Stop it!

[busb]

It's a damn pity many studios don't listen as closely to their output as their professional equipment would allow :wall:

:rofl: I think you'd find a lot of people who work in studios would be quite willing to take you to task over that. Try saying that on a forum where people actually make the music and you'll be laughed out the door, and unfortunately it shows great ignorance as to what goes on in a studio, and then more importantly what goes on afterwards, especially with regards to the record companies and their ridiculous demands.

Oh really now! I don't give a fig who laughs, Bud. What damn planet do you live on? Have you not heard of the loudness wars? Have you not heard gross compression? Now had I said that ALL studios.. instead of many studios, your reply may have some validity but I didn't say all.

I've read 1000s of posts on various forums regarding folk blaming equipment for fatiguing sound where the culprit is more often or not poorly balanced & dreadfully compressed recordings. The recording industry has a great deal to answer for! Having said that, there are many hugely professional & dedicated studio staff but a great many studios are far to lax. I am not friggin' deaf!!!

 

[davedotco]

Greetings from the Baja peninsular.

Over 6000 miles from London, Mrs DDC having a shower, and i see that you all have managed over 100 posts and all without my help, an early greating to Thompson apart.

At present I am more concerned about getting ready for a beach party than anything else, live band too, god knows what they will be like.

Who knows, I might even log in tomorrow and let you know.......... :cheers:

 

[skippy]

Have a good night and a great holiday, don't fall in the beach fire.

Have a bit of sympathy, it's -22c here at the moment, but the sun's been shining all day 8)

 

[busb]

Greetings from the Baja peninsular.

Over 6000 miles from London, Mrs DDC having a shower, and i see that you all have managed over 100 posts and all without my help, an early greating to Thompson apart.

At present I am more concerned about getting ready for a beach party than anything else, live band too, god knows what they will be like.

Who knows, I might even log in tomorrow and let you know.......... :cheers:

May both of you have an extremely fine & memorable holiday, Dave. Just send us a collective postcard: "Glad you're not here..!"

 

[margetti]

.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Recently I have noticed in a few threads regarding sound quality a few members keep dropping the Active Speaker bomb into the discussion as if they'll give a noteable imrpovement in sound quality over passive speakers, stop it.

There is no decernable difference between the two types of speaker - outside of the convininece and flexability passive speakers offer - given a straight blind test I doubt anyone could tell passive from active anyway. So please - there is enough confusion in this hobby already.

Thank you.

as somebody who likes to champion cable differences, I find it slighty odd that you're now bringing blind testing in to the equation to back up your own views when you've previously said that people should just trust their ears.... I hope you can apprecaite the irony/hypocrisy of your post.... Just sayin...

Sorry fellas, while this thread has run its course pls allow me to respond to a few post in it which due to time restraints I could not respond to previously.......

Cheeseboy, this post makes no sense to me, what do you mean? I have always been pro test, sighted or blind. I have said many times MY set differenciates between cables clearly I have also said if anyone can hear differences then trust that - the reason this thread was raised is basically to make the uninitiated aware that the differences in performance between passive and active speakers is not the night and day difference some would have you believe, pls pointt out the irony/hypocrisy? ...... I don't get it.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Recently I have noticed in a few threads regarding sound quality a few members keep dropping the Active Speaker bomb into the discussion as if they'll give a noteable imrpovement in sound quality over passive speakers, stop it.

There is no decernable difference between the two types of speaker - outside of the convininece and flexability passive speakers offer - given a straight blind test I doubt anyone could tell passive from active anyway. So please - there is enough confusion in this hobby already.

Thank you.

Erm, nope. Whilst bi-wiring, different interconnects, different mains cables (or anything else on the mains), passive bi amping and bi-wiring make no difference whatsoever active speakers are vastly better.

Lol... now you're just plain drunk..... hope you've had time to sober up and see the stupidity of this post... crazy drunk people on the internet...lol!!

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Just got these this week.

Currently 1ft from the wall. 2 x 15ft RCA - XLR cables fed from the Sonos. 8ft apart and about 10 ft from the listening seat, still playing about, but so far so good.

http://www.genelec.com/faq/acoustical/52-i-am-not-getting-enough-bass/

Just a link to the positioning possibilities, I'm definitely getting enough bass.

The main thing is, whether passive or active, just enjoy what you've got. Time for a beer :cheers:

Big room, can those little speakers do it justice?

I take it the boxes they're sitting on helps with the timbre of the sound - I'd wager my passive set up would sound better in that room than what you have - but horses for courses, nice lay out .

you should consider slim floorstanders with side firing woofers - with a ceiling that high don't you loose most of the sound or is it the lense being used makes the room look bigger/taller than it is?

 

[altruistic.lemon]

Thompsonuxb, active crossovers do have a theoretical advantage, but they aren't massive orders of magnitude. If you compared 2 speakers of exactly the same model, one with passive, and one with an active crossover, you should be able to pick the difference in a blind test. It isn't massive, but the active should sound slightly better.

However, doesn't alter the fact that box design, driver choice, rigidity, materials used etc will have as much, if not more impact.

 

[skippy]

Room dims are 17ft x 15ft x 25ft (hwd).

They fill the whole house as it's open plan.

http://www.genelec.com/products/previous-models/8050a/ and click on the specs tab

 

[chebby]

Just got these this week.

Currently 1ft from the wall. 2 x 15ft RCA - XLR cables fed from the Sonos. 8ft apart and about 10 ft from the listening seat, still playing about, but so far so good.

http://www.genelec.com/faq/acoustical/52-i-am-not-getting-enough-bass/

Just a link to the positioning possibilities, I'm definitely getting enough bass.

The main thing is, whether passive or active, just enjoy what you've got. Time for a beer :cheers:

Big room, can those little speakers do it justice?

They are quite big 'little' speakers (452mm tall) with 8" bass/mid drivers and bass response down to 38hz (+/- 2dB). Each cabinet has a 150 W amp (bass/mid) and a 120W amp (tweeter) built-in and they can reach 110dB SPL.

Skippy mentioned the listening distance was only 10 ft so I think they seem more than adequate to the task.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Just got these this week.

Currently 1ft from the wall. 2 x 15ft RCA - XLR cables fed from the Sonos. 8ft apart and about 10 ft from the listening seat, still playing about, but so far so good.

http://www.genelec.com/faq/acoustical/52-i-am-not-getting-enough-bass/

Just a link to the positioning possibilities, I'm definitely getting enough bass.

The main thing is, whether passive or active, just enjoy what you've got. Time for a beer :cheers:

Big room, can those little speakers do it justice?

They are quite big 'little' speakers (452mm tall) with 8" bass/mid drivers and bass response down to 38hz (+/- 2dB). Each cabinet has a 150 W amp (bass/mid) and a 120W amp (tweeter) built-in and they can reach 110dB SPL.

Skippy mentioned the listening distance was only 10 ft so I think they seem more than adaquate to the task.

lol... must be the fish bowl lense or his furniture is huge.

Looked at the link I see they come in various sizes but these look like the babies in the series.... half a metre tall, you sure?

 

[chebby]

Looked at the link I see they come in various sizes but these look like the babies in the series.... half a metre tall, you sure?

I don't want to overuse the Father Ted "small, far away" clip on YouTube so here is a picture to help you...]

 

[Alec]

Just got these this week.

Currently 1ft from the wall. 2 x 15ft RCA - XLR cables fed from the Sonos. 8ft apart and about 10 ft from the listening seat, still playing about, but so far so good.

http://www.genelec.com/faq/acoustical/52-i-am-not-getting-enough-bass/

Just a link to the positioning possibilities, I'm definitely getting enough bass.

The main thing is, whether passive or active, just enjoy what you've got. Time for a beer :cheers:

Big room, can those little speakers do it justice?

They are quite big 'little' speakers (452mm tall) with 8" bass/mid drivers and bass response down to 38hz (+/- 2dB). Each cabinet has a 150 W amp (bass/mid) and a 120W amp (tweeter) built-in and they can reach 110dB SPL.

Skippy mentioned the listening distance was only 10 ft so I think they seem more than adaquate to the task.

lol... must be the fish bowl lense or his furniture is huge.

Looked at the link I see they come in various sizes but these look like the babies in the series.... half a metre tall, you sure?

Zoom in abit.

 

[skippy]

Looked at the link I see they come in various sizes but these look like the babies in the series.... half a metre tall, you sure?

I don't want to overuse the Father Ted "small, far away" clip on YouTube so here is a picture to help you...]

:O

:rofl:

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Lol...skippy I'm not knocking your set up honestly.

But if they are bigger than they look in this pic pls bare with me, looking at the proportions ( comparing it to the fire/surround they don't look nearly half a metre tall) - but having seen some stand mounts on the page then in the flesh I know the size can be deceptive. My floorstanders are only 80cm tall and in my minds eye looking at the pic they'd stand taller than your speakers on the box - but I could be wrong - no harm, alright.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Looked at the link I see they come in various sizes but these look like the babies in the series.... half a metre tall, you sure?

I don't want to overuse the Father Ted "small, far away" clip on YouTube so here is a picture to help you...]

o.k point taken..... :rofl:

 

[skippy]

Uxb,

Absolutely no offence taken.

Just to clarify the plinths are 690mm tall and 350mm wide, the speakers are 450mm tall so 1140mm from floor to top of speaker.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dJsDFij0JRY

 

[JMacMan]

If actives are better let's put it to the test.

Will someone nominate one of the 5 best active speakers ever made. I'll see if I can come up with a passive speaker that I think might sound at least as good. Then we'll get them together in the same room playing the same pieces of music at the same volumes one after the other. Either sighted or blind. I don't mind which.

Sure. B&O Beolab 5's.

But to be fair, as well as being a four way, fully active speaker, the overall design and engineering addresses most of the shortcomings of conventional (box) speaker designs as well, which would make the purely active comparison difficult.

I agree with points made by others, in that given a conventional, ported, MDF box loudspeaker, where everything else is equal, (i.e. exact same speaker apart from passive v's active crossover) an active crossover is an undeniable technical advantage; however it doesn't mitigate or necessarily make up for all the other design shortcomings.

MDF painted/veneered Rectangular/Cuboid Box speakers with reflex ports (active or passive) work well up to a point, but the main reason for their ubiquitous prescence in the market place, is that they are cheap to manufacture, not because they are the best technical answer to building loudspeakers.

If you really want to advance the state of the loudspeaker art, good drivers, with active crossovers in an MDF ported box, is only going to take you so far, and in the context of the technolgy and materials available in the 21st century, that's not really very far at all.

There are much better ways of building loudspeakers - unfortunately cost constraints rule many of them out, given that HiFi is such a niche market, and hence limited volume will always be very costly per unit cost, to gain a return on intitial investment.

Cheers

JMac

 

[busb]

If actives are better let's put it to the test.

Will someone nominate one of the 5 best active speakers ever made. I'll see if I can come up with a passive speaker that I think might sound at least as good. Then we'll get them together in the same room playing the same pieces of music at the same volumes one after the other. Either sighted or blind. I don't mind which.

Sure. B&O Beolab 5's.

But to be fair, as well as being a four way, fully active speaker, the overall design and engineering addresses most of the shortcomings of conventional (box) speaker designs as well, which would make the purely active comparison difficult.

I agree with points made by others, in that given a conventional, ported, MDF box loudspeaker, where everything else is equal, (i.e. exact same speaker apart from passive v's active crossover) an active crossover is an undeniable technical advantage; however it doesn't mitigate or necessarily make up for all the other design shortcomings.

MDF painted/veneered Rectangular/Cuboid Box speakers with reflex ports (active or passive) work well up to a point, but the main reason for their ubiquitous prescence in the market place, is that they are cheap to manufacture, not because they are the best technical answer to building loudspeakers.

If you really want to advance the state of the loudspeaker art, good drivers, with active crossovers in an MDF ported box, is only going to take you so far, and in the context of the technolgy and materials available in the 21st century, that's not really very far at all.

There are much better ways of building loudspeakers - unfortunately cost constraints rule many of them out, given that HiFi is such a niche market, and hence limited volume will always be very costly per unit cost, to gain a return on intitial investment.

Cheers

JMac

I think this paragraph pretty well sums it up. The problem with cuboid boxes is that they tend to sound like cuboid boxes. Some designs such as my Arros do a good job of disguising the boxiness at the expense of bass depth but hearing the clarity from well-sorted open-baffle designs that eliminate most cabinet resonances can be quite an ear-opener.

When speakers approach the £3k level, I'd expect a little more than cuboid boxes, though many well below this price do at least avoid parallel panels.

One thing active designs have the potential to do is to allow tailoring to match room placement far more flexably than with fixed/partially adjustable passive Xovers. I take the point that active cube speakers only address some issues that could be sorted.

 

[steve_1979]

...The problem with cuboid boxes is that they tend to sound like cuboid boxes...

Two of the best speakers I've ever heard are made by Genelec and Quested. The Genelec's are famous for their curvy enclosures both internally for standing waves and externally for diffraction purposes. The Quested's are unashamedly square.

They're both equally exellent speakers which have a slightly different presentation but I couldn't honestly say that the Quested sounded any more or less 'boxey' than the Genelecs. I'm not even sure what 'boxey' sounds like.

...When speakers approach the £3k level, I'd expect a little more than cuboid boxes, though many well below this price do at least avoid parallel panels...

I've read about and understand why curved enclosures are better than boxes but in practice I think the differences are minimal at best. Especially with small speakers. I've heard too many times speakers with square enclosures that sound just as good or better as curved ones. Still, for anything over the £3-4K mark I'd want curved enclosures too even if the difference is only minimal.

 

[busb]

...The problem with cuboid boxes is that they tend to sound like cuboid boxes...

Two of the best speakers I've ever heard are made by Genelec and Quested. The Genelec's are famous for their curvy enclosures both internally for standing waves and externally for diffraction purposes. The Quested's are unashamedly square.

They are both equally exellent speakers which have a slightly different presentation but I couldn't honestly say that the Quested sounded any more or less 'boxey' than the Genelecs. I'm not even sure what 'boxey' sounds like.

Smearing of the sound in the time domain caused by internal reflections which manifests itself as lack of clarity & a loss of dynamics.

 

[steve_1979]

Ahh. I get it.

Somebody should write a translation guide for hifi speak.

 

[spiny norman]

Somebody should write a translation guide for hifi speak.

Someone has.

 

[steve_1979]

Somebody should write a translation guide for hifi speak.

Someone has.

Thanks.

boxy

1) Characterized by an "oh" vowel coloration, as when speaking with one's head inside a box.

2) Used to describe the upper-bass/lower-midrange sound of a loudspeaker with excessive cabinet-wall resonances.