YG Acoustics Announces Sonja XV Loudspeaker

Status
Not open for further replies.

Carlos269

Well-Known Member
Mar 21, 2012
1,438
1,147
1,215
#1 reason to have a dedicated room = wife doing dishes during the final movement of Scheherazade.

Agree. My comments have been about purpose built rooms and not about dedicated rooms. I have seven dedicated rooms for my audio equipment through my house and could not live with out them.......or should I have said, my wife would not let me live here and enjoy my audiophile craziness without them.

I think it’s perhaps semantics that at the end of the day, these purpose built rooms just become a dedicated room after all, but the logic behind the trouble and expense to build them just doesn’t add up to me. To each their own. I am hoping that someone can enlighten me, regarding their need.
 

DaveC

Industry Expert
Nov 16, 2014
3,899
2,141
495
Agree. My comments have been about purpose built rooms and not about dedicated rooms. I have seven dedicated rooms for my audio equipment through my house and could not live with out them.......or should I have said, my wife would not let me live here and enjoy my audiophile craziness without them.

I think it’s perhaps semantics that at the end of the day, these purpose built rooms just become a dedicated room after all, but the logic behind the trouble and expense to build them just doesn’t add up to me. To each their own. I am hoping that someone can enlighten me, regarding their need.


Even frequency response

Control of decay times

Control of reflection vs diffraction vs absorption

re 4 tower systems, the sound you hear below the transition frequency, or schroder frequency of the room is a result of destructive and constructive interference. So the frequency response of the bass is dependent on the placement of the speakers and/or subs and your LP. With a 4-tower system I assume the woofer towers will be set up symmetrically. Their position may be variable, but there are constraints, moreso vs subs you can put almost anywhere in the room. This means with a 4-tower system you can simulate what the in-room bass response will be relative to position, and you can setup your 4-tower speakers to achieve smooth bass response without trial and error. Now, whether the owner of the system prefers flat frequency response, "ideal" RT60 (decay) times, etc. is another story... some do not!
 
  • Like
Reactions: sbnx

Carlos269

Well-Known Member
Mar 21, 2012
1,438
1,147
1,215
Even frequency response

Control of decay times

Control of reflection vs diffraction vs absorption

re 4 tower systems, the sound you hear below the transition frequency, or schroder frequency of the room is a result of destructive and constructive interference. So the frequency response of the bass is dependent on the placement of the speakers and/or subs and your LP. With a 4-tower system I assume the woofer towers will be set up symmetrically. Their position may be variable, but there are constraints, moreso vs subs you can put almost anywhere in the room. This means with a 4-tower system you can simulate what the in-room bass response will be relative to position, and you can setup your 4-tower speakers to achieve smooth bass response without trial and error. Now, whether the owner of the system prefers flat frequency response, "ideal" RT60 (decay) times, etc. is another story... some do not!

If you are building a room to optimize and compensate for the particular 4 tower speaker system, then the correction of their response and room interaction could be achieved on a static basis. Now a days there is no need for this as you can use DSP or Dirac room correction to achieve similar results on a dynamic basis. Silly to build a room for a specific set of parameters when solutions are at hand to tailor to dynamic environments.
 

DaveC

Industry Expert
Nov 16, 2014
3,899
2,141
495
If you are building a room to optimize and compensate for the particular 4 tower speaker system, then the correction of their response and room interaction could be achieved on a static basis. Now a days there is no need for this as you can use DSP or Dirac room correction to achieve similar results on a dynamic basis. Silly to build a room for a specific set of parameters when solutions are at hand to tailor to dynamic environments.

Lol, sorry but eq has it's limitations. Apparently you don't understand how bass propagates in an enclosed space.
 

Carlos269

Well-Known Member
Mar 21, 2012
1,438
1,147
1,215
Lol, sorry but eq has it's limitations. Apparently you don't understand how bass propagates in an enclosed space.

You laugh, I laugh but the joke is on you. I have done acoustic designs for NASA in my previous life. I don’t want to cock spare and compare credentials but can assure you that you will come up on the short end of the stick.
 

DaveC

Industry Expert
Nov 16, 2014
3,899
2,141
495
You laugh, I laugh but the joke is on you. I have done acoustic designs for NASA in my previous life. I don’t want to cock spare and compare credentials but can assure you that you will come up on the short end of the stick.

Awesome. In that case, please carry on with your misinformation! :p
 

treitz3

Super Moderator
Staff member
Dec 25, 2011
5,459
961
1,290
The tube lair in beautiful Rock Hill, SC
Alright, gentlemen. Let's get back to polite and respectful decorum...

Both of you are better than this.


Tom
 

DaveC

Industry Expert
Nov 16, 2014
3,899
2,141
495
Alright, gentlemen. Let's get back to polite and respectful decorum...

Both of you are better than this.

Tom

"get back to"??? (please see micro's response a few posts back... there was NEVER a time Carlos showed any respect for me.)

I think my response has been extremely reasonable given the obvious trolling and provocations by Carlos. And it's simple fact he's spreading misinformation.

I'll have to politely and respectfully disagree with the fact this post was directed at BOTH of us. Trolling is against TOU, Carlos was trolling, I'm not.
 

Tango

VIP/Donor
Mar 12, 2017
4,938
6,268
950
Bangkok
Where did you hear the M9s? Just curious as I know you wouldn't make comparisons without hearing something, right?
Benefit of the of the doubt goes both way Bob. You can question a person by saying have you heard it when he doesn't talk positive of the speaker. At the same time he could also question that it is so easy to say the highest price speaker that nobody have heard except for people who sell it or get benefits advertising it potentially has a better sound than the lower price one and yet that lower price one still cost a lot. And since you have said before you don't believe there is a "better" but just "different" then it is legit to hypothetically compare the top of the line of another brand that is priced lower to the much higher price one even without listening to it.

From my experience one needs no paying top money on a system to get comparable exceptional sound to most expensive one. But a lot of money is still involved. A lot of money (which is also subjective to whom is talking) can get a person a "better" sound but up to some very high spending and efforts put into, then the "better" diminishes and the "different" set in. It is not my opinion. It is my fact.
 
  • Like
Reactions: adyc and Folsom

microstrip

VIP/Donor
May 30, 2010
20,806
4,698
2,790
Portugal
I have never thought of building a dedicated listening room to solve for the acoustic issues of a particular set of speakers. I think of building a dedicated listening room consistent with objective standards of acoustics theory (maybe Golden Ratio dimensions, non-parallel side walls, no mirrors or glass, etc.).

As far as I know there are no objective standards of acoustical theory applied to stereo reproduction in small or medium size rooms. We have a few rules that seem reasonable due to common sense, but lack any proved evidence. In fact, when scientists study our "rules" most of the times they show their irrelevance, as most are just scaled from acoustics of auditoriums and concert halls, ignoring that acoustic properties such as diffusion in large spaces can't be scaled and stereo needs a very different type of environment than life music.

I think of different speakers in that dedicated listening room as occasioning perhaps different absorption or diffusion treatment on the walls or different locations for acoustic panels to deal with first reflections


Curious that we never address with depth the most important part of the room behavior - bass. In this zone a proper room can do more than the best woofers or crossovers. But tuning the room on the bass needs hard calculations and simulations - we can't change wall thickness or materials easily and small building details can change the whole picture.

The nice thing of this lack of standards is that we can pick from the many rules those we enjoy, even change them according to our desires and still be happy and sometimes, successful.

First reflections are mainly a question of preference and speaker design. We should not forget that the high-end is based on audiophile individual or group preferences.

If MikeL switched to panel speakers I do not think any wholesale redesign or modification of his purpose built listening room would be seriously considered. Switching to panel speakers might occasion slightly different treatment on the front wall, or something like that, but that's it.

MikeL room is an example of the type of paradigm of an extreme hobbyist. Many years of experience and enjoyment to tune his great room, going through many processes of trying and learning with his own current speakers. IMHO it is an exceptional case and can't be debated as a typical experience. But considering the way he likes to listen I think that switching to panels would need big changes. But I am just guessing, I hope he chimes on the subject.
 

Rhapsody

VIP/Donor
Jan 16, 2013
3,366
6,279
2,535
Brooklyn NY
Rhapsody.Audio
Benefit of the of the doubt goes both way Bob. You can question a person by saying have you heard it when he doesn't talk positive of the speaker. At the same time he could also question that it is so easy to say the highest price speaker that nobody have heard except for people who sell it or get benefits advertising it potentially has a better sound than the lower price one and yet that lower price one still cost a lot. And since you have said before you don't believe there is a "better" but just "different" then it is legit to hypothetically compare the top of the line of another brand that is priced lower to the much higher price one even without listening to it.

From my experience one needs no paying top money on a system to get comparable exceptional sound to most expensive one. But a lot of money is still involved. A lot of money (which is also subjective to whom is talking) can get a person a "better" sound but up to some very high spending and efforts put into, then the "better" diminishes and the "different" set in. It is not my opinion. It is my fact.

Tang, What exactly is your point?
 

sbnx

Well-Known Member
Mar 28, 2017
1,182
1,331
290
If you are building a room to optimize and compensate for the particular 4 tower speaker system, then the correction of their response and room interaction could be achieved on a static basis. Now a days there is no need for this as you can use DSP or Dirac room correction to achieve similar results on a dynamic basis. Silly to build a room for a specific set of parameters when solutions are at hand to tailor to dynamic environments.

Oh! You didn't say you were wanting to go down the Dirac/DSP route. Of course DSP can be used to flatten out frequency response aberrations due to room modes and can correct some timing errors. However, it can't fix nulls. From my experience I see no deleterious effects below 70ish Hz when done outside the main signal -- eg subwoofers. But, DSP has it's own set of demons that have to be dealt with. I am a believer in the pareto principle -- fix the big problem first. If you are forced to have your system setup in an untreated living space then DSP is better than not as it gets rid of the big problems leaving smaller ones. But if you want improve further then you are stuck.

In my previous house I had my stereo setup in the living area. I could not get the front of the speaker much more than 36" from the front wall and left/right positioning was also somewhat constrained. Therefore I owned a Tact 2.0s. It definitely improved the sound of my system through the magic (science) of DSP. When we moved to the new house with a dedicated music room I no longer needed the Tact. And in fact gave it away on this forum a year or two ago. I would not trade what I have now for what I had then in a million years.

DSP sucks many an engineer down its rabbit hole. If this is the route you HAVE to take then ok. But if this is the route you are taking by choice thinking it is a panacea -- good luck.

One Edit: What is the person with a turntable supposed to do with DSP?? Convert his analog signal to digital?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Alrainbow and DaveC

DaveC

Industry Expert
Nov 16, 2014
3,899
2,141
495
Oh! You didn't say you were wanting to go down the Dirac/DSP route. Of course DSP can be used to flatten out frequency response aberrations due to room modes and can correct some timing errors. However, it can't fix nulls. From my experience I see no deleterious effects below 70ish Hz when done outside the main signal -- eg subwoofers. But, DSP has it's own set of demons that have to be dealt with. I am a believer in the pareto principle -- fix the big problem first. If you are forced to have your system setup in an untreated living space then DSP is better than not as it gets rid of the big problems leaving smaller ones. But if you want improve further then you are stuck.

In my previous house I had my stereo setup in the living area. I could not get the front of the speaker much more than 36" from the front wall and left/right positioning was also somewhat constrained. Therefore I owned a Tact 2.0s. It definitely improved the sound of my system through the magic (science) of DSP. When we moved to the new house with a dedicated music room I no longer needed the Tact. And in fact gave it away on this forum a year or two ago. I would not trade what I have now for what I had then in a million years.

DSP sucks many an engineer down its rabbit hole. If this is the route you HAVE to take then ok. But if this is the route you are taking by choice thinking it is a panacea -- good luck.

Agreed. Thanks for taking the time to spell it out. :)

If you're going to invest in a 4-tower system you probably also have the will and means to optimize it's setup to the point you don't need DSP to try to cut bass peaks. DSP is not a substitute for proper setup.
 

Carlos269

Well-Known Member
Mar 21, 2012
1,438
1,147
1,215
Oh! You didn't say you were wanting to go down the Dirac/DSP route. Of course DSP can be used to flatten out frequency response aberrations due to room modes and can correct some timing errors. However, it can't fix nulls. From my experience I see no deleterious effects below 70ish Hz when done outside the main signal -- eg subwoofers. But, DSP has it's own set of demons that have to be dealt with. I am a believer in the pareto principle -- fix the big problem first. If you are forced to have your system setup in an untreated living space then DSP is better than not as it gets rid of the big problems leaving smaller ones. But if you want improve further then you are stuck.

In my previous house I had my stereo setup in the living area. I could not get the front of the speaker much more than 36" from the front wall and left/right positioning was also somewhat constrained. Therefore I owned a Tact 2.0s. It definitely improved the sound of my system through the magic (science) of DSP. When we moved to the new house with a dedicated music room I no longer needed the Tact. And in fact gave it away on this forum a year or two ago. I would not trade what I have now for what I had then in a million years.

DSP sucks many an engineer down its rabbit hole. If this is the route you HAVE to take then ok. But if this is the route you are taking by choice thinking it is a panacea -- good luck.

Which would you rather have a purpose built room optimized for one particular set of speakers and set-up or adaptive response? The point I was making is that designing a room to compensate for or optimize a particular 4 tower system marries you to that set-up; because in the physical world there is no universal or one-size-fits-all when it comes to room acoustics.

Do you have any experience with electronic bass traps?
 

jeff1225

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2012
3,011
3,257
1,410
51
Agree. My comments have been about purpose built rooms and not about dedicated rooms. I have seven dedicated rooms for my audio equipment through my house and could not live with out them.......or should I have said, my wife would not let me live here and enjoy my audiophile craziness without them.

I think it’s perhaps semantics that at the end of the day, these purpose built rooms just become a dedicated room after all, but the logic behind the trouble and expense to build them just doesn’t add up to me. To each their own. I am hoping that someone can enlighten me, regarding their need.

I’m building a room that is the golden ratio, has pitched ceilings, a dedicated bathroom, will house all of my records and will be sound proof so I can listen whenever I want. Try finding that in a house in a neighborhood that my wife likes, next to good schools for my daughter with a killer kitchen.
 

Alrainbow

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2013
3,189
1,387
450
Which would you rather have a purpose built room optimized for one particular set of speakers and set-up or adaptive response? The point I was making is that designing a room to compensate for or optimize a particular 4 tower system marries you to that set-up; because in the physical world there is no universal or one-size-fits-all when it comes to room acoustics.

Do you have any experience with electronic bass traps?

What is this one size fits all ..?

room acoustic treatments , diffusors , et al were created to help those in need , BTW once you have the correct dimensions to satisfy your desired low FC cutoff , the rest is academic , its not rocket propulsion with return landing pad accuracy . .


:)
 

Tango

VIP/Donor
Mar 12, 2017
4,938
6,268
950
Bangkok
Tang, What exactly is your point?
My point is it is legit for a Mdp632 to state his opinion on value, SQ for the amount of money he pays even if he has not heard the M9 in direct comparison to the YG. The YG is obviously less expensive than the Magico. And After all all top speakers with appropriate set up with matching equipments are just sounding exceptional in somewhat different way. So the question you asked which someone viewed as sarcasm should not be intended a sarcasm at the first place.
 

Alrainbow

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2013
3,189
1,387
450
If you are building a room to optimize and compensate for the particular 4 tower speaker system, then the correction of their response and room interaction could be achieved on a static basis. Now a days there is no need for this as you can use DSP or Dirac room correction to achieve similar results on a dynamic basis. Silly to build a room for a specific set of parameters when solutions are at hand to tailor to dynamic environments.

If all this rah rah is about adding DSP , you can forget about it , DSP kills the music , love it on Movies thou ...


:)
 
  • Like
Reactions: jeff1225

Alrainbow

Well-Known Member
Dec 11, 2013
3,189
1,387
450
Oh! You didn't say you were wanting to go down the Dirac/DSP route. Of course DSP can be used to flatten out frequency response aberrations due to room modes and can correct some timing errors. However, it can't fix nulls. From my experience I see no deleterious effects below 70ish Hz when done outside the main signal -- eg subwoofers. But, DSP has it's own set of demons that have to be dealt with. I am a believer in the pareto principle -- fix the big problem first. If you are forced to have your system setup in an untreated living space then DSP is better than not as it gets rid of the big problems leaving smaller ones. But if you want improve further then you are stuck.

In my previous house I had my stereo setup in the living area. I could not get the front of the speaker much more than 36" from the front wall and left/right positioning was also somewhat constrained. Therefore I owned a Tact 2.0s. It definitely improved the sound of my system through the magic (science) of DSP. When we moved to the new house with a dedicated music room I no longer needed the Tact. And in fact gave it away on this forum a year or two ago. I would not trade what I have now for what I had then in a million years.

DSP sucks many an engineer down its rabbit hole. If this is the route you HAVE to take then ok. But if this is the route you are taking by choice thinking it is a panacea -- good luck.

One Edit: What is the person with a turntable supposed to do with DSP?? Convert his analog signal to digital?

Yep And flatten it does .....!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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