Any BARF Audiophiles?

GAJ

Well-known member
Elac 310 (400w) 2-10s

Onkyo TX-NR636

That's right; easy to tweak with the phone app and/or different placement.

"Optional" EQ settings in my Denon receiver, (something called Dynamic EQ by Denon maybe Onkyo has something similar), makes my sub sound awful so might want to see if you have something similar and try turning it off if it is on.

Have fun.

Auditioning a pair of KLH Albany's for my friend's who's house burned and they are moving into their home in 2 months or so.

So far in 2.0 with very little "break in" my LX16s put them to shame but they are starting to sound "fuller" with time.

Could be my imagination though. :laughing

Will test them head to head again in a week after 50 hours playing movies etc in my main room.

I resurrected my college era Sansui 881 for them that needed some service work plus dug out an old 3 disc CD changer/burner that was in storage for them as they don't stream.....................yet.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1505.jpg
    IMG_1505.jpg
    63.2 KB · Views: 24
Yeah, Onkyo has a “music optimization” which is supposed to “enhance” compressed music. It’s just an EQ.

Thanks for all the guidance so far. It’s been an enjoyable journey!
 

GAJ

Well-known member
Yeah, Onkyo has a “music optimization” which is supposed to “enhance” compressed music. It’s just an EQ.

Thanks for all the guidance so far. It’s been an enjoyable journey!

What I know about audio is far less than what I don't know! :laughing
 

GAJ

Well-known member
Yeah, Onkyo has a “music optimization” which is supposed to “enhance” compressed music. It’s just an EQ.

Thanks for all the guidance so far. It’s been an enjoyable journey!

I'm assuming you have all speakers set to "small" with a 60 or 80hz crossover to the sub?
 
Onkyo has an autoEQ function that "manages" that.

It's pulses the speakers and sets speaker type and such. I am pretty sure they're set to small.

I have the low pass on the sub set at 65, 10 above the min range on the speaker.
 

GAJ

Well-known member
Onkyo has an autoEQ function that "manages" that.

It's pulses the speakers and sets speaker type and such. I am pretty sure they're set to small.

I have the low pass on the sub set at 65, 10 above the min range on the speaker.

Yes, IIRC, some newer Onkyos did away with the confusing "small" and "large" designation as they should have been "using a sub" and "not using a sub" because some people don't want to call their large speakers "small" just to properly integrate a sub.
 

DReg350

Well-known member
So this whole sub-woofer thing just confuses the heck out of me. Perhaps it's because I've chosen to go with an older two channel architecture. A tube amp with left and right speaker outputs only.

I just can't wrap my head around adding a sub-woofer, with it's own separate solid state amp, between my tube amp and the speakers. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to defeat the investment. Tube amp and carefully selected tubes, cables and speakers to achieve a certain sound. Then plop the sub-woofer between them for more bump only to loose the sound I've achieved by introducing a solid state amp, which I believe will adversely affect the sound coming out of my speakers negating any improvements my tube and tubes may have given me. That and the fact that I'd want the sub on the other side of the room someplace, which would make cabling visible, ugly and insanely expensive. I'd love to have more punch, but not at the expense of fidelity and aesthetics.
 

GAJ

Well-known member
So this whole sub-woofer thing just confuses the heck out of me. Perhaps it's because I've chosen to go with an older two channel architecture. A tube amp with left and right speaker outputs only.

I just can't wrap my head around adding a sub-woofer, with it's own separate solid state amp, between my tube amp and the speakers. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to defeat the investment. Tube amp and carefully selected tubes, cables and speakers to achieve a certain sound. Then plop the sub-woofer between them for more bump only to loose the sound I've achieved by introducing a solid state amp, which I believe will adversely affect the sound coming out of my speakers negating any improvements my tube and tubes may have given me. That and the fact that I'd want the sub on the other side of the room someplace, which would make cabling visible, ugly and insanely expensive. I'd love to have more punch, but not at the expense of fidelity and aesthetics.

Subwoofers were primarily developed for Home Theater and I have a 15" sealed servo subwoofer with a 1250 watt amp in my main home theater that has a 15hz bass extension spec.

That being said the few times I listen to music in there with my towers that have a 39hz bass extension spec I listen in stereo direct with the subwoofer switched off.

So for music a sub with capable speakers is not necessary.

And if you have bookshelves and are using a modern receiver with bass management adding a subwoofer makes a ton of sense.

In my secondary room I have a setup similar to that and it sounds great.

The whole tube/analog niche audiophile should probably use tower speakers but for others with less esoteric tastes a bookshelf/sub setup makes a lot of sense.
 

TerryM

--/\~
So this whole sub-woofer thing ...

I've never been sold on them for two channel music listening, and I don't have a home theater setup. I'm sure if implemented well they'd just fill in an octave I don't have, but like you, I like my current amps, don't want the cube sitting around and cabling is already borderline on the spouse approval scale.
 

GAJ

Well-known member
Just auditioned in home some KLH Albany speakers vs my Martin Logan LX16s in my secondary room for my friends who lost their home in the fire. They should move in within 2 months so doing some legwork.

Unlike the Q Acoustics Concept 20s I tested here a few years back the new KLH don't hold a candle to the LX16s. Very thin sounding with a lack of detail in the tweeter.

It wasn't even close sad to say as I'm sure they are going to love the real wood veneer Walnut cabinets as they are "wood" crazy.
 

DReg350

Well-known member
My wife LOVED the sound of the Martin Logan’s we saw at a Magnolia month’s ago. She walked away quickly when the rep shared the price. :laughing I’d love to have a pair some day.

I just acquired a pair of Proac Tablette Anniversary in Zebra wood. My friend overpowered them and fried one crossover. He's having it replaced under warranty, but was disgusted, so he just gave them to me. I wouldn’t have bought them, but I’m delighted to have them. Meanwhile the NOS drivers that I installed in my Swifts a year or so ago must have finally burned in cause the sound just keeps getting better. Really happy with them.

I’m thinking my next upgrade may be a new DAC. So far I’m leaning heavily towards a Musical Paradise MP-D2 MK3. It’ll be awhile though.
 

tzrider

Write Only User
Staff member
Subwoofers were primarily developed for Home Theater and I have a 15" sealed servo subwoofer with a 1250 watt amp in my main home theater that has a 15hz bass extension spec.

Subs have been in use long before home theater was a thing. In college we used all tube gear, preamps and main amps, but bi-amped the setup with a crossover between the preamp and the power amps. The mains were tube amps, while the subs were run by SS amps. For the lows, you don't need or want tube amps unless you like wooly, uncontrolled bass. The crossover didn't degrade the signal from the pre and resulted in a setup where the mains and main amps only had to deal with the frequencies above the cross-over point.

This was for our main PA system. A lot of acts came through and they all raved about our system, always prefering it to their own. The Joffrey Ballet said it was the best sounding system they had ever heard anywhere.

The guy who conceived the setup ran a similar configuration for his home system; Marantz tube pre, crossover, McIntosh 2100 for the mids and highs, Mac 2300 (SS) for the subs. Dahlquist DQ-10 mains and a pair of Dahlquist (I think) subs. Probably still the best sounding system I've ever heard.
 

GAJ

Well-known member
Subs have been in use long before home theater was a thing. In college we used all tube gear, preamps and main amps, but bi-amped the setup with a crossover between the preamp and the power amps. The mains were tube amps, while the subs were run by SS amps. For the lows, you don't need or want tube amps unless you like wooly, uncontrolled bass. The crossover didn't degrade the signal from the pre and resulted in a setup where the mains and main amps only had to deal with the frequencies above the cross-over point.

This was for our main PA system. A lot of acts came through and they all raved about our system, always prefering it to their own. The Joffrey Ballet said it was the best sounding system they had ever heard anywhere.

The guy who conceived the setup ran a similar configuration for his home system; Marantz tube pre, crossover, McIntosh 2100 for the mids and highs, Mac 2300 (SS) for the subs. Dahlquist DQ-10 mains and a pair of Dahlquist (I think) subs. Probably still the best sounding system I've ever heard.

Yes, that will still work if you get a sub with speaker level connectors for your tube amp.

My Dad had DQ10s.

Great looking and great sounding back in the day.
 

GAJ

Well-known member
My wife LOVED the sound of the Martin Logan’s we saw at a Magnolia month’s ago. She walked away quickly when the rep shared the price. :laughing I’d love to have a pair some day.

Note that the LX16s at almost half the price of the Motion 15s are identical, it was a simple name change that sidelined the LX16 as Martin Logan rebadged their non ESL speakers as the Motion series.

https://www.amazon.com/MartinLogan-...ocphy=9032332&hvtargid=pla-567491409776&psc=1
 

DReg350

Well-known member

GAJ

Well-known member
Top