Jump to content

PeterSt

  • Content Count

    7546
  • Joined

  • Last visited

7 Followers

About PeterSt

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I tried the configuration from my last post, but No ... Maybe my ears weren't up to the task last night ? I experienced the sound as way too light and with a big hole between the highs and even lower mid and found it highly annoying. I could have tried to solve this by now changing my Blaxius^2 config but it doesn't work for me to have something not-working and tweak to get it better. For me it must sound right and then tweak to improve further.
  2. @Roger Waters, what was intended here ?
  3. Well, the longer I listen to "PNF" the more I appreciate the highs output. For me, the level (or amount) of it, balances very well to what happens right under it. But interestingly: So A: B-Y & W-R B: B-Y My notes don't tell my that I tried that one, but I did try this : A: B-Y & W-R B: B-Y & W-R And my description as of Sept. 1, 2018: Very general key description : a lot of low highs. Later (Oct. 21, 2018), at revisiting this config, I noted: Today I am going back to a config with more mid (lower highs as described on the forum on Sept. 2, 2018 ). I do this because it seems (with too much of stuffed ears the past week !) that the new Blaxius^2 at A:B-W, B:B-W shows me too few mid. After a week, this combi could be too much "tearing" (scheuren). So if I read back on my own text here (you may also want to follow the link) it could be what you are looking for. But it could also be what I must revisit again, now being used to "PNF" largely but indeed maybe agreeing with you that the highs could be less a little, or better, the mid could be more. And this config could be about that exactly. But also (for me): The "scheuren" (tearing) I mention in there by now is obvious to me as this indicates a too fast mid which mid is emphasized at the same time. It makes different music sound similar and thus I would reject it. But what I also see in there is that this can probably be counter-attacked by a change in Blaxius^2 configuration which at that time was just new, me hunting for configs - forcing myself not gong mad. By now I could probably cope ... And then not to make you people mad, but on the Blaxius^2 for ages I have A:B-R, B: B-R, just being too lazy to try things there. Here the summarized text behind the link on the A: B-Y & W-R B: B-Y & W-R : This one, so far, has it all. It shows superb bass which also sings (see earlier post). It has highs which are "normal", but which somehow manage to squeeze out even more detail all over (read : actually continuously and not only "occasionally"). All, really all contains new sounds while at the same time music as such is playing (this latter is THE task). The electric butterflies are there, meaning that the spookiness is all over there again, but this time never in a way that you'd think : right, nice, but this has to be wrong. And the technical justification: With this, I forced myself to find configs "with reason". And well, this one is about the thought of balance, and how the Middle shield connects to the both connectors, that shield in itself protected by and surrounded with the two other shields. The "protected by" is quite explicit, because if those two, Inner and Outer would also connect to the connectors, it wouldn't be protective (in my electrical view and thinking). Thus, both the Inner and Outer shields just open ended at both sides, BUT connected to each other and thus not to the Middle shield. And really, at the first hit (I am serious !) you can hear it is right.
  4. Many people ask for a photo of A: B-W & Y-R, B: B-W AKA "PNF". So here it is:
  5. Yeah, I think you now added the straight line. I never thought of that, but now it speaks to me. I think it is a straight line here, but certainly not at 0 degrees. Maybe it is important to add this: My current room can not be used for QSound very well. My previous room (and house) seemed perfect for it. But mind you please: just acoustically and no further processing. Also no headphones while I recall that QSound officially works for headphones only (easy to look up, which I just don't - haha). So ... in my previous house I had perfect QSound (or the good representation of the phase manipulation). I know this is room-treatment dependent, hence it is very room dependent. If I am right that QSound is for headphones then all I claim about in-room stuff (no processor for it) is illegal to begin with. Still it could be interesting to know for you it can be done. But don't ask me how.
  6. ST, this could be a too general description of something which now comes across as normal. I mean, something going from left to right ... (I admit, "right through you" as per the description is something else, but a. I don't experience it like that and b. it shouldn't be like that IMO - although it would imply death as such). The album is full with better examples, though less easy to explain (e.g. Three Wishes). Try Vogue from Madonna's Immaculate Collection. This is straight from front to back across the sealing. Easiest example at the end: the dying out flying over your head Vogue - vogue - vogue - vogue. This ends up straight behind you, at the back wall. And then you still might need better motivation because that just works as is, in-room. As often, I might be missing the plot ...
  7. Hi bluebeat - would you be helped by extra *low* HF output ? I mean, I should be able to find at least one config which complies to that explicitly, but ... But for me it would give the stuffed ear feeling. I am not sure it will be the one or the other and that nothing exists in between, but for me, as soon as the stuffed ear sense appears, I am out. But now you with the tinnitus ... ?? Something else is that I think that I know what you mean. And if I am right on that, you should use quite different means to counterattack your sensations. Suppose you'd drive by and pop in, I could try to show you ... Regards, Peter
  8. If I eliminate some misty words from this sentence, I come up with this: It is very rare to hang on to their vintage equipment in the name of good sound. But is that what you wanted to say ? I mean, it seems to conflict with the next sentence: ... Anyway, it seems that I do not recognize much of it, or I misunderstand most. An audiophile always has the best sound of everyone (this is because it relates to the spent money and you always being satisfied), and a random visitor thinks it sounds worse because he too has the best system, and if he might think it sounds better then he rejects that because he doesn't want to know and again thus thinks the auditioned sounds worse. Unless he wants to buy it, of course. Take that for a vague sentence ! haha I don't recognize the status thing. But then I am from a country where people tend to have modest systems, do not have a dozen servants for whatever job (including setting up the audio system) but may spend money on cars and brag about that. So ... if I indeed sense correctly, you are from a country where this is all quite opposite, hence the post (and subject ?). You would have a hard time making this clear to the random "western" guy and only those from the west who experienced the homes of audiophiles in "the east" (not sure how to describe it otherwise), know how giant these differences are. We won't be different persons as such but all around us is organized - and works completely different. Including what "status" as such is. Peter
  9. Would that be prior or post BREXIT ?
  10. I encourage people to encode their MQA files to MP3. Now the size will finally be a lot less.
  11. Or another one ... I sell a pair of speakers and amplifiers (for $12K) to an existing customer. This is not a commercial trade but a personal transaction. He does not have all the money yet so he offers a down payment and will purchase for real in 6 months or so of time. I tell him that no down payment is needed. A next person asks for the (2nd hand) speakers and I have to reject. Within those six months the buyer gets divorced. He can't obtain the speakers any more and with great apologies cancels the purchase. Now I am happy. We know what a down payment is for, right ? So if I would have had accepted the down payment, I undoubtedly would be legitimate in keeping it AND keep the speakers when he would have canceled the order. He, who is unexpectedly in financial troubles to begin with. Can you understand my happy ? How much more difficult would it have been to even send back that money. Instead now virtually nothing happened (including not selling the speakers at all because that other person disappeared on the horizon when the speakers became available again). I think this is 100% your situation and if I had accepted the down payment I would have created this thread for you. And I know, the history with your friend urged for the arrangement as you did it. But still ... Read your own title. It contains "ethical". So you know what to do ...
  12. Yes, morally, for you. I would have thought from second #1 "no way it will be happening like that". So as soon as you accepted that situation things were bound to go wrong. I have a situation at hand, not really similar, that someone purchased a Lush^2, told one hour later that he had to cancel the order, but his email about that ended up in my spam box and I only found the email when his cable was under way already. Now he likes to send it back under the rule that everybody can return BUT "the shipping costs are yours (both ways)". This is about $50 only. I guess it is nobody's fault that his email ended up in my spam box, unless it is his (between very large quotes). So I must pay for the shipping ? morally yes. But it is too hard to do for real (and $50 only). So many principles at stake. But ... the best thing to do is make that customer happy which not even turns out to be a customer. Now back to your situation ...
  13. This reads as a loss of 5500. How do you do that ? (I must have missed something somewhere)
  14. I slowly start to learn what those biology lessons ever back were actually for.
×
×
  • Create New...