d87parfo@odalix.ida.liu.se (Par Fornland) (03/18/91)
My first encounter with good imaging was about a year ago in a
shop. The dealer was trying to sell me a dmp sampler-CD with
excellent sound. He put the CD in the player and pressed play. He
said nothing about what components he used. The solo guitar came
from somewhere 1.7m up on the wall. Incidently he had tiny cheap
speakers on a shelf, about 1.7m up on the wall, so I thought:
"That's a clean sound from those little speakers!" After some time
when the dealer was discussing the my friend, I went closer to hear
exactly which speakers he used, of the ones on the shelf. When I
got really close, I discovered, the sound wasn't coming from the
shelf, it came from some strange looking _things_ standing on the
floor. "WOW! WHAT'S THAT!?!?" - Martin Logan Seq. II it turned
out to be.
A remarkable experience, had never heard of such a thing ever!
Sound coming from above the speakers!!! Well, let's move on to my
question:
I have read several news now about imaging, and have become
somewhat irritated on my own system, which refuses to sound outside
the speakers. The image between the speakers are (IMO) very good,
but have you ever heard a 2.5m wide symphony orchestra? Ofcourse
I can imagine I'm sitting far back in the hall, but it still doesn't
seem right. I have put curtains on the whole wall the speakers
are standing at, and on my right wall. On the opposite wall there
are windows, and behind me I have a bookshelf. There are wool
carpets on the floor. I have thereby reduced most of the reflections
in my quite small student's room.
My speakers are the new Dahlquist DQ8 (excellent imaging according
to some US-mag. review). I have a Technics SU-V450 amplifier (well
worth its price according to a swedish mag.), and an old, cheap
and probably relatively lousy CD-player, Technics SL-P111. The
cables are _really_ cheap.
How can I improve the imaging, what component makes the most
improvement of the image? I intend the keep the speakers. Perhaps
it is impossible [:-(] to make to sound wider with these speakers,
even with highest-end components? In that case I'll just have to
live with it...
My guess about what makes the greatest diff. is as follows: 1.
speakers 2. amp. 3. cables between amp. and speakers 4. cables
between CD-player and amp. 5. CD-player but I'm not at all very
experienced, so it's only a guess.
Would someone please help me out? I think the question is of general
interest!
-- !!!!!!!!! Sound's good, HiFi's better but Music is the ultimate!
But I think John Cage would disagree! ("Sound's all", he'd say...)
!!!!!!!!! Par Fornland, Linkoping Institute of Technology, Sweden
Bjornkarrsgatan 10c:10, 582 51 Linkoping, Sweden Tel. (Sweden)-013-260486
d87parfo@odalix.ida.liu.se !!!!!!!!!keith@uunet.UU.NET (Keith McIntyre) (03/20/91)
In article <10308@uwm.edu>, d87parfo@odalix.ida.liu.se (Par Fornland) writes: > When I > got really close, I discovered, the sound wasn't coming from the > shelf, it came from some strange looking _things_ standing on the > floor. "WOW! WHAT'S THAT!?!?" - Martin Logan Seq. II it turned > out to be. > A remarkable experience, had never heard of such a thing ever! > Sound coming from above the speakers!!! Well, let's move on to my > question: > > How can I improve the imaging, what component makes the most > improvement of the image? I intend the keep the speakers. Perhaps > it is impossible [:-(] to make to sound wider with these speakers, > even with highest-end components? In that case I'll just have to > live with it... > > My guess about what makes the greatest diff. is as follows: 1. > speakers 2. amp. 3. cables between amp. and speakers 4. cables > between CD-player and amp. 5. CD-player but I'm not at all very > experienced, so it's only a guess. > > Would someone please help me out? I think the question is of general > interest! In several other postings I have put on the net I have mentioned the imaging/soundstage that I get with my system. It consists of a 6.5 year old Sony CD player (CDP-111), Quicksilver interconnects, Threshold s/300 amplifier, MIT Zap Chord speaker wire and the Martin Logan Sequel IIs that you listened to. This is a "modest" high end system that performs beyond my wildest imagination in terms of soundstage and imaging. Prior to my purchase of the Sequels, I had an older pair of Magneplanar Tympanis - everything else was the same. As a result of my experience, I would say the speakers are the biggest factor. My Threshold amp is next in importance. It requires a minimum of 12 hours warm up to get the wide, deep, and high soundstage I hear all the time. My CD player is very modest - equivalent to the Sony X33ES CD player of today. The best soundstage I hear is 20 feet high, 50 feet deep and about 70 feet wide. My speakers are 9 feet apart in a room that is 15 by 18 feet. This is not an exaggeration - this is what is clearly audible by everyone who has listened to my system. Not every recording has this soundstage, there are severe limitations in the reproduction chain that are put in place before that CD goes into my player. In my opinion, the Sequel IIs are the most underrated speakers on the market. Hardly anyone is aware of their capabilities - even the people who sell them. Soundstage imaging this good adds an incredible amount of enjoyment to music. -Keith McIntyre
billt@chips.com (Bill Tuohy) (03/21/91)
In article <10308@uwm.edu> d87parfo@odalix.ida.liu.se (Par Fornland) writes: > > My first encounter with good imaging was about a year ago in a >shop. The dealer was trying to sell me a dmp sampler-CD with >excellent sound. He put the CD in the player and pressed play. He >said nothing about what components he used. The solo guitar came >from somewhere 1.7m up on the wall. {stuff deleted} > A remarkable experience, had never heard of such a thing ever! >Sound coming from above the speakers!!! Well, let's move on to my >question: > ... > How can I improve the imaging, what component makes the most >improvement of the image? I intend the keep the speakers. Perhaps >it is impossible [:-(] to make to sound wider with these speakers, >even with highest-end components? In that case I'll just have to >live with it... > >My guess about what makes the greatest diff. is as follows: 1. >speakers 2. amp. 3. cables between amp. and speakers 4. cables >between CD-player and amp. 5. CD-player but I'm not at all very >experienced, so it's only a guess. > A few comments... Cables should probably be last on your list, unless they are worn out or frayed, or if the speaker wire is extremely thin ( > 18 guage, maybe) The order of amp/speaker/source importance is debatable, I'd give them probably equal weighting. If you have a good amp and speakers, you can probably tolerate a cheap CD player, but maybe not for long :) There seems to be one important element you haven't mentioned: Speaker placement. You mention having them on a wall. They should probably be out a couple feet from any walls, and a couple feet off the floor. Try to make the dimensions from the two near walls and the floor all be different, to minimize standing waves from reflections. Also try closing curtains over any windows in the room. Place the left and right speakers symmetrically, that is the left speaker is the same distance from the left wall as the right from the right wall, same distance from the rear wall, etc. Then sit at the tip of an iscocoles (sp?) triangle, meaning if the speakers are 6 feet apart, then try to place your listening seat about 8-10 feet from the speakers. These dimensions are all approximate, you'll have to experiment. Also experiment with the toe-in of the speakers, range it all the way from having the front of the speakers parallel to the back wall, to angled in so that your ears are on a direct line with the drivers, and see what seems best to you. With proper placement, good room acoustics, and decent equipment you should be able to a decent sound stage, extending beyond and above, as well as behind the speakers. If you still only hear a narrow stage in the center, then you probably need better equipment. I think cables tend to affect low frequency response most but maybe not. I believe the "imaging" information is mostly in the highs, if there is such a thing. The CD player probably would be the place to start, from what you said about the relative quality of your equipment. Give it some time, it takes a while to get used to the sound of a new arrangement to recognize what the effects on imaging are. Be patient, take it slow, listen a LOT, and try not to make hasty decisions about spending lots of money on new stuff. Good luck! > >!!!!!!!!! Par Fornland, Linkoping Institute of Technology, Sweden Bill
tmajni%sequent.uucp@RELAY.CS.NET (Tim Majni) (03/22/91)
>> My guess about what makes the greatest diff. is as follows: 1. >> speakers 2. amp. 3. cables between amp. and speakers 4. cables >> between CD-player and amp. 5. CD-player but I'm not at all very >> experienced, so it's only a guess. To me this looks like an upsidedown pyramid. I think you got it backwards. Its almost like religion. I BELIEVE, BROTHER, that a system should be put together from the source to the speakers, putting more emphasis on the source. The main postulate of this theory is that a signal doesn't get better as it's amplified, it gets worse. The better the starting signal, the better the end results. Now, in reality, all parts of the systems should be of "good" quality to get good sound. If you have a budget, and say you where $500 under when you have your dream system put together (ha ha Ha HAA...) you should dump it into the source, not the speakers. The British say you should spend 1/3 on source, 1/3 on amplification, and 1/3 on speakers. Lets see how my dream "budget" hi-end system fairs: 1. Wadia or ? Transport $2000 Theta Pro Basic Processor $2000 $4300 BAE Interconnects $200 Coax Interconnect $100 2. Quicksilver Preamp $1600 Threshold S200 $2250 $4050 BAE Interconnects $200 3. Apogee Stages w/ Stands $2500 -or- $3000 Martin Logan Sequel II OCOS Speaker Wire $500 Well, I guess I adhere to my theory in thought. My wife will kill me if I go round my system up to this tomarrow..., but this is what I'm working towards :-). > This is a "modest" high end system that performs beyond my wildest > imagination in terms of soundstage and imaging. Prior to my purchase of > the Sequels, I had an older pair of Magneplanar Tympanis - everything else > was the same. As a result of my experience, I would say the speakers are > the biggest factor. My Threshold amp is next in importance. It requires a > minimum of 12 hours warm up to get the wide, deep, and high soundstage I > hear all the time. My CD player is very modest - equivalent to the Sony > X33ES CD player of today. I see we differ in theory and practice somewhat, but I BELIEVE, BROTHER, in those Sequels. I had a set home for demo this past weekend. WOWWWW!!! My wife nixed them, hated the way they look though you know :-(. If you really want to give your sound box a shot in the arm, take home a Theta for demo! It may just change the way you think about your speakers being the biggest factor in imaging! It actually gave more imaging to my current system with "baby" Thiel CS1.2s, than did the Sequels. I BELIEVE, BROTHER, that together they will put goose-flesh on your body you never thought possible. Don't take my word for it, take a Theta home for demo, don't just listen to it in a store. By the way, be ready to buy it! I own no stock or interest in Theta... Happy Listening Tim Majni tmajni@sequent.com
rmorss@uunet.UU.NET (Richard Morss) (03/26/91)
ccicpg!keith@uunet.UU.NET (Keith McIntyre) writes: >In article <10308@uwm.edu>, d87parfo@odalix.ida.liu.se (Par Fornland) writes: >> When I >> got really close, I discovered, the sound wasn't coming from the >> shelf, it came from some strange looking _things_ standing on the >> floor. "WOW! WHAT'S THAT!?!?" - Martin Logan Seq. II it turned [stuff deleted. . .] >> >> How can I improve the imaging, what component makes the most >> improvement of the image? I intend the keep the speakers. Perhaps >> it is impossible [:-(] to make to sound wider with these speakers, >> even with highest-end components? In that case I'll just have to >> live with it... >> >> My guess about what makes the greatest diff. is as follows: 1. >> speakers 2. amp. 3. cables between amp. and speakers 4. cables >> between CD-player and amp. 5. CD-player but I'm not at all very >> experienced, so it's only a guess. >> I would have to agree with your first pick, the speakers certainly will make the largest contribution to imaging. Some just won't do it at all. Others can give avery wide stage with no depth, others will allow the stage to go beyond the speakers. (Check out the Chesky Sampler -- gives a very nice width and height demo.) Second, would have to be the room and/or the recording itself. No matter how good the speakers and room are, if the phase info is not in the recording, forget it -- a big bust. Included in the room/speaker parameter is where you sit -- near field or far field. This also depends on the speaker sound field. Play with sound absorption materials behind the speakers and on the side walls (corners to just in front of the speakers). Stands, rugs, etc. There just doesn't seem to be a science to it. One configuration sounds super with one recording, and then seems to fall apart with another. I guess that's what keeps the hobby going. While the electronics and cables may make a difference (don't want to get into magic cables, etc., please), IHMO these will provide the least pay-off. I've played with B&W 801's for the last 6 weeks. I've settled on a config that puts them ~10 feet apart, 26" from the back wall (sound absorbing matl behind), and 32" from the side walls. This seems to provide a large "sweet spot" and maintains the stereo image for more than one person. The image is stable as you move from side-to-side and front to back, also. I guess the bottom line is, find a speaker that will do what you want, and then play with the room and the placement (maybe a wife will preclude this :-) ). Happy hunting. dick morss
ag@sics.se (Anders G|ransson) (04/08/91)
>>>>> In article <10380@uwm.edu>, ccicpg!keith@uunet.UU.NET (Keith McIntyre) writes:
keith> In my opinion, the Sequel IIs are the most underrated speakers on the
keith> market. Hardly anyone is aware of their capabilities - even the people
keith> who sell them. Soundstage imaging this good adds an incredible amount of
keith> enjoyment to music.
keith> -Keith McIntyre
The Swedish magazine 'High Fidelity' use these speakers in their
reference system.
-Anders G|ransson