Speakers/Power Amp

  • Thread starter Thread starter Snowman999
  • Start date Start date
When did you expect to get monitors with true clarity ? hahah

I have big speakers and switchout the nearfields like changing curtains, and headphones for flat bass. That's it for making music over here.
 
Geeeezus Jimmy, i swear sometimes I think you're going through pms. You'll get bent out of shape over nothing. :D

We're having a conversation, it's a thread for crissake. Bringing up different points of veiw is what this stuff is all about. It's not like we're aurguing politics.

And as to mono, not everyone listens on earbuds. I know a lot of people with bluetooth speakers sitting somewhere in the home. You get more than ten feet from it and it collapses into mono.

And yeah, a car is better for stereo imaging.

I'm not saying to mix in mono, but that it's usefull to check in mono.

There's also a recent video about mono from that Graham guy. You may go whaver, but he's a bit more highly regarded than any of us.

I'm sure if any of us got interviewed on Pensado's Place, we'd have heard about it.

On the 'home theater, not everyone has the full array. Myself, I have a big screen but just two speakers. That was brought up as an example, simply to illustrate that as being only of the few times that people outside of the recording world will actually sit in any kind of 'sweet spot'.

There, end of my rant.
:D
 
"One note is hard enough and as it's vibrating you want another "

Err? For the benefit of any noobs looking in? That ^ is not how speakers work. If you look at a music waveform on a 'scope you can see that whatever is playing the resultant is ONE waveform and it is that which is reproduced by the cone.

It is a fundamental basic theory of sound that ANY periodic sound is composed of a set of sine waves. These combine to produce the signal that the speaker reproduces.

Of course, if you want to bring in intermodulation distortion or Doppler effects, they are another story!

Dave.
 
RFR said:
Geeeezus Jimmy, i swear sometimes I think you're going through pms. You'll get bent out of shape over nothing. :D

We're having a conversation, it's a thread for crissake. Bringing up different points of veiw is what this stuff is all about. It's not like we're aurguing politics.

And as to mono, not everyone listens on earbuds. I know a lot of people with bluetooth speakers sitting somewhere in the home. You get more than ten feet from it and it collapses into mono.

And yeah, a car is better for stereo imaging.

I'm not saying to mix in mono, but that it's usefull to check in mono.

There's also a recent video about mono from that Graham guy. You may go whaver, but he's a bit more highly regarded than any of us.

I'm sure if any of us got interviewed on Pensado's Place, we'd have heard about it.

On the 'home theater, not everyone has the full array. Myself, I have a big screen but just two speakers. That was brought up as an example, simply to illustrate that as being only of the few times that people outside of the recording world will actually sit in any kind of 'sweet spot'.

There, end of my rant.
:D
Click to expand...

And a totally sincere smile.

:)
 
" If you look at a music waveform on a 'scope you can see that whatever is playing the resultant is ONE waveform and it is that which is reproduced by the cone".

Ya, but for duffers like me, music on the scope doesn't supply any dirt. I got pulse tones to generate. And, I can plot that on top of other test tones
 
garww said:
" If you look at a music waveform on a 'scope you can see that whatever is playing the resultant is ONE waveform and it is that which is reproduced by the cone".

Ya, but for duffers like me, music on the scope doesn't supply any dirt. I got pulse tones to generate. And, I can plot that on top of other test tones
Click to expand...

The force is strong with you....

:)
 
Well, for decades and decades audio shit used to be accompanied with film photographs of the evolving scope display supposedly depicting this and that : ) So, this and that is fine slicing, I propose. haha

Like I said earlier, I've not fell into a scope since I've been in Arizona, but I can use my sound cards as sources & scope inputs ( ringy as they are) using software. Anyone can pull out their measurement MIC and play with it.
 

Attachments

  • V_Analizer.webp
    V_Analizer.webp
    87.3 KB · Views: 33
garww said:
Like I said earlier, I've not fell into a scope since I've been in Arizona...
Click to expand...

Careful...I hear there are sinkholes opening up from all the ground water being sucked out in that dry state.
 
miroslav said:
Careful...I hear there are sinkholes opening up from all the ground water being sucked out in that dry state.
Click to expand...

haha. Well, this place is a hole. I guess there was a reason this was the 48th State that was more valid, today, than I expected
 
garww said:
" If you look at a music waveform on a 'scope you can see that whatever is playing the resultant is ONE waveform and it is that which is reproduced by the cone".

Ya, but for duffers like me, music on the scope doesn't supply any dirt. I got pulse tones to generate. And, I can plot that on top of other test tones
Click to expand...

Yes well. My points is not really about 'scopes or the supply of manure. A lot of people think speakers reproduce discrete frequencies. They don't, they reproduce a sum of all the frequencies of the signal as a complex waveform.
I just wanted to make that point clear.

Keep Calm and Carry On chaps.

Dave.
 
ecc83 said:
Yes well. My points is not really about 'scopes or the supply of manure. A lot of people think speakers reproduce discrete frequencies. They don't, they reproduce a sum of all the frequencies of the signal as a complex waveform.
I just wanted to make that point clear.

Keep Calm and Carry On chaps.

Dave.
Click to expand...

That is immaterial if one frequency is affecting reproduction of the other. Commonly, it's a sound box like a acoustic guitar
 
garww said:
That is immaterial if one frequency is affecting reproduction of the other. Commonly, it's a sound box like a acoustic guitar
Click to expand...

Which is exactly what ecc83 said here: "they reproduce a sum of all the frequencies of the signal as a complex waveform". That's what the sound box of a guitar does.
 
gecko zzed said:
Which is exactly what ecc83 said here: "they reproduce a sum of all the frequencies of the signal as a complex waveform". That's what the sound box of a guitar does.
Click to expand...

Yes, and that is what guitar is about. Some will be clearer in the mid-bass, etc.. Like I said, one frequency affecting the reproduction of another.
 
"
Yes, and that is what guitar is about. Some will be clearer in the mid-bass, etc.. Like I said, one frequency affecting the reproduction of another. "

No, it doesn't that is also the point. Many "frequencies" can be radiated by a speaker and they do not interfere or interact unless there is a non-linearity in the system. Such a non-linearity could be a poorly designed crossover network but most likely distortion cause by the suspension. Such distortion for high quality drive units should be very low at the accepted 85ish dBSPL average monitoring level but is probably the mechanism that causes speakers to sound "hard" as the SPLs get higher.

I remember the dire warnings and much hand wringing about Doppler distortion (around the 80s/90s?) but like "TID" it seems the laws of physics have changed and no one gives them a second thought these days! Maybe because they were phantasies?

Nothing is perfect in this world but top line monitors usually keep THD below 1% even at levels above 100dB.

Dave.
 
Fork! Forgot and can't edit.

Much UNlike an acoustic guitar I cannot imagine a speaker system should be! (not Guitar speakers tho'but. )

Dave.
 
I get the cab/box/x-over thing, but I can take up the issue of authentic clarity and flat response right at the complex waveform hitting the driver. One can shoot as many test tones to a driver as they have tracks in a DAW

haha. 1kHz isn't causing most people mud. They can compare their 50Hz distortion to that old 1968 speaker.

I know K&H can publish some meaningful specs, but I wouldn't mind seeing what looks like outstanding specs on other amps and boxes.
 
rayc said:
Headphones for flat bass - hmm. Beats maybe?
Click to expand...

There's a couple flatter than a sen 280, but what isn't : ) For me, anyway, it's much harder to make sense out of headphone specs than monitor specs. Independent test results are out there - more so than with monitors. I think the 7506 was one of the cheaper phones with a wide flat spot down there, for example
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top