Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > rec.audio.high-end > #9779

Re: Attenuate highest highs?

Show all headers | View raw

On 18/02/2020 3:28 pm, ~misfit~ wrote:
> On 15/02/2020 7:32 am, Peter Wieck wrote:
>> I think you are missing the point. If too much energy is being 
>> dissipated by the speakers in the high range, then too much energy is 
>> being dissipated in the high range. And, the brute fact of the matter 
>> is that there is not a whole lot going on above 15 kHz anyway. So if 
>> the OP perceives that his speakers are overly bright, we should start 
>> there.
> 
> A lot of the material I listen to is 'full range' and does have a 
> reasonable amount of high frequency content.
> 
> (I was listening to the Lindsey Buckingham Christine McVie album the 
> other day and there were 'tinkling' noises in one track that I could 
> hear but not clearly. It made me wonder why two 70 y/o plus musicians 
> were using sounds that they likely couldn't hear!)

**Those "tinkling noises" you hear are somewhere around 3kHz. You need 
to employ some room treatments to deal with the problem.

> 
>> I agree that attenuating the high range is not the answer. But neither 
>> is tweaking room acoustics. We need to work with the Human Ear and how 
>> we perceive sound at various volumes.
>>
>> Which is why balancing the speaker output does seem to be an answer, 
>> especially given that one does not normally blast music in an office. 
>> At low volumes, in general, not enough energy gets to the bass 
>> driver(s) to balance the treble, especially as speaker efficiency 
>> drops. These are 88 dB speakers, not horrible, but not great either.
> 
> I do generally listen to music with a wide dynamic range so the volume 
> is set higher than it would be if I were listening to compressed pop or 
> rock music. I sometimes listen to music while computer gaming and it can 
> be louder than you'd expect in an 'office'.

**Is the amplifier being allowed to enter Voltage limiting (aka: 
Clipping)? If so, then all bets are off. You may need an amplifier with 
more output Voltage capability.

> 
> I use the term 'office' loosely to mean the area of the house where my 
> computer and desk are. It's a habit I picked up when I owned a small 
> business and did my stocktaking and accounts etc. from a home office.
> 
>> Eschew needless complexity. If the electronics have a "Loudness" 
>> function, start there. If they have tone-controls try *BOOSTING* the 
>> bass - again that nasty issue of low-volume weak bass is more at-issue 
>> than excess treble (at low volume). Failing both these things, is it 
>> possible to relocate the speakers, moving them more towards room 
>> corners, or closer to the floor, or similar so as to help 'boost' the 
>> bass response. However, this might sacrifice sound-stage.
> 
> The bass is good. I'm using a small kitset pre-amp with no tone controls 
> which goes through a crossover in a second-hand kitset subwoofer 
> amplifier. (Playmaster 300W Subwoofer Amplifier.) The crossover takes 
> away all of signal below a certain point, sums it and feeds it to the 
> 300W MOSFET amp. It has three selectable crossover points and a level 
> control.

**You're an Aussie then?

> 
> I've got it set to the lowest of the crossover points (which are 70, 90 
> and 120Hz) as I want to preserve as much directional information from 
> low frequencies as possible. The Sony SS-K30EDs seem to handle 
> frequencies down to 70Hz just fine with minimal drop-off.
> 
> The subwoofer is a very inefficient thing that I built braced 25mm MDF a 
> couple of decades ago. It's a 10" driver in a ~40l internally-braced 
> sealed box and as such is very 'musical' when compared to ported 
> subwoofers that I've heard. It's response tails off below about 26Hz but 
> I'm fine with that.
> 
>> Only after the obvious fixes have failed should we push towards more 
>> heroic measures.
> 
> Cheers,


**Room damping treatments and ensuring your amp is not clipping should 
go a long way to solving your problems. Give me a call. I'm in the book.


-- 
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

Back to rec.audio.high-end | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-13 01:19 +1300
  Re: Attenuate highest highs? Unsteadyken <unsteadyken@gmail.com> - 2020-02-13 16:59 +0000
    Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-14 12:18 +1300
  Re: Attenuate highest highs? Peter Wieck <peterwieck33@gmail.com> - 2020-02-14 04:11 -0800
    Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-18 18:05 +1300
      Re: Attenuate highest highs? Peter Wieck <peterwieck33@gmail.com> - 2020-02-18 06:45 -0800
        Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-19 14:21 +1300
  Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-15 04:18 +1100
    Re: Attenuate highest highs? Peter Wieck <peterwieck33@gmail.com> - 2020-02-14 10:32 -0800
      Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-17 04:58 +1100
        Re: Attenuate highest highs? dpierce.cartchunk.org@gmail.com - 2020-02-17 14:27 -0800
          Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-19 06:35 +1100
      Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-18 17:28 +1300
        Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-19 06:41 +1100
          Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-19 09:14 +1100
            Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-19 15:02 +1300
              Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-20 08:44 +1100
                Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-20 13:05 +1300
                Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-21 05:01 +1100
                Re: Attenuate highest highs? Peter Wieck <peterwieck33@gmail.com> - 2020-02-21 04:37 -0800
                Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-22 06:57 +1100
                Re: Attenuate highest highs? Peter Wieck <peterwieck33@gmail.com> - 2020-02-21 12:48 -0800
                Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-23 05:37 +1100
          Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-19 14:28 +1300
            Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-20 08:57 +1100
              Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-20 13:46 +1300
                Re: Attenuate highest highs? Peter Wieck <peterwieck33@gmail.com> - 2020-02-20 05:18 -0800
                Re: Attenuate highest highs? Trevor Wilson <trevor@rageaudio.com.au> - 2020-02-24 09:46 +1100
    Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-18 16:18 +1300
  Re: Attenuate highest highs? dpierce.cartchunk.org@gmail.com - 2020-02-14 13:05 -0800
    Re: Attenuate highest highs? ~misfit~ <shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> - 2020-02-18 17:48 +1300
  Re: Attenuate highest highs? "Mat Nieuwenhoven" <mnieuw@zap.a2000.nl> - 2020-02-17 08:50 +0100

csiph-web