|
Combat Pretzel posted:Mentioning ABX on audiophile forums nets you InstaBans(tm). Most of the times, anyway. Don't forget threats of lawsuits! Funnily enough, nothing ever came from that. I wonder why...
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 21:13 |
|
|
Wasabi the J posted:I know it's not in context here, but I really dislike automatic Bose hate. They aren't accurate and boy do you pay for them, but they have been doing the active noise cancellation game longer than anyone; so, if that's what you need,I always recommend them first. Yeah, aren't their headphones supposed to be relatively good? The speakers are generally awful because they're obsessed with getting everything as small as possible, and that's usually at a cost of quality.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:Yeah, aren't their headphones supposed to be relatively good? The speakers are generally awful because they're obsessed with getting everything as small as possible, and that's usually at a cost of quality. Sure, but they're still massively overpriced
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
Oh no doubt, but if you get em cheap or whatever they're not going to sound bad at least. I wouldn't pay RRP for any Bose kit unless I hear amazing things from trustworthy sources. I keep losing and breaking earbuds so screw paying top dollar for anything anyway!
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 18:35
|
|
|
I've had the QC2's before. They're alright, but the build quality is poo poo (cheapest plastic headband you can imagine), and they sound like they cost $80, not $300. The noise cancelling was alright, I guess, but I rarely used it since it would give me headaches after awhile.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
Wasabi the J posted:I know it's not in context here, but I really dislike automatic Bose hate. They aren't accurate and boy do you pay for them, but they have been doing the active noise cancellation game longer than anyone; so, if that's what you need,I always recommend them first. Buy Other Sound Equipment… Am I right? To be fair some of their stuff isn't bad, it's just a couple of hundred quid more than it should be. Also this is one of the worst things I've listened to at it's scale: http://imgur.com/a/bNoAs#28
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
I finally went ahead and ordered IK Multimedia | ARC System 2 in lieu of treating my room with bass traps and acoustic foam and whatnot. I know it should work *somewhat*, since it's based on Audyssey MultEQ® XT32, but I'm really curious to see how it will solve the standing waves. If it doesn't work I can maybe buy a few acoustic marbles or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
Depends on the current acoustics of the room. Room correction won't get rid of nodes, nulls and reflections, but you'll definitely notice an improvement in the one spot you set it up for. It might sound worse in other spots though. Don't aim for perfectly flat response, try for a nice house curve.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 19:25
|
|
|
Who want to hear their favourite artists talking absolute bollox? https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1003614822/ponomusic-where-your-soul-rediscovers-music?ref=category
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
What's pre-ringing? Is that an actual thing that actually happens with modern hardware? lovely mp3's? This product is really obviously designed to make money with their music downloading service.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
Sagacity posted:I finally went ahead and ordered IK Multimedia | ARC System 2 in lieu of treating my room with bass traps and acoustic foam and whatnot. I know it should work *somewhat*, since it's based on Audyssey MultEQ® XT32, but I'm really curious to see how it will solve the standing waves. Knowing how difficult phase alignment and correction can be even in 'clean' environments such as outdoors I'm very, very skeptical of a piece of software that claims such strong results with just a few measurements, especially when it doesn't seem to expose the data points it's working with nor what it's doing to compensate for the anomalies it thinks it's picked up. It's also not going to magically fix a massive standing wave problem, at best it'll create a null in response or phase angle shift at that frequency to minimise the effect but that will then impact all of the mixes you make. Does it need a pass through so that it has a reference signal to work from to gauge what is truly 'flat'?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
Jago posted:What's pre-ringing? Is that an actual thing that actually happens with modern hardware? lovely mp3's? Pre-echo occurs with all DCT-based lossy encodings. It is also not noticeable for most kinds of music. But it is the main reason why you should encode classical music as loss-less.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 15:26
|
|
|
Pre-ringing is bad handling of transients. Ideally, the MP3 encoder chooses short frames for transients, but if for some reason the psychoacoustic model thinks it needs a long frame despite the presence of a transient, said transient gets stretched in time. What was supposed to get a click, and still would have sounded like one on a short frame, would now sound like an annoying blip.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 21:18
|
|
|
Neurophonic posted:Knowing how difficult phase alignment and correction can be even in 'clean' environments such as outdoors I'm very, very skeptical of a piece of software that claims such strong results with just a few measurements, especially when it doesn't seem to expose the data points it's working with nor what it's doing to compensate for the anomalies it thinks it's picked up. I'm still skeptical as gently caress though, so I at least checked that it came with a 60-day refund policy  Waldo P Barnstormer posted:You'll definitely notice an improvement in the one spot you set it up for.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 10:34
|
|
|
Oh boy, just got a pair of Genelec 8020a from a "let's get rid of stuff" sale at the studio I intern at. I have no idea how much of this is placebo (probably a decent chunk) but I'll be damned if mixes don't sound more revealed and detailed. I hear stuff that I'm used to only hearing via my K701 headphones. Am I drinking the cool aid here? Luckily I get to try them out for a while before shelling out the cash, so I have some time to make a proper judgement.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 10:36
|
|
|
TyrantGuardian posted:Am I drinking the cool aid here? No; speakers themselves are one of the biggest factors in your sound quality. Decent encodings are what I would argue the second (not talking about going full  on your music collection, just making sure they're not some lovely 32k encode from 1998).Real studio monitors (like the ones you picked up) normally sound magically clear in their sweet spot, as that's what they're designed to do.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 10:46
|
|
|
I had pretty much the same reaction to my Adam A5Xs when I got them. Vocals and dialog in movies are so much better than with a run-of-the-mill set of hifi speakers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 10:51
|
|
|
To clarify, I had a pair of Yamaha HS80M previously, and that is what I'm comparing this experience to. I figured Genelec might be at least as good but this is a completely different ballpark thus far. Oddly enough, these little guys have more friggin' bass in them, something I always had issues with the HS80M - though they do have a higher cutoff frequency. For whatever reason, the Yamahas just never... did anything below 100Hz unless I did extreme EQ settings (this obviously made my mixes way too bassy for quite a while until I learned to compensate for it). Edit: vvvvv- Yeah, those are the ones. If anything, I found them not clear enough. They never revealed as many details in the mix as my headphones and I always had to put those on to do detailed FX mixing as well as getting a good pan image. Maybe they were just too big for my room and HS50M would have worked better? TyrantGuardian fucked around with this message at 13:18 on Mar 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 11:11
|
|
|
TyrantGuardian posted:To clarify, I had a pair of Yamaha HS80M previously, and that is what I'm comparing this experience to. I figured Genelec might be at least as good but this is a completely different ballpark thus far. Are the HS80s the 'reimagined' NS10s? I know a couple of people who use Yamaha NS10s, they are the kind of speakers that are so brutally harsh without a decent mix, 90% of the time you'd just assume they are terrible speakers. I wouldn't want to use them day to day for anything other than mixing anyway. I have a pair of Alesis Monitor One MK2 monitors that I use for a bit of audio recording, but because they're pretty flat sounding and great on the ears, they happen to work really well for general HiFi/Stereo listening.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 11:40
|
|
|
Sagacity posted:In this case that's exactly my goal. This is not intended to be a fix for a living room setup, it's just my "home studio" (I use the term loosely), where I usually sit in a single spot. That spot should be as flat as possible, or at least not as ridiculously boomy as it is now. I didn't realise you were going to use this for a studio. Also, I'd like to take back what I said about improvement and replace it with "you will notice a difference". Also, that sweet spot you set it up for can be measured in millimetres. Have you measured the response of the room yet so you know what you're dealing with? Have you tried moving your sub or speakers around to get a flatter response? Honestly, I think you would be better off treating your room first. Then I could see one of these being used to set up simulations of response curves for different types of target systems. You don't need to spend much on treatment if you are willing to do some of it yourself. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbLVjHfHahg Talking about speakers that reveal bad mixing or mastering, can anyone give examples of good and bad mastering in similar kinds of music? A Lone Girl Flier fucked around with this message at 16:02 on Mar 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 15:46
|
|
|
Waldo P Barnstormer posted:Have you measured the response of the room yet so you know what you're dealing with? Have you tried moving your sub or speakers around to get a flatter response? Waldo P Barnstormer posted:Honestly, I think you would be better off treating your room first. Then I could see one of these being used to set up simulations of response curves for different types of target systems. You don't need to spend much on treatment if you are willing to do some of it yourself. Hopefully I can try it out tomorrow, I'll report back then.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 16:40
|
|
|
Waldo P Barnstormer posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lbLVjHfHahg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5wJxpvw22g The instructor in the first video only briefly mentions avoiding clipping and hyper-compression, so I wanted to add this next video because I don't want anyone to get the wrong idea of the first one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-O5l6NSsdY Wasabi the J fucked around with this message at 18:32 on Mar 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
Sagacity posted:Haven't tried it yet, but if it's anything like regular Audyssey setups you need to put a microphone (included in the package) in multiple locations in your room. Then, it will play a number of test tones (really annoying sounding frequency sweeps) through each speaker individually and it will work out, based on what comes in through the microphone, what the difference is between the actual tone and the tone that was picked up. Then it essentially tunes a multiband EQ (or rather an FFT-based "infinite number of bands" EQ) based on that. Oh I know exactly what it will be trying to do, but the theory behind it, without being able to do a proper transfer function comparative to source and at least two or three averaged measurement points will massively impact the potential for making any real difference. And ever, EQ is EQ - it affects phase and group delay so the less the better. This is more what I was getting at; ideally it should be working at least to this standard: http://www.wavecapture.com/RoomCapture.html
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
Okay, so I just did the initial calibration. I measured the frequency response at 10 or so places and then applied the plugin to some songs I know quite well. And, I must say, it really works. I realize that in this thread it's quite dangerous to talk about improved imaging and bass response ("air", "solidity", "presence", "quintessence") but it's really a very clear difference. One that would pass an ABX test It's still not ideal, i.e. the response is not perfectly flat, but my home studio's mixing capabilities just went from pretty hopeless to quite reasonable. Yay!
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 17:52
|
|
|
Sagacity posted:Okay, so I just did the initial calibration. I measured the frequency response at 10 or so places and then applied the plugin to some songs I know quite well. And, I must say, it really works. I realize that in this thread it's quite dangerous to talk about improved imaging and bass response ("air", "solidity", "presence", "quintessence") but it's really a very clear difference. One that would pass an ABX test I've been thinking about getting one of these. My room sounds loving terrible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 18:19
|
|
|
My living room sounds like absolute garbage without a room correcting eq, I used my iPhone with a measurement mic to do the original cal when I moved in and used an analog eq. Now I have a receiver that does about the same thing, turning it off completely destroys the treble and everything sounds like poo poo. Those frequency sweeps can also be converted mathematically to get an impulse response which can be used to calculate reflections, presumably so the effect of room treatments can be evaluated.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
So, a new danish web store for audiophiles has opened, appropriately enough it's called audiophile.dk (Google-translated link). They have products in every price class, for instance their selection of speaker cables extends from a modest $735 for the basic model, to $30,500 for the 25th anniversary model. Both prices are for a set of two 2.5m cables, finished with spade lugs. Cables for longer runs or bi-wiring cost extra, naturally. The selection of power cables is equally wide, from $560 for the basic no-frills version, to $14,000 for the 25th anniversary version with built-in power conditioner. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
People that spend that much on cables more than likely burn that much just to start their fireplace because it amuses them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
Philthy posted:People that spend that much on cables more than likely burn that much just to start their fireplace because it amuses them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 19:43
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:They have products in every price class, for instance their selection of speaker cables extends from a modest $735 for the basic model, to $30,500 for the 25th anniversary model. Both prices are for a set of two 2.5m cables, finished with spade lugs. Cables for longer runs or bi-wiring cost extra, naturally. Oh hey I have that speaker cable! It cost £50 for a 100m roll and I made up my own Speakon cables with it for my PA kit. Same gauge. It just appears they've put some braiding over the rubber outer and cleaned off the powdery poo poo from the + and - inners and popped some spades on. That justifies the price alright. Every time I see poo poo like this I genuinely question whether or not I should do it too. The cash would be loving lovely.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 01:17
|
|
|
Honestly as long as you use good quality origin materials, it's not like you're lying to advertise a 100x price version with some patter about being "top quality audio reproduction cable" or something like that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 01:19
|
|
|
88h88 posted:Oh hey I have that speaker cable! It cost £50 for a 100m roll and I made up my own Speakon cables with it for my PA kit. Same gauge. It just appears they've put some braiding over the rubber outer and cleaned off the powdery poo poo from the + and - inners and popped some spades on. That justifies the price alright. Do you have a link to where it can be bought online or something? I feel like trolling some audiophiles.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 07:46
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Do you have a link to where it can be bought online or something? I bought it from an ebay seller called Pro Line Audio and it was a bargain, they're currently not selling anything but Thomann has basically the same thing on offer for a few quid more (but still farrrrrrrrrrrrr cheaper than what they're asking) 100m of 6mm for 280 Euros/2089DKK. 6mm sits between 10/11AWG which is thicker than the poo poo they're charging 163,500DKK for... Bargain! Get some braid, a bit of shrink tubing and some spades and nobody will ever know the difference. http://www.thomann.de/gb/cordial_cls260.htm 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 10:50
|
|
|
88h88 posted:I bought it from an ebay seller called Pro Line Audio and it was a bargain, they're currently not selling anything but Thomann has basically the same thing on offer for a few quid more (but still farrrrrrrrrrrrr cheaper than what they're asking) I wouldn't want to work with 10ga wire.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 01:47
|
|
|
jonathan posted:I wouldn't want to work with 10ga wire. Why not? For long cable runs to high power low impedance driver combinations such as subs it's far better to use 6mm soldered into the NLT range of SpeakOn connectors to minimise power loss.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 03:03
|
|
|
jonathan posted:I wouldn't want to work with 10ga wire. I run 12awg for my PA setup and I'd consider that over the top for home use.
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 12:22
|
|
|
A/V Cable Haiku: Got quote from vendor I'll get it from Monoprice Saved six hundred bucks
|
|
#
?
Mar 20, 2014 21:19
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:A/V Cable Haiku: What were you thinking? no concern for airiness? Danceability?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
I'm in the process of making my desk look cool and idly looking around at some flat cables to connect to my monitors and USB devices (I think flat cables look cool) and ran across a $350 USB cable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 19:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 21:13 |
|
|
Try $1100 for a 1.5m ethernet cable! http://www.stereophile.com/content/ethernet-cables-audioquest
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2014 23:36
|
|