That was my first guess but I said it for the benefit of others as many readers are not horn familiar and might get confused on woofers and compression drivers
Ron’s New System
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
That was my first guess but I said it for the benefit of others as many readers are not horn familiar and might get confused on woofers and compression drivers
I'm not trying to convince, but fleas do have a special sound quality. This is my long in the tooth, (somewhat worn) ordinary ebay 45 tubes on my humble amp appliance @ 2 watts on the 75 inchers. Samsung Galaxy 8 phone. Sound meter showed 90b peaks for the whole system playing.
I prefer Ron's much more to this, and I am not referring to the subjectivity preference of the rest of the system, but I just don't hear her opening her mouth properly on yours whenever she raises he voice. Lots of tube fogginess as well. If only tubeness was wanted to counter some hardness from SS, that is fine. This to me is exactly what fleas should not sound like.
"I prefer Ron's much more to this, and I am not referring to the subjectivity preference of the rest of the system, but I just don't hear her opening her mouth properly on yours whenever she raises he voice. Lots of tube fogginess as well. If only tubeness was wanted to counter some hardness from SS, that is fine. This to me is exactly what fleas should not sound like."
Sure, whatever. The sound in the room is much better, it sounded like the mic was saturating on the phone a bit. 2A3 is also sounds better with better tubes and a bit more power.:
45 is a microscope and if I want ultimate reveal of the source, it's what I'll put in there. The vid is a reasonable simulacrum of reasonable dynamics and good imaging spread and localization for such a low powered device.
Sure, whatever. The sound in the room is much better, it sounded like the mic was saturating on the phone a bit. 2A3 is also sounds better with better tubes and a bit more power.:
45 is a microscope and if I want ultimate reveal of the source, it's what I'll put in there. The vid is a reasonable simulacrum of reasonable dynamics and good imaging spread and localization for such a low powered device.
I would guess your WAVACs are probably more suitable for moderate/loud levels. My 2A3 amp sounds almost limitless on my Hornings.
I'm scarcely going to defend a YouTube video. Either you hear it or you don't. There are so many different devices and headphones, and there is no 'normalization', standardization or level equalization across the devices of prospective listeners.
It sounds pretty decent to me on my Mac with headphones, but I produced it so there's that. Listening directly to the desktop video that I uploaded sounds better, too, without the cacaphony of YouTube manipulations.
It sounds pretty decent to me on my Mac with headphones, but I produced it so there's that. Listening directly to the desktop video that I uploaded sounds better, too, without the cacaphony of YouTube manipulations.
When I listen now to my "Fields of Gold" recording from about a month ago on Vimeo it sounds a bit too smoothed over for me. After listening sessions a month ago I removed all of the acoustic absorption panels from the front wall.
Now I am pretty ambivalent between the current set-up (ASC TubeTrap farm) and nothing on the front wall. I think the configuration of TubeTrap behind each speaker and one in the middle of the front wall (all diffusion inside out) results in a lot less absorption than the wallpapering panels I had a month ago.
I think I would not be able to A/B it, but the configuration of TubeTrap behind each speaker and one in the middle of the front wall, and the odd pair in the middle between the speakers, might be generating a little bit of additional depth and soundstage openness, and warming up the sound just a very little bit.
Now I am pretty ambivalent between the current set-up (ASC TubeTrap farm) and nothing on the front wall. I think the configuration of TubeTrap behind each speaker and one in the middle of the front wall (all diffusion inside out) results in a lot less absorption than the wallpapering panels I had a month ago.
I think I would not be able to A/B it, but the configuration of TubeTrap behind each speaker and one in the middle of the front wall, and the odd pair in the middle between the speakers, might be generating a little bit of additional depth and soundstage openness, and warming up the sound just a very little bit.
Last edited:
I hear Carlos' "Fields of Gold," even with headphones, as transparent, but also as "sharp" and slightly metallic and a bit dry, with a treble-emphasized frequency balance.
Make sure that you are listening to the video on the YouTube App or on the YouTube page in a separate window tab and not on WBF. It makes a difference.
Sounds like your 45 amp is clipping on the vocal peaks.
If asked to choose which sound you would prefer based on subjective description and not listening, you would have chosen the sound from a month ago
Do you mean my description today of the sound from a month ago versus my description a month ago of the sound from a month ago?
I can understand why you might think that, but I have never aimed to maximize smoothness.
If you think I was just trying to maximize smoothness, what do you think prompted me to continue to experiment beyond all of the absorption panels I had on the front wall a month ago? That smoothness didn't sit right with me.
Maybe I'm not understanding you . . .
Most of your online research is if I listen to A vs B, which will be warmer/not more highs kind of drift. Sometimes it is which will add more weight. Also kind of why you rejected Kcin's IO Eclipse tube recommendation above. And my point to you is always don't look for a particular attribute - some are just better, and sometimes, the balance gets better.
That is based on actual listening, not your deep dive description analysis on forums if one attribute is more or less
Thanks Brad:
0) Electron Images “Amati” dual chassis preamplifier, with built in high-gain MC phonostage
1) A pair of Eternal Arts “Arpa” AD1 SE monoblock amplifiers by Dr. Burkhardt Schwäbe from 340 Hz to 3 KHz and from 6.8 KHz - 21 KHz
2) Radu Tarta “Sublime” PSE 4P1L amplifier from 3 KHz to 6.8 KHz and from 21 KHz - 30 KHz
3) A pair of Hypex FA503 Fusion Amps in bridged mode for 1000W from 80 Hz - 340 Hz
4) A pair of Crown XLS-1002 Series 2 amplifiers in bridged mode for 1100W from 27 Hz - 80 Hz
I think that the video stands fine on its own. When evaluating system videos you have to have intelligent expectations. I’m surprised that I have to repeat this as it has been discussed previously, and that someone like Bonzo has not figured this out with his experience with recording of system videos: Because of the microphone’s, typically used for recording these videos, limitations in low frequencies response, system videos will have a slight high frequency tilt. It is not a stretch for myself, and for others, to factor this in when assessing these videos.
The converse is also true, a video that sounds overly smooth, devoid of high frequency detail and/or bass heavy on a system video will sound darker, more congested and “muddy” in the room.
Go to my comparative analysis, on another site, and you will clearly hear the difference between my new reference horn system and the latest WBF darlings.
Last edited:
lacks 2 midbasshorns above HF, but line source from 65 and up....
and "electronic pointsource" from 65 and up
and "electronic pointsource" from 65 and up