Perhaps you did not see this in the post to which you just responded, so I will ask you again:
Can you present an argument for why using subwoofers and main speakers that can both be driven by two of the same SET amplifiers is not a good approach?
Natural Sound
- Thread starter PeterA
- Start date
Perhaps you did not see this in the post to which you just responded, so I will ask you again:
Can you present an argument for why using subwoofers and main speakers that can both be driven by two of the same SET amplifiers is not a good approach?
I rather think the owness is upon you to prove the validity of this unusual approach !
Very few audiophiles and manufacturers that apply audio science together with real world listening are advocates of *matching amplifiers* between lower base of the main transducer , and a totally separate Sub Base array …. Are AvantGarde , Cessaro , Living Voice , Aries Cerat …. I could go on , following this *Ideal Audio Practice* ?
It is the actual design of the sub base transducer to match the lower base of the main speaker that matters , not the application of the same amplifier that matters imho , and the considered opinion of many audio experts way above Karmeli’s pay grade.
Who said anything about the subwoofer not matching the character of the main speakers? Did I say anything about a “ideal audio file practice“? I have no idea where you come up with this stuff.
Part of the challenge is creating a subwoofer that can be driven properly by 18 W of SET power. The subwoofers I have tried all required much more power. But I tried the wrong subwoofers.
I don’t know what you mean by proof. The onus is on the listener to find a combination he thinks sounds good.
I didn’t make any such comment but nice try !
To return to my original query which you swerved , What exact equipment In Utah or elsewhere, have you heard this theory put into practice ?
” Part of the challenge is creating a subwoofer that can be driven properly by 18 W of SET power.”
You wrote this: “It is the actual design of the sub base transducer to match the lower base of the main speaker that matters , not the application of the same amplifier that matters imho , and the considered opinion of many audio experts way above Karmeli’s pay.
I responded with this: “Who said anything about the subwoofer not matching the character of the main speakers?”
You could read my report on the DDK‘s natural sound in Utah thread for specifics. Surely you know about his speakers and amplifiers. That system has the best main speaker subwoofer integration I’ve heard anywhere. I do not know the specific subwoofers in Tang’s system but he has the ML2 amplifiers and the videos of his speakers and subs in both Utah and in his room sound superb.
I do not care if the approach is uncommon. I judge only on the sound of the final result in comparison to my reference.
Oh Give it a rest …. You tried this conflation once already … And No I do not consider either *videos* to confirm anything let alone sound ‘”superb” What sub base /same amplification, does Karmeli have running in his system videos that supports your contention ?
You also confirm that you have zero idea of Tango’s system configuration , and yet you refer to him in support of your hypothesis , Does he have multiple Lamm amplification running his main Cinema speakers as well as some undisclosed sub base system ?
Really
I sent you a private message via text this afternoon. Perhaps you changed your telephone number. 1192A I do not know the RCA connector designation.
Sorry but his videos are not good. Moreover, the biggest issue in them is the sub integration. There is a massive hole in the midbass, on all the videos he had released, and the bass comes from subs that can especially on his Magda Tagliaferro ERC (solo piano) be identified are in different parts of the room separate from the speaker. He took off all his videos except for the New World, which usually has excellent weight and bass, but not in his video. His videos have decent midrange in a very small midrange frequency range.
Most of the music he played on these, like the Haitto Chaconne, New World, Tagliaferro, the Mahler, and many others, I have heard better on videos on much cheaper systems, smaller speakers, and analog using Garrard, SPU, Holbo (used under 5k with the arm). Not to mention that his system in videos does not remotely sound like the Kondo Bionor videos, or David's Bionor videos you released, or even the videos of the same Eurodyn that David had put up. This is possibly because the baffle works differently in different rooms.
I have nothing against supporting the trial for a change in system, but it would be better if his friends showed friendship by saying he is still setting things up, rather than claim these videos are anywhere remotely good. I also hope people who do not like his videos do not in any way think these are representative of vintage or SETs horns.
I used to love his videos with the Cessaro.
Last edited:
Well … There is more of an agenda going on there In which Tango is but a pawn.
Yes I would concur that several of the audio clip videos that Tango put up of his previous Cessaro system were very good indeed , seems to me that he has gone backwards somewhat which is a shame .
Recommended amplifier power at least 200 watts at 8 ohms. This means that a set amp never gains control over the subwoofer.
JBL B 460 | Hifi-Wiki
The discussion is about whether or not SETs and the ML2 in particular, can be used to drive subwoofers. At least that is what Argonaut argues is “uncommon”. He asked me for examples of what I thought were good implementations and I gave him two. You seem to want to discuss why you do not like Tang’s new speakers. On that topic, we simply disagree.
I’ve also been you underwhelmed with Tang’s videos on YouTube with the new system. Have you talked to him? Is he happy with the system?
The last time we communicated he seemed very happy with the new speakers and subwoofers. That was a few months ago.
Tang hasn't said his system is the best or his videos are the best he has heard. He is happy but knows his subs are not integrated. In fact his videos were named after the distance of the baffles from the speaker and the crossover, because he was changing those to find what is a good position.
As someone who backs vintage and SETs horns, I get PMs from people who don't have much exposure to the category, are interested, but are misled into thinking this high spendy set up is a representation of what the category can do - because it is high spendy, and Peter makes comments like these are the best videos - so they naturally think all of us are the same and this is the best that the category can get to, and therefore I would like to publicly clarify my opinion that no, this is not even close, so for those who don't like this sound, don't lose heart.
That said, to counter your "what is your point" paranoia conspiracy question, I don't understand the point of saying this is the best sound either, unless you are really bad at hearing, in which case that can be your sonic opinion.
I would simply have said David's Eurodyn videos sounded quite good, and Tang is trying to set up to get there.
Look at Ron's thread. Do you see him claiming his sound is the best? Do you see his friends claiming after a visit that his sound is the best? His is in set up phase. It is an exploration that facilitates a healthy discussion, whatever sound camp you are in.
Bill and I are very good friends. I have often posted his videos saying they are in early set up phase. His set up is far from sounding what the Mayer Pnoe Vyger RS did. I don't go to hifi shows to rooms which have gear I back, and then claim these were the best rooms at the show when they were not. All such behaviors are purely tribal.
ps: When Tang uploaded his videos, I sent him on whatsapp with videos of the same LPs on other systems I recorded that I thought were better. He can listen and make his judgement.
Last edited:
Similar threads
