XXHighEnd

My own Orelo MKII's have been playing around for some 4 weeks now, and I feel it took 3 weeks for them to get loose enough so I can be definite of its qualities.

Please notice : I am not writing this as a commercial text so I will also not describe matters in absolute sense. So what I will try to describe is how this speaker will sound different to all what we're used to, regardless price. And for those who read this out of the blue without knowing me : It can only be for the very best possible in audio just because I am into that explicitly and that only. If it were not the very best to my own knowledge, it would not be here. Or at least not in this forum.
But what is "the very best" ?

First of all (and for me) : Total Neutrality;
I know, this is a tough one for a speaker, but by now I think I can say that it's easier to make a speaker "neutral" than a DAC (to name something). Anyway it is my very foremost requirement, because I just can not live with ever the same sounds which might be obvious but which is also about what you are used to (and I have been spoiled already).

So, big deal, neutrality ?
Now wait. We are talking about an open baffle speaker which is capable of enourmous power in the bass (3x 15") and don't you think that it is an easy job to make that bass neutral. I think it takes spades of experience to know what "neutral" actually is for the lower regions, and it is not just about colouring as we might know from earlier "hi-fi" eras;

When a speaker goes straight to 19Hz (+/-0.5dB) like this one it is all so easy to tune in too loud under say 30Hz. Oh, you will have slam alright when done so, but it might occur to you that the slam gets tiring after a few days. So "all the time slam" is not a neutral thing. Slam must be there when intended, and must not be there when not intended. So that's what I meant with the necessity of spades of experience, because this is not so easy to tell.
Also let's not forget our playback software and tweaks in there, because obviously we need to see through that (virtually eliminate it) to deliver an inherently neutrally sounding speaker. This is a most tough job of course.

Without wanting to drift off, I will by saying that the latter is the exact reason for all the adjustments the owner of the speaker can make. So, we know how vastly another Operating System can change the sound, or how (new) XXHighEnd tweaks do, or how others do not use a computer at all, or use Foobar etc. - it ALL makes a huge difference. Not everybody knows, but in this forum we we all do, and I think I am (allowed to be) upfront with that.

So the Orelo MKII sounds totally neutral when it was tuned to the specific situation.

Of course people may add "yeah, through your ears", but although to some degree that might be true it is only for a small degree because something like neutrality is an absolute phenomenon hence it is not subjective. But again, it needs the experience.

You may read the above as an "oh, so when I receive the speakers I must start tuning to my specific situation, right ?"
Well, sort of, but actually not. For this time assumed that the owners will all use the same best situation and which is actually depicted by this very forum, we will tell eachother what to do/set, with at least at first me ahead. So for example, when the current XXHighEnd version best utilizes Settings XYZ, then the speaker will be tuned to that by (at first) me, and all what's needed further is that we copy eachother's settings (and start tweaking from there).
So let's see what actually the parameters (possible variations) are (at least for current due owners) :

- We all use XXHighEnd;
- We all use the NOS1 D/A converter;
- We all use the same amplification (because built-in);
- We all use the same speaker wireing in normal circumstances (because built-in);
- We can all use the same DSP settings (because shared as config files);
- We do not use the same interlinks;
- We do not have the same rooms;
- We might not use the same Fletcher-Munson (http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=2923.0) settings/curves (this already can depend on the genre we play);
- We might have added room correction settings in the DSP (but I never will).

So as you see not all that many variables exist and when room correction is left out of the equation, we should all be able to copy eachother's found settings and have all neutral (again).

---

For outsiders : This all may come across as pretty daft or stupid or strange at least, but the insiders will know that all these minute changes to software etc. can heavily/heavenly influence SQ and this sure is related to neutrality all over. Also notice that this starts with a DAC (NOS1) which is to be completey neutral, and not any other DAC will do this really, so if your's is another then you possibly won't be able to comprehend because of that already.

---

With all this neutrality thing it is good to realize that this speaker goes into all extremes imaginable. So it can output way more high frequency level than normally dialled in (pre-tuned here plus the Fletcher-Munson possibilities) , and it can output bass that crack your walls. So instead of squeezing out at best it's merely a hold-back at best. But of course this is a good thing !

Then the sound

We'll assume the source to be "100%". But please notice how crucial this remark is with just the (only one !) example of Windows 7 against Windows 8 and how Windows 7 will provice distorted sound while Windows 8 does not. So, all I can do is assume the best as how I have it here, and what I can add is that you can have the very same (but not my room).

Mid-bass is superb. Or at least as superb as I could make it which all depends on the bass-mid cross-over.
Notice that the X-Over has been setup such that we all can adjust it later through DSP.
The tightness of the mid-bass and the being forward of voices is scary at times.
I will honestly add that many more speakers will be good at this, because it is not related to extremes as such. In the mean time though, it depends on the speaker how difficult it is to get the mid-bass right, like where the cross-over (if any) is in the frequency spectrum.

When you envision a top end of the mid-bass, like how a blues (not bass) guitar can sound, you'll find yourself in the raging speed of the top horn with its 118dB of sensitivity.
All this speaker is about is speed-speed-speed but how speed sounds for the mid frequencies (think 500-2000Hz) is hard to explain.
Side note for existing Orphean horn owners : Although this is the same horn and drivers, nothing compares to it; your sensitivity will be 114dB (115dB for older versions like my own);
What you get from the additional 3-4dB of sensitivity is a kind of air in that mid range. How that guitar comes forward together with voices. But also how toms (drums) get their individual colour better. How metal remains that and won't get plastic.

The highs.
I have difficulty with putting into words what is going on there but maybe I can do it by referring to other types of speakers :
Say you're used to a wide bander officially rated to 16KHz (or more) then you have no highs in comparison. Just nothing.
If you are used to paper in the tweeter, then you will know that no "metal" ever came from that when listening to this.
If you are used to a dipole etc. radiating speaker, then you will know that your highs would not disturb much and can even sound warm. But if you listen to this Orelo MKII then you see the accuracy lacking in that dipole and that actually the sound is quite grey. Not fast. Smeared. Not capable of the real transients.
With the horn as used here you will see that the room can be so full of all individual ticks and squares and things all in there own position in the space. This too is all related to speed but also how a spec of 22KHz is really that.

Which brings us to the bass.
Here too, the spec (http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=2903.msg30689#msg30689) of the low end "19Hz +/-0.5dB" (17Hz at -3dB) is really that and you will only know what this really means when your subwoofers are replaced by this. And how or what ? Speed again !
This time it is about the free moving diaphragms and how nothing (pressure chamber) holds back and how you will finally perceive any 32Hz as a really vibrating that. So you can do the test with speakers rated at 27Hz on the low end, and see whether you hear that 16' organ pipe (32Hz). But I don't think you will hear a thing.
So with a pair of subwoofers (or one) you will ?
Haha, sure yes, but really nothing like intended, and all it needs is going to a church with that 16' in there. Or listen to this speaker, but that's a bit tough when you don't own it;
Here too it is about the "air" which plays quite another role than "music with air" as we may know it. What it does all together is again let sustain all in its own space. An attempt :

If you put up this nice blues with the lowest key on an electric bass guitar you will hear 30Hz. But mind you, this time at "concert level" hence as loud as you may have heard it at a concert. So say this is loud, of course depending on your volume level. But while envisioning this loud bass, all the fragile highs do not mix mix up with this. Nor does a voice. Or this hi-hat playing. The brushes. This is foremost because the low frequencies were tuned so that no audible harmonic distortion is at play. So think of it : Any normal speaker will not take into account the THD (Total Harmonic Distortion) because actually nobody cares much. So, it is an official rating that woofers are allowed to show 7% of THD. You want to know how that sounds ? well, put up a 24Hz tone and listen to 48Hz and 72Hz instead. And point is : while 24Hz will just be audible when no distortion is around, 48Hz etc. is VERY audible and it blasts through the room. This is not because this harmonic is louder but just because we human can easily perceive that while 24Hz is the under limit. Stupid thing is : these distorting harmonics are related to the fundamental so it is not even easy to discern what's brought to you from how reality is. So how would you recognize a 16' organ pipe while perceiving an 8' one ? (64Hz) You won't unless you'd really know the recording and the piece itself (read : what was meant to play).
An electric bass guitar ? same hing. The guitar produces a more square sound to begin with, and a plucked string at 30Hz will show at 90Hz because of that (squared = odd harmonics). So maybe you will hear some "fundament" in the 90Hz but this is really (really !) different from hearing that 30Hz with a now more faded 90Hz on top of it (which now just creates the timbre of the instrument).
And subwoofers ? Oh, they produce 20% of THD easily.

Got that ?
Then now I possibly could explain to certain extend how this speaker changes everything and all. Almost all on the low end sounds different / real just because a. it is output at the proper level in the first place and b. it is undistorted by guarantee.
Small notice : While for mentioned 30Hz this really is so, for 19Hz the 88dBSPL reference level should not be exceeded.

So a bit more about this latter :
If we'd look at FFT analysis we can learn how "ambience" works, and what create it; the most simple example is a kick drum which forms a sort of "thunder roll shock wave" into the room, BUT the room itself contributing to that. And hey, I am referring to the recording room/space (haha, got you). What this does is turning the fundamental of 38Hz or so (this can vary) into that lower "roll" and it can go beyond 20Hz easily. Now here's a new one : You won't know about it, because what happens ?
Well, first what should happen :
The 20Hz is not audible. But it is pressure. So, you will feel it (at mentioned 88dBSPL you sure will). So it is part of the game and it is a support to that 38Hz of the kick (drum). Ok.
But when a subwoofer produces this with its high distortion, you will get 40Hz at least (and probably 60 and 80). The 20Hz will be there too but lower in energy (because the energy is now spread to 40Hz and 60Hz and so on) and the 38Hz kick drum is mixed with 40Hz so it sounds different but also louder (because the frequencies of 38 and 40 add up) and its sound will be more sharp because 60Hz plays as well.
All wrong and all not real.

Of course, when the speaker can't produce 20Hz in the first place (and no subwoofer is around) then you will nicely hear that 38Hz and no interfering 40 and 60Hz. So, good. But now the ambience has gone ...

---

Like with so many things in this forum, I was not dictating from any schoolbook; I obviously don't like schoolbooks anyway, but I also think that a book for this does not exist (yet).
We must realize that any normal speaker manufacturer will not go (have gone) about like this, which already starts with many things needing to come together first. Too many to exist, really.
Because this is so, I think I can claim a speaker which is so different from anything else (never mind I don't know all) that this really also *makes* the difference. I mean something like : makes the difference needed to again get a few steps closer to the real reality of music through loudspeakers.

It still needs more, and I already have again done more, but that is for another day. ;)
Peter

There's no point in my commenting on any detail of your post Peter... until I get my Orelo speakers here. But I just wanted to say thanks for sharing - as a prospective owner, I'm fascinated by what I'm about to receive.

I suspect your post will come across to many as 'marketing', but to me it comes across as 'education'. You were at this exact place 3-4 years ago with the NOS1 - trying to convince people that the generally accepted 'formula' for most DACs at the time was wrong. And of course you were at this place with XX way, way earlier than that. Let's see if you can make it 3/3.

Mani.

Hey Mani (and others),

So you aksed me to write something about the sound, but it occurred to me that I actually can't do such a thing. And maybe it's only because maybe more expect me to write about "the sound" because I always do. But in this case it indeed would come across as marketing, so how to do it (read : I-do-not-want-to-write-like-that). So what happened by sort of nature is that I made it a mere technical thing (which you caught well) and which to some degree felt justified for not-so-marketing like. And hopefully it comes with sufficient explanation / clarification. But maybe not easy to understand for all.

It might also not be so easy to comprehend what it means that concert level bass keeps separated from highs in their own space etc. So I have that experience, but when you don't how to know or feel what I mean with it. So ...

Let me try to express in my more normal way what I experienced only yesterday. Remember, this is after 4 weeks of owning the speaker, and then this happens for a first time :

Lately I haven't been playing much "Jazz" or the like, just because the whole Orelino setup made me want to listen more to the real basses. Yea, what to say ... real basses. By ambient sh*t. Nicely real eh.
Hmm ...
Still I liked to revisit some upright bass without being into Jazz right away, so I dug up some Renaud Garcia-Fons I actually know well. So this is a guy with a room full of those basses and possibly he even plays more of them at one time. Ok, he's good. And he could be the exception of playing those machines without operating a Jazz band.
Just saying : he has a down side, and this is that somehow his albums sound the same throughout for the nature of sound. You know that I claim that when this is so, something is not neutral. Well, this is an example of that and possibly this is why I don't like to play the albums much. And before I continue : this not-neutrality is still in there, so it is the means of recording or whatever.

All right.
So I played this one perhaps a year ago. And yesterday as the first of the session. Oh boy, what the heck happened to it;
This is quite impressive tuneful music and actually you'd say that nothing much can change about it. It's no ambient suddenly showing a 25Hz somewhere and it's no drums sounding better, so it's just a bass player but with some horn and other instruments we might never heave heard (of). Oh ?

WTF became of this ?? suddenly this bass (which is not a small instrument) sounds like a feather light instrument with the strings all floating in front of you. Suddenly I see that this guy could be the very best bass player on earth just because of the speed he is able to put in to ... yeah, whatever all was not there before. Those other instruments I just tried to mention ... I actually heard them all for the first time. Horns ? So many horns ?
Anyway, the bass turned from a stiff hard-pluckable instrument into a steering-powered so easy to play thing. Yes, that's the good description : so easy to play. It is so full of air and all, that you see the guy hop up and down including his instrument - he may even fly a meter or two. So that's where the feather-light comes from (in my perception).

It also suddenly becomes apparent that he merely plays the higher keys strings than the real low ones (btw out of 5);
Possibly I told about it just a few days back, but several years ago I pointed out that one day we should be able to perceive the vibration of cello-keyed instruments. And this now has become reality. So notice : It is far more difficult to let a higher frequency vibrate audibly than the lower ones (but the lower sure also has its challenges).
But this is no cello and things work out very differently (when played high-keyed). It zooms (like nylon) and does and, well, wow ?

What is also very apparent (mind you, all in relation to my former speakers - also not the worst) is that he plays the strings often merely like a guitar. Now some new fun :
It is not all that difficult to hear how a Spanish guitar receives a wipe of the hand over the 6 strings, which should be related to the way higher frequency. So with the upright bass I now feel that this is easily smeared because of the lower frequencies being close together (think octaves now). But sh****t, not so any more. It just brings a whole new dimension.

But really. This now happens after a month and all what it needed was playing it.
Of course I run into similar experiences each day. But I feel that expressing about it (like in the above) will be too much of a commercial endeavour. But it won't be since I am not.
And I can tell you, this post was 10 times easier to write because not forced. No thinking about anything. Just experience. Didn't check for typos as well.

Peter

http://www.amazon.com/Oriental-Bass-Renaud-Garcia-Fons/dp/B000005CD8

Nice Peter. Thanks.

(I've ordered the CD in anticipation of my speakers.)

Mani.

I am enthusiastic for you Mani :) I sure would be frantic would I be able to get them !

These are the times where you first want to listen to them alone, then invite some friends to share :)

I am talking like when I was 15... Such a long time ago...

Alain

we can see Garcia-Fons playing on


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7eviXA0NtN0&list=PLcizG4wuCg6tpu1X8VKzl4qzOGceWp4eW&index=9

Peter,

Very interesting write ups on the Orelo and very interesting technically. Mouthwatering definitely. However, do not take this the wrong way but I am not going to get too carried away just yet - some convincing is needed and my ears (being the ultimate arbiter) are the only things that are going to do that.

I am very impressed with the design and originality and potentially I am anticipating that they could be the best sounding speakers. However, there are two problems that concern me. The first one is - well - it is "horns" in general and how my ears perceive them.

I have heard many horn setups (including Orphean) over the years and without exception what I hear is - well I hear a "horn". A very distinctive sound the horn has to my ears. Very impressive, very dynamic, very forward, very fast - but at the end of the day they always sound to me - well they sound like "horns". The other thing is that it always sounds like one is listening down the throat of the horn (not a nice perspective) and I have not yet heard anything like decent or natural imaging from a horn set up. So from what I have heard to date I am not sure I could live with horns. But I really do want to be proved wrong.

The other thing I find is that horns never sound quite right in that I always feel I need to get up and tweak - so maybe they are too just revealing of the source - in which case I have to assume you have sorted that because well I know you would have to!!!  Or maybe it is an inherent problem with horns. I just don't know and I shall wait to hear them before I make up my mind.

But now the biggest problem of all and that is the sound of the room. Now I know that the lack of a rear going wave is just total genius and is going to reduce some room interaction problems. But I also know for sure that the sound of any speaker is to a large extent going to be dominated by the sound of the room. Nick's room is one of the best examples (and by no means is his room going to be typical - no way!) but in the middle of Nick's listening room is a big stair case in a stair well - so there is a very high ceiling right in the middle of the room. The result is a very substantial lift in the upper base that does dominate the sound. It is inconceivable that any speaker could overcome that particular room problem. So whilst one could anticipate that Orelo's would sound very good in that situation one could also anticipate that there would be very significant "room" interaction problems. And I suspect that will be the case in other different room shapes (X-Fi?). That of course applies to all speakers but I for one would not invest such a large sum of money without knowing for sure that the speakers would work in my particular room. After all they are going to pump more bass energy (room excitation energy) into any room than any other speaker.

So it would be very interesting to get some feedback on what the Orelo's actually sound like in other more typical listening environments some "normal" rooms, if there is such a thing - after all your room is not typical at all.

How for example do they sound in Bert's room compared with yours? what other rooms have you listened to them in? and what steps have you had to take to get them to overcome room interaction problems.

Don't get me wrong but when a pair of speakers cost more than many would pay for a car I think these are relevant questions.

I really look forward to hearing them and I hope that they fulfill my expectations!!

Cheers

Paul

I had an interesting conversation with Gerd Sauermann when he was here a few weeks ago. He told me of a demo that he and a horn speaker manufacturers did in Germany a short while ago, with his amps and the horn speakers. Apparently, people initially complained about the horn speakers sounding "like horn speakers". But Gerd and the amp manufacturer had a trick up their sleeves. They stopped the music playback, brought some real instruments into the room and started playing them. Only after people's ears had become acclimatized to the real instruments did they start the music playback again. The response the second time was totally different, and massively positive. Apparently, they could play along with the music and people couldn't tell what was real and what was coming from the speakers.

My previous Swing horn speakers were flawed in many ways (you heard them, so you know), but one thing they did do was to introduce me to a different type of sound. For the first time I heard life-like transients from my system, and now that I've tasted this, I can't go back. But I have to say that it took me quite a while to acclimatize to the sound, flawed though it was.

Of course you'll get a chance to listen to the Orelos at my place. But I'd caution against making a quick judgment because I suspect they'll be so different from anything else we've ever heard from a replay system...

Mani.

First I have to say is that since the Swing and related Orphean horns many things have changed...and as for your hearing concerns I do agree that you'll always hear it when a horn is playing simply because it is a very directive sound, the opposite of diffuse.

Another effect is a typical sound due to reflections (all sound is "forced" to go in one direction) but this effect goes away completely once you're getting used to them. I only hear it when I am back from Holidays. Otherwise my brain is filtering this out leaving only the clear, dynamic and effortlessness sound with super focus no other type of speaker can do equally well.

I am not sure what you hear/experience but spend a few days with a good and neutral horn (like the Orphean M3) and get used to that. If you then still not like the presentation then it is mostly the "in-your-face" feeling you do not like and then you'll need more distance from the speakers to reduce that effect.

Once living with a set of decent horn speakers and you'll never want anything else...  :yes:

Bert

Hey Paul,

Over night I have been thinking how to respond to this, but after now reading Bert's response I see that my answer would have been "as weak" so to speak. I mean, I some times very explicitly try to watch for horn sound, but I really can't do it. Still it would be true I think that when you hear it a first time it will be recognizable. Well, exactly what Bert said. But maybe I can add something to it :

Because I always have been "tweaking" my own Orphean, it is easy for me to recognize when the "horny" sound jumps in;
This is when horn instruments start to excel. :yes:

Got it ? So when a sax etc. is really going to sound more sax than normal, the horn plays the horn along with it and something is wrong.

When I read your post yesterday I had no other thing in my mind than you referring to my Orphean (when you visited us), but only now I see that you just as well can have been referring to Mani's Swing. Well, not knowing how you perceived the difference between the two, I can say upfront that the both are not comparable, but ALSO that it is incomparable to the "M3" as how Bert refers to it. And while Bert answers in general to the Orphean question (with that M3) in the end in here (this topic) we talk about the Orphean horn for the Orelino / Orelo MKII which yet is quite another beast. Base is M3 (filter version) but electronically all is different and part of this is the equalizing of the horn.


This is a little subject or Bert and me may disagree over somewhat, or it is the lack of experience of Bert. But we talked about it before, and it is not so easy to try for Bert;
What I'm talking about is that when all is set well, the "triangle" rule won't even apply any more. So, distance of the speakers vs. listening distance - those rules have quite vanished. Notice though that I am not much of a sweat spot listener, but some times I try;

So what I did here - quite 100% on purpose (Bert did it himself, haha) - is putting the speakers eve more apart than they already were. This is born from my idea that it just can work - or has to work in my view. Well, it never changed in a month of time.
Now, this seems unrelated, but it is not once you envision that even with this large distance, you can be crazily close by and perceive all the "picture" very OK. So really think like listening at 4 meters distance, while the speakers are 6 meters apart. Now do notice that this is the exact other way around as how Bert proposes it - further off.

It is way more complicated (and discussion worthy) if on- and off axis listening is incorporated. And while I listen off axis, Bert listens on-axis. But now think ...
When one wants to listen on-axis, how to ever achieve what I talked about above. So when on-axis, you actually just turn the speakers in your face at all times and only making the listening distance larger helps.

Still there ?

Then back to my elsewhere mentioned height of the speaker (Orelo MKII the top horn, Orelino not) so listening (from a seat) would always be off-axis automatically (but now under it instead of aside of it - no difference).

And yet still there ?
Then think of the Fletcher-Munson curves and what they do more than only following some principles;
The on-axis listening desire comes from the best possible way to perceive the highest frequencies (there is even more to this but never mind for now). This is because beamed straight to you they are caught the best (uhm, I hope you'll understand this). However, when stepping aside somewhat, all what happens is that the spread is more and therefore the energy less. So solution : Switch that "High" F-M switch higher.
So it really is a concept, with the notice that crazy Bert again just did what I thought was best, while he himself is not much able to try it out in his own room (too much Big Orelo speaker there ;)).

It is again more complicated when we look at how the toeing can be done. Nothing special or new, but sure different opinions count here. So the two extremes :
1. Toe out and let the sound reflect on the side walls (on purpose !);
2. Toe in ("overed") and let the sound not reflect the side walls of the speaker at that wall and hope the late reflections of the *other* wall are harmless and so better put curtains there.

#1 and #2 are totally different solutions obviously, and I adhere #1. So I challenge for the reflections (and no curtains) with the idea that now audible reflections are of proper / natural phase and just contribute in natural fashion.
Now, not claiming to be correct on this, this now *requires* off axis listening for this reason already. Or IOW, envisioning the smaller room and on-axis listening, you'd always be hitting the opposite wall(s) in a fashion that would come down to first time reflections but of wrong phase (see 45 degree angles hitting the walls).
Toeing out in a small room has the opposite effect forthe better, because now the first time reflections will be very little time delayed with phase effects I can't reason out well, but where a now 180 degree could be nicely compensating the time delay. Of course any mile will vary here (mm as well) but it would be better in control in my view, this way.

So Paul, having that all said, and hoping you're still with me ... now what about the control of 180 degree radiators ?
As how I see it there is no control at all and you are more than ever in the hands of your room.

Maybe some more later, but I'd say this is enough for now.
Peter

Well Paul, though I like to respond to this, you actually said it all. And more;

The "more" is about the more revealing in the first place, which makes you hear better where yet to improve. And of course I am not talking about the horn now, but about the remainder of the system. Now you can call that a down side, but I sure do not ...

Btw Paul, I shouldn't put words in your mouth, but I can expect you to at this moment have the most experience with the Avant Garde's with my notice that they bite as hell to my ears. So horns are not horns and/but I can also expect you to be in a skind of struggle some times with the guy owning the AG's who thinks nothing is wrong with them (with only one reason being "he's used to them").

Also it is not to be underestimated what happens to a horn when not sufficient low frequency support is present. So NOW they come across as fast (and biting). But you can't try the difference because it is as it is.
An example of the other way around that hopefully speaks somewhat :
When I would tune-in a too heavy sub-low (so think under 35Hz or so - only there), what will come from it is background music. So the highs and freshness is snowed under by the heavy low end support. Remember, just under 35Hz where hardly anything plays and it's actually only ambient information you'll perceive.
And so I can of course also make that too lean and things start biting.

Moral : It needs this facility first to enable the real judging of a horn. So I don't think that when you switch off your woofers your mid-high begins to bite. Only lack of bass, that's it. But with a mid-high horn it does bite and this is only about the speed + directivity (just way more high output in your face).

Ok, I hope this is clear somewhat.
Peter

So Paul ...


Of course I can't say that any random strange room will survive, but in my view the chance it won't is small.
Mere problem is : we always - ahead of everything else - think it is our room being the culprit, while really something else is. For fun, try Foobar again and see how undoubtedly your random response will be that now your room is causing troubles. Well, it does, but clearly something else was changed. Try it !

But otherwise I can only testify from my own situation (and Bert's) but what can you do with that. Ok, maybe ask Nick. I think we ran the lot through the lowest and loudest frequencies and if he now tells you that problems will all over the place, well, he's making up things. So he won't. But more interesting could be that "someone" explains how it is able to work. Nick could try it. I am just used to it.
Please never forget though that once at a time my rack was stacked with equalizers and room correction means and all, just because the very unchanged room needed it. But this was prior to XXHighEnd and more ...

So apparently Nick's room causes some troubles. So, accepted. But what we still don't get I think is that this is all caused by wrong bass. I am not saying that Nick's bass is specifically wrong, but what would happen along my same lines of theories is that the bass will be so distorted that no "tight" waves spring from it. So it is all about that and it is all about XXHighEnd attacks that and how the NOS1 attacks that further. And just saying : If I'd use the NOS1 on a Mac and Audirvana the whole room makes me duck away - that bad. Hey, same NOS1.
So along these lines of theory, any better bass - which means bass with more controlled output and which is less distorted is way way louder in the first place and causes less problems in the second. I myself reported about it somewhere when the Orelino was first in, and I really couldn't understand how the heck this was possible. It seems that at least my room can take infinite bass (and of the lowest frequency kind). There is so much headroom in this (I never ever reached a limit) that any playing at more moderate (but still loud) levels in a random other room will still be OK.

Of course there is one other parameter and this is the room length. So when too short you will run into the cancellation of the frequency that exactly fits that length, and there is nothing really to do about that. And *now* we suddenly run into the strange problem of the better the bass output (say the louder) the more this will be noticable.
Usually this is about distinct tones like a bass guitar sequence and one of the notes now drop out. Well, since even a bass guitar plays justified chords this is a matter of putting your head a few cm more forward and away is the problem for that one track. Another track may need a slightly different positiion.
In the end it won't be a problem if you keep your head still, and only when explicitly comparing things you will need to. Otherwise it's fairly tough to recognize something is really missing (but it depends on the music).
So I referred to Bert's room because that clearly happens at his place andd for myself this is no big deal at all. However, back to the start of this post :

It happened I think 20 times at least that Bert himself blamed his room for something in this area (of bass) not working out. But none of that 20 times it was the room because always afterwards it was proven that the cause was something else.
Bert knows, because we always make fun of it.
But moral : Even if you build fine speakers for a great deal of your life - even then you will blame the room just because normal theories depict that and the excuse is easy. So we normal users of those speakers will blame the room even earlier.
But I don't and it is my advice to force yourself into this same thinking; Only if you do that you may find the culprits. Otherwise you will be stuck with them forever.

Regards,
Peter

PS: What happened at the latest x-Fi was not bass related. The room sucking highs that was.

Correction, I don't (never do/did) and prefer to have the speakers crossing in front of me (my room) and when possible (not an option with my Orelo's) pointing them up 5-10 degrees as well to have all early reflections in another direction than to my ears.

Sitting in the so called triangle then gives a perfect picture of the recorded space as seen by the microphones. But this is a whole other discussion...

There is not just one single way to enjoy!  ;)

Pointing them out works well too (I do not disagree) but only when the first direct reflections are not being directed directly to my ears which is the case when I toe them out here (my room is too small). And then still it is a matter of preference... some like it hot and others simple don't.

As a side note; I do have plenty experiences with horns and have heard the Orpheans and the other Oris horns in a lot of different spaces/environments...  :)

Bert

Yes, you are right. But there's nuances in this too and I thought to leave them out, not thinking about your more detailed observation of my text. Now it's even more complicated ... :) :)
So if you disagree, just say so :

So yes, you cross in front of you for all your good reasons. However, the degree of that is still to be regarded on-axis just because it too much still is so. Now I actually need a picture to show that, but I don't have it really. But let's use this one :

(http://www.stordiau.nl/orelo/IMG_0706a.JPG)
This can be called off-axis with the notice it is only that really when you're out of the most direct beam of the tweeter. But focus on the grey part in the middle of the horn.
This picture is taken from the sweat spot I think (didn't take the photo just now). So now envision this same angle of beaming but now crossing in front of you.
This would not work and the speaker would need the 45 degree angle of toeing I talked about.

Notice that the distance is not important. It is about that 45 degrees which is too much.

Now for our fun I could ask Bert to put up a nice picture of his listening position to show that
a. this is not 45 degrees at all;
b. thus the beaming is more direct (read : way more on-axis).

If I am not correct on this then for sure the picture will show up soon. :)

Anyway, as you can all see there is more to it, because the degree of being off-axis obviously also counts and it is an analogue thing (stepless). Everybody will do this to his best ideas and empirical finding (listen) but once you want to be out of the beam as much as I do, there is no option to do that toed-in.
And of course, while I just said that the distance won't matter much, it practially does for sure because the more close you need to be (read : the shorter the room) the more this overdone angle starts to count and the worse it will get for those reflections on the other wall.
And so in my view - when you need to be too close to the speaker and the "in your face" would be a problem, it is not an option to toe in. Toe out yes.
In my view.

And of course everybody can do what he wants !
Peter

Interesting debate.

Personally I love horn presentation. I really value their ability to project sound into the room and generate lifelike dynamics. I'll put up with a lot of "issues" elsewhere to have these qualities. High efficency horns do put the upstream system under a magnifying glass howver and the slightest problem in source or amps is writ large in the sound. sometimes I think these problems are confused with the sound of the horns themselves. Get the front end and amp performing well and IMHO the experience can be magical.

I'm guessing that as the efficency of the horn increases the ability to expose source and amps also increases making it harder to obtain a sound without "problems" being exposed in unglorious fine detail, so a very hard job to get this right with a 118db/w speaker then.

This brings me on to Peter system and Orelo spekers. They are quite exceptional to listen to. The latest NOS1 spec, the active amps and Orelo speakers as a replay chain are spellbinding to listen to. I have to say that Peter makes some bold claims about this system here but having had the chance to listened to it I recognise in the sound all of what he is saying about the Orelos.

Whilst at Peters I listened to his son playing drums live in the house. Afterwards Peter played a recording he had made of the same drum kit back through the NOS1 and Orelos, you really could not tell the difference save for a slightly less pronounced kick in the chest from the kick drum, otherwise cymbals and drums were simply the same as the live drum kit  :-)

Its all about personal preferance I guess. I don't think I could be without horns of some type of horn speaker in my system, but a set of Orelos would be be something else !

Nick.

ps, Mani I have a case of speaker envy even before you have taken delivery of your set of Orelos haha.

Hey Nick, I'm a little confused. Did you listen to Peter's actual Orelo MkII speakers (the black 'Darth Vader' ones in his pics above) with 3x 15" bass drivers, or the previous Orelino speakers with 3x 12" bass drivers?

My understanding was that it was the latter. And from the sounds of it, things have moved on considerably from there with the Orelo MkIIs.

Mani.

PS. You should pity me not envy me - the wait has been a long one... and continues...

Thank you for sharing that Nick.
Btw I am positive that you pointed out the difference between what you heard (the Orelinos) and what I am writing about in this topic (Orelo MKII) but it may not be clear to everybody right away.


So I applied a small correction in your quote to emphasize it;
Orelo MKII has two times the woofer surface of the Orelino you heard, but I didn't try that drumming track again to check it out. But I think it will work 100% now. Claims-claims-claims ;)

Hey Nick, I don't think I told you that because of your (mutually hastely arranged) visit I had to postpone the new speaker's arrival till the Monday after. But it really was so. I honestly had forgotten about it while you were here and only thought about it again just now.

Regards and thanks !
Peter

Hi Mani,

We cross posted somewhat but when I was finished and saw yours I let mine be as it was. But clear now I think.


Yeah, and see what I just wrote about even being able to postpone (for 4 more days). Haha. So far my own wait has been longer than yours. There is a small difference though - I implied the longer lead time myself.
But this has offially passed, so from now on we can all blame Bert. LOL

Peter

(Highlight mine.)

'Days'? What I would give for just a 4-day wait. I think you meant 'weeks'.

Nick, Paul, don't pack your bags to come over for a listen just yet. Think we'll be well into May by the time they're here...

But really, I know that a lot has gone into these speakers. And although of course I'm dying to have them here, I would much rather give Bert as much time as he needs to get things absolutely right. Once they're in position at my place, I'm not moving them for anything, and sending them back for upgrades/changes will be simply out of the question. Got to get it right first time!

Mani.

Haha, no, days. But the underlaying message was too complex to see I suppose. So, 4 more days on 165 days, who cares. And mind you, that 165 is about 165 late. But I caused a great deal of that myself, so that feels a bit different for my own. For e.g. yours it only feels worse, but indeed it is so that it is not allowed to fail.


And although it was promised in advance, already the last 4 weeks have been spent on throughput time needed to check all the settings and reality values and all. Just envision a few additional XX parameters and if you would be so kind to find the very best switchable options because they will be hardwired before delivery.
Almost undoable and feeling a great responsibility.

Regards,
Peter

Which year would that be? ha ha


I would say that is not the case with what I hear at Nick's they sound very good particularly in the large space at Nick's and particularly following all the work that Nick has done in tracking down problems in his system. They do show up problems in the front end though but that would be (I guess) what all horns do!!.

Cheers

Paul

Certainly my experience is that the "room effects" I had here with my previous Audio Note system have been greatly reduced. The reinforcements / cancellations are very significantly less with NOS/XX.

I look forward hearing Orelo MkII and my expectations are even higher now.

So today we tried it with the Orelo MKII's together with some very well trained ears. I set it up somewhat differently this time, and now during our son Paul drumming upstairs I put up the recording and level matched it as well as possible. So the trained ears could walk from the one drumming room right into the other.
This time the result was that the pressure of the kick drum was somewhat too high now. In my view this should mean that something like 0.5 - 1dB too much energy goes to the low end.
Anyway, as I expected (and hoped) now there is headroom.

Peter

 Peter. I just want to emphasise that my comment about the weight of the kick drums is such a minor observation when you consider that the comparison is with a live high dynamic range set of instruments :-).

Great that even this small point (considering the achievement of accurately matching live drums) is fixed. What a reply system  :)

Nick.

Yes Peter, I concur with Nick.  As someone who was a firm friend to a mad drummer for much of my childhood (as well as an avid fan) I have not yet met a system that can accurately and wholly reproduce a drum kit, including its presence chest rattles and all, so all I can say is WOW.

Can't wait to hear them!

Anthony

Hi,

is there any CD available to listen to a "live" kick drum?

I do have some "drummer CD's" in my collection, but ..... ?

Joachim

Hi Joachim,

Maybe that exist but it will be hard to recognize for being correct in itself or not. But I think chances are zero because these recordings are not marginally better than anything I ever played here - it's almost iinfinitely better; you have no clue unless you know how a live drum kit sounds (and I am sure wel all know that).

This history of these recordings are maybe not even known to anyone, so why not tell about it ...

I guess you have heard that I buy instruments so I can compare with reality; the drum kit was amongst that (but gave it for Paul's birthday);

These recordings were taken July 29 2010, a month or so before the Big Orelo speakers went to that x-Fi show here. The tracks are named "kick drum" because Bert needed a means to check the representation of the Big Orelo speakers hence tune those 4x15" in there (also through DSP).

(http://www.stordiau.nl/images/img_4256a.jpg)
So here you see that setup with just two measurement microphones and 30 meters of XRL down the line at the other end a FireFace800 for ADC. The only thing we needed to spend some time on was the width of the "picture" which needs to represent the width of the instrument and maintain it's "stereo" as well.

(http://www.stordiau.nl/images/img_4254a.jpg)
So with some close up you can see that the kick drum should be in the left side somewhat, and it really is.
For those who heard it : we took 9 or so recording sessions of 5-10 minutes and they vary for this "picture" and the one I usually play is only played because of how the individual elements sound and not for it's best staging. But I really don't know any more the track with the best staging unless I listen to them all again. But anyway it was about the kick drum.

So ... this has been done to create the no-nonsense Orelo speaker and I can tell you, if "we" wouldn't have the drum kit at the time already, we just would have bought one for the job.

That this turned out to be a best recording I ever heard in my life from CD (or LP) was something quite else and it may make one delusional, knowing that we hunt for the best SQ which can not exist if the recording hasn't been on par. And if only our own would have sounded "maybe better" or marginally better ... but there is just no comparison. I will give you an example which could be quite unexpected :

We always talk about cymbals because they are so hard to do. How long they sound and such. But now envision just dropping the stick (I mean not smashing but let it fall) on the floor tom. This easily sounds for over 10 seconds through the speakers, just like it does in reality. Or how each tom hit  will let the others sound as well (because of the reverb into the others). Or whole the whole drumkit sounds and how the engaged snare for the snare drum always sounds when hitting something else. Or, and this too is quite revealing, how you hear back the room the drum kit is in (instead of the playback room).
If I'd sit down for it I think I can put up quite a list of elements heard which are not heard through even the very best recordings (those focused on drums included).


For a long time I had no ADC means so I haven't been able to re-do the recordings with a Paul who has grown up quite a bit by now and really hits the kit in good fashion. So I guess it is time to make a few more and put those up. Then we'd all have a reference of how these days it can be done (key is not molesting anything) with many of you owning a finest DAC for it and using playback software which also does it's best. If you then don't perceive the real thing, then maybe ...
;)

Of course the drum kit is just one aspect of the music spectrum, but I think it shows so many crucial elements that it is quite representative for all. Not 100%, but sufficiently enough for today.

Peter

Hi Peter,
thanx for your comment.

Some days ago I heard a live concert via television, and the astonishing thing was, that I heard at first a KICK DRUM. This was the major instrument.
In live concerts the drums are the loud-voiced instruments, but during the record mixing ............. !

I found a CD with pronounced percussions from Christian Prommer

http://www.amazon.com/Drum-Lesson-Christian-Prommers-Drumlesson/dp/B002V72K1W/ref=sr_1_4?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1396779268&sr=1-4&keywords=christian+prommer

and there is an "Acoustic Drum Solo" on the Stereophile Test CD2.

The impact of the kick drum is on both CD's not very impressive. My neighbor is a drummer and I listened a couple of times to him ............. .

It seems that we have to organize a "rally" to the Netherlands.

Joachim

Thank you Joachim.

So I tried ...

The Stereophile makes you crazy because the sticks "stick on" the skins. I suppose that's intended to create slam, but far from reality there.

Christian Prommer ? there they made a mistake and it should have been called "bass guitar lessons". Yes, I liked that. Otherwise ? Not sure where the drums were apart from "percussion". But those cymbals in there ? at "Plastic Dreams" I gave up (but played they other 3 "drum lessons").
You know, an adder "sisses". This is not a word I see used often, but at this album all sisses and not few.

Now for fun, grab Who's Next (the Who). Somehow it it slipped through my mind as even better. Now start with I'm in Tune and take the hits on the toms as a reference hence compare that with the Prommer album.
And when you're at it anyway, notice that the cymbals of this outbetter the both Stereophile and Prommer.
Btw both come across as super-slow (there's also bonga's in the Drum (last I think) Lesson track of Prommer - under water ones).
I think I heard a blurp or two from a kick drum as well. But really, "blurrrp".

So not really ... ;)
Regards,
Peter

Hi:
Peter's right ... "there ain't nuthin like the real thang"! ... listening to real instruments vs a recording.  Since the low end frequencies have been the focus of some revelatory discussion surrounding the Orelo MKII's, I can see where even renting drums for a month to A - B the sound might be warranted.  Short of that though, here's a drum album some may wish to consider.  It's an older but well recorded DRUM album from Sheffield and covers kick drum to cymbals; solos and band: http://www.sheffieldlab.com/sheffield.pl?detail=SL10081.  I own it and is my go-to album for the low end... that and organ music.  javascript:void(0);

Bruno

Thank you for that hint Bruno. Actually I was looking for this in response to Joachim, but it wouldn't get into my mind.
Now I am not sure whether this is Sheffield Lab, but I recall that they excel on recording kick drums but I didn't like the remainder. So this was a subject maybe two years back or so, but I don't think it was in this forum because I can't find it. Throughout time this Track/Drum Record has popped up a couple of times though, first in 2007 and not coincidental by our friend pedal with 7x12" per side subwoofers.

I am going to try it myself later today.
Peter

:oops:

Just found a review of this Sheffield' Track/Drum Record I wrote myself in 2011. Better not play it for reference ...

But it is funny, because half of the remarks (below) I could have made from yesterday's little trial just the same. It is only that I didn't mention it all.

Some quoted "highlights" :

---

First off, it is completely dead. There's nothing alive in it. A robot.

Same I thought yesterday of the Stereophile track.

Next, I do not perceive a high DR at all. So, it should be, but it looks like not to be at all.

So this is odd. Recordings especially created to show off drumming does NOT show dynamics ? I mean, didn't I tell the same from yesterday's (super slow).

Down to the real merits of what I hear, it is distortion all over. Each hit on a tom, snare and even base drum carries the exact same distortion. It makes the drum sticks stick to the skins.

And really, this sure is not my standard vocabulary. I really really didn't even know I wrote that 2 page "review".

If I may call it like that, the release sound is always the same.

It is way way too dry (part of the being dead I think), and therefore there is no realism at all. I tried to imagine a dead room, but it is articial IMO.

Stereophile exactly the same.

It is the worse representation of toms etc. sounding different amongst eachother. Cymbals same story. This, while a great deal of the track(s) seems to be about explicit showoff of just that (differentiation).

---

Especially with the latter remark in mind, I will listen again tonight. So, I know that at some stage back at that time I/we got all better (XXHighEnd) for exploring the different sounding toms, but I also know how again that improved. Btw, the Stereophile track sure shows that.
Also, prior to that listening later today, I can already warn about the distortion (one of the remarks above) which the most easily can have come from Windows 7 and pre-1.186 ( we just know now in comparison to Windows 8 ).

So I am actually curious myself ...
Peter

Now this could be interesting or educational or ... not sure ...


Let me start with telling about the subject, because all is prone to be misinterpreted :
Our latter posts are about good examples of drumming recordings which started by me telling about my own recording which by so infinitely far exceeds everything I ever heard on any album. The subject is not about my superb recording techniques (I know so few about it that I can't destroy recordings, haha) - the subject is also not about a best in the world drum kit - and the subject is also not about how poor recordings on the albums we know are. So, it is only about finding a fine example of a good drumming recording, and while I say I don't know them, "you" may come up with examples, which next I compare with my own self recording.

So nobody should feel miserable about his "for life" example being debunked and we rather scratch our head and think about how things can end up so very poor. Of course it needs you to believe me with my close to 100% resemblance of the real kit.

Let me also tell you that this "review" I quoted from, was from within a subject about compressors and expanders and companders and such and again this album was handed as a best example.
Ehm of what ?

But now we see how difficult talking audio is because at playing the album yesterday I ran into a biggest surprise.
Also, please be with me at comparing with the real thing. So, this is not per se about a better or poor recording, but how it would compare to the real thing which coincidentally can be done these days. So look through these glasses, ok ?

---

I put up track 1. This did not last for 10 seconds because it was totally bass heavy and nothing to listen to for fun. Next track same thing, but let that play till things got unbearable. Then skipped to the Ron Tutt track, because that should be a better one for drumming ...

Now here's your hint : Ron Tutt is on track 5.

No no no. I just can not get how this can be regarded any good. It really really is nowhere and it is like my ears are stuffed. Way way too much bass heavy and in relation to that no highs. No dynamics.
So what is this ? pump up the basses and now people will perceive a nice kick drum ? Is it now me and the speaker over-expressing this ?
I don't get it.
So, referring to my previous statement "this is not about poor recordings as such", well, it IS. This-is-too-poor-to-listen-to.
:bye:

Now please (please ?) bear with me, because we need to understand what is happening. It is crucial to get that ...

Remember how I started out yesterday about this ? I told that I recalled that Sheffield Lab was great on the kick drums (throughout their recordings), but otherwise ? maybe not.
This "judgement" was from when I listened through my also great horn speaker with "horned" 1x15" plus subwoofer(s). This thinking was not specifically about this Track/Drum record, but general for their recordings. This one in specific I quoted my own texts from elsewhere yesterday, but this is not very important. What is, is this :

The speakers I now listen to (actually still the subject of this topic) do not stop at 27Hz (or actually long before that) and they don't use blurpy subwoofers which actually don't do a think other than adding punch (when tuned right). So, and I don't want to repeat it all over, but ... these go the most straight to 19Hz. This means that when a mixing engineers feels so happy to give you some additional (illegal !) punch and which JUST a compressor does (with the proper timing), I perceive that as, well ...
That I really could not tell whether I was listening to 3 toms or a kick drum. Now, you may tend to think I am exaggerating things but I really do not. Anyway, might you believe me then now you might understand the "unlistenable" better.
This, while with my previous speaker this was quite all right.

And so I think it can also happen that punch is added in order to let us perceive something like a kick drum better, because it does not anticipate an Orelo MKII much. You will get what I mean here.
So clear : What I perceive can be dead-wrong while you perceive it as very ok.
So done ?

Haha, not quite and this is about Ron Tutt being on track 5;

Where I drew my quotes from (compression etc. subject elsewhere), it was about the XRCD whatever version which was advised to me. Well, that went unnoticed back at the time, but yesterday I found I had another version. A "normal" one. Here Ron Tutt is on track 3.

Can I tell you that this normal version is only 11dB less compressed ? Now THAT makes a difference, I can tell you.

Nothing is bass heavy on this version and now attacks on the cymbals are audible which were completely lacking on the XRCD. Now it suddenly is a quite better reference.
It remains a dead thing again, and it is my guess that people who record drums do that especially in a deadened room.
The representation of the cymbals is still nowhere, but at least now it is listenable. But now the stupid thing :
No way it represents the kick drum well. That needs added punch ...

So what also remains is the sound of the sticking sticks, and I think this is compressor behaviour. At least this is how it was explained to me by a recording engineer. What also remains is that all hits sound the same because of it. So, snare, tom of various size or kick drum, it's all hit by the very same (sized) sticky stick. This, while at least the kick drum is hit by a soft "ball" and its attack should sound way more full because of it. But not so on this now better recording.

Watch the very first hit (it's on a tom) of this Ron Tutt track. You can hear the drum kit sing along for a small second and it even needs close listening. I told you, when I do that the tom itself already sounds over 10 seconds. TEN. It does so in reality and it does on the self recording. In this Ron Tutt I only heard this kit playing along at this first hit and for maybe a second and nowhere else in the track.

Can we now to some extend understand the unbelievable difference ? This will be in everything you know. Not only in drums. But at least this is how I call such an explicitly taken drum track "dead".

An also funny thing is, and I already noticed day before yesterday, when you after such an explicit drum recording listen to normal music, they all do better on the drums. I am serious. So STILL some fools are around who think they can improve on recordings and they do well on drums.
Not.

Peter

Hi Peter,

I find this a very interesting subject and am sending you my go-to drum reference track to see what you think.  If I am understanding what you mean by "sticking sticks" then this track most certainly does not have any of that and although the kick-drum is not a feature of the track I think you may find it interesting.

It is a recording made by Paul Klipsch of the Joe Holland Jazz Quartet in 1955 and recently remastered from the original 15ips 2-track Master tapes.  Apparently it is one of the first stereo recordings produced so I am interested in your opinion Peter...if they got it right almost 60years ago then why don't they get it right now? 

Ok, I know the answer to that but I still like to ask the question. :)

Let me know what you think.

Regards,

Anthony

EDIT: For those interested I got the album from here (https://www.highdeftapetransfers.com/product.php?pid=7189).  It is track #11.

Hey Anthony, looking forward to that !
I suppose there should be some "kick" in anything controlled (without dials) by Paul Klipsch. I didn't know this existed.

Read the Liner Notes with great interest, which maybe deminished somewhat after seeing on the last page that recording to DSD went through a Korg and next was converted to PCM by Saragon.
However, I suspect a poor quality already from that old tape, knowing that my own tape transfers also did not work out (all over lacking highs). But I hope not !!

Best regards and thanks,
Peter

Oh dear. DSD to PCM via a software converter. It never ceases to amaze me how stupid some people are. They go to all that trouble to get the tapes, prepare them, set them up on the R2R machine... and then can't be bothered to take two transfers - one in 'pure PCM' and one in 'pure DSD'. This isn't difficult to do. I have the capability in the little 'studio' in my basement. And it's exactly what I do with my needle drops - once at 24/192 with a Pacific Microsonics Model Two and once at DSD128 with a Korg MR1000. (Incidentally, I use the MR1000 and not the MR2000 that they use because the latter has a cheap nasty power supply, and the former has a 12V input allowing me to use a high-quality linear PS.)

Hey Peter, did you ever make your home drum recording available to the rest of us to listen to? I know you're a little embarrassed about the playing (it was you and not Paul, right?), but if we promise not to laugh, it may be very educational for us to be able to hear what a drum kit should sound like.

Mani.

Hi Mani,

I few posts back I "promised" to re-do the recordings now Paul is really making something of his drumming. I have an "as poor" ADC again, so it shouldn't be difficult. :innocent:
So I can keep on shouting about this all, but it doesn't tell much without putting up the example so I will do it. And if that 400 euro ADC messes up after all (previously it was a FireFace800) then I suppose I'll have to put up one of the existing ones (indeed "performed" by myself).

Thus, my blahblah really isn't sufficient ...

Regards,
Peter

Peter, I was hoping you read the liner notes, they also give the specs of the recording microphones which were not great in the highs.

Mani, you would not be surprised to know that this HDTT crowd think that in general DSD has a slightly better sound than PCM, which may not be surprising considering how the get the PCM.  Still though, this album is one that I use when comparing good DSD dacs to the NOS1 and the NOS1 ain't been beat yet even with this little disadvantage:  dac quality still trumps music file format.


Anthony

At the risk of going  :offtopic: it would be interesting to know what these "experts" think they are comparing. IIRC pure DSD does not really exist because it has to be (kind of) converted to PCM so the studio can work on it. The only "pure" DSD would be to record it direct not do any mixing etc and just play it back (like the old direct to disc) - that won't happen in real life. And all of that is before you even start to look at the "imperfectible" DSD as opposed to "perfectible" PCM as Stanley L puts it.

Well Paul, that is not offtopic if we see that for a take as it was done with the Paul Klipsch record, DSD is just OK. So, especially because no mixing was applied, it can be taken from the tape (but which is not the master tape in this case !) which would be the same as recording it directly to DSD. But *that* hardly happens, so it is not plausible the (DSD) means is OK in general (exactly how you put it).

Notice that some go as far as recording to analogue, mix in analogue and then go to DSD. And next they say that no PCM conversion has been in order.
:swoon: Oh well ... :swoon:

Peter

Anthony, THIS IS THE SH********T.
Ok, calm down.

Man, you really really don't know what is happening to you when you hear this track playing and right from the first hit you think HUH ?!?, this is me myself drumming there.

... but I guess all what happens is that FINALLY this sounds exactly the same ...
But SO surprisingly, just the exact same drum kit, somehow. But really, also the almost same playing with one stick on the rim + skin, the other stick hitting that stick. Heck, I'm flat on the floor.

So ... if anyone wants to hear how toms can sound, this is it. And so it DOES exist. But from 1955 ?

Cymbals too sound OK, but not 100% as I have it here. Why ? not completely sure, but I think something goes wrong in the highs itself. So, listen to the hits on the snare and you can hear it. Or the roffle towards the end, where all the highs mush up. And mind you, the cymbals towards the end measured 110dB when I just played it (which is exactly right/real).
Of course I looked at the frequency response in it and not sure how Mr Saragon envisions a DSD to PCM conversion, but if I were Weiss I would have left out the DSD noise. Well, something like that and beyond 80KHz. And some very steep peak at 52KHz. But alas and who cares. It is smazing anyway.

Kick drum is there too but underemphasized. Hardly used and when used not hard/loud. But level seems OK to me.

Summarized, when you hear this (and I think everybody can perceive what I like you to perceive) then you know what we're all missing ...
Maybe you won't perceive all the air from it (the open baffle thing with sufficient SPL) but you will see that this sounds totally different from what you ever heard through speakers.
But
I must be careful of course, because someone like Anthony already heard it too.

Anthony, thank you. I will get the whole album of course. Just totally curious how the other tracks will sound.
Super.

Peter

Here we get an idea how ............ !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yet9KPR7wfw&list=TLuGJTr9KnBJDnSbqqV9TUFRfIhqK5h6Kz

P.S. The best I could find in my old stock until now.

http://www.amazon.com/Blind-Faith/dp/B000059T00/ref=ntt_mus_ep_dpi_1

Piece no. 6 - bass solo starts at 6min, drum solo at 9min.

Hey Peter,

Bold text with stars... most probably you wanted to say: "Sheer Entertainment", right? :)

And what about Juan's 'old' drum/cymbals suggestion: Count Basie / Dizzy Gillespie alb. "The Gifted Ones", Track #6, "Ow!"
(most pbbly you have the disc already)
 
Thks,
George

Well well George,

It is funny, but I'm just into the third track of "Big Band Basie" (RR) and thought to write that possibly these kind of speakers hugely benefit from big bands. I don't recall Juan saying it, but he certainly is right.
I'm not quite sure yet how it works, but it feels related to recording from the larger distance and now the bigger room doing the work on the low end.

So ... :yes:
Thank you George.
Peter


PS: Tomorrow I am going to take some Jazz drumming lessons. Thank you Joachim. :secret: :)

Hi Peter,
this video, listened to with acceptable near field monitors connected to the PC,  has a sound resolution of the drum kit (Tom Toms, Cymbals, Snares) which I can’t find on any CD. You can hear the stick hitting the cymbals prior to the sound coming  and the post-pulse oscillation of the Tom Toms, just what you criticised.

This CD from Dave Weckl sounds not bad.

http://www.amazon.com/Dave-Weckl-Band-Live-Plugged/dp/B0000C9JDR/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1396981776&sr=1-1&keywords=dave+weckl

My impression is that good recorded Live CD’s are presenting a better/natural sound than most of the studio recordings.

Joachim

Hey Joachim,


I sure tend to agree with you. Less "super mixing" to be done eh ?

Otherwise all my PCs are not connected to any decent speakers (so 1 square inch in-built monitor "speakers" only, but I will try those tomorrow anyway).

Regards,
Peter

I agree about the cymbals Peter.  My thoughts were something to do with the accuracy of the microphone, especially in the highs, as well as the placement of the microphone.


It's probably just as important as the actual sound quality, but to me this album sounds like the musicians are having fun.  That's what stays with me after I have listened to it, that I have just heard a super relaxed jazz quartet that obviously play off each other and enjoy what they are doing.  You don't often get that in a studio album.  I think that is one of the first things that gets washed away when you start editing a performance.

Anthony

This seems like typical DSD behaviour to me.

Mani.

Ha! I've discovered your secret!   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRhoHN8x_00

 :drinks:

In other words, It is never too late for all of us.

Edit: and vice versa

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9DQtkjsWFQ&list=PL82A3C61C990361AD

There is one further aspect of speaker performance that I would be interested to hear your view on Peter particularly in relation to the Orelo MKII.

As I have posted elsewhere I have now built three IPL transmission line speakers S2, S4 and S5. IMHO they are superb and there is very little "out there" that is as good particularly in the bass. The S5's are a special case they are big and it took me a long time to get them to work in my big odd shaped room. But now they do and the bass performance is special.

Having heard the speakers in 3 very different size rooms what is clear is that in the smaller rooms bass generally is tighter even though I have no complaints at all about the sound in my big odd shaped room since I managed to get big improvements in that area by room placement changes.

The question is though what causes this very noticeable effect. Now I guess you (Peter) are going to say that it will not be problem with the Orello MkII but it would be interesting to know why.

Cheers

Paul

I'd have to guess Paul ...
So hit me (tap on the shoulder would also be OK) when I have it all wrong;

Of course by now I'm a convict of "large enough woofer area", so this has to be my base. And in case you missed it, please read this : Re: Bass Issue (Lack thereof) (http://www.phasure.com/index.php?topic=2939.msg30932#msg30932);

With that (post behind that link) as the general thought, there's the THD involved and believe me, there is no single way this can be OK when no sufficient woofer surface is present, BUT (!!) at the SPL involved. Also, the lower the frequency the more tough it gets. Also, generally, each woofer rolls off under around 100Hz which is a sort mechanical self-protection (not explicit, but it's just more tough in that area, the lower the more).

THD is the factor of frequency, power applied and mechanical properties of the driver. However, I personally think that those properties are not the most crucial which already comes from them not being easy to interpret in their environment; just too many factors involved. And so :
It is only about the allowed excursion and no matter what driver and what size (like 10" vs 21") when the excursion crosses a limit (like 0.5cm) audible THD is your share. Notice that I gave the 21" as an expample on purpose because it will show you (hopefully) that some properties do matter, like the surface of 21" being too large now, and when not too heavy and slow (the mass) then too weak (but again implying distortion).
So we stick to the excursion, and now it is only a matter of power applied. Why only that ? because the lower the frequency the more power needed to create "your" SPL and thus the more excursion.

Notice : It is somewhat more complicated because I assume "linear power" in your situation which is different from boosting more at the lower frequencies. This is about the mechanical(ly implied) roll off under mentioned 100Hz and when this is not boosted the frequencies are just not there (or less there) and so they also can not distort (haha).

Now finally to the point : The bigger room needs more power to get the same SPL at the listening position.

It will not be so that the lower frequencies will get boosted because of this, but the more excursion implied, the more the lower frequencies will distort. And this is not exactly "more tight". Possibly more deep or low, but tight not.

For a cabinetted speaker it won't even be easy to observe the excursion, or better put : I myself won't be able to tell what is allowed because you will observe less excursion anyway because of the back pressure. But otherwise ? 2mm to one side perhaps for something like 30Hz.
So the difficulty here is that when you observe 1mm it can already be way too much because the driver doesn't move freely, but I can't tell and it will vary per speaker (literal) design.


You may have seen me telling how super surprised I was that with the Orelino already I was able to get out that "concert level bass" and that I could not understand how it kept on working for the room size I have; What I meant there was that I was used to my 1x 15" cabinetted (horn) woofer and there would have been no way to get out that SPL without the room being "full". So my observation was relative to that, and it now is my conclsusion that this is not about rooms getting full at all, but just about the distortion implied, never mind we don't observe it as distortion.

Lastly, the phnomenon "tight bass" I think does not exist any more for me. This is because there's always first that other phenomenon now : do you perceive the individual wave/frequency cycles. Well, you will as long as they don't wobble (are distorted) and it is clear to me that it is that what has all changed. And for something like 30Hz in a more square form this is there at 80dBSPL but just the same at 100dBSPL. But keep in mind : this 100dBSPL is the output of that 30Hz frequency and not something you measure from a voice, that 30Hz being 15dB or so down. So that this can work really seems crazy but it just does.

Long answer eh ?
Peter

When I'm typing in here anyway again (previous post) ...

Day before yesterday I have experienced something quite new and exciting;

I was playing Rhoda Scott / Kenny Clark - Jazz in Paris.
Already at the end of the first track I noticed that the ending went super spacious. Ok, nice that was. But at the end of the second track - same story. Then I started to watch out for what actually happens and I think in the middle of the third track it happened again. So what ?

She switches on the Leslie at very low frequency (at also lower frequency of sound)

Djeezz, what an effct *that* gives !
Man, you just feel the "wave" going back and forth. Very special.

Peter

Mouthwatering indeed!!