Natural Sound

Drive is also person dependant .
One persons standard ain t the other one , some might like a bit less jumpy/ accurate sound and a more " forgiving / laid back/ slow " amp.
It then being a slightly underpowered system , there are so many variables in play
 
Last edited:
Yes, how long it can keep moving, how well it will stop, will change the hold (or whatever you choose to call it) on the note. The control has to be there for the hold.
FYI - the technical term for what you are struggling to articulate is called and referred to as the amplifier’s “damping factor“.
 
Last edited:
FYI - the technical term for what you are struggling to articulate is called and referred to as the amplifier”s “damping factor“.

No. I am trying to describe the sound of drive for a single instrument vs for an orchestra and not use a technical term. For me it as just surprising to read that drive can be missing for an orchestra and not for chamber music. Damping factor is constant in both cases
 
  • Like
Reactions: gian60
Drive is also person dependant .
One persons standard ain t the other one , some might like a bit less jumpy/ accurate sound and a more " forgiving / laid back/ slow " amp.
It then being a slightly underpowered system , there are so many variables in play

Drive is not subjective
 
  • Like
Reactions: gian60
Drive is not subjective
Thats your opinion .
Sometimes i hook up my 10 watts class A transistor for a change , it controls the woofers perfect/ is able to control the speaker perfect but a different kind of control / presentation .
When i play a gregorian choir CD for example , i actually prefer this presentation , its a softer / gentler " underpowered " presentation
Instead of the CAT when i have a racehorse at the wheel " overpowered "
I think there is a balance and this is different per person/ music they listen too
 
Last edited:
Peter,
Several of the Vitavox installations I've seen on the net have super tweeters. I think I might be interesting to experiment with a horn super tweeter such as the Fostex 500A. Romy uses a ribbon tweeter from RAAL that operates above 12.5K for his "Macondo" horn speaker system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KeithR and morricab
Peter,
Several of the Vitavox installations I've seen on the net have super tweeters. I think I might be interesting to experiment with a horn super tweeter such as the Fostex 500A. Romy uses a ribbon tweeter from RAAL that operates above 12.5K for his "Macondo" horn speaker system.

Careful with this as this might set Peter back.where he was. Over the years, I have made the observation, to use Peter’s language, that the difference between “Natural Sound” and “Hi-Fi Sound“ is the reproduction of the high frequency contour.

In the pursuit of flat 20 Hz to 20 KHz and beyond you will notice that as you increase the high frequency response of the system above 16 KHz you will gain more high-frequency detail, air and sparkle but that comes at the expense of image focus and that relaxed “Natural Sound”.

In other words, if Peter is happy with his 12 KHz to 16 KHz high frequency performance, then he should just enjoy it. Focusing on getting extended high frequency response may due away with that “Natural Sound” magic that he is enjoying.

For example, on my big Wisdom Audio Adrenaline Rush based reference system I can go between both of these presentations by simply adjusting the 25 KHz control knob on the Cello Audio Palette MIV equalizer. This is part of the reason why I never implemented/installed the RAAL supertweeters, which are to be driven by Mark Levinson ML-2 monoblocks, in the system as I prefer the image focus and soundstage boundary definition that the more relaxed “Natural Sound” provides. Very easy to go back and forth by simply rotating a knob.

I will not take this further here but if you take a close look, the one thing that you will notice is that most if not all of these vintage speakers with “Natural Sound” have frequency response only up to about 16 KHz. This is where you have to ask yourself, do you want a modern speaker with extended high frequency resolution and a “Hi-Fi Sound” presentation or a vintage speaker system with the more relaxed “Natural Sound“ presentation? These are of course generalities as the amplifier in use also plays a part in this, where you can use a modern speaker with a tube amplifier that will yield that “vintage” sound, if the combination results in a high-frequency roll-off.
 
Last edited:
Peter,
Several of the Vitavox installations I've seen on the net have super tweeters. I think I might be interesting to experiment with a horn super tweeter such as the Fostex 500A. Romy uses a ribbon tweeter from RAAL that operates above 12.5K for his "Macondo" horn speaker system.
Yes the cult of the super tweeter junkies. It’s quite common for people to stick a super tweeter on their speakers, not necessarily vintage either, 99.9% of them can’t hear for themselves and did it because they either saw or some random person recommended it. I’ve come across dozens of setups like that and not a single one sounded right or was implemented properly. All you get is some disjointed pssst pssst pssst. Both @Solypsa and @Carlos269 are correct in their posts.

david
 
I was attempting to get the thread back on track discussing Peter's system. It's just a suggestion of something to experiment with like a new cartridge. The Tannoy Westminster, for example, is unconvincing without the super tweeter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KeithR and PeterA
Careful with this as this might set Peter back.where he was. Over the years, I have made the observation, to use Peter’s language, that the difference between “Natural Sound” and “Hi-Fi Sound“ is the reproduction of the high frequency contour.

In the pursuit of flat 20 Hz to 20 KHz and beyond you will notice that as you increase the high frequency response of the system above 16 KHz you will gain more high-frequency detail, air and sparkle but that comes at the expense of image focus and that relaxed “Natural Sound”.

In other words, if Peter is happy with his 12 KHz to 16 KHz high frequency performance, then he should just enjoy it. Focusing on getting extended high frequency response may due away with that “Natural Sound” magic that he is enjoying.

For example, on my big Wisdom Audio Adrenaline Rush based reference system I can go between both of these presentations by simply adjusting the 25 KHz control knob on the Cello Audio Palette MIV equalizer. This is part of the reason why I never implemented/installed the RAAL supertweeters, which are to be driven by Mark Levinson ML-2 monoblocks, in the system as I prefer the image focus and soundstage boundary definition that the more relaxed “Natural Sound” provides. Very easy to go back and forth by simply rotating a knob.

I will not take this further here but if you take a close look, the one thing that you will notice ifs that most if not all of these vintage speakers with “Natural Sound” have frequency response only up to about 16 KHz. This is where you have to ask yourself, do you want a modern speaker with extended high frequency resolution and a “Hi-Fi Sound” presentation or a vintage speaker system with the more relaxed “Natural Sound“ presentation? These are of course generalities as the amplifier in use also plays a part in this, where you can use a modern speaker with a tube amplifier that may yield that “vintage” sound.


Exactly!

It takes some work to integrate a tweeter and even then there are trade-offs. Also, there are trade-offs between using different xo slopes, with higher order you can get a more accurate sound but some won't want that as the speaker sounds a bit more modern. I think it's worth experimenting with if you think you want more extension but results are not guaranteed and IME it's more likely to NOT work.

I've found that it's not a given that a super tweeter can be implemented coherently regardless of achieving a perfect crossover. If you simply add one to an existing system the result is not often able to be fully integrated. The reason for this is the tweeter doesn't necessarily sound like the midrange horn, so no amount of crossover tweaking will help with this issue. So it can be an exercise in frustration, and you may have to try multiple tweeters in hopes of finding one that will match up well.

With my speaker, I had to audition a bunch of tweeters and spent a ton of time on this. I was able to achieve a fully coherent result, but it wasn't particular easy and even then some may prefer not using it at all. The mid actually extends to 20 kHz, but it's not very accurate above 15 kHz, this is typical for all drivers that aren't dedicated tweeters. Like very low frequencies, a dedicated driver will perform better but implementation is often difficult.
 
Yes the cult of the super tweeter junkies. It’s quite common for people to stick a super tweeter on their speakers, not necessarily vintage either, 99.9% of them can’t hear for themselves and did it because they either saw or some random person recommended it. I’ve come across dozens of setups like that and not a single one sounded right or was implemented properly. All you get is some disjointed pssst pssst pssst. Both @Solypsa and @Carlos269 are correct in their posts.

david

Super tweeters cause issues with coherence. This is usually observed with tannoys. A super tweeter can take away from the strength of that point source coherence
 
  • Like
Reactions: the sound of Tao
Exactly!

It takes some work to integrate a tweeter and even then there are trade-offs. Also, there are trade-offs between using different xo slopes, with higher order you can get a more accurate sound but some won't want that as the speaker sounds a bit more modern. I think it's worth experimenting with if you think you want more extension but results are not guaranteed and IME it's more likely to NOT work.

I've found that it's not a given that a super tweeter can be implemented coherently regardless of achieving a perfect crossover. If you simply add one to an existing system the result is not often able to be fully integrated. The reason for this is the tweeter doesn't necessarily sound like the midrange horn, so no amount of crossover tweaking will help with this issue. So it can be an exercise in frustration, and you may have to try multiple tweeters in hopes of finding one that will match up well.

With my speaker, I had to audition a bunch of tweeters and spent a ton of time on this. I was able to achieve a fully coherent result, but it wasn't particular easy and even then some may prefer not using it at all. The mid actually extends to 20 kHz, but it's not very accurate above 15 kHz, this is typical for all drivers that aren't dedicated tweeters. Like very low frequencies, a dedicated driver will perform better but implementation is often difficult.
Yes it take experiment and proper implementation. No difference between cables, cartridge set up, speaker positioning, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bonzo75
Yes it take experiment and proper implementation. No difference between cables, cartridge set up, speaker positioning, etc.

IME, it's quite different in that it's more likely to not work, and the tweeter will sound disjointed, and this phenomenon is black and white. Other things are not so clear and have more trade-offs.

For example you can get a reasonable result with speaker positioning with some work, with a tweeter you may arrive at a place where it simply won't work at all no matter what you do.
 
Iirc peters horns go to 16 khz
Depends how much db they are down at 15 - 16 khz .
Otherwise i wouldnt bother i think .
I dont think there is an audiophile who can hear a 17 khz tone .
One can do a tonetest on you tube .
All this my tweeter goes to 30 40 khz nonsense imo nobody hears it , certainly not with cd anyway
 
I was attempting to get the thread back on track discussing Peter's system.

Jeff, this was precisely the way I read your post and suggestion. There are lots of OT posts which frankly belong in other WBF threads. There is no need to bring up digital or amp/speaker pairings that don't work. I appreciate your effort to get us back between the rails.

Your suggestion about a super tweeter did produce some great responses. When I was in Utah, I spent some time listening to David's JBL M9500? in his small room. The achievement was getting those large speakers to sound good in that extremely challenging room, all without the standard audiophile room acoustic treatments. David achieved this, and I was very impressed with the result. However, I heard a slightly different sound than I did from the Vitavox or the big Seimanns. The sound was more "modern". I did not immediately put my finger on it, but after some discussion with David, it was clear that these modern horns sounded different because they had more extension, particularly in the highs, and the bass was somewhat different too. Thinking back on it now, I think they simply went out further in response, and were perhaps designed more from the measurement perspective than from listening, though I am not sure.

Regardless of the design goals, what I heard was a more modern sound which was very slightly less natural than the two other iconic speakers David has set up. The JBLs were really good, but they did not have quite the same MAGIC of the Vitavox and Bionors. David also did an experiment where he added a sense of "air" riding on each recording. I think he switched cables or something, but I can't remember. He said many people love that and seek it out through gear or accessories. After I few minutes, I heard exactly what he meant. It was a coloration added to everything, and it quickly became tiresome. It was certainly not what I would consider "natural", but I understand why some like it and are drawn to that type of sound.
 
Last edited:
IME, it's quite different in that it's more likely to not work, and the tweeter will sound disjointed, and this phenomenon is black and white. Other things are not so clear and have more trade-offs.

For example you can get a reasonable result with speaker positioning with some work, with a tweeter you may arrive at a place where it simply won't work at all no matter what you do.
I've heard multiple systems with properly implemented super tweeters (Fostex 500A and 90, Tannoy and DuKane). Success usually depends on matching impedance, using a proper adjustable crossover and time aligning them successfully.

Like most things in audio, its not rocket science.
 
Careful with this as this might set Peter back.where he was. Over the years, I have made the observation, to use Peter’s language, that the difference between “Natural Sound” and “Hi-Fi Sound“ is the reproduction of the high frequency contour.

In the pursuit of flat 20 Hz to 20 KHz and beyond you will notice that as you increase the high frequency response of the system above 16 KHz you will gain more high-frequency detail, air and sparkle but that comes at the expense of image focus and that relaxed “Natural Sound”.

In other words, if Peter is happy with his 12 KHz to 16 KHz high frequency performance, then he should just enjoy it. Focusing on getting extended high frequency response may due away with that “Natural Sound” magic that he is enjoying.

For example, on my big Wisdom Audio Adrenaline Rush based reference system I can go between both of these presentations by simply adjusting the 25 KHz control knob on the Cello Audio Palette MIV equalizer. This is part of the reason why I never implemented/installed the RAAL supertweeters, which are to be driven by Mark Levinson ML-2 monoblocks, in the system as I prefer the image focus and soundstage boundary definition that the more relaxed “Natural Sound” provides. Very easy to go back and forth by simply rotating a knob.

I will not take this further here but if you take a close look, the one thing that you will notice is that most if not all of these vintage speakers with “Natural Sound” have frequency response only up to about 16 KHz. This is where you have to ask yourself, do you want a modern speaker with extended high frequency resolution and a “Hi-Fi Sound” presentation or a vintage speaker system with the more relaxed “Natural Sound“ presentation? These are of course generalities as the amplifier in use also plays a part in this, where you can use a modern speaker with a tube amplifier that will yield that “vintage” sound, if the combination results in a high-frequency roll-off.
in addition, i have found i rather difficult to blend one with a relatively wide bandwidth horn...I too use a bit of equalization to bring up or down the highest frequencies (above 10KHz) rather than adding another driver and all it's integration issues.
 
IME, it's quite different in that it's more likely to not work, and the tweeter will sound disjointed, and this phenomenon is black and white. Other things are not so clear and have more trade-offs.

For example you can get a reasonable result with speaker positioning with some work, with a tweeter you may arrive at a place where it simply won't work at all no matter what you do.
Yeah my DIY was originally going to be a three-way; however, I found that the mid/high horn drivers worked very well with a bit of EQ (also due to the constant directivity horns) right up to 20Khz.
 
Jeff, this was precisely the way I read your post and suggestion. There are lots of OT posts which frankly belong in other WBF threads. There is no deed to bring up digital or amp/speaker pairings that don't work. I appreciate your effort to get us back between the rails.

Your suggestion about a super tweeter did produce some great responses. When I was in Utah, I spent some time listening to David's JBL M9500? in his small room. The achievement was getting those large speakers to sound good in that extremely challenging room, all without the standard audiophile room acoustic treatments. David achieved this, and I was very impressed with the result. However, I heard a slightly different sound than I did from the Vitavox or the big Seimanns. The sound was more "modern". I did not immediately put my finger on it, but after some discussion with David, it was clear that these modern horns sounded different because they had more extension, particularly in the highs, and the bass was somewhat different too. Thinking back on it now, I think they simply went out further in response, and were perhaps designed more from the measurement perspective than from listening, though I am not sure.

Regardless of the design goals, what I heard was a more modern sound which was very slightly less natural than the two other iconic speakers David has set up. The JBLs were really good, but they did not have quite the same MAGIC of the Vitavox and Bionors. David also did an experiment where he added a sense of "air" riding on each recording. I think he switched cables or something, but I can't remember. He said many people love that and seek it out through gear or accessories. After I few minutes, I heard exactly what he meant. It was a coloration added to everything, and it quickly became tiresome. It was certainly not what I would consider "natural", but I understand why some like it and are drawn to that type of sound.
What is amazing about your new speakers Peter is that the S2 compression driver and bass unit used in one of the most modern and expensive modern horn speakers on the planet, the Living Voice Vox Olympian. Not only is the Vitavox corner horn still relevant 60 years later, the individual drivers are still used to make statement speaker systems.
 
IMO the importance of speakers claiming that the tweeter goes up to 30 or 40 kHz is that they have pushed out the first resonant mode of the tweeter to that point so we don't hear the ringing. If we go back and look at measurements from speakers from the 90's and 2000's we typically see that resonance somewhere between 15k and 20k Hz. Both Thiel and WIlson speakers suffered from this as did almost all speakers that used a metal tweeter from that era. There have been some nice advancements in tweeter technology in the past 10 years.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing