|
|
Post by jjmatrix on May 1, 2013 6:27:03 GMT -5
Speakers on their side? Toilet paper taped over the tweeters? Man, you'd better go see a Doctor immediately!   At first I also thought you're crazy Boom ;D, but then suddenly realize that when I got my speakers, it took me more than 3 months to stop messing around with the placement. Great thread; thanks! |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on May 1, 2013 6:32:09 GMT -5
Well, there's no question that I am crazy, but i can hear... I know what I want and although I may have to compromise some things, I think that the majority of the wants should be attainable (but just maybe not with these speakers).
|
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on May 1, 2013 8:05:06 GMT -5
At those prices I wouldn't compromise. If you don't like them there's plenty of other models out there that mayt fit the bill. The treble will stick out for ever now that you've noticed it and it'll bug ya how much of the sound you are missing by doing whatever it is that you would be doing to damp the treble. But since we are talking about treble dampening. You could use a set of 12 db RCA attenuators. They create a very slight dampening on the treble while still preserving the detail. They do cause a slightly elevated low-mid range but it is perceived as increased depth. If you want to audition them I'd be glad to loan you a set of mine. |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on May 1, 2013 8:12:25 GMT -5
You know, another stupid thought just occurred to me; the SM65s are bi-wireable. That means that they're also bi-ampable. By using my XPA-2 on the woofers and sticking a Mini-X on the tweeters, I could control the tweeter-to-woofer balance with the volume pot on the Mini-X.
This might control the sibilance that's bothering me. Of course, the toilet paper solution is significantly cheaper if it will work.
The ultimate question is, are these speakers worth all this effort? I'm at about the end of my rope trying to make these things sing. If a room EQ will do the job, then it may be time to look for one. Does the UMC-200 have room correction and, if so, does it work better than the Emo-Q of the older UMC-1? My UMC-1 did CRAZY things to my speaker polarity trying to equalize the room. Now that I have ATS pads in place, hopefully the room EQ programs will work better?
How much sound quality would I lose going from a tube preamp to the UMC-200? Would the room EQ make up for the sound quality difference?
In any case, first things first. I'll remove one more layer of toilet paper and listen again. If the soundstage is back without the sibilance, then other options become academic. If I'm still fighting the DefTech speakers, then the next step is to replace them with another speaker pair from one of the closets & see if the next set will image any better.
I realize that this thread is becoming somewhat tedious. If y'all are tired of hearing about it just say so & I'll shut off the yapping.
Cordially - Boomzilla
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on May 1, 2013 8:17:00 GMT -5
...But since we are talking about treble dampening. You could use a set of 12 db RCA attenuators... Thanks, Gar - I profoundly appreciate the offer of the attenuator loan. Where would the attenuators go? Before the preamp? Between the pre & power amp? In the speaker leads? Cordially - Boomzilla |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on May 1, 2013 8:56:01 GMT -5
Not the speaker leads or the power amp outs. But in between any of the other choices you did. I put mine at the output of the XDA-1. You can also put it between pre and power amp or at the output of the DAC. Depends on how you feel about the sound difference (if any) I have no idea if there is due to where one puts it. They are basically a set of resistors that look like an RCA plug extender. Just let me know. Also in regards to excessive sibilance/treble and the tendency of the speakers to clump with a slight change. I would suggest that your toe in and the distance the speakers are apart needs to change very slightly. I see from your posts you have moved the speakers around a whole lot and are probably sick of it by now but maybe a little bit more - from personal experience YMMV. |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on May 1, 2013 9:22:11 GMT -5
I think you need to determine/decide if it is really the speakers or the room that is causing problems. If the room, then nothing is going to sound right until you do the proper treatments. But if your room seems like it isn't too lively and isn't too dead, then maybe those speakers just aren't the ones for you. I would suggest focusing on the room to see if you've done all you practically can with it and then if you're still not happy, sounds like you need to try different speakers. Placement is critical but it seems crazy to have to go through all those gyrations like what you are doing. You end up making the speakers into a completely different model with all those modifications.  |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on May 1, 2013 9:22:44 GMT -5
OK - Why should attenuators between the low-level signal components make ANY change in the sound? It would be the same as turning up the upstream component volume and turning down the downstream component volume.
With the XDA-1, I can understand how the attenuators could make a difference - the DAC attenuates volume in the digital domain. It therefore throws away word-length as the volume decreases. Using the attenuator would ensure that the DAC operated at the top of its volume range where resolution was the highest. Since my Audioquest Dragonfly already attenuates volume in the analog domain, I think that the attenuators would do nothing for me.
Of course, with my Oppo (used as a music source with volume controlled by the Oppo), then the attenuators would have the same benefit as they do with your XDA-1. However, since I already run my Oppo's output at 85% to 90%, I doubt that I'd hear a difference. My volume is currently controlled with the Dared (analog) preamp's remote control.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on May 1, 2013 9:27:57 GMT -5
I think you need to determine/decide if it is really the speakers or the room that is causing problems. If the room, then nothing is going to sound right... Hi monkumonku - I agree. The room (before these speakers) was a completely different animal with excessive slap echo. However, at the time I bought these speakers, I also bought five 2x4 foot ATS attenuator panels. Three are hung on the wall behind the speakers, one behind the listening couch. Since the "hand clap test" yields no echo, I think that the room is no longer an issue. I have not, however, tried any speakers in the ATS-treated room other than the DefTechs. Maybe try some other speakers and see how they image? If I have the same problems with others that I'm having with the DefTechs, then it will be an indication that the room needs further attention? |
|
|
|
Post by garbulky on May 1, 2013 9:46:47 GMT -5
OK - Why should attenuators between the low-level signal components make ANY change in the sound? It would be the same as turning up the upstream component volume and turning down the downstream component volume. With the XDA-1, I can understand how the attenuators could make a difference - the DAC attenuates volume in the digital domain. It therefore throws away word-length as the volume decreases. Using the attenuator would ensure that the DAC operated at the top of its volume range where resolution was the highest. Since my Audioquest Dragonfly already attenuates volume in the analog domain, I think that the attenuators would do nothing for me. Of course, with my Oppo (used as a music source with volume controlled by the Oppo), then the attenuators would have the same benefit as they do with your XDA-1. However, since I already run my Oppo's output at 85% to 90%, I doubt that I'd hear a difference. My volume is currently controlled with the Dared (analog) preamp's remote control. I've heard that too. I got the attenuators due to the lossy digital volume control. But it does change the sound signature as well and it's not to do with the lossy volume control as I've tried it on some other devices. It's not supposed to. But it does. It also did it for the behringer UCA 202 analog outputs. The treble is slightly recessed the lower mids/upper bass is bumped up. Same change happened on two different brands (Rothwell and Harrison lab 12 db) almost to the same exact amount). A dding 24 db of attenuation made this sound signature change wayyyyyy more pronounced but at that point the pronounced nature of it made the thing not listenable to my ears (it sounded bad, lack of low end mids were too pronounced, boomy, and sounded more like a cheap transistor radio). If you can't hear the 12 db change, you would easily hear the 24 db change even if your ears were stopped up. If I had to guess it has to do with some sort of resistance that isn't uniform over the frequencies band we listen to. The attenuator itself is a very simple circuit. Only way for you to know is to try it and see if it makes any difference to you. |
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,256
|
Post by KeithL on May 1, 2013 11:08:25 GMT -5
Electrically, an attenuator is pretty simple - but it DOES change the electrical characteristics of the connection, and so CAN interact with other components. Although an attenuator SHOULDN'T change the sound at all, there are basically two ways in which it CAN do so: 1) An attenuator should simply be a pair of resistors, but it is possible that a given one was designed differently for some reason, or that the electrical characteristics of the parts and construction are less than optimal. (It should be pretty easy to get that part right.) 2) An attenuator both loads down the source component, and changes (usually increases) the source impedance seen by the destination component. The values chosen are usually intended to NOT make significant differences with most equipment. However, the sound of the source component COULD change because the attenuator is loading it down more heavily, and the sound of the destination component COULD change because the attenuator is making the "apparent" output impedance of the source component appear to be higher. This higher source impedance could also interact with your interconnect to produce a filter effect. Let's say you have a preamp and a power amp, connected by a 20' interconnect, which has quite a bit of capacitance. Assuming both preamp and power amp are solid state, this will probably work fine. Now you connect an attenuator to the output of the preamp (before the cable). Now the impedance feeding the cable is higher, so the capacitance of the cable will interact with that new/higher source impedance to produce a high-cut filter effect, rolling off the high end. The "fix" is to connect the cable directly to the preamp output, and plug the attenuator directly into the input on the power amp, and then connect the cable to the attenuator. This will eliminate the problem because now the low impedance output of the preamp is driving the cable instead of the higher source impedance of the preamp plus the attenuator. (The input of the power amp shouldn't have much capacitance, so shouldn't interact with the attenuator.) Tube preamps have other issues: Putting an attenuator on the INPUT of a tube preamp shouldn't cause any problems, but putting one on the OUTPUT of a tube preamp might not be a good idea - because tube preamps tend to have rather high output impedances, and so are likely to interact with it. (The values chosen for most attenuators ASSUME that a solid-state component will be feeding them.) Also note that some attenuators have a definite direction that you have to connect them in - others do not. If the one you're using is directional and you connect it backwards it is VERY likely to either interact, or not work at all, or not work as expected. OK - Why should attenuators between the low-level signal components make ANY change in the sound? It would be the same as turning up the upstream component volume and turning down the downstream component volume. With the XDA-1, I can understand how the attenuators could make a difference - the DAC attenuates volume in the digital domain. It therefore throws away word-length as the volume decreases. Using the attenuator would ensure that the DAC operated at the top of its volume range where resolution was the highest. Since my Audioquest Dragonfly already attenuates volume in the analog domain, I think that the attenuators would do nothing for me. Of course, with my Oppo (used as a music source with volume controlled by the Oppo), then the attenuators would have the same benefit as they do with your XDA-1. However, since I already run my Oppo's output at 85% to 90%, I doubt that I'd hear a difference. My volume is currently controlled with the Dared (analog) preamp's remote control. I've heard that too. I got the attenuators due to the lossy digital volume control. But it does change the sound signature as well and it's not to do with the lossy volume control as I've tried it on some other devices. It's not supposed to. But it does. It also did it for the behringer UCA 202 analog outputs. The treble is slightly recessed the lower mids/upper bass is bumped up. Same change happened on two different brands (Rothwell and Harrison lab 12 db) almost to the same exact amount). A dding 24 db of attenuation made this sound signature change wayyyyyy more pronounced but at that point the pronounced nature of it made the thing not listenable to my ears (it sounded bad, lack of low end mids were too pronounced, boomy, and sounded more like a cheap transistor radio). If you can't hear the 12 db change, you would easily hear the 24 db change even if your ears were stopped up. If I had to guess it has to do with some sort of resistance that isn't uniform over the frequencies band we listen to. The attenuator itself is a very simple circuit. Only way for you to know is to try it and see if it makes any difference to you. |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on May 1, 2013 14:23:27 GMT -5
Rather than take a loss on the DefTechs, I think that I'll move them to the rear channels & just go ahead with a HT setup. I'll run Klipsch Cornwalls for the front R&L, a Klipsch Heresy with sub for the center, and the DefTechs as surrounds (full range - no sub).
I'm rather curious to see if the ATS panels make a significant change in the sound of the Klipsch Cornwalls anyway...
Now I need:
A UMC-1 for control
A Mini-X for the rears
A XPA-100 for the center
;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Chuck Elliot on May 1, 2013 14:36:19 GMT -5
Rather than take a loss on the DefTechs, I think that I'll move them to the rear channels & just go ahead with a HT setup. I'll run Klipsch Cornwalls for the front R&L, a Klipsch Heresy with sub for the center, and the DefTechs as surrounds (full range - no sub). I'm rather curious to see if the ATS panels make a significant change in the sound of the Klipsch Cornwalls anyway... Now I need: A UMC-1 for control A Mini-X for the rears A XPA-100 for the center ;D What happened to the wife that didn't want subs (from many threads back). Now she's going to accept 4 more speakers in the room with 2 of them big as a house? |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on May 1, 2013 14:47:44 GMT -5
Well, if I sneak them in when she's gone maybe she won't notice them?
;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Chuck Elliot on May 1, 2013 14:57:05 GMT -5
Well, if I sneak them in when she's gone maybe she won't notice them? ;D Dude, your gonna come home one night and the room is gonna be cleaned out with all your stuff stacked in the basement! Tread carefully! The deal I cut almost 20 years ago was that I could do anything with the man cave that I wanted, but I had to give up any control over the rest of the house. In my mind, it was a good deal! |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on May 1, 2013 14:57:44 GMT -5
Well, if I sneak them in when she's gone maybe she won't notice them? ;D That's what is so good about Emo gear. It all looks the same. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by monkumonku on May 1, 2013 15:02:24 GMT -5
Well, if I sneak them in when she's gone maybe she won't notice them? ;D Dude, your gonna come home one night and the room is gonna be cleaned out with all your stuff stacked in the basement! Tread carefully! The deal I cut almost 20 years ago was that I could do anything with the man cave that I wanted, but I had to give up any control over the rest of the house. In my mind, it was a good deal! He'll come home and all his stuff will be in the trash cans outside. Then he'll ask his wife, "why'd you throw away all my stuff???" And she will reply, "I didn't throw them away, I just put them inside your speaker stands." ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Chuck Elliot on May 1, 2013 15:05:16 GMT -5
Dude, your gonna come home one night and the room is gonna be cleaned out with all your stuff stacked in the basement! Tread carefully! The deal I cut almost 20 years ago was that I could do anything with the man cave that I wanted, but I had to give up any control over the rest of the house. In my mind, it was a good deal! He'll come home and all his stuff will be in the trash cans outside. Then he'll ask his wife, "why'd you throw away all my stuff???" And she will reply, "I didn't throw them away, I just put them inside your speaker stands." ;D  That gave me the best LOL I've had in a long time! |
|
|
|
Post by Boomzilla on May 1, 2013 17:14:36 GMT -5
He'll come home and all his stuff will be in the trash cans outside. Then he'll ask his wife, "why'd you throw away all my stuff???" And she will reply, "I didn't throw them away, I just put them inside your speaker stands." ;D I'm just NEVER gonna live that down, am I? I was being facetious about sneaking ANYTHING past my wife. She's observant AND intuitive. Fortunately for me, she's also tolerant, loving, and kind (she'd HAVE to be to live with me...). The only reason I speculate on going HT is because I already OWN all those speakers and have them stashed in various closets. My better half would probably like to have her closet space back, even if it did clutter the living room a bit. The main experiment I want to try is to get some different speakers up to see if my imaging woes are speaker or room related. If the latter, then I'm not yet done with room treatment. My goal is to optimize the gear I currently own without having to change gear again. We'll see how that goes. Cheers - Boomzilla |
|
|
|
Post by The Mad Norseman on May 1, 2013 18:24:53 GMT -5
Wow. Sounds like an AWFUL LOT of trouble to go through to end up with something sort of jury-rigged, and only sort of acceptable to your ears! Maybe these DefTechs aren't the right speakers for your ears?, or for that room? I think the SM65's have gotten pretty decent reviews elsewhere, but occasionally its just 'not a good marriage' for whatever reason... So maybe its time to sell 'em (even at a bit of a loss) and start over, because what you're doing may be very educational, and very interesting - but is not really practical, (ex. laying them on their sides?, toilet paper over the tweeters? adding attenuators?). Nope. Time to put your foot down big guy! (But thanks for a very interesting thread just the same!).  |
|
