|
Grex > Oldmusic > #96: Home Theatre System: speaker sensitivity question |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 47 responses total. |
jmsaul
|
|
response 10 of 47:
| 
May 6 13:35 UTC 2002 |
Oops, that was meant to be "Kennewick." ;-)
|
keesan
|
|
response 11 of 47:
|
May 6 20:48 UTC 2002 |
I am happy with the stuff we find at rummage sales and the curb, that often
only needs the switches cleaned. Receiver, tape deck, speakers at the curb.
$5 receiver at a church sale. Big speakers are now cheap because there are
good small ones. Put your own ad in the paper for old stereo equipment.
|
tpryan
|
|
response 12 of 47:
|
May 7 01:57 UTC 2002 |
I saw some 12 inch speakers at the Re-use center that have
lost there speaker surronds.
My recently repaired speakers sound great. No more bass
farts, and good to hear good tweeters again.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 13 of 47:
|
May 7 09:06 UTC 2002 |
resp:9 How the hell did you hear of Kennewick or Quicksilver? It's a
fairly long-time staple of my hometown (yeah, I used to live there).
Kennesick. Hehehehe
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 14 of 47:
|
May 7 10:48 UTC 2002 |
I did a web search. ;-)
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 15 of 47:
|
May 8 04:02 UTC 2002 |
Well, I also know there are other places, but yes, that's a biggie.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 16 of 47:
|
May 8 14:28 UTC 2002 |
Try there, then. The key with this stuff is to actually listen to the
equipment, and ignore the hype. Don't rely on original price as an indicator
of quality, either; there's a lot of bullshit, especially toward the higher
end of the audio market. If you can, try to listen to multiple items of the
same type with the same music.
|
gull
|
|
response 17 of 47:
|
May 8 15:40 UTC 2002 |
Also, a buck spent on better speakers is worth ten spent on anything
else.
Don't let anyone sucker you into paying for really expensive speaker
wire or interconnects. In the case of interconnects, as long as
they're well shielded and have good connectors, you're fine. In the
case of speaker wire, the only thing that really matters is that the
wire gauge is correct. (i.e., large enough that you don't loose
excessive amounts of power.) There have been double-blind tests that
showed audiophiles couldn't hear the difference between super-expensive
exotic speaker cable and ordinary zipcord from the hardware store, and
there's no physics that says they should be able to.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 18 of 47:
|
May 8 21:30 UTC 2002 |
I agree with gull on wire and interconnects, but if your speakers are much
better than the rest of your equipment they'll just make its flaws more
obvious.
|
scott
|
|
response 19 of 47:
|
May 8 23:10 UTC 2002 |
I don't agree with the "speakers are too good for the other components"
argument. I suppose shitty speakers would sound better somehow? ;) Buy good
speakers, and if you then don't like your whatever else you can buy a better
one next year.
(Caveat: It's possible that the really good speakers are less efficient than
the OK ones, and therefore need more power which the amp may not have. I'd
buy that argument.)
Yeah, don't spend any real money on interconnects. Buy the basic cables at
Radio Shack (cheaper than Meijer, last I looked), and use lamp cord or
whatever for the speakers. I used to read rec.audio.high-end years ago, and
some people were claiming that *thinner* speaker cables sounded better! Some
people also swore by Romex, that AC stuff in the walls of your house.
|
other
|
|
response 20 of 47:
|
May 9 00:24 UTC 2002 |
Probably well shielded cables are better than non, unless you're sending
a balanced signal to the speakers. Of course, if you're sending a
balanced signal, then interference is irrelevant, so any cable will be
fine so long as it isn't small enough for its own resistance to become a
problem, but you'd still need a speaker with the capability to receive
and interpret a balanced signal.
|
keesan
|
|
response 21 of 47:
|
May 9 01:06 UTC 2002 |
You can get speakers cheaper if you are not trying to play things very large
or very bassy. Or get good headphones. I find the antenna is the most
important thing when listening to radio.
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 22 of 47:
|
May 9 02:39 UTC 2002 |
Re #19: I've experienced the "speakers too good for the other stuff"
thing myself, when I hooked a pair of Linn Nexus up to a
mid-range Denon receiver (the source was an NAD CD player, which
was fine). The Denon was designed to work with lower-quality
speakers that emphasized the low end more, and everything
sounded... ethereal through the Linns. A better amp fixed the
problem -- but I hadn't noticed the problem with my Polks.
There are basically two strategies for buying audio over time:
improve speakers first, and improve source first. I guess it
depends on what you want, but I'm for the second one provided
the other stuff in the chain is at least competent.
|
gull
|
|
response 23 of 47:
|
May 9 14:39 UTC 2002 |
Re #20: Usually interference isn't an issue with speaker wires because the
signal levels are so high. The exception is when the speaker wire acts like
an antenna, and picks up a nearby amateur radio operator or AM station. If
you do decide to use shielded speaker wire, follow good grounding practices
-- ground the shield at one end, and only one end. Ideally you want your
system grounded in a "star" pattern -- all the ground connections should
come back to a single point. That can be hard to achieve, though. I have a
problem with mine because the computer is grounded through its plug, and the
VCR is grounded through its cable line, and both are connected to the same
amp.
#22 sounds like an equalization problem -- the Denon amp must have had
excessive low-end roll-off. I don't have any equipment a serious audiophile
wouldn't turn up their nose at, though, so the amount of advice I can give
is fairly limited. I will say that NAD will forever have a special place in
my heart for running a campaign with the slogan "Go NAD!" ;)
|
krj
|
|
response 24 of 47:
|
May 9 22:27 UTC 2002 |
My feeling is that the advent of CD players largely demonstrated the
correctness of the Linn approach of improving the source of the music
before anything else in the chain. ( 1/2 :) ) (Joe Saul knows
this, but for everyone else: Linn makes very high-end turntables,
I've heard them sound very nice in the store but I was never willing
to spend that sort of money on components.)
Low-priced CD boom boxes now sound better than most home component
systems based on turntables did, in the LP era.
Of course right now most of my listening takes place in either two
forms: (1) 44K Real Audio streams, or (2) in a car with crummy
door seals moving at 70 MPH... and sometimes both...
|
other
|
|
response 25 of 47:
|
May 9 23:27 UTC 2002 |
Funny we should be having this conversation now. Today I was trying to
fix a noise problem with a some powered computer speakers and concluded
that the office they were in was just flooded with RF noise. The little
stereo mini cord by means of which the computer audio was fed to the
speakers was acting like an antenna and doing it waaay too well. I
unplugged the cord from the computer and held it up and you could clearly
hear at least a couple of radio stations playing through the speakers. I
told the person whose office it was to try wrapping the cord in aluminum
foil. Or wallpapering in it...
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 26 of 47:
|
May 10 04:00 UTC 2002 |
Re #23: It's possible. I'm a knowledgeable consumer of audio, but I'm not
a technical expert. However... if you believe that the job of the
pre-amp, amp, and speakers is to accurately reproduce your source,
it makes sense to upgrade the source first.
Re #24: Linn also makes very high-end CD players. Yes, you can hear the
difference (no, I don't know why, but I've a/b'd them, and you
can).
|
scott
|
|
response 27 of 47:
|
May 10 12:41 UTC 2002 |
It's relatively easy and cheap to make a good amplifier instead of a cheesy
one. Transducers are much tougher, so speakers are usually the weakest link.
Back before CDs it was speakers and turntables. Now it's pretty much just
speakers, although there's plenty of arguments going around about CD players.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 28 of 47:
|
May 10 13:44 UTC 2002 |
resp:26 how much money we talking about for these Linn CD players?
resp:27 well, how do you do that? Most A/V receivers aren't modular.
|
jaklumen
|
|
response 29 of 47:
|
May 10 13:45 UTC 2002 |
whoops-- btw, scott or krj-- could you link this to the music conf,
please?
|
gull
|
|
response 30 of 47:
|
May 10 13:54 UTC 2002 |
Re #25: The best trick is to wrap the cord around a ferrite rod or through a
ferrite toroid, near the end the amplifier is on. Sometimes an iron nail or
a big steel washer works, too. The idea is to create a choke coil that will
have a high impedance to RF, but will let audio pass unaffected.
Re #26: I'm a little suspicious of informal A/B tests, because they're so
susceptible to the placebo effect unless they're done "blind". (People tend
to expect the more expensive equipment to sound better, and they hear what
they want to hear.) There are also a lot of subtle tricks...like if one
player's output level is slightly higher, it will sound 'clearer' in an A/B
test.
Re #28: My understanding is that audiophiles turn up their nose at A/V
receivers in general. They aren't big fans of any of the Dolby surround
sound systems.
|
scott
|
|
response 31 of 47:
|
May 10 15:25 UTC 2002 |
OK, I'll link this to the Music conf. Good idea!
|
jmsaul
|
|
response 32 of 47:
|
May 10 16:42 UTC 2002 |
Re #27: That's true, and it makes sense to upgrade the weakest link in
your chain. I was assuming all elements were of equal quality,
but if not then upgrade the worst one first.
Re #28: (Price of Linn CD players) I think they have models that retail
for ~$1300, ~$2200, and ~$10000 (not a typo).
(Separating amp and pre-amp) He wasn't suggesting that you build
your own amp stage for an existing receiver, he was just saying
that at a given price point / level of quality the amp is likely
to be empirically better than the speakers, because it's cheaper
to do amps right.
Re #30: (Informal a/b tests) I'm suspicious of them for the same
reasons. I had a friend switch the equipment out, I couldn't see
which one was running, and I know he didn't mess with the volume,
but it's always possible that other factors (e.g. output level)
confused the issue. On the other hand, how else do you decide
which you like better? There really isn't an objective measure.
|
bdh3
|
|
response 33 of 47:
|
May 11 05:07 UTC 2002 |
What parts of your body do you use to listen to your stereo?
(got a tin ear? then buy shitty speakers)
Thus the speakers are the most important. The problem is
good speakers will make a shitty system sound even more
shitty than shitty speakers will. (is simple physics)
Second is the 'input'. A shitty media player will obviously
render the best speakers mute point. GIGO, and the best
speakers will obviously only more accurately reflect the G.
Thirdly is the 'middle ware'. This is the last place that
you should concentrate on. (Unless you are listening to
(c)rap in what case obviously it is the first place U should
spend yer $ - GIGO again).
|
keesan
|
|
response 34 of 47:
|
May 11 12:37 UTC 2002 |
Without a good antenna I cannot even receive the three radio stations that
I listen to, no matter how good the speakers.
Toroid - magnet from a hard drive or a speaker?
|