I would recommend anyone using Inguz/DRC to use REW to check just what
is going on. I had a lot of problems getting ImpulsePrep to produce a
good impulse response, due it turns out to a bug (now fixed) in
ImpulsePrep - but I could only tell a bad impulse response from a good
one by using REW. As
Thank you (both of you) for the tips, it sure made for interesting
reading.
The speakers seem to be very similar, sharing many components, so the
choice between the Quads and the Wharfedales might boil down too
whether the better finish and supposedly better enclosure is worth the
extra money. I
As per Mortod's example above, I've run an SB3 into my larger DSP's
second input; using the first for my regular processor link. SB
optical went to my processor; SB co-ax straight to the speaker.
It makes it a very easy way to do an A/B of SB vs a.n.other source, opt
vs co-ax etc
I found that
Meatwad650;228940 Wrote:
If WAV and FLAC output the same PCM they how could they sound different?
The theory - and it is pure speculation backed up by no facts at the
moment - is that somehow even though the bitstreams are provably
identical something is different when decoding FLAC vs WAV.
It
buzzy_;228936 Wrote:
Could be an excellent option. But you owe it to yourself to look into
this a bit more and venture outside this forum. Google on them.
These Wharfedales have been called the poor man's Quad as they are
under the same ownership and share many features. If funds are an
That 15dB suckout at 650kHz should be quite audible. Do you have access
to the Alan Parsons Soundcheck CD? The 1/3rd octave sweeps should show
that up if it's actually there.
I notice that there is a lot of HF roll-off, corrected and uncorrected
- is that right? You're way down at 10kHz... I
Pat Farrell;228941They make lots of sense to the retailers, the margins are
very high.[/QUOTE Wrote:
I guess - that stuff is insane. The last time I looked at cables,
which was a while ago, I thought it was possible, but unlikely, that
uber-expensive analog cables would make a
Phil Leigh;228960 Wrote:
The theory - and it is pure speculation backed up by no facts at the
moment - is that somehow even though the bitstreams are provably
identical something is different when decoding FLAC vs WAV.
Sorry, but I gotta call BS on that. I think the only real signal loss
you might enjoy this thread...
http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=37044
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minimal...
...SB3+TACT+Altmann+MF DACXV3/Linn tri-amped Aktiv 5.1 system and some
very expensive cables
Phil Leigh wrote:
That 15dB suckout at 650kHz should be quite audible.
To a bat, maybe. :)
R.
___
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
The lde cable debat.
My experince is that the sound different , and thats about that ,
some sound a littel warm sound sound a littel more cold or bright or
whatever the key is not have expensiv the are but have well the fit
the sound of the rest of your system.
But i will say that
Thanks, Phil, for your response. I'll have give the whole thing some
more thought and experimentation. I've also been reading the First
shot at using Inguz thread which is a real eye-opener.
--
westernboy
Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that
counts can be
Ooops - sorry I meant 650Hz
Thanks Robin :o)
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minimal...
...SB3+TACT+Altmann+MF DACXV3/Linn tri-amped Aktiv 5.1 system and some
very expensive cables ;o)
Phil Leigh;228966 Wrote:
I notice that there is a lot of HF roll-off, corrected and uncorrected -
is that right?
I assume that that is due to the graphs not being corrected for the mic
calibration? I'm using a RS SPL which rolls off steeply at low and high
frequencies. There's a feature in
Well, I have both REQW and TrueRTA, and now with Hugh having included an
uncorrelated Pink Noise test signal into Inguz I plan to use TrueRTA to
compare predicted to actuals. In my case I have a Behringer ECM8000, so
even if I don't use any cal corrections for the speaker there shouldn't
be too
Hmm, I shouldn't have said that. I just looked at the ECM cal file I use
when I use REQW to actually make measurements. It has some pretty
noticable falloff at either end of the band. The one used by DRC has
similar characteristics. I'll have to figure out what to do when I use
TrueRTA. The cal
Nice to see I've stirred up a hornets' nest. Muahaha. My work here is
done!
If a sound occurs in a room e.g. a note from a loudspeaker, the brain
is able to distinguish the directly radiated sound from the reflection
*if they arrive at sufficiently different times*.
This is one reason why
darrenyeats;228997 Wrote:
Omnipole and dipole advocates work on the above premise, namely
reflections happen so work with it not against it. I think a really
short Executive Summary would be by creating natural and familiar
acoustic conditions in the listening space, the brain can do its DSP
You may already know this, but an anechoic room sounds awful! It's
simply not natural.
Anyway this isn't all about reflected vs direct sound. There are other
issues such as standing waves and room modes.
I haven't tested RC with non-direct radiating speakers but I have
experimented with speaker
Meatwad650;228970 Wrote:
Sorry, but I gotta call BS on that. I think the only real signal loss
for some of this stuff is between the auditory nerve and the auditory
cortex. :)
For those that would suggest the digital path sounds different then
basically you're suggesting that something
Meatwad650;228970 Wrote:
Sorry, but I gotta call BS on that. I think the only real signal loss
for some of this stuff is between the auditory nerve and the auditory
cortex. :)
For those that would suggest the digital path sounds different then
basically you're suggesting that something
Wombat;229031 Wrote:
Now i got curious and was doing this wav and flac thing. Hard to do a
real abx just from the handling, leave alone detecting a difference.
I hope everybody knows if you play Flac-Flac and switch to Flac-Wav
you have to restart the song completely otherwise the decoding
I should read more before posting! Thanks for the hint.
--
Wombat
Transporter - monoblocks - self-made speakers
Wombat's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4113
View this thread:
Ken Kessler interview concerning Vandersteen's baffleless loudspeaker
design.
I thought it interesting.
http://stereophile.com/interviews/688vandersteen/
.
--
haunyack
Transporter - BK R200.2 - Vandersteen 3A Signature. (Listening room)
SB3 (RWA analog) - Rotel RB1070 - BW Matrix 805.
tonyptony;228991 Wrote:
I got a line on Audiocircle of someone who calibrates these mics, but I
never got a response to my email. I would like to get a cal for my own
mic.
I had my ECM8000 calibrated by Cross-Spectrum Labs (cost $50,
http://www.cross-spectrum.com/measurement/mike_meas.html).
I'm getting the feeling there's some slightly odd logic in play here.
When you listen to a good recording of (say) an acoustic guitar you are
hearing the sound of an instrument in a room. What you want to hear is
that instrument in that room, since that is what was recorded - okay so
it will
I wonder if this breaks a record for slowest reply to a technical
problem.
It's in both channels. The noise completely stops if I remove the audio
cable from the back of the speakers (perhaps that's entirely expected,
but just in case it isn't). It varies in volume when I move the cable
around
So the Stereophile forum has been debating this and a a recording
engineer has created (http://www.soundkeeperrecordings.com/format.htm)
samples of both format; just the for a TP owner to use in a blind test
to see if they can reliably tell which is which.
--
amcluesent
Phil Leigh;229027 Wrote:
To be clear - I've tested this and found no difference at all in my
system. I wasn't claiming to AGREE with the theory - you asked what it
was!
Oh, I was aware that it wasn't *your* theory and I agree with your
testing so far. I was just informing those that might
The problem is that when two systems have different frequency response
there's no unique way to level their volumes. You could do so using a
sine wave at some particular frequency (as Sean suggested) or with the
SPL of broad-spectrum noise - but those are just two of an infinite
number of
pugwonk;229069 Wrote:
Will buying a more expensive audio cable help?
Chris
Uh-oh...
.
--
haunyack
Transporter - BK R200.2 - Vandersteen 3A Signature. (Listening room)
SB3 (RWA analog) - Rotel RB1070 - BW Matrix 805. (Bedroom)
Fridgidare - Mirror Pond pale ale - easy chair w/remote -
haunyack;229098 Wrote:
Uh-oh...
.
No.
Try another cable - any cable.
--
Phil Leigh
You want to see the signal path BEFORE it gets onto a CD/vinyl...it
ain't what you'd call minimal...
...SB3+TACT+Altmann+MF DACXV3/Linn tri-amped Aktiv 5.1 system and some
very expensive cables
To answer one question, my music is in FLAC format, and the tags are
properly done. I did some limited testing today, and didn't have any
problems. I'll keep testing, and see if it happens again. I also have
an upgrade to do on another server, so I'll see if anything strange
happens with the
Would the Audioengines work well in a small-ish bedroom? I'm
considering an upgrade to my CSW computer speakers.
Another option I have...I have an old pair of CSW Ensemble IIIs.
Two-way sats with a bass module. I could power them with a small
50wpc amp I'm sure - and that would be cheaper.
34 matches
Mail list logo
