Overemphasize any part of the system.
Wrong answer/solution.
Wrong answer/solution.
Speakers The single most critical component
I know we've been over this Q hundreds of X's over the past 20 years here on audion, You can find dozen of topics dealing with this Q <which is the ,,,,most important component...>>
well time for yet 1 more topic dealing with this,, perhaps unanswered, un-resolved issue.
I'm bringing up the old hachet due to my recent experience acutally hearinga FR in my system.
Let me tell you, there is not even 1 traditional/conventioanl/xover design <The Boxed Type>> in the world that could convince me , there is something that will beat out FR (caveat, FR requires some sort of high sens =sensitivity, tweeter) in the Boxy world of speakers.
That is to say, FR + Compression Horn is the future of 21st Century high fidelity.
One lab has already brought us these ~~~SHF~~~ aka SuperHighFidelity single drivers.
The code word here is ~~SHF~~~ which can not never be employed when describing xover/trad/conventioanl style aka The Box designs. db level under 91 are _<<IN-EFFICIENT>> , = dysfunctional, out dated, old school , = Dinasaurs.
For amps, I only consider tube amps (PP and SET) as ~~SHF~~~ I can not include ss amps in this topic.
IMHO all well made tube amps sound very close,
a kt88 in brand X will sound close to brand Y.
So amplification takes a distant 2nd place in critical component. No need to break the bank buying amp A vs a lower priced kt88 amp B
CD players, nearly all tube DAC's , tube cdp-ers sound close. No need to braek the bank over X vs Y.
My Jadis DAC is only miniscule gain over the Shanling,
the Shanling
only a miniscule gain over the Cayin CD17.
Now as for best source , phonograph is the ideal playback medium vs cds.
I have some LP's now , but my main collection are classical cds, most not on LP version. Cables , I did note some gains employing silver/copper wiring throughout my entire system including inside the Defy.
Tweak worthy.
New Mundorf caps in all componets, tweak worthy.
Yet the main central component remaisn the speakers.
Here is where the entire audio resolution either rises to Nirvana or falls to <<distortion/muddy waters,/pollution/anti-fidelity voicing issues.
Your system's fidelity is ultimately dependent on what speaker you have chosen to employ.
Forget all you've learned over the years,
The new mantra is <,The speaker is key component>
All else is just extra tweaks/nuances.
To sum up, a ~~SHF~~ driver will match even the top of line Wilson weighing in at hundreds of lbs priced $$$$$$$ overa single FR driver.
FR beats out any/all xover box design speakers. Mostly due to that key specification ~~db level~~~ which is everything in speaker design and thus in resolution/fidelity.
well time for yet 1 more topic dealing with this,, perhaps unanswered, un-resolved issue.
I'm bringing up the old hachet due to my recent experience acutally hearinga FR in my system.
Let me tell you, there is not even 1 traditional/conventioanl/xover design <The Boxed Type>> in the world that could convince me , there is something that will beat out FR (caveat, FR requires some sort of high sens =sensitivity, tweeter) in the Boxy world of speakers.
That is to say, FR + Compression Horn is the future of 21st Century high fidelity.
One lab has already brought us these ~~~SHF~~~ aka SuperHighFidelity single drivers.
The code word here is ~~SHF~~~ which can not never be employed when describing xover/trad/conventioanl style aka The Box designs. db level under 91 are _<<IN-EFFICIENT>> , = dysfunctional, out dated, old school , = Dinasaurs.
For amps, I only consider tube amps (PP and SET) as ~~SHF~~~ I can not include ss amps in this topic.
IMHO all well made tube amps sound very close,
a kt88 in brand X will sound close to brand Y.
So amplification takes a distant 2nd place in critical component. No need to break the bank buying amp A vs a lower priced kt88 amp B
CD players, nearly all tube DAC's , tube cdp-ers sound close. No need to braek the bank over X vs Y.
My Jadis DAC is only miniscule gain over the Shanling,
the Shanling
only a miniscule gain over the Cayin CD17.
Now as for best source , phonograph is the ideal playback medium vs cds.
I have some LP's now , but my main collection are classical cds, most not on LP version. Cables , I did note some gains employing silver/copper wiring throughout my entire system including inside the Defy.
Tweak worthy.
New Mundorf caps in all componets, tweak worthy.
Yet the main central component remaisn the speakers.
Here is where the entire audio resolution either rises to Nirvana or falls to <<distortion/muddy waters,/pollution/anti-fidelity voicing issues.
Your system's fidelity is ultimately dependent on what speaker you have chosen to employ.
Forget all you've learned over the years,
The new mantra is <,The speaker is key component>
All else is just extra tweaks/nuances.
To sum up, a ~~SHF~~ driver will match even the top of line Wilson weighing in at hundreds of lbs priced $$$$$$$ overa single FR driver.
FR beats out any/all xover box design speakers. Mostly due to that key specification ~~db level~~~ which is everything in speaker design and thus in resolution/fidelity.
- ...
- 353 posts total
| Post removed |
The first question I will ask is why you are so insistent that a full range driver is the ultimate in reproduction. When we look at psychoacoustics, brain operation, I don't think there is a good justification for it. The concept of time alignment of all drivers sounds like a great idea, but somehow speakers that are not perfectly aligned still sound as good as ones that are. Why is that? The reason is likely that the ear/brain uses a very narrow portion of the audio band, about 200-1500Hz to extract timing information. That is it. That is where all the timing information comes from. If you are aligned in that area, you have done what is needed. Even then what matters is both speakers are the same, not so much alignment. After that, frequency response and distortion dominate, and full range dynamic drivers will always have doppler distortion worse than multi-driver systems. It is unavoidable. They also tend to have higher distortion. It is a technical solution in search of a problem while creating other problems. |
rspyder89 posts04-26-2021 6:24pmI think the speaker is the last piece in the audio upgrade path for two reasons: No, just ... no. Give me a $150-$500 DAC with volume control, a $2-3,000 amplifier, $20,000 speakers (of my choice), and enough money to fix most of the acoustic issues in a room. I will put that against any $5,000 speakers, I don't care what electronics you connect it to, and that goes quadruple if you don't fix the acoustic issues. |
I've heard a couple of Feastrix driver systems. Volti showed a single driver system with a Feastrix driver at Capital Audiofest one year. It was a pretty decent sounding system. A friend of mine has a Feastrix field coil driver that he put into an Onken cabinet. This was also a nice sounding system. My friend also had the Feastrix power supply for the driver (solid state). We tried the power supply on a Western Electric 555 compression driver system to see how the power supply compared to a Tungar tube power supply; there was no comparison, the Tungar supply smoked the solid state supply. With these kinds of systems, everything matters, including the DC power supply for the driver. My personal favorite field coil driver is the Jensen/ERPI 13" M10 which must be used with a tweeter. This is a spectacularly good wide range driver. I particularly liked a system I heard with this driver in a open backed cabinet (i.e. open baffle) with the M10 run full range (no low-pass filter) and a tweeter crossed in around 8,000 Hz. Most of the full/wide range systems with field coil drivers that I've heard required periodic adjustment of the voltage fed to the driver (the M10 is an exception). By periodic, I mean during the listening session. To me, this is a bit too much work. |
- 353 posts total