Lord Helmet

Can someone shed some light on this?
https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...56#post4826056
(start on post #41)

Which is correct? Will speaker spikes isolate the sound to the floor or will it make it worse?

SiGGy

It will isolate it, bass and midrage frequencys will not resonate easily through the spikes. Way better than if you had the entire speaker bottom on the floor/carpeting.

There is even magnetic stands that will levitate your speakers to keep them off the floor if your a total sound nut. Some stuidos hang the speakers from the ceiling using wire to achieve the same results.

iTimmy

Spikes typically improve the sound of speakers, there are some exceptions depending on speaker design and flooring but as a rule for conventional speakers its a good idea.

I've been in the high end circle of audio for longer then I can remember and the magnetic stands are NOT for speakers, and no self respecting audiophile would even think of hanging speakers from the ceiling like a studio does. There is a lot of controversy over isolation vs. coupling on components and which is better, cones are coupling NOT isolation. Isolating a speaker from the floor is a bad idea, for sonics - that's the one thing most all audiophile's will agree on.

SiGGy

Your 24. Do you smoke a lot of pot so that you can't remember that far back?

I've personally owned and setup a recording studio
Done work in a few major studios (CRC, Chicago tracks)
Helped with testing of high end near field monitors with the guys who made them
Spent countless hours on a TEF analyzer doing studies on MANY speakers $4k+ to comapre
created custom speakers myself
Setup and analyzed MANY venues in the Chicagoland area

Whats your background? or can't you remember that either.

Do you even know what a TEF analyzer is?

I'm not dissing you, but comming in and saying the things you are I hope you have more than hot air to run on.


That's incorrect. Floors 1st off create a time delay reflection which sucks if your sitting at a far, then they can create a resonance which will screw your low frequency response creating peaks and such you would not want. (if your a purist)

Most rooms are either designed for acoustics or they have sound proofing/non reflective materials to make up for it. (in an audiophile room)

No studio has their near field monitors on the floor, they are raised to ear level usually isolated from whatever they are mounted too. Most near field monitors are designed to playback the music within +/- 1-2db 200-20k hz. Using the floor as a coupler that's not going to happen.

Not to mention, the odds of people having the same type flooring/carpeting is pretty bad. So it's not like most good speaker designers even take this into account when they design. They usually test their speakers isolated in a sound proof room. (if were talking audiophile speakers...)

An "audiophile" may like the way the coupling to the floor sounds, but that's a perference not a standard between all listeners. And I personally don't know one person who thinks using the floor is a good thing. I know people with systems upwards of $250k.

Most "audiophiles" are about simpilicy and non interference, the purity of the recording and playback! I.E. From a purist point of view. Having the floor produce a resonance goes 100% against being pure, your speakers should already be capable of producing a flat 20-20k sweep.

lol, because studios have no clue what they are doing...

And you say this because you have experience testing speakers hanging with a TEF (time enegery frequency) analyzer? or even just testing speakers with a TEF?

Reality is a lot of speakers need the walls and floor to sound good. Good designs however do not. Hence "near field monitors" ; the floor/walls shouldn't even be an issue. You should be sitting within 3'-5' of the speakers with no chance of a reflection before you ear.

iTimmy

I've been in high end audio for 10+ years and my family has been into it for my whole life, in addition to being a classical trained musician - I have taken lesson's for over 10 years. I was one of the original members at the discussion forums at www.audiogon.com - my moniker over there is Tireguy as well. I've owned a system worth over $75k, I have over 6 good friends who have systems valued at over $250k and have listened to them all in great lengths. I personally have 2500+ CD/SACD/DVDa's and listen to recorded music 3+ hours a day. And I have never smoked as much as a cigarette let alone anything else.


Your a studio guy, HUGE difference from high end audio, I've dealt with plenty of people like you who are all about specs and measurements. Bottom line is that your trying to accomplish a different task in the home then you are in the studio. Most all studio's are comprimised to cater to the average american consumer and produce absolutely horribly engineered recordings.

So tell me about the systems you know valued at over $250k and who they are, I am sure I know who they are, and chances are high that I have listened to their system - I am curious.

My friends in this realm don't rely on RTA's to tune there system, they trust their ears, often what sounds good or rather looks good on the machine won't sound good or like the original performance. The tools can help get you close, but when your tuning a system for a human, there is no better device to do that then a human.

I trust my experience in audio more then any machine, I have listened to hundred's of systems in various rooms, and I have played and heard so much live music my reference of what I am trying to achieve with a system is clear.

Try selling crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here.

iTimmy

That's the only statement you made that I agree with.

SiGGy

Sorry, I was kidding about the marijuana.


I'm actually a record man, records sound better than CDs (if you can find a direct to record recording that's in good shape). And play it back on a nice tube pre-amp and tube amp with a set of electrostatic headphones.

Your not one of those nuts who thinks the monster cable actually sounds better are you? Reality is if the analyzing equipment can't pickup a difference, there's no way in HELL your ear can. The equipment I've used to test cables with is 5x-10x more sensitve than a ear.

Your ways off on near field speakers. They are a purists speaker. They are designed to reproduce sound near flat +/-1 or 2 dB from 200-20k. Thats audiophile speakers. Martin Logan electrostatic stacks with no center focus and some bad peaks, thats just warm soft fuzzzy enjoyment. Not a purists system.
I have done a lot of work with speakers of this type (near field).

Getting a good ear takes MANY MANY MANY years of experience. And you'd only get it in a studio type environment that is controlled.

I can introduce you to guys who work in CRC. They can sit and listen to your system and tell you where your peaks are. They can say your +4db at 13k -6db at 8k. I'd love to see an one of your associates be able to do that just listening to a piece with that type of accuracy. It takes 20+ years of experience to be able to do that with *that* kind of precision. You don't get an ear like that unless you work in the industry. Sure some people can tell if one instrument is too high, but that's not the same thing as being able to do a full sweep.

And todays recordings, like Dave M/ are fantastic, they are not compressed and EQ'd to be played on all around cheap systems. That's the 1980s... A lot has changed in the past 10 years in the recording studios. Not to mention all of the new super bit (DVD) discs with 96k sampling rates.

Now, I totally agree that most studio *mains* are very generic sounding. But good high end studios and newer sound engineers listen back on good near field monitors. A lot of old school *stubborn* engineers playback on shitty Yamaha NS-10's and other I could mention. Why? Because that's what they are use too. However newer guys and audio purists mostly listen on Genelecs and such for playback.

Most of my friends "high" end system above $150k are all electrostatic setups. Either Martin Logan, with all tube amps, tube preamps, record players in sand. Granted they sound nice, they dont have a good sound stage, and they don't get very loud...

In the end it all comes down to perference with sound systems... I like the sound of the huge stacks, but I perfer the sound of a pair of electrostatic headphones with a good tube D/A converter and Tube preamp/amp if I'm going to go that direction.

But for sound staging/reproduction/loudness there's no beating a good set of near field monitors IMO. You hear exactly what the engineer intended and how he mixed it. No color, no distortion... (on a good set of near field monitors)

I also *hate* metal tweeters, tin, titanium, copper, diamond coated... I've listended to them all for many many many extended hours. They all have BIG peaks thay have to be dealt with in the crossover or EQ. All of those materials have a natural resonance in human hearing range. Lots of "high end" speakers use them. Silk has a much smoother transition and doesn't require mass ammounts of attenuation in the crossover or the EQ.

Once thing does remain, and it's how good the speaker can reproduce the sound thats comming from the source without adding color to it. (assuming your components didn't do that prior anyway) I'd rather listen to it as it was recorded and meant to be heard, todays recordings at 96k are fantasic ;about equal to older analog recordings that have been held to as superior for all of these years.

once again, in the end it's all preference. Some people like plastic tweeks (yuck), some like bass +20dB from the rest of their music. But I had to step in and correct the speaker hanging, and the complete isolation. They don't have a bad effect on sound reproduction, they might have bad effect on a specific speaker. They are good in practice depending on the application.

RTA is not the same as a TEF BTW. This tells me you don't know where I'm comming from ...

TEF is time energy frequnecy, I can tell you how much of a time delay there is between your woofer, tweeter and midrage down to the microsecond when it hits your ear. And yes, your ear can hear that. You want all of yoour drivers in time alignment with one another. Good speaker manufacturers align all of the coils up properly to get rid of these delays. I can tell you what the phase is comming in from the tweet vs. your midrage/woofers in your lisenting sweetspot. I can tell you where your reflections are in the room and how it is acoustically effecting (canceling) the direct sound from your speakers. From the time delays I can determine what is causing the reflections (sound multipath) and how far they are from the speaker drivers. I can tell you how long it takes your woofer/tweeter/midrage to react (driver delay). Hell I can tell you if your woofer is using a metal basket and if it's outputting a resonance thats contributing to the output on your speaker...

All of those variables play a big part as to what you hear. I'm just barely touching on what can be done... TEF analyzer does a LOT more than you imagined, I've already typed up a small book here so I won't go on.

As I was saying TEF is a LOT more than a RTA... it's full speaker diagnostics/build quality, room diagnostics, and amp/preamp diagnostics.

And really without a unit like this to measure you dont have a baseline to go from besides preference. Which totally changes between everyone...

SiGGy

I'd say that's more than likely you. You sound like one of the nuts that claims they can hear the difference between a $50 RCA cable and a $500 cable.

iTimmy

Yup I am

There is not a cable in my system(including power cords) that costs under $500 and I did extensive down grading last year! Last year the interconnect I was using was $6400 for a 4 foot pair(XLR)

Always Dirty

You're coming across as a giant douchebag with all these $ amounts.

iTimmy

I am not a sound engineer, I trust me ears, though the TEF sounds interesting!

Believe it or not, we are on the same page in many respects, a good analog rig will outperform any digital(including my old Emm labs DCC2/CDSD combo, being into studio gear I am sure you've heard of emm labs, I am good personal friends with the VP of North America and was involved with the development of there home audio lineup the first time they entered the market). However, at the age I am I was a child of the digital era, I grew up with vinyl but the ticks and pops drive me out of my mind! Even on a Rockport Sirius 3 with a dynavector cartridge and a brand new record there will be surface noise and light pops audible from the listening position. That said there is a certain palpability and three dimensionality that digital just can not do - but digital is easy and convenient and getting better and better. One of my friends(who has what many people feel is the best system in the country here's a link to his system http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr...9020&read&3&4& , I am curious what your thoughts will be on it) I feeled explained digital vs. analog the best I've ever heard it, analog is much like looking through a window watching a baseball game but the window is dusty, the higher you go the less dust you see and the clearer it becomes but the dust is still there. As where digital its as if your watching the same baseball game through a window, this time its perfectly clear, but the window is cracked, the higher end you go the fewer cracks you see, but they are still there.

I completely agree with you about metal tweeters, I had a set of Avalon Acoustics that I was NEVER happy with(my first high end speaker) they had a metal dome tweeter that I just couldn't tame. I have since switched to planer magnetic/ribbon speakers and more recently switched to a conventional dynamic speaker with a horn loaded silk dome and could not be happier. The only exception, from my experience in regards to the metal tweeter is with ribbon's, ribbon tweeter's are the best, however, there are no drivers available to compliment today in terms of speed. Do you have any experience with the new plasma tweeter's used by companies like Acapella? I don't know if its the tweeter that makes those speakers sing the way they do, but they are one of the ONLY speakers I would think of upgrading to, the problem is the cost, the cheapest model that is decent is $35k+ the top of the line is $350k!

Electrostat's are ok, I really like the big sound-labs, but they are so unreliable I was too affraid to try them myself. They are also HUGE, the make the statement e2's from martin logan look small. They are so natural and realistic in the midrange, and cohesive on a whole new level(at least the soundlabs because its a single driver), and are getting better and better up top and down low, but they still suffer from a lack of dynamics.

I've listened to more moitors then I can name, and they all have the same problem, while they image and stage very well and some of the real good ones are capable of creating an accurate venue, they always sound small, a bosendorfer concert grand piano sounds like its at best 2 feet long. Since I am a huge piano nut, that's a problem for me.

I am also a tube head, my current system is all tubes - I don't think I could go back to SS, its just lifeless in comparison.

In closing, I can only agree with your statement about it being about personal prefference and doing what you feel is best to accomplish what your trying to get from a system. A lot of audiophiles have system's they are very proud of, yet I wouldn't be happy listening to them.

iTimmy

Its not my intention to do that, the "cables don't make a difference" debate is never ending on the audio forums and I forget people outside of the craziness of being an audiophile wouldn't understand that the amounts I've spent on cabling is considered bare bones by high end standards.

Your point has been taken, I will reduce the amount of douchebaggery in my audio related posts.

Always Dirty

Some people might resent that you're using interconnects that costs more than 6 months' rent. But I digress.

Ron Burgundy

I would like to see pics of a $ 100k ++++ system please, much less a $ 250k system


Or do you like being ripped off?

Ron Burgundy

p.s. not from the internet, pics of your system

SpeedyV6

$75K? WTF!

iTimmy

Click the link in post #11, Mike has well over $200k into the room design/construction alone then start looking at his equipment, click on the specefic components and it will give a brief description and list a price, be prepared to fall out of chair.

I would never spend that kind of money on a system, and by the time I am Mike's age I will be in a better financial situation then he is, to me its just not worth it. Though to him, he couldn't think of a better way to spend money.

iTimmy

click the link in my signature the other hobby, that links you to my system

fuzzy02CLS

iTrader: (2)

So back on topic please???

Yes or no on Spikes?

I have big ass speakers. The 15" woofer sits almost to the floor. The speaker sits on my carpet. Would spikes help lesson the bass resonating through the floor & walls?

Lord Helmet

Mine are pretty big too except they are 12's.

iTimmy

There is no real answer, it depends on the speaker design and what the floor is made of. Besides its going to do nothing to help reduce air born resonance, which from a pair of 15" woofers is going to be substantial.

Try them, they are cheap enough and can vastly improve the sound.

SiGGy

I like the analog vs digital analogy. It's really true.

No, I have NO experience with that type of tweeter technology. Sounds interesting, I'll have to read about it.

lol, ya we are both a lot more a like than I thought. I see you gathered I'm a huge tube head as well

I absolutely love my Stax electrostatic headphones on my tube amp/preamp. And I run a newer model ALTIS tube D/A on it. Sounds amazing. All warm and not so fuzzy

have you listened to vinyl on a laser-turntable?