Emotional Speakers

[FR DRew]

16 hours ago, Peterbean said:

Hi Andrew, it’s very interesting to follow your hi fi adventures!  
You are raising an eternal question. “ How good is the other “ 

I still have the 100mm HDA midrange speakers at work.  They still sound nice enough.  The Audiospheres still have the capacity to do quite special things (although some of the negative aspects of them (maximum volume capacity and bandwidth) are certainly obvious.  I still remember the Richard Allans that you had many years ago in Watson fondly as a quite special sounding fullrange driver and the Fostex horns that I had way back when pressurised a room with a palpable presence that I'd still love to be able to recreate.

I was quite a devotee that efficiency and speed were the way to go and things like Zu souls, Devores etc would still interest me if I had the budget and the time to play around.

The Martin Logans fill a space like no other speaker I've heard.  Not just when I'm in the room that they are playing, but spread to other adjacent rooms in the house.  At low volumes they are quite transfixing, but (as I think is the case with many small stats) as volume rises they get harsh quickly.

That brings me to the ATC SCM10's when driven by 140W of Krell.  Being a small cabinet and high damping, in theory they should be the opposite of what I'm chasing.  They respond amazingly to the large power amplifier giving scary dynamics and not feeling sluggish or slow at all.  Despite the low efficiency they feel tight and fast.

The other week I was in an adjacent room while Buena Vista Social Club was playing and they dynamics from the nearby room sounded closer to real than I've heard in many years...  In the room listening gives a remarkable window on the recording studio and what was being done.

Online legend is that Bill Woodman considered them one of his best speakers and I"m certainly delighted with them.

[statman]

1 hour ago, POV said:

 

Curious which digital amplifiers you've listened to for context?  Given there's a relatively small number on the market from a select few manufacturers.

 

 I recall an interview with Bruno where he was quite enthusiastic about the Border Patrol tube amps,  from recall (I might be wrong) he said it was best Class A amp he'd heard.  I dont recall if he said his D amps were better, maybe someone can find the interview. 

I cant help comparing class D to the way that transistor amps initially took over from tube amps- that was all about economics and the first transistor amps were horrible.   As were the first Class D amps I heard . What they are like now I dont know , but if that horrible output filter is still there.......... 

[POV]

14 minutes ago, statman said:

 

 I recall an interview with Bruno where he was quite enthusiastic about the Border Patrol tube amps,  from recall (I might be wrong) he said it was best Class A amp he'd heard.  I dont recall if he said his D amps were better, maybe someone can find the interview. 

I cant help comparing class D to the way that transistor amps initially took over from tube amps- that was all about economics and the first transistor amps were horrible.   As were the first Class D amps I heard . What they are like now I dont know , but if that horrible output filter is still there.......... 

 

OK but @FR DRew was talking about digital amps not Class D analogue amps wasn't he?

 

I'm very well on the record with my views on high performance Class D, I love it and find it to be the perfect amplification platform for modern systems deploying DSP.

Edited September 6, 2024 by POV

[Auracle]

2 hours ago, POV said:

 

OK but @FR DRew was talking about digital amps not Class D analogue amps wasn't he?

 

I'm very well on the record with my views on high performance Class D, I love it and find it to be the perfect amplification platform for modern systems deploying DSP.

Hey guys,

Didn't realise I was that far behind to the point of ignorance.

Can someone explain what a "Class D analogue amp" is?

I had always assumed that the terms Digital and Class D were interchangeable.

 

The article highlighted by the OP is very interesting. Some of the points have given me avenues to pursue in my Music Appreciation classes. Many Thanks.

[Cloth Ears]

3 hours ago, statman said:

 

 I recall an interview with Bruno where he was quite enthusiastic about the Border Patrol tube amps,  from recall (I might be wrong) he said it was best Class A amp he'd heard.  I dont recall if he said his D amps were better, maybe someone can find the interview. 

I cant help comparing class D to the way that transistor amps initially took over from tube amps- that was all about economics and the first transistor amps were horrible.   As were the first Class D amps I heard . What they are like now I dont know , but if that horrible output filter is still there.......... 

I don't know about that (the first transistor amps were horrible), but then the first transistor amps I heard were early Sansui, Pioneer and Marantz - they sounded pretty good playing  appropriate speakers (i.e. late 60's, early 70's). Mind you, I think they were all pretty mid-fi for that period - although admittedly I'm not sure what was considered hi-fi during that period.

Note that I didn't get introduced to these until 10-15 years afterwards - and they certainly were superior to a lot of the guff being presented in the early 80's!

[David A]

8 hours ago, Grizzly said:

 

"Little" may be relative!

 

I have a set of the Jade 20 and concur they work particularly well with tubes and class A amps for a real musical cuddle, but can also get the air guitar swinging when the mood is right.

 

Lol, I mean little for floorstanders. The Jade 20's definitely play big and scale up as I described. They have a perfect handshake with the Fez Titania integrated. And their 12" bass/midrange units provide a solid bass foundation. Definitely toe-tapping speakers as you eluded to!

 

Edited September 6, 2024 by David A

[David A]

8 hours ago, statman said:

Whatever gets you through the night is alright............

The key factor to lend musicality to actively driven speakers with active x-overs is Analogue signal processing (ASP), thereby ensuring the analogue signal is not converted back to digital via DSP which should be left to subs imho. But I can think of one member who will argue that point with me till the cows come home.

 

Edited September 6, 2024 by David A

[POV]

1 hour ago, Auracle said:

Hey guys,

Didn't realise I was that far behind to the point of ignorance.

Can someone explain what a "Class D analogue amp" is?

I had always assumed that the terms Digital and Class D were interchangeable.

 

No, a Class D amplifier is not the same as a digital amplifier, but they do seem to get confused, seemingly both due to the 'D' and the use of Pulse -width Modulation.

 

Class D is a type of analog amplifier that uses pulse-width modulation (or similar) to control the operation of output transistors. They work by rapidly switching the transistors on and off which create a high-efficiency amplification process. The output is then filtered to reconstruct the amplified analog audio signal. Class D is highly efficient compared to traditional linear amplifiers (like Class A or Class AB) because in Class Dtransistors spend most of their time in either fully on or fully off states, reducing energy loss as heat.

 

Digital Amplifiers amplifier that processes digital audio signals directly, without first converting them to analog. Digital amplifiers take a digital input signal (typically PCM) and convert it directly to a pulse or switching signal for amplification, eliminating some stages of signal conversion.  Note that while digital amplifiers avoid the requirement for pre amplifier digital to analog conversion, ultimately their ouput stage is a form of DAC as it requires an analogue waveform to be output via speaker cables to speakers.  The best examples of modern fully digital amplifiers are from Technics and Lyngdorf if you want to look at examples.

 

So the key similarity is that both use high-speed switching , the key difference is in how they handle input signals.  Class D amplifiers amplify analogue signals, while digital amplifiers amplify digital signals directly.

 

Note that the designation of Class D amplifiers is not because of their association with "digital" but rather the letter "D" was simply the next available designation in the alphabetical sequence when this type of amplifier was introduced.

[statman]

50 minutes ago, David A said:

The key factor to lend musicality to actively driven speakers with active x-overs is Analogue signal processing (ASP), thereby ensuring the analogue signal is not converted back to digital via DSP which should be left to subs imho. But I can think of one member who will argue that point with me till the cows come home.

 

Id be interested in an example of modern ASP.  Only analogue processing I'm familiar with is active crossovers, and they get very complex with opamps and CR filters.

I used to build 24dB tube crossovers,  but so many caps and resistors resulted in some smearing of the outputs. 

Agree that DSP is brilliant for sub bass, fixing room modes.

[David A]

2 hours ago, statman said:

Id be interested in an example of modern ASP.  Only analogue processing I'm familiar with is active crossovers, and they get very complex with opamps and CR filters.

I used to build 24dB tube crossovers,  but so many caps and resistors resulted in some smearing of the outputs. 

Agree that DSP is brilliant for sub bass, fixing room modes.

For a well executed electronic x-over with ASP you need parts with with tight tolerenences, incl: caps within 1-2% which are pricey. But when done right, they can be superior to passive x-overs in full range speakers.

[Auracle]

5 hours ago, POV said:

 

So the key similarity is that both use high-speed switching , the key difference is in how they handle input signals.  Class D amplifiers amplify analogue signals, while digital amplifiers amplify digital signals directly.

 

Thanks Drew.
This was the takeaway section I was looking for.
I won't hijack this thread with semantics, as it is an interesting topic.
I will just add an analogy if I may.

I recall a Star Trek (next Gen) episode where Data was playing the violin and asked for a critique. The reply was along the lines of "-you played that piece perfectly, but it lacked emotion." A perplexed Data then spent a considerable amount of time chasing the "emotional" aspect/context of human existence. This task was made more confusing when witnessing decisions that were illogical.

 

So, how well do we understand what technologies aid/diminish the "emotional" aspect of music reproduction? (some comments already have made interesting points)

 

And the scary part: Will AI ever get a better handle on it than we can?

 

Floor is yours.........

[statman]

3 hours ago, David A said:

For a well executed electronic x-over with ASP you need parts with with tight tolerenences, incl: caps within 1-2% which are pricey. But when done right, they can be superior to passive x-overs in full range speakers.

 

Have you seen how many caps are in an analogue crossover.  Yes you need tight tolerances for accurate response, but all those cap/filters make a real mess of the phase response, even if they do eventually add up to minimum phase .

I agree with you that active crossovers can be superior in getting the best performance out of each driver, but getting back to "emotion" the simpler passive cuts to the core  for releasing the music, imo. 

Again, I  agree that an active crossover gives superior objective sound quality, its just that the inferior objective sound quality of a good passive sounds more realistic to me. Even if I know it has many  faults , as did many of  the "magic" speakers i recall over the years.

Of course it comes down to how and what we listen for. 

Neither method is absolutely wrong or right.

This whole emotion thing is damn perplexing. 

Edited September 6, 2024 by statman

[David A]

57 minutes ago, statman said:

I agree with you that active crossovers can be superior in getting the best performance out of each driver, but getting back to "emotion" the simpler passive cuts to the core  for releasing the music, imo.

Well I guess i'll find out when I setup my new system and start doing some critical listening after the break in period .

[statman]

7 hours ago, David A said:

Well I guess i'll find out when I setup my new system and start doing some critical listening after the break in period .

 

Maybe "critical" listening is the crux of the biscuit, as Frank Zappa said.

Jeez ive done my share of critical listening and still do, but does that bring us what were chasing?

Can we replace emotion for realism ,  and is realism tied to accuracy? 

 

 

[TS23]

13 hours ago, statman said:

I agree with you that active crossovers can be superior in getting the best performance out of each driver, but getting back to "emotion" the simpler passive cuts to the core 

Often/mostly line level crossovers are active, however they can be passive where pre-amp and amp(s) are comfortable (or with buffers if necessary) so wondering if you have also found that passive line level also comes up short on emotion, when compared to passive (speaker level) crossovers? 

Cheers B 

[statman]

6 minutes ago, TS23 said:

Often/mostly line level crossovers are active, however they can be passive where pre-amp and amp(s) are comfortable (or with buffers if necessary) so wondering if you have also found that passive line level also comes up short on emotion, when compared to passive (speaker level) crossovers? 

Cheers B 

 

I built an open baffle speaker with Supravox field coil driver , Raal tweeter and 2x 15 inch bass drivers. It had a mixture of passive line level and passive speaker crossovers. I noticed more than one guy choke up when the violins and cellos started to sing.

 

[parrasaw]

6 hours ago, statman said:

I built an open baffle speaker with Supravox field coil driver , Raal tweeter and 2x 15 inch bass drivers. It had a mixture of passive line level and passive speaker crossovers. I noticed more than one guy choke up when the violins and cellos started to sing.

What a great combination of drivers.

That must have sounded amazing in combination with your amps etc.

I am surprised that you didn't have some requests for some "special orders"............. or perhaps you did? 

 

Edited September 7, 2024 by parrasaw

[David A]

9 hours ago, statman said:

 

Maybe "critical" listening is the crux of the biscuit, as Frank Zappa said.

Jeez ive done my share of critical listening and still do, but does that bring us what were chasing?

Can we replace emotion for realism ,  and is realism tied to accuracy? 

 

 

Ah, I guess i'll try to uncritically critically listen and see if that moves my emotions without being biased by the former antithetical criteria....if that makes sense.

[dcathro]

9 hours ago, statman said:

 

I built an open baffle speaker with Supravox field coil driver , Raal tweeter and 2x 15 inch bass drivers. It had a mixture of passive line level and passive speaker crossovers. I noticed more than one guy choke up when the violins and cellos started to sing.

 

 

Interesting, do you have some photos?

 

My home builds are partial open baffles - Supravox 215 exc OB mids, Seas T35 alnico tweets, and Wolf Von Langa 15" FC woofers in 130L ported boxes. Crossovers are passive 1st order and external.

 

[statman]

10 hours ago, dcathro said:

 

Interesting, do you have some photos?

 

My home builds are partial open baffles - Supravox 215 exc OB mids, Seas T35 alnico tweets, and Wolf Von Langa 15" FC woofers in 130L ported boxes. Crossovers are passive 1st order and external.

 

 

No sorry, it was a long time ago.   Yours sound very interesting,  bet they sound good.

[dcathro]

31 minutes ago, statman said:

 

No sorry, it was a long time ago.   Yours sound very interesting,  bet they sound good.

 

Your up early

 

Sounded like yours showed some promise. Did you sell them?

 

I think the Supravoxes are wonderful drivers. Unlike you, I have put xover filters on them to integrate them fully with the bass and tweets. I avoided capacitors on the high pass by using a shunt inductor and resistor ( like the Sonus Faber Sincap ). Quality of xover parts also really matter with these. The WVL woofers and the Seas tweets are also great drivers.

 

I started my project in 2009, but got sidetracked. Have been playing with them now for past 4 years and still finding ways to make small improvements.

 

I built mine to be my last speakers, but in recent years, I have heard some horn implementations that I also really like.

 

By the way some of my friends have your preamps, and I have enjoyed listening to great music through them.

 

Cheers

 

David

[statman]

1 hour ago, dcathro said:

 

Your up early

 

Sounded like yours showed some promise. Did you sell them?

 

I think the Supravoxes are wonderful drivers. Unlike you, I have put xover filters on them to integrate them fully with the bass and tweets. I avoided capacitors on the high pass by using a shunt inductor and resistor ( like the Sonus Faber Sincap ). Quality of xover parts also really matter with these. The WVL woofers and the Seas tweets are also great drivers.

 

I started my project in 2009, but got sidetracked. Have been playing with them now for past 4 years and still finding ways to make small improvements.

 

I built mine to be my last speakers, but in recent years, I have heard some horn implementations that I also really like.

 

By the way some of my friends have your preamps, and I have enjoyed listening to great music through them.

 

Cheers

 

David

 

Yeah I also mostly listen to horn implementations these days , life's too short for compromises in realism.  Supravoxes great example of driver not being so accurate, but sounding very pleasing.  Always wondered what one would sound like in one of Martin's Azura horns. Probably even worse  response, but could be quite magical.

 

 

[THOMO]

I think some drivers just have a nice tone.Just like some musical instruments have a nice tone .This is probably purely accidental .Or rather where a combination of electrical ,mechanical and materials come together to produce more than the sum of their parts.This mostly seems to be associated with vintage style drivers but I am sure there would be modern ones that achieve that sort of sound too.It would be good to identify those that have those qualities.Before some team of engineers apply complex crossovers and equalisation to them to get them measuring "perfectly' and  kill off their natural charms!

If you witness musicians selecting amps/speakers or instruments it is all about tone and timbre.They could not care less how the things measure.

[dcathro]

5 hours ago, THOMO said:

I think some drivers just have a nice tone.Just like some musical instruments have a nice tone .This is probably purely accidental .Or rather where a combination of electrical ,mechanical and materials come together to produce more than the sum of their parts.This mostly seems to be associated with vintage style drivers but I am sure there would be modern ones that achieve that sort of sound too.It would be good to identify those that have those qualities.Before some team of engineers apply complex crossovers and equalisation to them to get them measuring "perfectly' and  kill off their natural charms!

If you witness musicians selecting amps/speakers or instruments it is all about tone and timbre.They could not care less how the things measure.

 

Old school drivers were built for sound, often with craft paper formers and fragile voice coils. They were high efficiency but could not handle power. I have a pair of "modern" 2 ways that used the last low powered musical driver built by Seas - the CA17RCY. This is a really nice sounding driver ( 90db eff ) but cannot be played loud or you burn out the voice coil. Thorsten Loesch wrote a blog on this driver as it was used in the first 3 series of Wilson WATTs - later ones had heavier more robust cones and lost the magic. Modern mainstream drivers are made for power handling with heavier gauge voice coils and stronger heat resistant glues. They don't do micro dynamics.  Of course there are specialty manufacturers who still make things in the old way but you won't find them in a Wilson, Rockport, Magico, etc.

[HamishC]

Great discussion. The search never stops; it only pauses - I guess until we hear something that moves us enough to fork out the cash on the next iteration.

I've only recently upgraded my system with new Sonus Faber speakers, Chord cables, and sources (Rotel CD player and a WiiM streamer) and I'm still thinking about the next system update. I know what speakers I'd love if I could afford it (Audiovector R3 Arrete with some serious power amps), but that might never happen.

But a lovely thing happened the other day - a friend I haven't seen in years came over, and we started talking about music and movies, so I put on an orchestral piece I had that he said he recalled from his childhood. I cranked it up, and all of a sudden, he was crying uncontrollably. It caught me off guard. I was about to stop the music, but he reassured me that it was tears of joy and love. He said he'd never heard the power and detail of that music like that before.

I've never had music I've played for friends do that. It made me very proud and happy that my system could impart such an emotional response. My system has already given me many emotional moments that had me freeze and marvel at the richness of music I thought I knew. I hope that'll keep happening until such time I encounter another system (or component) that raises the bar again - and empties the wallet!