.
                          > > > > >
                          > > > > > The ear/brain is hard to fool --above the bass anyway.
                          > > > >
                          > > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          >
                        • laurie483000
                          I hadn t properly looked into this unit and so thanks for that information - saved me doing the research. I think my Velodyne sub has a built in sharp cut off
                          Message 12 of 19 , Aug 15, 2012
                          • 0 Attachment
                            I hadn't properly looked into this unit and so thanks for that information - saved me doing the research. I think my Velodyne sub has a built in sharp cut off filter (though I need to check that) so it might work OK with the dual core unit, but the lack of appropriate inputs is another matter. Maybe it's not so attractive anymore. I get the impression that Stereophile might be reviewing the unit soon, so it will be interesting to see what they have to say.


                            Laurie


                            --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "thomasmallin" <tmallin4@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > P.S.: To elaborate on my sketchy comment about checking the number of available inputs and outputs:
                            >
                            > I've looked at the description and manual for this unit and one thing I don't understand is how you would use it to create a fully digitally crossed over sub/satellite system. It appears to be able to do either a low pass crossover or a high pass crossover, but not both at the same time. You would somehow have to use two of these together to do that, as far as I can tell. Thus, as is, you'd have to use the low pass controls on your subwoofers and let the DualCore do the high-pass crossover for the main speakers, a less than ideal arrangement, I 'd say.
                            >
                            > Also, if you want to use this as a digital preamp, the only digital inputs it has are a single USB and a single toslink. There are no coax or AES digital ins or outs. What's with that? The unit might be okay for single-source systems, computer-based audio, or for those who believe toslink sounds better, but most of us would miss the digital coax and AES inputs.
                            >
                            > For my system, in which I need three non-USB digital inputs (tuner, Squeezebox, and CD), I think the only reasonable way I could use this would be to use an analog preamp and that would involve an additional A/D - D/A conversion in the signal path.
                            >
                            > I think this unit is best suited for use in an otherwise analog system, such as in the tape loop of an analog preamp.
                            >
                            > What the audio world needs now is a full-sized unit with the real estate to provide all the analog and digital input/output flexibility and functionality of my TacT RCS 2.2XP--for less money and with much better customer service. In one box that unit does all the preamp switching, sub/sat crossovering and time alignment, DSP room correction with cut-off frequency anywhere from 40 Hz to 10 kHz, lots of bands of parametric EQ, plus crosstalk cancellation if you want to use it. In the Maui-modded version, it even sounds wonderful.
                            >
                            > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, Tom Mallin <tmallin4@> wrote:
                            > >
                            > > I looked at this unit awhile back. Make sure it has enough inputs for your system
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > On Aug 11, 2012, at 10:55 AM, "laurie483000" <laurie483000@> wrote:
                            > >
                            > > > Useful to know and makes the unit even more attractive. I had formed the impression that there was some control of the treble possible, but I was more thinking of being able to adjust maybe the upper mid without necessarily affecting the treble. Will investigate more and await the reviews.
                            > > >
                            > > > Laurie
                            > > >
                            > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@> wrote:
                            > > > >
                            > > > > There is EQ available above 500 Hz--it is just
                            > > > > not automated(which is probably all to the
                            > > > > good since you want to fine tune the higher
                            > > > > frequencies by ear anyway--or at least you
                            > > > > ought to want to!)
                            > > > > REG
                            > > > >
                            > > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "laurie483000" <laurie483000@> wrote:
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > Stereophile were impressed too with the DSPeaker dual core at a recent show, using Gradient loudspeakers and a sub - best bass of the show they said.
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > http://www.stereophile.com/content/dspeaker-does-it-all-1099/
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > I'll await the reviews, but it would seem in a CD / digital source only system, to obviate the need for a separate preamp and DAC as well as providing the (mainly bass) EQ. It incorporates a volume control, sub x-over and they stress the low jitter performance of the DAC. My wife would appreciate a reduction in the number of 'hifi' boxes, which might then enable her to understand how to play music, all by herself.
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > I wonder if the DAC side is as good as the Benchmark. It would be nice if some more EQ control higher up were available, as I do find my M30s just a touch midrangy in my room, but maybe fine tuning the bass would ameliorate this. I'm interested @ 850 euros and so will have to investigate UK dealers. I'd have to do other things for my SACDs, satellite radio plus future hi-res downloads, though - so not a complete answer. I think it copes with web sourced music channels, not quite sure, but I want to get into this soon. I don't bother with records these days - well not at the moment.
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > Laurie
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > --- In regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com, "Robert" <regtas43@> wrote:
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > I definitely think that for many room and most speakers in them,
                            > > > > > > correction is so worthwhile that running analgoue through
                            > > > > > > it is worthwhile. But with some systems, analogue EQ is enough--
                            > > > > > > this happens reasonably often--and with some one does not really need anything.
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > Contemporary A to D to A does effectively no harm. One is not losing much if anything. But whether you want to do correction and how much...
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > This is a complex issue because one hears both the speaker itself and its relationship to the room, and the extent to which each counts and how they interact depends on frequency.
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > Fortunately, the lower frequencies are where the room and the speaker are most nearly combined --and that is also where one is most likely to need correction. The DSPeaker quits correcting about 500 Hz
                            > > > > > > max but you can pull the upper limit down, too, eg correct only the deep bass. And
                            > > > > > > you can do parametric EQ higher up to fix whatever is wrong with your speakers to your ears(it will also measure for you if you want it to).
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > This is a very elegant system, and to my mind it does what one
                            > > > > > > wants. And it is easy to use and not very expensive and it
                            > > > > > > is optimized in all directions. I did not give it a Golden Ear
                            > > > > > > award for nothing!
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > A full review will be along eventually.
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > It may not be all things to all people. If you want more aggressive correction--bottom to top, phase manipulation, then you might
                            > > > > > > want to look elsewhere. But for most purposes, I think this will
                            > > > > > > be enough. And trying to erase the room entirely by pushing phase around and so on is not
                            > > > > > > necessarily something that sounds good , no matter how appealing it may be in engineering terms.
                            > > > > > >
                            > > > > > > The ear/brain is hard to fool --above the bass anyway.
                            > > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > >
                            >
                          • regtas43
                            It is rather intriguing to go on line and look at what various engineers have to say. They are almost all extremely assertive but they assert quite different
                            Message 13 of 19 , Dec 19, 2013
                            • 0 Attachment

                              It is rather intriguing to go on line and look at what various engineers have to say. They are almost all extremely assertive but they assert quite different things. The guy on the TAS Stirling LS3/6 comment site is all pushed out of shape about standing waves in boxes etc. He completely ignores the fact that the waterfall of the square boxes he seems to dislike so much in fact look about the same in the midrange as do his own Vivid speakers or the BandW Nautilus 800 series. Then he notes but does not seem to care very much the beaminess of the LS3/6 --and he even admits that this could be an advantage.

                              Olive on the other hand in other places just hates the big midrange driver speakers like the BandW and says they keep doing it because it is their visual trademark to have that big yellow driver. He also suggests that people ignore off axis because they do not have the facilities to measure it. Now it is a bit hard to measure power response. But it is surely no trick to measure the horizontally off axis response--take the speaker outside and go for it. (The ground plane reflection is not going to cause ny perturbations in the range around 1-4k that is mainly in question here).

                              Of course Olive is a champ at claiming to have all the answers. Toole was the same.

                               

                              What is really true? Olive is closer than the standwaves in boxes stuff. But Olive completely ignores the possibility that people might use one of the BBC heritage speakers as it is intended--with the speaker further from the side wall and the listener closer and with the side walls damped. He assumes that everyone wants to hear lots of sound off the walls.

                               

                              But it you do hear lots of sound off the walls, it is quite true that you will not hear the M40s or the LS3/6s at their best. The M40s in particular definitely do not do themselves justice if you put them close to side walls which are highly reflective. This is not what they are for. But so what?

                              No wonder audiophiles lost interest in experts--they all contradict each other with enormous amounts of aggression but rather little logic.

                               

                              Oh well, Look for something on axis smooth and not too toppy and then isten for yourself. It is the best hope! And try to remember what concert music sounds like. I am sure you all do that anyway but it never hurts to remind ourselves. And never forget that recordings are made wrong. almost without exception--too damned close.

                               

                              REG

                               

                               

                            • kevindoyle.forum
                              Alan Shaw recently said, You can imagine then that placing individual microphones close to performers to spotlight their contribution is philosophically
                              Message 14 of 19 , Dec 19, 2013
                              • 0 Attachment

                                Alan Shaw recently said, "You can imagine then that placing individual microphones close to performers to spotlight their contribution is philosophically wrong. That heightened attention to the near field sound is not ever what we in the audience hear."

                              • Charles Daniell
                                For dog lovers and a wonderful performance by the late Peter O’Toole… “Dean Spanley” Dean Spanley is a 2008 New Zealand and British
                                Message 15 of 19 , Dec 20, 2013
                                • 0 Attachment

                                   

                                  For dog lovers and a wonderful performance by the late Peter O’Toole…      “Dean Spanley”

                                   

                                   

                                  Dean Spanley is a 2008 New Zealand and British comedy-drama film, with fantastic elements, from Miramax Films, Atlantic Film Group (UK) and General Film Corporation (NZ), directed by Fijian New Zealander Toa Fraser. The film is based on an Alan Sharp adaptation of Irish author Lord Dunsany's short novel My Talks with Dean Spanley, and stars Sam Neill as the Dean, Jeremy Northam and Peter O'Toole as Fisk Junior and Fisk Senior respectively and Bryan Brown as Wrather.

                                   

                                  [Free stream on Netflix]

                                   

                                  C. Daniell

                                • Peter
                                  Two Blu-ray versions of this film are available, one from Germany and the other from Sweden.  Both are coded for Region B, which can t be played here in the
                                  Message 16 of 19 , Dec 20, 2013
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Two Blu-ray versions of this film are available, one from Germany and the other from Sweden.  Both are coded for Region B, which can't be played here in the states unless you have a Playstation, a Region B player, or a Region A player that's been modified (e.g., one of the Oppo models).

                                    From: Charles Daniell <cfd@...>
                                    To: "regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com" <regsaudioforum@yahoogroups.com>
                                    Sent: Friday, December 20, 2013 9:27 AM
                                    Subject: RE: [regsaudioforum] OT warning: Film recommendation
                                     
                                     
                                    For dog lovers and a wonderful performance by the late Peter O’Toole…      “Dean Spanley”
                                     
                                     
                                    Dean Spanley is a 2008 New Zealand and British comedy-drama film, with fantastic elements, from Miramax Films, Atlantic Film Group (UK) and General Film Corporation (NZ), directed by Fijian New Zealander Toa Fraser. The film is based on an Alan Sharp adaptation of Irish author Lord Dunsany's short novel My Talks with Dean Spanley, and stars Sam Neill as the Dean, Jeremy Northam and Peter O'Toole as Fisk Junior and Fisk Senior respectively and Bryan Brown as Wrather.
                                     
                                    [Free stream on Netflix]
                                     
                                    C. Daniell
                                  • mike44402903
                                    I haven t figured out when Yahoo quotes a replied-to message and when it doesnn t. So I am quoting TM manually: What the audio world needs now is a full-sized
                                    Message 17 of 19 , Dec 20, 2013
                                    • 0 Attachment

                                      I haven't figured out when Yahoo quotes a replied-to message and when it doesnn't. So I am quoting TM manually:


                                      "What the audio world needs now is a full-sized unit with the real estate to provide all the analog and digital input/output flexibility and functionality of my TacT RCS 2.2XP--for less money and with much better customer service. In one box that unit does all the preamp switching, sub/sat crossovering and time alignment, DSP room correction with cut-off frequency anywhere from 40 Hz to 10 kHz, lots of bands of parametric EQ, plus crosstalk cancellation if you want to use it. In the Maui-modded version, it even sounds wonderful"


                                      I do agree, one thing TacT got right was providing a hardware/software combination that gave an actual audio enthusiast everything in one box. All kinds of digital inputs, and switching among them. All kinds of digital outputs.  An ADC card available as an option, to handle analog in. DAC cards for up to 4 channels likewise, for analog out. It was a true digital/analog preamp with very good room correction.


                                      It would be wonderful to see a similar solution come out with the best of today's technology, and -- as Tom said -- some customer service.  My 2.2X has been out for modification for 2 yrs + 10 months, and I can't wait to get it back -- though I am not sure that will ever happen.


                                      The Classe CP-800, perhaps, will do many of the things the TacT does, but has no DRC of its own. However, if you know what you want, and what you want is fairly simple, you can apparently program it into the unit's parametric equalization facility.


                                      Anyone here have any experience with that product?

                                    • listentwice2002
                                      The Lyngdorf TDAI2170 provides a RoomPerfect correction system, 2.2 crossover with delay compensation, HDMI, SPDIF digital and analog in/outputs plus USB,
                                      Message 18 of 19 , Dec 20, 2013
                                      • 0 Attachment

                                        The Lyngdorf TDAI2170 provides a RoomPerfect correction system, 2.2 crossover with delay compensation, HDMI, SPDIF digital and analog in/outputs plus USB, voicing EQs from a wide selection, , Plus an integrated digital amp with 17ßW/ch. All available at a fraction of the original TacT 2.2X costs.

                                        br HM


                                      • mike44402903
                                        Thanks, HM, I will certainly look into it. I m not sure if Lyngdorf is imported into the US, but it should not be difficult to find out. Mike
                                        Message 19 of 19 , Dec 21, 2013
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Thanks, HM, I will certainly look into it.  I'm not sure if Lyngdorf is imported into the US, but it should not be difficult to find out.  Mike
                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.