|
|
Post by leonski on Feb 20, 2020 3:00:27 GMT -5
Aimlessly 'improving' stuff is not the way to go. System goals will help you see thru the fog of 'too much stuff'. And unless you need an audiologist to help with hearing problems, MORE power probably isn't going to get you there. What are you kidding me...if it wasn't for upgradeitus the audio industry would be in the toilet! :>) yep. 'Sell The Sizzle'. |
|
KeithL
Administrator 
Posts: 10,276
|
Post by KeithL on Feb 20, 2020 12:49:18 GMT -5
With most older gear the headphone output was derived from the main amp outputs. With most modern equipment the opposite is true... and a separate small headphone amplifier is used.
Headphones are also a rather different experience than speakers.
Comparing two different amplifiers using headphones would probably be quite revealing. However I would not expect it to tell you much about how those amplifiers would compare using speakers. (Almost any amplifier can drive headphones well, and provide more damping than they can possibly require, but headphones will be more sensitive to the noise floor than speakers.)
Also note that different speakers place different demands on the amplifier. And, obviously, the difference between different speakers is usually far greater than the difference between amplifiers, and so is likely to overshadow it if you're listening to different speakers.
For that matter, even the differences between different rooms are usually far greater than the differences between amplifiers.
Therefore how two amplifier compare with one set of speakers doesn't always tell you much about how they will compare with a different set of speakers... or in a different room.
For example, speakers with heavy woofers are often particular about how much damping the amplifier provides, while speakers with light woofers are less so, and planar speakers like Magnepans are not at all.
Your best hope, if you cannot compare them on equal ground, is to try with speakers that are as close as possible to the ones you own. For example, if your speakers have light 12" cone woofers, try to compare on a similar speaker, and not one with a heavy woofer, or one with several 6" mid/woofers, or a planar.
(Of course your best bet is to compare them on equal ground... with your room and speakers... and make sure you can return the amplifier if you fail to be impressed by it.)
Man, if I had the dosh in hand I would be plunking down some money on their super powerful high end amps. They would simply whip your speakers into visceral compliance. Since I don't I'm into plinking vs. Plunking at the moment. :>) I imagine that is so and surely will visit the McIntosh dealer one day. Question, given it is impossible for me to bring my speakers along how best to demo amplifiers? Someone recommended that I use headphones. I never thought about doing that and didn't even know whether the headphone jack would share the same circuitry? Just curious if anyone has an recommendation on how to best demo one amp over another in contrast to what I already have? |
|
KeithL
Administrator
Posts: 10,276
|
Post by KeithL on Feb 20, 2020 13:02:18 GMT -5
It doesn't work that way.
When you "passively bi-amp" a speaker you are not simply connecting two speakers in parallel. (Don't even think of trying to run the two sections of one speaker in series... it doesn't work that way... you probably wouldn't break anything... but it would almost certainly sound quite awful.)
In most cases, if you have a 4 Ohm speaker, each section is still 4 Ohms... over the range of frequencies for which it will be operating. However, for each of those sections individually, the impedance over the range of frequencies it is not expected to reproduce is very high.
So, because each operates over a different and non-overlapping range of frequencies, when you parallel them, the overall impedance remains more or less the same as their individual impedances.
And, no, the XPA Gen3 amps are not bridgeable... and, being fully differential, the XPA-DR amps are already "bridged"... so you cannot "bridge them again". (The original XPA-2 amps were bridgeable... and our current little A-800 is bridgeable... but none of the other are.)
I'm not really considering this but if the Ulfberhts are bi-amp ready then wouldn't each speaker connection be 8 ohms? 8 Ohms paralleled wired would equal the one 4 ohm rating of the Ulfberhts. If the Tektons are bi-amp ready, running two 8 ohms in series would equal 16 ohm load and the mono blocked amps bridged or otherwise would probably make half the output. The only option would be to bi-amp and run a mono block or bridged amp on each speaker channel which would be the correct 8 ohm rating. That means I'd need 4 bridged (8 channels) or 4 mono block amps which would all be running at 8 ohms each. Are Emotiva Gen 3 amps bridgeable? If so I'd only need to order one more 8 channel amp. Then in total 13 channels with 8 bridged together to power up the Ulfberhts, 1 channel for the center, and 4 channels for the Atmos. If the Emotiva amps are bridgeable then puzzle solved.
(I doubt the Ulberhts if bi amp ready are 2 ohm running in series to produce the 4 ohm rating.)
Shame home audio isn't like car audio where pro level amps are stable at 1 or 2 ohms.
|
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Feb 22, 2020 1:38:29 GMT -5
First?
Amps DO differ a lot in the ability to handle real speaker loads. Not generally fairly easy stuff like Magnepan, but more difficult from some of the B&W line or Electrostats. Evaluating amps using headphones on this basis would probably be worthless. 2 amps within a couple db of the same power output can differ drastically when phase angles, coupled with impedance dips rear their ugly head.
Magnepan makes use of what is called a Series Crossover. This makes it very difficult to biamp without simply going to an active crossover and disconnecting the passive internal crossover. Something you should do ANYWAY if you want real biamp.
It IS possible to connect speakers in series, otherwise, too. I did so many years ago when experimenting with EARLY 'quadraphonic' sound. DynaQuad, by name. I built the circuit than later simply went to a pair of stereo amps.
First amp connected normally and for front speakers. Rear speakers connected IN SERIES from + to + (yep....PLUS to PLUS) on the 2nd amp. If you try this, MAKE SURE the amp is a common ground type or you WILL have problems. This fed an out of phase signal to the back speakers. LIVE material was frightening. You sat in the MIDDLE of the crows. Performer from in front and crowd noise all around you. But studio albums had NO such ambiance and the back channels remained silent.
'Biamp Ready' is a red herring. You won't net nearly the gain you anticipate. All connected amps will still be seeing the entire frequency range and trying to swing that voltage. If you go to an active crossover, depending on the frequency, you might net as much as 3db additional amp power. Not a trivial amount. This as each amp is 'band limited'....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2020 0:23:29 GMT -5
I have no idea as to why you suggest my goals are on stuff rather than sound. And I wasn't aware of there being a bottleneck. I don't listen to stereo configuration music playback though with a push of a button the Onkyo bypasses the DAC and runs straight from the source. However, there's a night and day difference going from stereo to 3 channel mode. The dedicated center channel through a center Ulfberht adds a dimension missing from stereo. I also can't help but notice the lack of Atmos' missing objects overhead while playing movies etc. I desire to hear the overhead whirl of choppers or bullets whizzing past my head during movies such as Black Hawk Down or Saving Private Ryan. And I agree with you regarding McIntosh, that is, for ten grand one should have the opportunity to listen to the product first. Found a local dealer nearby since McIntosh doesn't sell the amp I was looking at online. They also don't have Tekton's try and return policy for months at a time. Never made my way down to the local McIntosh dealer last weekend as I began rethinking what was most desirable especially since most of my time in front of the system isn't music listening but movie playback. While I do listen to music I seldom listen to playback at low levels but rather what most might consider uncomfortable. I never really listened to music at this kinda level before until purchasing the Ulfs. First thing I noted after 30 minutes of playback was that I was not fatigued from listening. The system just plays louder and louder while sounding as beautifully at low levels. Though, the Ulfs are rated at 1000 watts I'd like something more to push the speakers to a point beyond my expectation. Happy you have your desired setup. The Ulfberhts have 4 12" subs. The 4-10 was excess but now that I've listened to the system I find it difficult to live without. The 4-10 sub is a sealed enclosure and actually sounds wonderful up to where I have it crossed over at 120hz. Last two months I've been playing with various cross over points and I find the 120hz to be most desirable for me. Just that added range between 80 to 120hz draws out a part of the music at levels I never heard before. In my mind this is an amusing point which goes to the power of suggestion. A problem I am facing is actual visual orientation. There's only 1 4-10 on the left side and I'd like to balance out the visual. I keep hunting left with my head because of the off balance visual. When a bass note really quakes I keep leaning left with my head looking towards the source. Anyways, when the second 4-10 arrives I plan to integrate it into the system. As is the low end is incredible but not quite there yet. The hairs on the back of my neck are only starting to raise from high SPL levels rather than making them stand straight up  I'm sure you see where'd I like to put the other 4-10 [one on left and one on right]. And I can't wait to get rid of the 2 Atmos upward firing speakers by Klipsch ontop of the Ulfs. Under the vaulted ceiling they are ineffective only raising the sound stage rather than making an overhead presence. I'm certain 4 in ceiling Atmos speakers will provide the desired effects. Stereophile calls the Impact an 'Easy Load' which is good. You get a lot out of every watt put in. But the measured sensitivity is over 6db (a lot) lower than the spec...... Picking up where you and I left off Mr. Leonski. Interestingly, Stereophile measured sensitivity but doesn't state which frequency or what kinda noise they test with. I performed my own in home test using white noise and measured the same sensitivity Tekton actually claims [99db @2.83 volts]: www.disqus.social/2020/06/tekton-design-ulfberht-speaker.html  Obviously, there is no standard measurement in the industry. But clearly, Stereophile deviates from the manufacturer's measurements which results in the manufacturer's specifications. |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 21, 2020 1:16:14 GMT -5
Stereophile has a 3 or 4 part article on measurement of speaker sensitivity. They'll go over the various arguements and techniqus. I DO know one thing from your photo......You are getting a lot of reflected sound if using a constant tone. Do you want to measure the speaker OR the speaker and the room? If just the speaker? Find a BIG open space. Your driveway if nothing else. Prop speaker up to clear from some ground effect. THAN repeat your meausre. The 2 major competing thoughts, but agreed NOT 'standards' are In-Room and Anachoic. Out doors you can 'simulate' anachoic. This works IF you limit the time window of the measurement. Sound moves 1 foot per millisecond, roughly. That is a first-pass rule of thumb. And used to estimate reflections. BIG rooms use a measure called RT60 which I'll leave to YOU to look up. I don't know how to factor in the impedance swings of the speaker. The 2.83 volt innput would be perfect at 8 ohms. But would be 2 watts at 4 ohms and therefore reduce your reading by 3db.....And So On. Here is link to PART I of the Stereophile article. www.stereophile.com/content/measuring-loudspeakers-part-one-page-3 |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 21, 2020 1:24:16 GMT -5
It doesn't work that way.
When you "passively bi-amp" a speaker you are not simply connecting two speakers in parallel. (Don't even think of trying to run the two sections of one speaker in series... it doesn't work that way... you probably wouldn't break anything... but it would almost certainly sound quite awful.)
In most cases, if you have a 4 Ohm speaker, each section is still 4 Ohms... over the range of frequencies for which it will be operating. However, for each of those sections individually, the impedance over the range of frequencies it is not expected to reproduce is very high.
So, because each operates over a different and non-overlapping range of frequencies, when you parallel them, the overall impedance remains more or less the same as their individual impedances.
And, no, the XPA Gen3 amps are not bridgeable... and, being fully differential, the XPA-DR amps are already "bridged"... so you cannot "bridge them again". (The original XPA-2 amps were bridgeable... and our current little A-800 is bridgeable... but none of the other are.)
I'm not really considering this but if the Ulfberhts are bi-amp ready then wouldn't each speaker connection be 8 ohms? 8 Ohms paralleled wired would equal the one 4 ohm rating of the Ulfberhts. If the Tektons are bi-amp ready, running two 8 ohms in series would equal 16 ohm load and the mono blocked amps bridged or otherwise would probably make half the output. The only option would be to bi-amp and run a mono block or bridged amp on each speaker channel which would be the correct 8 ohm rating. That means I'd need 4 bridged (8 channels) or 4 mono block amps which would all be running at 8 ohms each. Are Emotiva Gen 3 amps bridgeable? If so I'd only need to order one more 8 channel amp. Then in total 13 channels with 8 bridged together to power up the Ulfberhts, 1 channel for the center, and 4 channels for the Atmos. If the Emotiva amps are bridgeable then puzzle solved.
(I doubt the Ulberhts if bi amp ready are 2 ohm running in series to produce the 4 ohm rating.)
Shame home audio isn't like car audio where pro level amps are stable at 1 or 2 ohms.
Keith, sorry I don't completely understand what you said. Many years ago while doing EARLY Dynaquad experiments, I wired 2x 12"3-way speakers (JBL4311 copies) IN SERIES between the positive terminals of a common ground amplifier. The difference signal produced a wonder surround effect on LIVE MATERIAL. Studio stuff, not so much.. The wiring was + to + OR + to - with the 'other' terminals connected to the amps positive terminals. To make sure the amp was correctly loaded, I put a 10ohm power resistor in the normal speaker wiring position. The resistor never even got warm. Such wiring was NOT possible with my later Carver Cube which was NOT a common ground design. As for a series connection? Magnepan uses a SERIES crossover in the new 1.7 and 3.7 series speakers. I'm not certain about the 20.7 or 30 series. It is therefore NOT possible to biamp maggies of the current generation any more. They only have ONE set of inputs and I think maybe a jumper for the installation of a resistor to tame the 'highs'..... I've seen the schematic and it is a little beyond me, but I can see the various sections and think I see when they are doing. I'm not sure of any sonic benefit, however. |
|
|
|
Post by AudioHTIT on Jun 21, 2020 4:58:01 GMT -5
2.83V is the correct input to measure sensitivity at any impedance, it seems @shimei has (roughly) confirmed the manufacturers spec even if there is some room interaction. I know I wouldn’t want to move a speaker that big and heavy into the driveway to try and get the last nit of accuracy (but I’ve moved one of my little B&W’s outside to do frequency tests). Though I’m not sure what the goal is, doubt I’d try to bi-amp anything that’s already that efficient (sensitive), but it’s a hobby, always fun to try something new.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2020 10:37:21 GMT -5
Stereophile has a 3 or 4 part article on measurement of speaker sensitivity. They'll go over the various arguements and techniqus. I DO know one thing from your photo......You are getting a lot of reflected sound if using a constant tone. Do you want to measure the speaker OR the speaker and the room? If just the speaker? Find a BIG open space. Your driveway if nothing else. Prop speaker up to clear from some ground effect. THAN repeat your meausre. The 2 major competing thoughts, but agreed NOT 'standards' are In-Room and Anachoic. Out doors you can 'simulate' anachoic. This works IF you limit the time window of the measurement. Sound moves 1 foot per millisecond, roughly. That is a first-pass rule of thumb. And used to estimate reflections. BIG rooms use a measure called RT60 which I'll leave to YOU to look up. I don't know how to factor in the impedance swings of the speaker. The 2.83 volt innput would be perfect at 8 ohms. But would be 2 watts at 4 ohms and therefore reduce your reading by 3db.....And So On. Here is link to PART I of the Stereophile article. www.stereophile.com/content/measuring-loudspeakers-part-one-page-3Klipsch has been receiving criticism as of late for providing specifications of in room [real world] measurements rather than anechoic chambered measurements for sensitivity. As you and I have discussed there's no standard in the industry or an absolute authority holding manufacturers to one or the other procedures. At least not like the auto industry and government enforced EPA standards as an example. Needlessly stated, some will favor Stereophile and some will favor the manufacturer. However, I have no doubt that repeating such measurement procedures should lead to the specification, that is, regardless of which specification. However, what initially didn't make sense to me was some suggesting that a standard 1000hz test tone ought be used. Doing so isolates only the speakers in a 21 speaker tower which operates at that frequency. Therefore, a 21 speaker tower theoretically may play no louder [sensitivity] than your average mini cubical Bose or book shelf speaker. In essence such tradition or preference equalizes, levels, or handicaps the playing field. I can only speculate as to why someone would do this, that is, whether they're pushing small speakers which seemingly is the rage today. I mean, I can't emphasize enough how the modern hi-fi crowd thinks a soundbar addition is the way to go. Backed with a publication's specifications which demonstrate these mini speakers as being formidable opponents may indeed attribute to such misinformation and faddish trend. As far as room interaction I have no doubt there's some. I did however plug the back of the ports during testing which should minimize room interaction to a degree. I was already experimenting with port plugs and forgot to pull them out. I suspect that retesting with the port plugs removed will result in more room gain and bump up the sensitivity more than the .8db gain I'm already seeing. Last point, I think sensitivity and frequency curves etc are two different things. Anechoic chambers aren't common place in people's homes. I couldn't really care if the sensitivity was measured in there but I'd appreciate if such specification can be replicated in the home. That is, unlike anechoic chambers which produce a more "neutral" but artificial environment. I imagine chaos if in room frequency curves were the standard. One would be attempting to replicate the room. Then again, is there a standard for anechoic chambers? This leads me to my next point, if stereophile doesn't have an Anechoic chamber then the point is mute. If they do then the specification they provide can't easily be replicated by the avg owner. Such really, is more difficult to "peer review". That is, if there's any science at all to testing procedures: observation, repeatability, and testability. Why was Tekton's specification important to me? Well, because the amplification I use is made from Parasound and the amp operates in Class A first 7 watts. Using Tekton's specification for sensitivity I may now come to this conclusion: This is for one Tekton Ulf speaker: 99db 2 watts 102db 4 watts 105db 8 watts Therefore, to reach THX reference levels [105db for mains] my system [1 speaker without room gain] is just switching out of Class A operation to Class AB at THX reference levels. However, with the LCR speakers and room gain I see that THX in the real world is achieved in Class A operation. And, to me this raises the question as why I prefer the Parasound fidelity to other Class AB amplifiers. Is it the mode of operation Class A vs AB or are there other factors? |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 21, 2020 12:09:38 GMT -5
First? the transition in an A A/B amp from 'A' to 'A/B' is gradual. Not a switch or anything but more a fade so that different observers may decide the transition occurred at different places. Again a matter of definition and I suspect lack of 'standard'. Though designers generally agree on what an 'A' amp is. When you get to a High Bias A/B amp, things start to get a little squiffy. Room interaction is not to be underestimated. The literature seems to concentrate on the bass region. This is where most people have trouble measuring, anyway. I'd limit my investigations to 200hz and above, for now. If the speaker could be moved to a large area and than TIME LIMITED as a 'window' of measure, that'd be good, too. There is Quite A Bit of 'Science' involved. Everything from microphone location relative to the drivers and baffle to the location where hte measurement is taken. Very few measurements are IT. Measurement systems are prone to all sorts of errors, effects and influeneces. Do you have any way to reference your SPL meter, for example? Or your volt meter? Both are subject to drift and repeatability errors. That is what seperates Stereophile from most of the rest of us. They have some real $$$ invested in gear AND I'm (guessing?) hoping they keep it both certified and calibrated. An annual trip to whoever does calibration to NIST standards is necessary and expensive. I hope Stereophile has a contract with this guys and gets everything checked. Linked is an artilce on RT60. This is the time it takes a sound impulse to 'decay' 60db in a reverberant space. Usually a large space. But the ideas are valid and you'll see reference to either ISO or other standards. www.nti-audio.com/en/applications/room-building-acoustics/reverberation-time-rt60-measurementMight be a tidbit here for you and your project. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2020 12:13:21 GMT -5
First? the transition in an A A/B amp from 'A' to 'A/B' is gradual. Not a switch or anything but more a fade so that different observers may decide the transition occurred at different places. Again a matter of definition and I suspect lack of 'standard'. Though designers generally agree on what an 'A' amp is. When you get to a High Bias A/B amp, things start to get a little squiffy. Room interaction is not to be underestimated. The literature seems to concentrate on the bass region. This is where most people have trouble measuring, anyway. I'd limit my investigations to 200hz and above, for now. If the speaker could be moved to a large area and than TIME LIMITED as a 'window' of measure, that'd be good, too. There is Quite A Bit of 'Science' involved. Everything from microphone location relative to the drivers and baffle to the location where hte measurement is taken. Very few measurements are IT. Measurement systems are prone to all sorts of errors, effects and influeneces. Do you have any way to reference your SPL meter, for example? Or your volt meter? Both are subject to drift and repeatability errors. That is what seperates Stereophile from most of the rest of us. They have some real $$$ invested in gear AND I'm (guessing?) hoping they keep it both certified and calibrated. An annual trip to whoever does calibration to NIST standards is necessary and expensive. I hope Stereophile has a contract with this guys and gets everything checked. Linked is an artilce on RT60. This is the time it takes a sound impulse to 'decay' 60db in a reverberant space. Usually a large space. But the ideas are valid and you'll see reference to either ISO or other standards. www.nti-audio.com/en/applications/room-building-acoustics/reverberation-time-rt60-measurementMight be a tidbit here for you and your project. You mean my blutooth microphone connected to my android phone won't land me similar results?  J/king aside, thank you Mr. Leonski, much appreciate your references and feedback. Enjoy, William |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2020 12:34:44 GMT -5
First? the transition in an A A/B amp from 'A' to 'A/B' is gradual. Not a switch or anything but more a fade so that different observers may decide the transition occurred at different places. Again a matter of definition and I suspect lack of 'standard'. Though designers generally agree on what an 'A' amp is. When you get to a High Bias A/B amp, things start to get a little squiffy. Room interaction is not to be underestimated. The literature seems to concentrate on the bass region. This is where most people have trouble measuring, anyway. I'd limit my investigations to 200hz and above, for now. If the speaker could be moved to a large area and than TIME LIMITED as a 'window' of measure, that'd be good, too. There is Quite A Bit of 'Science' involved. Everything from microphone location relative to the drivers and baffle to the location where hte measurement is taken. Very few measurements are IT. Measurement systems are prone to all sorts of errors, effects and influeneces. Do you have any way to reference your SPL meter, for example? Or your volt meter? Both are subject to drift and repeatability errors. That is what seperates Stereophile from most of the rest of us. They have some real $$$ invested in gear AND I'm (guessing?) hoping they keep it both certified and calibrated. An annual trip to whoever does calibration to NIST standards is necessary and expensive. I hope Stereophile has a contract with this guys and gets everything checked. Linked is an artilce on RT60. This is the time it takes a sound impulse to 'decay' 60db in a reverberant space. Usually a large space. But the ideas are valid and you'll see reference to either ISO or other standards. www.nti-audio.com/en/applications/room-building-acoustics/reverberation-time-rt60-measurementMight be a tidbit here for you and your project. Interesting reference, I must say I found this to be true, "Too much reverberation has a negative impact on the intelligibility of speech. This can, for example, make it hard to hear what a class teacher is saying." I got tired of my wife asking me "what did they say?" whenever viewing/listening to a movie. That's actually what motivated me to begin room treatment. I realize fancy equipment is best but I began my room treatment by simply walking around the open area living space clapping hands. I could definitely hear from the area echoes were most pronounced. Also, hitting the mute button suddenly during music playback resulted in what seemingly was a second of music continuing by bouncing off walls after the system went silent. Anyhoot, my room is far from complete but has come a long ways. As far as referencing my db meter I guess without thinking much about this that it should align [calibrate] with the Pre-Pro's THX reference levels. For example, the Pre-Pro sets gains LCR to achieve 105db at 82% on the volume knob. At least two devices, therefore, are suggesting the same reference levels. I'd definitely like to acquire that meter. Price? Thanks again, William |
|
|
|
Post by leonski on Jun 21, 2020 15:09:48 GMT -5
FIrst? I'm really glad anyone reads and GETS the links. Lots of good information on the internet, without regard to the rest of the nasty stuff going on these days.
The Harmon people have GOOD articles, one of which is my go-to discussion of multiple subwoofers and placement. Look THAT one up if you need some light reading!
Ok? Now let's just say for the sake of discussion that your meter agrees within measurement error WITH the THX reference level in your PrePro. Now what? What is the
TRACEABLE standard involved? A voltmeter at the manufacturing plant which hasn't been calibrated in 2 years? Or something with NIST Traceable settings.
Where I worked? I had a set of PERSONAL samples which were only loaned to one of the Engineers (they out ranked me,(but knew better than to screw with me) with the leaving of a Pint Of Blood as deposit.
I ALWAYS got my standards back in good order. QC had a set, as well. These were sent to an NIST lab on an annual basis and checked. In OUR FACILITY I used these to generate what is called a
Secondary Standard. Operators would use this standard every shift and recorded the measure on a control chart. IF the chart satisfied certain conditions the tool used for the measurment was DOWN until
someone checked it. Not always that Simple, since the facility was BUSY 24-7 and I worked more Christmas / NewYears and every Sunday (no NFL for ME!) than I can count. Quality is a big issue for some but
really, a self-managed program is best as opposed to a seperate QC department nosing around ALWAYS behind the curve of what was going on. QC is best at other functions and I worked with some of 'em on
stuff like audits and education of operators.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2020 15:40:32 GMT -5
Just updating the thread. Completed my front sound stage momentarily ago [finally] by adding a second 4-10 subwoofer. Doubling the amount of drivers had the effect I hoped for and desired. 10" woofers are barely moving with gain set at -6db but the deep rich low bass fills the room.  |
|
|
|
Post by cwmcobra on Jun 21, 2020 18:41:36 GMT -5
Eye candy? Art? All of the above? Very nice; thanks for sharing!
And, welcome back!
|
|
