audioeclectic
Member
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2019
- Messages
- 22
- Likes
- 3
If the speaker has an angle of inclination of 5 degrees, how far away should the listening position be, if my ears are 3.6 feet from the ground?
If the speaker has an angle of inclination of 5 degrees, how far away should the listening position be, if my ears are 3.6 feet from the ground?
Hello? Klipsch? Zu Audio? [list redacted as it overloaded the ASR server]I bet the specs are with in-room extension (i.e. +6 dB as they mention in the paragraph above the carts). They should make that clear.
I purchased the Arendal 1961 towers and am thinking I might return them. I can't seem to figure out why I'm getting such a muted treble response. I'm not one who lives sibilance, but the symbols in music are almost gone, and the entire upper range is seriously subdued. I played side by side with Q Acoustics 5040 towers and the difference was night and day in the treble. The same for my HSU Research HB-1 MK2 bookshelves. This is with a Denon AVR-X4800H in 2 channel mode and paired with a sub crossed over at 80 hz.
Could there be something else I'm missing. At first, I wondered if the super shallow binding posts were somehow obstructing the banana plugs from fully inserting, but it appears that's just the design. This is in a large living room and about 12-13 ft from MLP. The 5° angle seems to properly align with the ear axis.
At first when new I noticed that its treble was soft and low compared to the previous speakers I had, but I made the proper placement of the speakers, that the tweeter was focused on my ears and after 50 hours everything pleasantly improved its sound It is impressive, later I placed the acoustic treatments and I was even more surprised by what they can give, a lot of extension in very high frequencies, without being exaggerated, their sound tends to have a flat response, they are very honest to say in some way. My system is stereo without any type of processing or room correction, check that carefully as suggested in the previous note, remove all room correction and listen to them like this, in stereo, after that, go through the configuration of your AV Receiver again As you did with your previous speakers, after 50 hours, do the room correction again and they should improve a lot.I purchased the Arendal 1961 towers and am thinking I might return them. I can't seem to figure out why I'm getting such a muted treble response. I'm not one who lives sibilance, but the symbols in music are almost gone, and the entire upper range is seriously subdued. I played side by side with Q Acoustics 5040 towers and the difference was night and day in the treble. The same for my HSU Research HB-1 MK2 bookshelves. This is with a Denon AVR-X4800H in 2 channel mode and paired with a sub crossed over at 80 hz.
Could there be something else I'm missing. At first, I wondered if the super shallow binding posts were somehow obstructing the banana plugs from fully inserting, but it appears that's just the design. This is in a large living room and about 12-13 ft from MLP. The 5° angle seems to properly align with the ear axis.
At first when new I noticed that its treble was soft and low compared to the previous speakers I had, but I made the proper placement of the speakers, that the tweeter was focused on my ears and after 50 hours everything pleasantly improved its sound It is impressive, later I placed the acoustic treatments and I was even more surprised by what they can give, a lot of extension in very high frequencies, without being exaggerated, their sound tends to have a flat response, they are very honest to say in some way. My system is stereo without any type of processing or room correction, check that carefully as suggested in the previous note, remove all room correction and listen to them like this, in stereo, after that, go through the configuration of your AV Receiver again As you did with your previous speakers, after 50 hours, do the room correction again and they should improve a lot.
I can't speak for HSU, but the Q'Acoustics models tested by Erin, even the newer 5020 have all had quite elevated treble response. The 1961's are flat on-axis. It could be a case of you have gotten used to the elevated treble of the Q'Acoustics, which has now gone with the Arendal and they sound flat and lifeless.I purchased the Arendal 1961 towers and am thinking I might return them. I can't seem to figure out why I'm getting such a muted treble response. I'm not one who lives sibilance, but the symbols in music are almost gone, and the entire upper range is seriously subdued. I played side by side with Q Acoustics 5040 towers and the difference was night and day in the treble. The same for my HSU Research HB-1 MK2 bookshelves. This is with a Denon AVR-X4800H in 2 channel mode and paired with a sub crossed over at 80 hz.
Could there be something else I'm missing. At first, I wondered if the super shallow binding posts were somehow obstructing the banana plugs from fully inserting, but it appears that's just the design. This is in a large living room and about 12-13 ft from MLP. The 5° angle seems to properly align with the ear axis.
I understand very well what Amirm explains, especially what he says about the manufacturers also mentioning it so that you do not have the option of returning the new speakers if you did not like them. I understand very well that our mind sometimes plays a bad trick on us, however, being aware of that, you look for a way to focus on what you hear or perceive, and yes I have noticed slight differences with the mechanical elements, I have even noticed it with phono cartridges when the environmental temperature changes rapidly. The test that Amirm did or the one he mentions about the Revels could have been done better, allowing more time to pass. In that case I should think that my old ADS LS810 from 1980 should sound the same as when new, they should even measure the same as when new, and that is not the case.The speakers do not "improve" ... your brain adapts.
Do Audio Speakers Break-in?
There are a lot of "everybody knows" type of rules in audio with one of them being that audio gear in general, and speakers in the specific, benefit from "break-in." That is, their performance improves after some time. This is mostly touted by audiophiles but manufacturers also fuel this...www.audiosciencereview.com
Jim
It is entirely possible that I've gotten so used to the sound of the HSU HB1-MK2 speakers that the Arendal sound like they have no upper range detail. The Q Acoustics 5040 speakers were just purchased to see if I prefer them over the Arendal speakers before my 60 days to return them is up, so I'm more used to the Arendal speakers (50+ days listening at this point) than the recently delivered Q Acoustics. I can't imagine that what I'm hearing is desirable in the upper range. If I'm that biased at this point - even after 50 days of exclusive listening - I'd question whether I need to revisit the audiologist if I hadn't just seen one this past year and passed with a pretty good grade.I can't speak for HSU, but the Q'Acoustics models tested by Erin, even the newer 5020 have all had quite elevated treble response. The 1961's are flat on-axis. It could be a case of you have gotten used to the elevated treble of the Q'Acoustics, which has now gone with the Arendal and they sound
I ran separate Audyssey profiles for each of the two speakers and saved them under two different profiles in the Amp, and then saved those to two different quick button settings on the remote to dB matched output given their different sensitivity. That's the best I could do to make it a fast, switch-out-the-banana plugs-and-press-the-quick-setting-button comparison as I could. Not perfect on the methodology, but it's the best I could do.Did you remember to turn off any room correction/EQ from the previous speakers?
I understand very well what Amirm explains, especially what he says about the manufacturers also mentioning it so that you do not have the option of returning the new speakers if you did not like them. I understand very well that our mind sometimes plays a bad trick on us, however, being aware of that, you look for a way to focus on what you hear or perceive, and yes I have noticed slight differences with the mechanical elements, I have even noticed it with phono cartridges when the environmental temperature changes rapidly. The test that Amirm did or the one he mentions about the Revels could have been done better, allowing more time to pass. In that case I should think that my old ADS LS810 from 1980 should sound the same as when new, they should even measure the same as when new, and that is not the case.
because when listening to them now, it is very obvious that they generate a distortion, before at the same volume level with the same music in the same room, they did not generate the distortion and failure that is manifested today, the failure currently is that the coil hits the the rear part of the magnet in a transient peak, as I mentioned at the same volume level, same music and same venue. If I lower the volume and play the same music, this error does not occur, but it no longer produces the sound it used to, and I have also physically checked them and they do not have any breaks nor have they become detached from their basket.There's a difference between break-in and old age. What people call "break-in" supposedly happens in a short period of time; hours, days or weeks.
As for your ADS speakers not sounding the same as when they were new (over thirty years has passed) and not even measuring the same ... how do you know? Auditory memory is short-term, not long-term, and certainly not thirty years long-term.
And did you have them measured thirty years ago and then recently? I would suspect that the measurement technology used thirty years ago is not translatable to the measurement technology of today, although without seeing the measurements from thirty years ago, I can't say for sure.
Jim