Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 60

Thread: Wisconsin GTG discussion

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Space Coast, FL
    Posts
    578

    Default Re: The Tower Discussion Thread!

    Quote Originally Posted by monkuboy View Post
    Jim Salk just posted a possible alternative explanation on AVS for why the left Soundscape seemed to have a defective midrange. I thought this could also affect the other speakers that were less efficient - he postulated that the defect may actually have been the amp clipping, something that would not have happened with the higher-efficiency speakers. That's just another reason why the high-efficiency speakers had the advantage in an environment where everything was played at really high volumes. Here is the link:

    http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...3#post21918693
    Wow.

    That changes things, doesn't it. A very informative post by Jim Salk. The confirmation by Nuance also seals the theory.

    I could say a whole lot more, but what's done is done. I think this will be a good learning experience for everyone involved.
    -Jacob

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    27

    Default Re: The Tower Discussion Thread!

    Quote Originally Posted by curtis View Post
    Since it is on "some" recordings, it would seem that it is a issue with the recordings/material themselves.

    I would definitely look into a sub if you think the room is bass shy, or trying to rearrange the room.
    The link to Jim Salk's post above gets at what I was hinting at (despite the lack of clarity in my post I was not trying to suggest that my experience was the fault of the speaker). Instead, if one has an issue, before blaming the speaker, it is good to assess the system (including the room and recording itself) before concluding that the problem is the speaker. The problem could be the speaker, or it might not. The extra emphasis in the upper mids that I experience(d) could have been interpreted as a problem with the speaker except for the fact that it did not occur with everything I listened to. The person who made a similar comment on the thread may have had the same experience as myself, so I was curious what other variables could contribute to that perception as I want to consider all variables and possible explanations.

    I had a similar experience with Emotiva's UMC-1 remote control. They were going to have me ship the whole unit back to investigate the problem, but after playing around a bit, it turned out the problem was Panasonic's special HDMI port (for some functionality that I don't recall) on the TV. Switching HDMI outputs fixed the problem

    I have been in e-mail correspondence with Dave about my "bass problem" as I was curious why I was experiencing lower bass output than what I expected. After an assessment it became clear that my room was not providing the environment to contain the bass that I was accustomed to from my previous full range speakers that had powered woofers. I was initially concerned, but I probably will be buying a Rythmik sub sometime in the future as I really can't fix my room the way I might like.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Manhattan Beach, California
    Posts
    7,032

    Default Re: The Tower Discussion Thread!

    ^^^^^
    Understood.

    Bass and rooms rarely play nice together. It takes some experimenting with placement and measurements to understand what is going on. That is the luxury with a subwoofer, it can be placed where it sounds best, and can be adjusted independently.
    -curtis

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,538

    Default Re: The Tower Discussion Thread!

    I thought I would follow-up with some additional comments.

    Quote Originally Posted by sesquipedalian View Post
    After reading through the avs thread I am interested to find out more about the perception that the RAAL ribbons didn't seem well integrated (or comments similar to that effect). What specifically might allow for that impression? Crossover differences? Room differences? Driver differences? Listener preference?

    I own a pair of RAAL Sierra Towers, and I have noticed what seems to me, on some recordings, a more dominant upper mid and low treble similar to what one of the reviewers noted. I am not sure whether to attribute that to the speakers, my listening room, or the recordings. Given that I have less bass response than I would prefer in my room, it seems that it is likely a combination of the listening area and recording. If I paired the towers with a sub, I suspect I might hear more balance, even on the less than stellar recordings.
    The integration of our RAAL 70-20XR with our mid-driver is as good as it gets. The critical factor in driver integration is such that the directional characteristics of the two drivers are as close as possible at the crossover point. On-axis frequency response will not illustrate this nor will phase/reverse-phase plots. The only measurement that can truly represent this characteristic is a polar-response plot.

    Below is the polar response plot of the Sierra Ribbon Tower.




    This measurement shows the horizontal off-axis frequency response measurements from 0 degrees all the way to 90 degrees off-axis in 5 degree increments, it is an extremely revealing graph of loudspeaker performance. The RAAL and our mid cross at approximately 2.2 kHz. You will notice on this plot, at that range, the frequency response remains smooth and linear even up to 60 degrees off-axis. There is no midrange bloom or tweeter bloom. For this to be possible, considering 2 different drivers, both the phase and directional characteristics of each driver must closely match. With a cone woofer, as frequency increases the response becomes more directional. With a ribbon tweeter, as frequency decreases the response becomes less directional so the crossover point, desired slope and Q are critical. The little dip At 3kHz that becomes more noticeable as you get further off-axis is actually an edge reflection from the RAAL faceplate. Normally this would be smoothed out in 1/6 octave measurements and not noticed but we did not use any smoothing in this measurement.

    Here is an example of a polar response measurement whereby the directional characteristics of the mid do not match the tweeter. This is not bad at all but it is not ideal either.

    http://www.stereophile.com/images/911AT1fig08.jpg

    Notice at 3kHz how the energy of the tweeter “blooms” upward and is higher than the midrange energy, which is falling off rapidly as the speaker gets further off-axis. When we listen to a speaker in a room, we hear a combination of the direct sound and off-axis sound and this particular speaker has too much energy at 3kHz at not enough at 2kHz.

    Here is another example:

    http://www.stereophile.com/images/ar...110Focfig4.jpg. This model has some serious tweeter bloom in the 4kHz range.

    The ideal polar response is one where the frequency response remains linear but gently decreases uniformly as we get higher in frequency.

    I would also like to address some additional comments that I have read from the GTG. The Salk owner that questioned the implementation of our RAAL tweeter stated the following in his first sentence:

    “I used the rating sheets on all the speakers except the last one. I did not sit in the sweet-spot all the way through each speaker to not hog the seat. I continued to listen and complete the sheets while hanging in the back of the room.”

    In other words, for some of the speakers, he sat in the sweet spot and then for others he hung in the back of the room, yet he continued to rate / compare various speakers. I honestly do not see how anyone can fairly compare speakers when one sits in the sweet spot for some and stands in the back of the room for others. In a room as large as Terry’s, there is going to be significant high frequency drop-off towards the back of the room, even more so when there are bodies and chairs in front of you. In addition, a ribbon tweeter has very limited vertical dispersion, such that standing / sitting in a chair / sitting on the floor can make a significant difference in the high frequency response.

    Further along that same line, as there have been some comments regarding the high frequency response of the RAAL vs LCY. The SongTower with LCY ribbon, as tested by Audioholics (the only 3rd party measurements available) has a considerable rise in the high frequency response. http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/s...iew_fullscreen

    This will make the highs seem more prominent when compared to our RAAL implementation and if someone is used to listening to this, a response that has a flatter top end will not sound “right” to them. In a room as large as Terry’s, that has been ideally tuned and treated for his particular speakers (with LCY ribbon), I am not surprised our ribbon did not sound as crisp or bright as some of the other ribbon speakers.

    I own a pair of RAAL Sierra Towers, and I have noticed what seems to me, on some recordings, a more dominant upper mid and low treble similar to what one of the reviewers noted. I am not sure whether to attribute that to the speakers, my listening room, or the recordings.
    Since you are noticing this on only some recordings, the logical explanation is that it is the recording itself. We should never assume that a recording is properly balanced throughout the frequency bandwidth. There are very specific equalizations applied to recordings depending on what instruments the engineer wants to bring forward or highlight.

    If I paired the towers with a sub, I suspect I might hear more balance, even on the less than stellar recordings.
    Yes, as we have discussed in detail, in your particular room -- a subwoofer is highly recommended However, adding a subwoofer will not affect the delicate balance between mids and highs.
    .
    .
    .
    Good Sound To You!

    David Fabrikant
    www.ascendacoustics.com

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,538

    Default Re: Wisconsin GTG discussion

    Now I need to vent just a bit…

    There are some things about this GTG that really bother me. A clipping amp, people listening and reporting their comments from varying room locations and obvious biases. Two examples of this are with the SoundScape’s and Phil’s, both of which did not perform very well. Rather than comment that the “speaker” is not performing too well or that people are hearing something strange, the immediate consensus from the GTG was that something was wrong with the midrange of the SoundScape or that the crossover on the Phil’s got damaged. In the case of the Sierra Tower, instead – when something not quite right was heard by the Salk owners, it becomes a case of “improper implementation.” The only non-biased listener (doesn't own Salk, Ascend or Phil) actually preferred the Sierra Towers...

    In the case of the SoundScapes, nothing was found wrong with the speaker and I am quite confident the same will be said of the Phil’s.

    The SongTowers and HT2L performed well, but a few listeners reported some distortion or edginess in the Sierra Tower, compared to these 2 speakers. The SongTowers and the HT2L are 2-ways, while the only 3-ways at the GTG were the Phil 2 (w/possible problems), the SoundScape (w/possible problems) and our Sierra Tower (no problems, but possibly poor implementation ) )

    Could it be possible that some of the distortion being heard is being masked by the SongTower or HT2L, being that these are 2-way designs using a ribbon tweeter that must be crossed rather high and thus the speakers might not be capable of reproducing the same detail that a 3-way can? Is it possible that our Tower was simply reproducing the same distortion being heard on the other 3-way speakers, but to a slightly lesser degree since our towers have a bit higher sensitivity so the amp would have been clipping a bit less?

    No, instead the various Salk owners report speaker problems with the Salk and Phil 2, but questionable design implementation in the Sierra Tower? I find this extremely bothersome.

    This is not a knock on JS or DM, but the fact is that I have been designing complete loudspeakers from the ground up for a considerably longer period of time, not that this is any determination of sound quality but even a smidgeon of respect from their customer base would be nice.

    I have great respect for them both, but the ever increasing bias amongst their customer base is becoming rather hard to ignore, and that combined with information shared with me regarding certain brands being “pushed hard” by way of private messages on AVS is why I am trying to stay far away from AVS these days. Luckily, we don’t rely on AVS for our sales. Our Sierra Towers both w/RAAL and dome version are still at a 100% satisfaction rate, not a single return and I have never experienced this type of overall satisfaction with any audio product – and this dates all the way back to 1984, when I got my start in this industry…

    There is some irony here as well, such that if I had to guess at a single speaker at the GTG with the possibility of problems, it would actually be the Sierra Towers. Why? Simply because Brandon did the RAAL tweeter upgrade himself, which is a massive job – including installing the new crossover and his current pair of speakers have never been tested by us. The RAAL ribbon, while extremely robust and durable once implemented, can easily be damaged during installation. The only confidence I have that his pair of speakers are performing to spec are based on his comments, and these: “The RAAL is exceptional and the midrange is really good. Dave hit one out of the park with the RAAL Ascend Tower.”

    Care to guess as to whose quote that is? A bit different from his most recent impression though, same speakers but different circumstances... I suppose

    Ok, I vented – sorry guys, back to building speakers…
    .
    .
    .
    Good Sound To You!

    David Fabrikant
    www.ascendacoustics.com

  6. #26
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Stouffville,Ont..
    Posts
    538

    Default Re: Wisconsin GTG discussion

    Dave, I understand your fustration pertaining to comments made by certain factions in that GTG and accumulative others(from those guys) over the years that rubbed me the wrong way.... and why I chose the Ascends

    I have the utmost respect for you and your company....

    There...I hope that makes you feel better...

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,538

    Default Re: Wisconsin GTG discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by billy p View Post
    Dave, I understand your fustration pertaining to comments made by certain factions in that GTG and accumulative others(from those guys) over the years that rubbed me the wrong way.... and why I chose the Ascends

    I have the utmost respect for you and your company....

    There...I hope that makes you feel better...
    Thanks Billy!

    I do feel better... it is hard for me to just sit back and ignore. Some disturbing info shared with me from a few individuals considering our products on AVS forum really pushed me over the edge. I suspect you know or have an idea what I am talking about, but I was not aware that this was occurring and I found it shocking, to say the least.

    Frankly, I can't stand the politics nor do any of of us here actually have the time to stay on top of it. We are swamped, which is a good thing of course
    .
    .
    .
    Good Sound To You!

    David Fabrikant
    www.ascendacoustics.com

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    711

    Default Re: Wisconsin GTG discussion

    Dave,
    Thank you for your explanation and honesty. I in a way feel responsible for all the GTG's I attend with your Towers and the resulting feedback I never meant to cause a ruckus. I know these last 2 posts were tough for you considering you typically stay neutral on these issues. Sometimes a thorugh explanation is warranted, kudos to you!

    Now don't make me second guess my RAAL installation The father in law and I were extremely careful with the ribbons and made sure to connect the wires appropriately(hopefully right). Just to be safe, anything I should investigate to make sure?

    I truly hope the readers out there (in AVS and other forums) can look past the biases, product pushing, etc and choose for themselves. There are a lot of great speakers out there and not everyone one is a fit for you or I.

    In the end, the GTG was a great time and I could care less about the resulting politics and possible issues that came about.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    711

    Default Re: Wisconsin GTG discussion

    Oh,
    On a side note, my father in law (AKA - RAAL installation specialist) will be ordering the STC from you very soon. He is wondering what finish to order. His center is in a cabinet with a cloth front so he wants to know which finish is most popular for future resale purposes?

    Thanks,
    Brandon

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    501

    Default Re: Wisconsin GTG discussion

    Wonderful...

    And they seem to use crappy mp3s from what I read... Probably Fraunhoffer iTunes encoded mp3s at CBR in stereo...
    I sure would appreciate everyone slowing down a bit. Many of you are possibly only half right. I am in the process of getting some additional information, and know that many of the vocal tracks were not perfect recordings. This was intentionally done by Nuance and myself. Why? Well, we all know that MOST recordings suck on some level. I don't want a speaker that over exposes these issues so that I don't enjoy listening to 80% of the stuff out there. I need a certain level of perfection for great recordings, but the speakers/system needs to work for lesser recordings as well; even some poor ones.
    Seriously???

    I feel for Dave... As much as I enjoy audio, the industry is horrendous. From a lack of objectivity in reviews, to all kinds of technical issues (room, placement), listener bias & subjective tastes, snakeoil, flawed GTGs, crappy forums, and the list goes on and on... I've always said that Ascend was a refuge from all the audio BS, it's sad that there seems to be no way to get away from it... This isn't something new, it was always this way... "the more things change, the more they stay the same".
    Last edited by GirgleMirt; 04-17-2012 at 08:45 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •