CnoEvil said:FWIW. IMO. The Active route is not the way to go if you want a smooth sound with a rolled off treble.
Why do you think that?
CnoEvil said:FWIW. IMO. The Active route is not the way to go if you want a smooth sound with a rolled off treble.
Overdose said:CnoEvil said:FWIW. IMO. The Active route is not the way to go if you want a smooth sound with a rolled off treble.
Why do you think that?
CnoEvil said:NB. I am not being anti Active, but pro what I think is likely to meet the OP's needs / taste. eg A Unison Research "Simply Italy" Tube amp + Audio Note speakers is the sort of sound I think he is after,
CnoEvil said:Overdose said:CnoEvil said:FWIW. IMO. The Active route is not the way to go if you want a smooth sound with a rolled off treble.
Why do you think that?
You can't have it both ways......either Active speakers are much more accurate and neutral, or these active crossovers are not all they're cracked up to be.
I'm not sure recording studios would be queuing up to get nice smooth sounding active monitors with a rolled of treble (not great for looking deeply into a track)...it kind of defeats the purpose.
If you go the "Active Hifi Route", things tend to get very expensive, and the choice narrows dramatically......and the ones I've heard, certainly don't have a rolled off treble.
Arcam A19 with R100s sound quite smooth to my ears, so in this particular case, we are talking something with a golden midrange and a very smooth treble.....whereas Active speakers tend to give a clean and detailed presentation, often tipping a little into the analytical (which is the design brief for many).
NB. I am not being anti Active, but pro what I think is likely to meet the OP's needs / taste. eg A Unison Research "Simply Italy" Tube amp + Audio Note speakers is the sort of sound I think he is after, which is the antithesis of an Active set-up. In otherwards, it's about giving suggestions that IMO, have the greatest chance of success.
davedotco said:Dons tin hat and awaiting incoming....... ray:
floyd droid said:Incoming and waaaay off topic. Howard Popeck is still in the game Dave afaiaa.
As you were fellas.
CnoEvil said:davedotco said:Dons tin hat and awaiting incoming....... ray:
It is quite safe to remove your helmut again, at least as far as I'm concerned.....I always read what you have to say with interest, and whilst not necessarily agreeing, I find I do more often than not.
I know what the A19 + R100s sound like, so I'd be surprised if he found the Active solution worked.......but I have been known to get it wrong on occasion.
I don't need to tell you the difference in presentation between the likes of UR/Audio Note/ SF/ Jadis/Icon Audio/Harbeth vs The Active Monitor route.
davedotco said:CnoEvil said:Overdose said:CnoEvil said:FWIW. IMO. The Active route is not the way to go if you want a smooth sound with a rolled off treble.
Why do you think that?
You can't have it both ways......either Active speakers are much more accurate and neutral, or these active crossovers are not all they're cracked up to be.
I'm not sure recording studios would be queuing up to get nice smooth sounding active monitors with a rolled of treble (not great for looking deeply into a track)...it kind of defeats the purpose.
If you go the "Active Hifi Route", things tend to get very expensive, and the choice narrows dramatically......and the ones I've heard, certainly don't have a rolled off treble.
Arcam A19 with R100s sound quite smooth to my ears, so in this particular case, we are talking something with a golden midrange and a very smooth treble.....whereas Active speakers tend to give a clean and detailed presentation, often tipping a little into the analytical (which is the design brief for many).
NB. I am not being anti Active, but pro what I think is likely to meet the OP's needs / taste. eg A Unison Research "Simply Italy" Tube amp + Audio Note speakers is the sort of sound I think he is after, which is the antithesis of an Active set-up. In otherwards, it's about giving suggestions that IMO, have the greatest chance of success.
Cno, this could be an interesting one.
I know the OP is talking about rolled off high frequencies but we really have no real idea where in the range the problems lie, so this is not a specific answer but a more general one.
I many designs the tweeter is 'rolled off' quite slowly, Epos being a prime example for instance, so it is still outputing significant output well below it's nominal crossover point. At these frequencies the tweeter is no longer linear so much of what it produces is quite heavily distorted and these distortions are heard as higher frequencies, giving the treble a bright, somewhat wearing quality.
This is part of the problems with 2 way designs, getting the tweeter to go low enough to take over from the bass/mid unit before it starts to break up, it is always a tricky call for the designer.
In active designs the crossover slope is often much higher 24db/octave being quite common so that, an octave below the nominal crossover frequency the tweeter is recieving far less signal than it's passive counterpart. Distortion is much reduced as the signal is lower anyway and the tweeter may not be driven as far into it's non linear range, so distortion is reduced still further.
So in this respect, and if tweeter non linearity is the issue, actives are usually superior.
Dons tin hat and awaiting incoming....... ray:
Craig M. said:Dave's reply touches on why I find decent actives to actually be quite smooth (I think of smooth as something different to dull).
sorry, I won't help you with my post but I'm exactly where you are... just did few hours comparisions two days ago.. Sony mini system with Sony speakers bought for £200 8 years ago next to todays Marantz & Kef's £900.. the trebels are not there on Kef's and the bass much better on Sony's althought much smaler cabinets than Kef's... same songs played. Marantz with internal Dac and Sony via audio cable from Mac ( that means Mac built in Dac) at least I know I've got very good sounding bedroom hi fiGoat said:... If I can't find anything suitable, I think I am just going to sell the whole system - I never had any of these problems when I owned a cheap micro system for years!!
Thanks
Goat said:Thank you all for the suggestions, it is all food for thought.
I think it is either going to be a case of a bit of (an expensive) revamp, or, trial and error with some cheaper measures, such as resisters, or an equaliser, perhaps routing the streamer through a quality DAC like the Arcam Irdac etc. Or, just getting used to the sound of what I have!
I’ve always been tempted by Spendors, it’s just that they’re so damned expensive. Couple of questions though – 1. I presume for my current room of 11ft x 9ft, that it is either going to be the SA1 or A5, which would be most suited? 2. Is the Arcam A19 up to the job of getting decent performance out of them at moderate volumes? 3. Is there any significant tonal difference between the A5 and SA1?
Goat said:I am still struggling with treble...or rather, spending far too much time focusing on it when listening to music. Try as I might, I just can't shake the feeling that it intrudes too much and detracts from the overall enjoyment. The times I enjoy listening to my system the most, are on the treble-shy tracks, the mid-range heavy ones. This really shows the strengths (to my ears) of the arcam a19 and kef r100 speakers, which beautifully place and articulate the various strands of the mids and upper bass tones.
And don't get me wrong, the Kef R100's are still a significant improvement over the Kef Q300's and the Epos Epic 2 speakers I used to have. The transition from mids to highs is much smoother, and the overall quality of the treble is better too. But still...it grates, after months of trying to 'live with them'. I also appreciate that there are much much brighter and less refined speakers out there, but then I guess it is all relative.
Perhaps I am just oversensitive to it, but it has certainly got me wondering whether I am simply listening to the wrong speakers. Maybe more modern, revealing ones just aren't for me, even if they are technically 'better' in many ways.
So...I was wondering if anyone could recommend some speakers, prefferably bookshelves, which posess more rolled off treble, but still have a lovely midrange (and preferably taut bass, as that is another annoyance with the R100's. If I can't find anything suitable, I think I am just going to sell the whole system - I never had any of these problems when I owned a cheap micro system for years!!
Thanks
The R100s and R300s can both sound lumpy if the amp doesn't keep good control over them, or they are too close to the wall.....the outer bung greatly helps though.the record spot said:Try out Tannoy's Revolution DC4 or DC6, depending on your room size. I felt they left the R100s standing on demo and I know KEF are flavour ot the whatever around here, but the truth of it in my room is that the Tannoys deliver a sound that's way above their price.
Clarity without harshness, bass which is accurate instead of being lumpy (something I'd accuse the R100s of incidentally) and a midrange that's as good as any I've heard. They work best awway from a rear wall (mine are about two feet out), and well positioned. They're not fussy, but five minutes trying them out in different alignments works wonders - this applies to any speaker of course.
Assuming your room isn't massive, you'd be recommended to try them out, if only to later disregard them.
CnoEvil said:The R100s and R300s can both sound lumpy if the amp doesn't keep good control over them, or they are too close to the wall.....the outer bung greatly helps though. IME. The R100s are bassier than the Tannoys, which have a slighter cleaner presentation, with a less golden mid-range. I also think the Tannoys are a little fussier with amp matching, as they are more likely to show up bright electronics.