Jump to content

mitchco

Members
  • Content Count

    514
  • Joined

  • Last visited

6 Followers

About mitchco

  • Rank
    Sophomore Member

Recent Profile Visitors

29625 profile views
  1. @crenca when I first got the HP50's, I could not wear them for more than 2 minutes because of the clamping force - I have a big noggin and ears. So I grabbed the headband just above the ears cups on both sides and tried to split them apart. Lo and behold, there is a pivot point just above the ear cups on the headband that "gave way" on both sides of the headphone. Initially, I thought I busted them as there was quite the crack, but seems to be a pivot point. Now I can wear them for hours without any issue as the clamping force is "normal". Sure the headphones sit half on and half off the ear, but once the clamping force has been adjusted, it is much easier to position the cups on the ear to give the best fit/sound possible. For sure the ergos are not the best, but a really good neutral sounding headphone for the money. I would love to upgrade to something a lot more comfortable, but regardless of price, their sound quality is hard to beat for neutrality.
  2. Nice review Josh! Good to see measurements too! I am still enjoying my HP50's, definitely not the most comfortable ergonomic design, but I do like the sound. Keep up the good writings! Cheers, Mitch
  3. Hi @Em2016 I do feel the Golds are bright sounding, at least to my ears, from a neutral frequency balance preference. But still sound smooth as I don't hear any high frequency distortion. Nothing new on the list other than I upgraded my dual Rythmik L12 subs to F18's and very happy with the result: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/113-subwoofers-bass-transducers/1214550-official-rythmik-audio-subwoofer-thread-1223.html#post57390652
  4. @Em2016 Here I overlaid the Kii THREE's, D&D 8c's and the Phantom Gold's left and right distortion measurements. As noted, my equilateral triangle is about 9ft and each of these were calibrated for reference level playback (i.e. 83 dB SPL): As can be seen, all three speakers are well behaved from a distortion perspective at reference listening level. I would not take the absolute distortion numbers as gospel as these were not performed at 2.83v @ 1 meter. I also limited the the low frequency bandwidth to 500 Hz as below that I believe at that distance the room comes into play more than the speakers (could be true for all frequencies and the distortion is just the noise floor of my room). Also, my measurement mic is not the best for taking distortion measurements... To understand why the distortion plot stops at 10 kHz: https://www.roomeqwizard.com/help/help_en-GB/html/graph_distortion.html But the point is from a relative comparison perspective, all three speakers are super smooth and none of them sounded distorted in any way to my ears. Like I say, I don't recall at all, for any of these speakers sounding distorted in the top octave. Wrt the soundstage measurement deviation from linearity at 90 dB, I could no speculate what or why that is. The Gold is a DSP speaker, so there could be a limiter in the amp circuit and have nothing to do with the tweeter for all we know. Cheers, Mitch
  5. Hi @Em2016 yah, I don't remember any high frequency distortion when listening or measured. I am away from my main computer until Sunday, but will see if I have some measurements comparing the Kii Three and D&D 8c with the Phantom Golds and post up some distortion charts. Cheers, Mitch
  6. Hi @Em2016 yes it would be very easy to use digital room eq to tone down the bass and treble. But I was hoping the speaker would have some onboard capability like the D&D 8c or the Kii Three to contour the tone. Given that this is a DSP type speaker already, it seems like (and still is) an oversight not to have simple tone contouring available to the user, who may not have digital eq or a measurement system...
  7. Toole and Olive spent a great deal of R&D effort over years that included controlled subjective listening tests. I wrote a summary of that here, which Sean Olive peer reviewed before it was published: https://audiophilestyle.com/ca/reviews/nad-viso-hp50-with-roomfeel-headphone-review-r720/#science My preference is for a flat, but tilted target response from 20 Hz to -10 dB @ 20 kHz as measured in-room at the listening position. According to Harman’s research, this objectively measured flat, but tilted frequency response, (i.e. spectral balance), is subjectively perceived by our ears as a flat or neutral or accurate response. The deets are in the link above. Another good read is Toole's open access AES paper on The Measurement and Calibration of Sound Reproducing Systems: http://www.aes.org/e-lib/browse.cfm?elib=17839 Check out Fig. 14. Subjectively preferred steady-state room curve targets in a typical domestic listening room and the "trained listeners" preference. Depending on the speakers directivity and how damp/reflective ones room is, there maybe some fine tuning of how much more or less tilt is required by a couple of dB. This is easily accomplished by moving up or down the -10 dB @ 20 kHz point in the target response and then give it a listen and compare. I have tried many targets over the years, including the ones @semente linked above from the ASR forum. The straight line, but tilted target response sounds the most neutral to my ears. I think Toole and Olive's R&D in this area is the most credible, and really the only body of work I know of that uses subjective listening tests to correlate their objective measurements. They have repeated these tests over and over again, with different speakers and listening subjects and end up with virtually the same results each time. The first link above points to the body of work at the end of the article section in presentations, which points to over a dozen AES papers on the subject area. Good luck and have fun!
  8. Vintage Armaco AR20A circa 50s or 60s... Beckman DM27xl circa 90 Used in building amps, preamps, headphone amps, checking continuity, resistance, bias adjust, etc.
  9. Hi @malarz OK cool. You can control the sweep output level via Acourate. You can also insert a passive preamp(s) between the DAC and amps or use line attenuators to the mid and tweeter amps. You can also passively attenuate the drivers with pads (or L-Pad's) but not the best approach, but if no other way, then...
  10. HI @malarz I am not sure I understand the context... Assuming you have 6 DAC channels for a stereo 3- way active setup and outputting the DAC channels directly to the input of 6 channels of amplification? If so, does the DAC analog outputs have level control?s Or do your amplifiers have an input level controls? If so, then the idea is to trim the input level of each amplifier so that the logsweep produces a reasonably flat response or tilting downwards response as the frequency increases over the full range. Usually you run the woofer amp channel wide open as the woofer has the least sensitivity, then the midrange and then the tweeter needs the most level attenuation to be in line with the woofer and midrange levels... I may have misunderstood your question...?
  11. Hi @blue2 Thanks for the kind words. I see no-one has got back to you on this. Purchasing a calibrated measurement mic and REW is excellent acoustic measurement software to get you going, is a great idea. I don't know how you are going to get around the 2 sounds devices as seen by the computer though... I don't have any experience with Audirvana or HQPlayer,... However, getting the analog split off your preamp to the subs should work. With REW you will be able to assess your setup and then make a plan from there... Of course, I recommend Audiolense as the fastest way to integrate the subs with some room correction...
  12. Hi @ShawnC Sorry, I have no experience with either. You might have better luck with your q's on AVSForum, as the LS50W is popular there... Here is one thread: https://www.avsforum.com/forum/113-subwoofers-bass-transducers/2805681-kef-ls50-wireless-sub.html Kind regards, Mitch
  13. @rando Thanks! My conclusion sums it up... Really, I am looking for the most neutral sounding headphone out there. According to Tyll, who has measured over 1000 headphones (wow!!), and referencing Harman's scientific study around neutral sounding headphones, plus my own measurements and subjective listening, these are it! I recently upgraded my binaural mic preamp, as mentioned in one of my earlier comments, and recorded a tune with these headphones and then compared to the original recording. I am really impressed how close the recorded sound compares to the original track. Don't know what to say, I am still impressed on how neutral these sound and listening to them right now
  14. @Kvalsvoll I think you are taking my article too literally 🙂 I said similar frequency response, not exact. As already caveated in the article, several times, the LS50's were placed in a room null whereas the JBL's were not. This accounts for the difference in the 50 to 60 Hz dip. Again, as noted in the article, had I moved the LS50's to the exact same spot as the JBL's, would have resolved this issue and perhaps a few others. Also noted in the article, the science shows our ears/brain are not too sensitive to narrow band dips in frequency response below Schroeder. The JBL has a near infinite baffle whereas the LS50 does not. This will cause a different Speaker Boundary Interference Response (SBIR) above 100 Hz to around 400 Hz (directivity related as the polar response will be different for both speakers in this frequency range, aside from the fact that the LS50's were not in the same physical position as the JBL's...). The JBL's "constant directivity" comes into play at around 400 Hz: Where as the LS50's does not. The rest of the differences on up in the audio band are due to the directivity differences between the two speakers. As Floyd Toole and Sean Olive have often said, one cannot eq directvity. So both the measurement and correction software are "blind" to directivity, as we are measuring and correcting the sound power in the room (i.e. steady state response). The point of the article is to show that two speakers eq'd "similarly not exact" sound remarkably close, yet the big difference being how much room sound is let into the recording by the wide directivity differences between these two specific speakers that represent the near opposite ends of the directivity index scale. The intent is to have folks listen to binaural recordings to hear the audible difference and determine what one's preference is with respect to how much room sound one likes mixed in with the direct sound. It is nothing more than that. Enjoy the music!
  15. Hello @Kvalsvoll I see you just joined CA and this is your first post. Welcome! Thanks for your feedback. The only fair comparison is the LS50 plus sub vs JBL with sub as they have a similar frequency response, but very different directivity index. The LS50 standalone was to let people listen to what it sounds like without a sub. Checking on the specs, The little speaker is rated at 106 dB SPL max output and 2nd & 3rd harmonics (90dB, 1m) <0.4% 175Hz-20kHz with 85dB (2.83V/1m) sensitivity. I don't think the speaker was overloaded. at 83 dB SPL at the LP. I follow these levelling best practices using pro gear. 83 dB SPL I do not find too loud and has the right balance of bass to treble. For overly compressed material I drop the level down to 77 dB SPL. Kind regards, Mitch
×
×
  • Create New...