Gehe zu Seite: Erste 2 Letzte |nächste|

Pulz versus Sonodyne

+A -A
Autor
Beitrag
kspv
Ist häufiger hier
#1 erstellt: 10. Sep 2005, 23:02
I am an audio enthusiast from Bangalore, and this is my first topical posting in this forum. Somebody in this forum already mentioned about my review on www.audioreview.com on Lithos Studio-1, and somebody else referred to a Yamaha AX-396 stereo integrated amplifier that I exchanged at Audio Planet, Koramangala, Bangalore for an AX-596.

My set up now includes a Teac Distinction audio CD player (C-1D), a Yamaha AX-596 stereo integrated amplifier driving the Lithos Studio-1s, a Pulz RS-250 driving the Lithos Terra-150 (standard issue with Lithos Terra), and a BPL Diva Worldspace radio. The Pulz RS-250 takes input from the rec-out of Yamaha-AX-596. I am very pleased with the sound of Lithos (the original prescription of Rajiv D'souza to drive the Studio-1s was to go in for an NAD amplifier), and am used to adjusting the volumes of subwoofer and main-speakers separately in this arrangement.

However, of late, I have been pondering about adding a good, preferably Indian, pre-amplifier for the sake of common volume control. I know of five companies who make pre-amplifiers for hi-fi home audio in India. These are, Norge, Pulz, Sonodyne, Lyrita and Trendz. Norge and Trendz are not frequently seen in the market, and do not have a service network (though I am aware of the reputation Norge carries for good sound). So I eliminate both of them. Lyrita too attracted good reviews on this forum, but may not have any representation in Bangalore. But both Sonodyne (Forum Mall) and Pulz (Music Ranch) have their dealers and servicing (for minor problems only) here in Bangalore.

I would like to put it to this forum, as to how Sonodyne's SC 202R (non-logic), SP 203R (full-logic), would fare against Pulz RS-100 (non-logic).

I may specify that I am not a subjectivist like some distinguished members of this forum are, and damping factors, slew rates, and THD figures do matter to me as rough indicators of capabilities of the amplifiers (I have been a follower of Julian Hirsch), if not as the sole reasons why I would buy a particular amplifier. I am also aware that it is usually easier to create a pre-amplifier of good specifications than a power amplifier with good specifications.

Please throw some light on Pulz Vs. Sonodyne!


[Beitrag von kspv am 10. Sep 2005, 23:25 bearbeitet]
square_wave
Inventar
#2 erstellt: 12. Sep 2005, 10:41
A good pre-amplifier is a difficult equipment to manufacture. I am not very sure you will get a good one from the above mentioned manufacturers. I have not heard them, so can’t say much. But I have heard NAD / Rotel pre-amplifiers for around 15k from the used market which sounded pretty decent. I have a feeling you will be better off with one of them.
Neutral
Stammgast
#3 erstellt: 12. Sep 2005, 15:52
Pulz preamp is generally felt to be of lower quality than its power amp. As Square says, Nad and Rotel will be of better quality. But then they cost a lot more. I have the Pulz power amp RS250 and didn't add a preamp because it would add additional circuits that would degrade the sound.

I suggest that you get a preamp with a volume control on its remote. Most of the Indian preamps require you to turn a knob on the amp which is inconvenient in a big room.

Glad you like the Studio 1s. I liked them too but they don't produce sufficient bass. And the Terra sub is fairly costly. Have you tried the Pulz power amp with the Studio 1s? Does the sound compare with / exceed the Yamaha?
kspv
Ist häufiger hier
#4 erstellt: 12. Sep 2005, 18:50
Due to some problem with the Karnataka Sales Tax guys, the Audio Planet people took about ten days time to get the AX-596 from Mumbai for me. During that time, having left my AX-396 at Audio Planet, I was left with no amp to play my music, and so used Pulz RS-250 to drive the Studio-1s. Like most CD players, the TEAC C-1D could directly drive the power amp.

I did not find Pulz inferior in any way in dynamics or power reserves compared to Yamaha. Pulz is slightly rolled off (to my ears) in the higher frequency end, which will perhaps be to the liking of people who expect vinyl-like sound from their CD-based systems (isn't the initial success of NAD in the amplifier scene due to the deliberate upper frequency roll off they employed for the sake of people who were, till then, used to the vinyl sound, and wished to hear the same sound from their CD players?). People who have a bright source may also do well in pairing it with Pulz RS-250. Besides, the dual mono design of Pulz amplifiers inherently offers the best possible stereo seperation between channels. Ofcourse, it does not offer small comforts like a remote. But I was told by none less than Milind Raorane, that Pulz is scheduled to bring its new series with remote into the market.

I refuse to believe that just because a brand is Indian, it ought to be inferior to exotic foreign brands. We all know how costly are workmanship and skilled labour abroad, and how heavily Indian Customs taxes the imports. Besides, look at the amount companies like Bose spend on advertisements, and for planting favourable reviews in audio magazines (and also on litigation against anybody who criticizes them on any forum). On one of the internet forums, a guy once calculated that a Bose satellite speaker involves a manufacturing cost of not more than $7.00! But then, I can cause a riot by speaking it out among some of my friends who have purchased Bose systems by spending huge amounts. We all know PMPO is a hype. Who started it? Aren't these the companies from abroad with similar credentials? Is there a scientific proof that hand-wiring in pure silver by vestal virgins on full-moon nights greatly improves the sound quality of an amplifier? After all, making a good amplifier is not rocket-science, or else our DIY enthusiasts would not be doing it!

I once had a problem with my Pulz RS-250, perhaps due to the shorting caused by a faulty interconnect. I informed the same to the people at Lithos as well as Pulz through email. It was heart-warming to get the kind of response shown (Rajiv D'souza at Lithos, and Milind Raorane & Hedelbert Walker at Pulz). I received not less than eight STD calls from Mumbai in a span of three days. The equipment was sent to Mumbai, was repaired free of cost, and sent back to me. Will you ever be able to get this kind of response from any foreign brand?

Indian designs are not imitations either. Who would think of an ingenious design such as integrating a push-pull subwoofer (originally conceived by M&K) with a band-pass, thus executing a purely acoustic crossover that delivers purest possible low frequency sound? Isn't it an Indian company called Lithos? Why do people make statements like, "they are only Indian," or "they only use Peerless drivers"? Isn't it audio-snobbery?

I bought Yamaha-AX-596 because it offers outstanding value for money, and not because it is foreign. Though it is rated at 100 watts RMS (average) per channel, it has actually been tested to go upto 478 watts RMS per channel before it clips. That is ample power reserve for my Lithos Studio-1s which I never expect to use. Look at the specs; frequency response is +/- 0.5 dB from 20 Hz-20 kHz at a damping factor of >300 and a THD of 0.008% measured at 1 KHz at 50% RMS power. Now, I know that THD below 2% is generally not audible, and damping factor beyond 100 does not matter. It is just that perfection I am awed at. These figures speak something! Add to it the convenience of a remote, phono input, gold-plated (I wouldn't have minded even if they are nickel-plated, as I know that gold-plating is no better acoustically than nickel-plating) binding posts, and a stylish design. Why should I aspire for anything more?

My philosophy is fix a reasonable budget, buy reasonably good equipment within the budget, arrange the equipment scientifically in the listening room, and leave the rest of the magic to your CD-collection. Don't run after snake-oil acoustic remedies, and outrageously expensive foreign brands.


[Beitrag von kspv am 12. Sep 2005, 19:06 bearbeitet]
Arj
Inventar
#5 erstellt: 12. Sep 2005, 19:47
Hi kspv,

it is good that your budget and your requirements are clear and etched out. not many folks begin that way. you may achieve sonic satisfaction much ahead of most people !

Regarding a Pre-amp.. i confess i have not really iunderstood why you need one since you are using the yamaha as an int amp and a pre amp.. do you need it to control your sub ?

YOu have the option of getting someone to DIY a simple passive amp consisting of inputs and a volume pot as well..you may be able to do that yourself as well if so inclined..
abhi.pani
Inventar
#6 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 05:53
hi kspv,
Man even I have auditioned the AX-596. What other similarly priced amps did you compare it with ? Did you try NAD 320bee ?


[Beitrag von abhi.pani am 13. Sep 2005, 05:56 bearbeitet]
kspv
Ist häufiger hier
#7 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 06:17
I auditioned the NAD BEE 320 separately, and not as one-on-one comparision with the Yamaha. Sure NAD BEE 320 sounded good, but I did not find it qualitatively different from the Yamaha. I was told by a couple of friends about a "left channel hum" problem the model has, but did not face it with the piece I auditioned.

I am aware that BEE series is designed after Bjorn Erik Edvardsen’s 10/10 rule which states that best value for money in audio products is achieved when it costs 10 times more money to get 10% increase in performance. There was a time when Yamaha's products were plasticky, unnaturally bright, and were advertised with inflated wattage values like most other Japanese products. NAD at the same time was known for its build quality, and "vinyl-like" cold British sound. In course of time, Yamaha has became more obsessed with build-quality and natural sound with ruler flat frequency response, whereas NAD has become more plasticky. So I think now they are at the common meeting point.

By the way, did you find the NAD very different from the Yamaha?
square_wave
Inventar
#8 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 06:22
Hey dude,
I like your attitude to audio.........way to go man! Even I have had very good experience with our own designs. I own floor-standers made by acoustic portrait which I am very happy with. I respect serious audio manufacturers/hobbyists who know their job. Good examples are AP, Lyrita audio, rethm, cadence etc…. But I have serious reservations against mass-market Indian manufacturers like sonodyne and their ilk. They are not too different from their counterparts in Japan or elsewhere in the world. I feel there is a big difference between mass market manufacturers and serious audio manufacturer-hobbyists anywhere in the world. The trick is to identify them. We once compared the valve pre-amplifier (prototype) from acoustic portrait with a very respected model one from Audio research. The AP compared very well and some audiophiles even liked the AP better. But you are not going to get any printed specs because it is still under development.

About specs and about being subjectivists I beg to differ …….. most subjectivists are objectivists first. All good audio equipment is aimed at a desired technical benchmark first. Once the technical performance is achieved, good manufacturers spend hundreds of hours of listening to make refinements in the design, component part selection and physical layout. They spend the time listening, to detect and evaluate differences in sound that are not easily measured. Said another way, their ears and brains are the most sensitive instruments when it comes to detecting and resolving complex relationships in sound. Many measurable differences are not audible, and many audible differences are not measurable. The issue of measurability is therefore one of complexity, not sensitivity. No audio component that measures poorly can sound best and components that measure reasonably well often sound bad. Achieving good audio is a black art practiced by people who have years of experience and good intentions.

I agree the Yamaha in question has good specs but I have heard it in different systems and I find it quite inferior when it comes to communicating music in a convincing manner. It sounds clean and loud but not at all musical to my ears. I would pick up a NAD or a Cambridge audio anyday over a yammy at this price range.


[Beitrag von square_wave am 13. Sep 2005, 06:24 bearbeitet]
Manek
Inventar
#9 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 06:53
I would pick up a nad too...again !

its probably the question of tonality and individual taste. If a person does not find a quantum difference in sound, yamaha just could be amp for him/her.

and yes, you are not doing anything wrong picking up a yammy. its just that it fits that persons requirements.

Manek.
square_wave
Inventar
#10 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 08:06

Manek schrieb:
I would pick up a nad too...again !

its probably the question of tonality and individual taste. If a person does not find a quantum difference in sound, yamaha just could be amp for him/her.

and yes, you are not doing anything wrong picking up a yammy. its just that it fits that persons requirements.

Manek.


Very true Manek. That is how Bose made such a lot of money...
Manek
Inventar
#11 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 09:09
yup....one just needs to get the feel of the target audience's pulse.

manek.
SUB_BOSS
Gesperrt
#12 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 09:12
manek wrote :

its just that it fits that persons requirements.


very true...many claim NAD's are fast n puchy..way too dry and bright for me...Rotels were better..better build quality and loads of slam with good detailing..
square_wave
Inventar
#13 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 09:24
Sub,
You tried the NAD with klipsch RF3 right. It is a very bad combo in my opinion. Klipsch needs to be paired with warm, highly detailed amps with a slightly laid back presentation to sound the best. An audio analogue Puccini is a good SS option. They sound best with valve amps. With speakers having extreme characteristics like klipsch, you need a “system-approach” rather than a “component- approach”
SUB_BOSS
Gesperrt
#14 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 09:32
Sq wave wrote :


An audio analogue Puccini is a good SS option


AA puccini was very very disappointing....best was MF Class A..excellent lowend grunt, clean deatling and yes sir best midrange thru horns..but but..can't find one..


you need a “system-approach” rather than a “component- approach”


can you please explain these two approaches??
Manek
Inventar
#15 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 09:34
kspv,
Btw
if my amp were silver hardwired by vestal virgins on a full moon night, I would be a happy man.....probably thats as close as I would get to a vestal virgin !

Manek.
Krish
Stammgast
#16 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 09:44
Manek,
Have yer told 'yer better' half that as yet

Krish
Stammgast
#17 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 09:46
Kspv,
Try Lyrita Audio.Viren has on offer both a valve and transistor pre.

Krishnan
square_wave
Inventar
#18 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 10:06
System approach is always the best to get good sound. This is basically knowing what kind of sound you want and then buying all the components based on a “proven synergistic combination” which will result in that sound which you are after. This includes the source, amp, speakers, interconnects and speaker cables. If you liked a certain setup and how it sounds, you will have to buy all of it to get the same sound. One component change can drastically alter the sound. Now, most of the time this is not possible. You will have to compromise somewhere. Speakers which are not very extreme in nature are quite forgiving when it comes to components swaps. But a 98+db, horn loaded klipsch won’t be. You need to be very careful with your amp/source selection.

BTW: I know one guy who was very happy with the Puccini with his RF3. It is all a matter of taste.

I agree with krish. Lyrita would be a good option for a pre.
Manek
Inventar
#19 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 10:11
he he...krish, the V.V. is only assempling my amp so I guess I am safe but to be safer...., gotta check with the better half first...Thanks for the tip

kspv,
Its a good idea to talk to viren about your preamp requirements....maybe he can help you out with a V.V. special equipment model(V.V.S.E.) haa ! haa !

On a serious note, Viren may just have the amp you may be looking for.

Manek.
Arj
Inventar
#20 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 12:44

square_wave schrieb:
Sub,
You tried the NAD with klipsch RF3 right. It is a very bad combo in my opinion. Klipsch needs to be paired with warm, highly detailed amps with a slightly laid back presentation to sound the best. An audio analogue Puccini is a good SS option. They sound best with valve amps. With speakers having extreme characteristics like klipsch, you need a “system-approach” rather than a “component- approach”



Well I ran a NAD 320 with the same Klipsch RF3s for 1 year in a 12 X 10 partially treated, dedicated room and found absolutely no problems with it. And I did not find NAD bright but warmish and meaty (Although a bit sharp in the treble and softer on the bass in comparisn with the sugden and all that further improved when I got my CD modded )

..in fact found the rotel RA02 to be Thin sounding in comparison..

So Go Figure

BTW am running a SI T amp with JMR Twins these days and after the breakin this amp is AMAZING for that price.. it will surely give the NAD 320 a run for the money in terms its clean presentation (Must be due to the regulated DC power i use)
SUB_BOSS
Gesperrt
#21 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 12:49
Arj wrote :


Well I ran a NAD 320 with the same Klipsch RF3s for 1 year in a 12 X 10 partially treated, dedicated room and found absolutely no problems with it. And I did not find NAD bright but warmish and meaty (Although a bit sharp in the treble and softer on the bass in comparisn with the sugden and all that further improved when I got my CD modded )

..in fact found the rotel RA02 to be Thin sounding in comparison..

So Go Figure


May be RA 02 sounded thin, but Rotel pre+power sounds awesome with present set up...so go figure :*..In fact even Alraj found NAD pre+power to be too bright and lacking low end , so had to sell em and lose some moneys when he ended owning Rotel pre + power for RF's.


[Beitrag von SUB_BOSS am 13. Sep 2005, 12:56 bearbeitet]
square_wave
Inventar
#22 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 13:15
See……….it all boils down to personal taste/ room/ setup etc………one man’s poison is another man’s food. From my experience NAD’s are on the darker side of neutral while rotels are forward and slightly bright. I prefer a warm valve amp with klipsch or even something like Audio analogue or even MF……………It is all a matter of personal taste.
abhi.pani
Inventar
#23 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 13:45

square_wave schrieb:
Sub,
You tried the NAD with klipsch RF3 right. It is a very bad combo in my opinion. Klipsch needs to be paired with warm, highly detailed amps with a slightly laid back presentation to sound the best. An audio analogue Puccini is a good SS option. They sound best with valve amps. With speakers having extreme characteristics like klipsch, you need a “system-approach” rather than a “component- approach”


Hi Squarewave and others out there,
I dont think its that simple to select an amp. The fact that Klipsh is an ultra high sensitive and horn loaded speaker doesnt directly imply that any laid back amp (we are talking of high end amps only) will gel with it.
My observation says that if you want dynamics then there should be ample power reserves and high current capabilities within the amp whether the speaker is ultra high sensitive or otherwise.
For example I have auditioned the Marantz PM-7200 at a number of occasions, it has always impressed me with its mids and highs but the bottom end dynamics are no where close to satisfaction. Now if you use it with a Klipsh I am quite sure that it will again display tremendous quality in mids and highs but it will suck when it comes to drive the two 8 incher LF drivers of the same. The result might seem to be an overkill of mids and highs. I would attribute the same with AA Puccini, I have auditioned them at more than one occasions but even they suck for dynamics.
Now guys tell me is it that simple, when you have a speaker like klipsh I think we need beefy amps which are detailed as well.
A Cambridge Audio or AA or Marantz is no where a match for the klipsh IMO.

I know people would come up saying "to each his own" but practically its almost assured that a guy going for Klipsh is looking for some real SLAM with details intact. So we need to take it under consideration when we are suggesting an amp for the same.
square_wave
Inventar
#24 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 14:21
Dear Abhipani,
I am not talking about dynamics or high-current capabilities. All hi-res / high quality amps will have loads of this. I am talking about voicing of the amp. All amps are voiced in a certain way. The klipsch is voiced to be forward sounding. It is a speaker which can be considered as LOUD with an “in your face” sound. If you partner the same with an amp with similar qualities, you are asking for trouble unless you thrive on that type of un-natural sound.
I personally know somebody here in Bangalore (sub boss also knows him) who owns the RF3 for last 3 years or so. He is a hard core tweaker and has probably 25 years of experience in audio. Currently he is modding the innards of his rotel power amp. He got the best out of his speaker with a valve amp………so I am just suggesting……………I have heard them with a cayin valve amp and I felt it far better than the rotel. Well, I may be looking for a certain sound………..your mileage may vary……
Neutral
Stammgast
#25 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 15:43
Hi kspv,

It's a relief to hear that the Pulz guys treated you so well. Both my amp (RS-250) and bookshelves (Status 203) are made by Pulz. So I will die if they conk out and the company doesn't repare them promptly.

Your observation on the rolled off high frequencies on the Pulz is accurate. I was warned at the demo by Milind and Egelbert. They said that the sound would be very different from the usual 'disco' sound. The disadvantage of this rolloff is that you lose some treble details. The advantage is that you can listen for hours (I listen for upto 5 hrs at a stretch) without any ear damage. Have you heard any noise from the gain controls on the RS-250 power amp? I find them noisy below '3' and the amp just goes off if I reduce the gain below this.

I haven't heard Yamaha's stereo amps much; so can't comment on them. My take is that Studio 1s are small bookshelves needing just around 50W of power - does pairing them with a more powerful amp help in any way?

Does anyone know how to build a simple volume control for two channels - preferably with a remote control? I feel that preamps degrade sound quality and are only useful with multiple sources.

Klipsch fans answer this: is the 95+ dB sensitivity of Klipsch only for the mids and highs? Do the lows have less sensitivity? Is that why a high power and current amp will sound better?
kspv
Ist häufiger hier
#26 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 19:18
Dear Neutral,

Noise from gain-controls is a common problem experienced in high humidity areas and at sea-shores. At the service-centres, they routinely spray some Philips anti-static liquid into the volume control knobs, and that solves the problem for the next one year. Needless to say, this happens with all amps.

My surmise behind pairing Studio-1s with a powerful amp is that whenever the speakers demand higher output from the amp (i.e., bass passages), the latter should be able to deliver it effortlessly. It is the distortion that destroys the speakers more than the power. My idea is to nearly eliminate amp-based distortion by keeping it <1% at all levels of power requirement by the speakers. Reserve power is reserve power, and by no means I wish to call it into service when it is not needed.

I have once seen on the web an external attachment for the dual mono-amps to turn the two volume control knobs at once, which employs a dual belt mechanism. I do not remember the site name. You just have to do a Google search with the string, "volume control".

There are differing opinions about whether or not pre-amps degrade the sound. This is a huge discussion I would not like to tread upon in this thread. Insertion losses apart, you need a common volume control if you are bi-amping or tri-amping your speaker setup, and that is possible only at the pre-amp level. If your are using only a CD-source and a pair of high-quality speakers, by all means, avoid a pre-amp and directly connect your CD player to the power-amp. The analog output of CD-player at 2.00 Vrms is equivalent to most pre-amp outputs.

Question arises as to why one should not use the digital volume control available with the remotes of many a commercial CD player, to control the overall volume of the system. The answer is, digital volume controls give the best fidelity at their maximum volume. For every 3dB attenuation of a digital volume control, there is a loss of fidelity by 1 bit. Thus, a 16 bit CD player would sound like a 14 bit CD player, if you reduce its digital volume by 6 dB from the maximum. Only some CD-players like Wadia employ an analog volume control that is adjustable through remote-control, and they are too costly. They also have dual outputs for the main and subwoofer amplifiers. With them, you can totally eliminate a pre-amp even if your are bi/tri-amping, provided you are not using multiple sources.


[Beitrag von kspv am 13. Sep 2005, 19:27 bearbeitet]
Arj
Inventar
#27 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 19:46

square_wave schrieb:
Dear Abhipani,
I am not talking about dynamics or high-current capabilities. All hi-res / high quality amps will have loads of this. I am talking about voicing of the amp. All amps are voiced in a certain way. The klipsch is voiced to be forward sounding. It is a speaker which can be considered as LOUD with an “in your face” sound. If you partner the same with an amp with similar qualities, you are asking for trouble unless you thrive on that type of un-natural sound.
I personally know somebody here in Bangalore (sub boss also knows him) who owns the RF3 for last 3 years or so. He is a hard core tweaker and has probably 25 years of experience in audio. Currently he is modding the innards of his rotel power amp. He got the best out of his speaker with a valve amp………so I am just suggesting……………I have heard them with a cayin valve amp and I felt it far better than the rotel. Well, I may be looking for a certain sound………..your mileage may vary……


Quite true.. I had tried out a friends Vincent Pre/Power (Tubes) with my setup and it had sounded very good.
In fact with 10 watts of power input into a 98 db speaker can turn your bones to Jelly

It all depends on your setup and not to forget your CDP..if your CDP is warm, so will the sound be..
But this is really the first time in any forum I am hearing about the NAD being on the brighter side....to each ones own i guess.

BTW SUB, can u PM me your address ? I will be in bangalore for a couple of days and still need to post you that rubber footing and a spec sheet ;)I still have it safe with me !
benkenobi
Hat sich gelöscht
#28 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 20:27
I am sure most of you know that speakers are inherently very inefficient.
They output only 2-3 watts of acoustical power regardless of the kilowatts of electrical power pumped into them.
benkenobi
Hat sich gelöscht
#29 erstellt: 13. Sep 2005, 20:29

kspv schrieb:


Question arises as to why one should not use the digital volume control available with the remotes of many a commercial CD player, to control the overall volume of the system. The answer is, digital volume controls give the best fidelity at their maximum volume. For every 3dB attenuation of a digital volume control, there is a loss of fidelity by 1 bit. Thus, a 16 bit CD player would sound like a 14 bit CD player, if you reduce its digital volume by 6 dB from the maximum. Only some CD-players like Wadia employ an analog volume control that is adjustable through remote-control, and they are too costly. They also have dual outputs for the main and subwoofer amplifiers. With them, you can totally eliminate a pre-amp even if your are bi/tri-amping, provided you are not using multiple sources.


I would be very much obliged if you could post some references for your statements.
Arj
Inventar
#30 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 05:23

benkenobi schrieb:
I am sure most of you know that speakers are inherently very inefficient.
They output only 2-3 watts of acoustical power regardless of the kilowatts of electrical power pumped into them.


true hence the difference between Efficiency and sensitivity....
kspv
Ist häufiger hier
#31 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 06:08
Dear Benkenobi,

The following is the funda, as collected from the websites of Wadia, Wolfson Microelectronics, and sundry others.

"All digital volume controls perform mathematical calculation on the digital data representing the analog audio signal. Although complex in practice, it's easy to understand in principle. Reducing the volume in the digital domain is accomplished by multiplying each sample by a number less than one. Let's take the example of decreasing the playback volume by 6 dB. Because 6 dB represents a halving of voltage, every sample is multiplied by 0.5. The samples encode a number that represents the original analog waveform's amplitude at the time the sample was taken. By mutiplying each sample by 0.5, the amplitude of the reconstructed analog signal is reduced by half, or 6 dB.

But there's a price to pay for this digital slight-of-hand. The drawback of digital volume control is that the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) worsens at low volumes. This is due to the quantization error, which is inherent in any digital system and may result in audible noise. Its magnitude depends on the resolution of the digital audio data and/or the DAC. When volume control is performed in the digital domain, the digital audio signal’s amplitude may be decreased by several orders of magnitude while quantization noise remains constant, resulting in a lower SNR. In other words, a 16-bit signal atenuated in the digital domain may now have a resolution of a 15-bit signal. Lower the volume further, and you may have the equivilent of a 14-bit source. Dynamic range is reduced, and the music signal gets closer to the digital noise floor. With fewer bits, low-level signals can become more coarse, particularly at higher attenuation levels.

This is not the case with analogue volume control, where any gain or attenuation applied to the signal affects DAC quantisation noise equally, so that the signal to noise ratio stays constant. "


You appear to be a techie. So please decide for yourself and also enlighten us whether or not this logic is correct. Infact the other side of the argument, which I had seen in a heated discussion on <www.diyaudio.com> on this topic, says that analog volume controls too show signal deterioration upon attenuation, though there is no neat word such as "bit" to describe the deterioration.


[Beitrag von kspv am 14. Sep 2005, 06:18 bearbeitet]
abhi.pani
Inventar
#32 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 06:10

square_wave schrieb:
Dear Abhipani,
I am not talking about dynamics or high-current capabilities. All hi-res / high quality amps will have loads of this. I am talking about voicing of the amp. All amps are voiced in a certain way. The klipsch is voiced to be forward sounding.


Hi Square_wave,
I totally agree with you regarding voicing and one cannot neglect it at any point of his amp hunt but my concern is something else.
Like I said when one has "dynamics" high on priority then whats the way to go? Your statement that all hi-res amps have loads of wattages and current is not as accurate IMO. If you consider AA Puccini as hi-res then I would have to say that it does'nt have the kind of characteristics you have mentioned. Its very good on mids but when ot comes to bottom end its just average. I am not talking about amps costing a Lac and above. I am just considering the mid end amps available in India.
Unfortunately I havent got the opportunity to listen to a valve amp so cant comment on that. But considering SS amps only I rarely find amps (mid-end) which are detailed as well as dynamic. I still feel, even if klipsch are ultra-high sensitive, to get its low end grunt to fire one needs good high-current amps (keeping in mind the voicing of course). For that matter a Puccini or Marantz are not yet there.

P.S I am concerned with low end dynamics here.
square_wave
Inventar
#33 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 06:15
[/quote]
Quite true.. I had tried out a friends Vincent Pre/Power (Tubes) with my setup and it had sounded very good.
In fact with 10 watts of power input into a 98 db speaker can turn your bones to Jelly

It all depends on your setup and not to forget your CDP..if your CDP is warm, so will the sound be..
But this is really the first time in any forum I am hearing about the NAD being on the brighter side....to each ones own i guess.

BTW SUB, can u PM me your address ? I will be in bangalore for a couple of days and still need to post you that rubber footing and a spec sheet I still have it safe with me ![/quote]

Hey Arj,
It is just that some NADs do not work with klipsch for everybody.It could be a personal preference. Somebody who I know tried the NAD C370 with his klipsch and didn’t like it one bit. It is just a matter of personal taste. Nads are not bright at all in my opinion. They are actually pretty neutral and slightly on the darker side of neutral which I personally like. A well balanced amp in its price range.I was checking on the JMR speakers you have. Very interesting...
benkenobi
Hat sich gelöscht
#34 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 06:19
Thanks for that KVSP..
yes that is pretty much true..
regarding the quantization errors and all..
if i recall my analog communication basics, i think we came across a method to reduce quantization errors and also to increase the signal to noise ratio.
there is no doubt that going digital has flaws mostly based due to quatization levels and related shortcomings but the advantage with going for a digital system to to almost immunize it from the problems that plauge the analog domain.
it is much easier for the signal to get corrupted in the analog domain.
all that can happen in the digital domain is insertion loss, transmission loss(loss due to resolution of DACs).
I agree that making a competent analog volume comtrol is a pretty expensive affair which is best avoided,cause the gains are frankly not justifiable.


[Beitrag von benkenobi am 14. Sep 2005, 06:24 bearbeitet]
SUB_BOSS
Gesperrt
#35 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 08:31

It all depends on your setup and not to forget your CDP..if your CDP is warm, so will the sound be..
But this is really the first time in any forum I am hearing about the NAD being on the brighter side....to each ones own i guess.


tried NAD 320 bee with HK player and found it to be sharp and bright, but got bowled when heard NAD pre + power , NAD 521 cdp with PAradigms refernce in Mysore..it was one of the best matched combos with good mids, highs and punchy tight lows... if at all I can scrape more cash I will buy that whole set up as my second system..or may be primary... :D..have invited that gentle man from Mysore to sign in..he's into audio since 18 years and carries wealth of knowledge..


[Beitrag von SUB_BOSS am 14. Sep 2005, 08:33 bearbeitet]
Arj
Inventar
#36 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 08:32
The following, which you might have read is a good read

http://www.wadia.com/technology/dvcontrl/sld001.htm


kspv schrieb:
Dear Benkenobi,

The following is the funda, as collected from the websites of Wadia, Wolfson Microelectronics, and sundry others.

"All digital volume controls perform mathematical calculation on the digital data representing the analog audio signal. Although complex in practice, it's easy to understand in principle. Reducing the volume in the digital domain is accomplished by multiplying each sample by a number less than one. Let's take the example of decreasing the playback volume by 6 dB. Because 6 dB represents a halving of voltage, every sample is multiplied by 0.5. The samples encode a number that represents the original analog waveform's amplitude at the time the sample was taken. By mutiplying each sample by 0.5, the amplitude of the reconstructed analog signal is reduced by half, or 6 dB.

But there's a price to pay for this digital slight-of-hand. The drawback of digital volume control is that the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) worsens at low volumes. This is due to the quantization error, which is inherent in any digital system and may result in audible noise. Its magnitude depends on the resolution of the digital audio data and/or the DAC. When volume control is performed in the digital domain, the digital audio signal’s amplitude may be decreased by several orders of magnitude while quantization noise remains constant, resulting in a lower SNR. In other words, a 16-bit signal atenuated in the digital domain may now have a resolution of a 15-bit signal. Lower the volume further, and you may have the equivilent of a 14-bit source. Dynamic range is reduced, and the music signal gets closer to the digital noise floor. With fewer bits, low-level signals can become more coarse, particularly at higher attenuation levels.

This is not the case with analogue volume control, where any gain or attenuation applied to the signal affects DAC quantisation noise equally, so that the signal to noise ratio stays constant. "


You appear to be a techie. So please decide for yourself and also enlighten us whether or not this logic is correct. Infact the other side of the argument, which I had seen in a heated discussion on <www.diyaudio.com> on this topic, says that analog volume controls too show signal deterioration upon attenuation, though there is no neat word such as "bit" to describe the deterioration.
Arj
Inventar
#37 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 08:38


I was checking on the JMR speakers you have. Very interesting... :)


Yup Am really enjoying them myself..Surprising how good the Sonic Impact T amp is with them..Just 15 Watts into 4 ohms and the bass is just gettin fantastic as the speakers break in...
still cannot get over the fact that they are only $25

JMRs are a killer in the mid range. really having a more healthy respect for Norah jones - Never liked her when i heard her before..now the voice is pretty mesmerizing.
Was thinking of adding a REL Strata to it (As I had heard at the dealers), but currently just want to wait for the speakers to break in and enjoy the music..Will think of the sub later
SUB_BOSS
Gesperrt
#38 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 09:39
Hey Arj how will a Sonic Impact T sound with Rf
Arj
Inventar
#39 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 10:09
I think it will sound good. have not figured out if it is " Bright" or not.. My speakers are a bit on the warmer sound of neutral and there is no High frequency peak. hence feel it is more neutral.

But the speakers are just breaking in and have not been able to spend enough time for critical listening hence cannot comment on it yet..

It has enough power and no noise..hence my gut feel is it should be pretty compatible..
SUB_BOSS
Gesperrt
#40 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 10:15
if you can pick up one for me for $25
square_wave
Inventar
#41 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 10:32

Arj schrieb:


I was checking on the JMR speakers you have. Very interesting... :)


Yup Am really enjoying them myself..Surprising how good the Sonic Impact T amp is with them..Just 15 Watts into 4 ohms and the bass is just gettin fantastic as the speakers break in...
still cannot get over the fact that they are only $25

JMRs are a killer in the mid range. really having a more healthy respect for Norah jones - Never liked her when i heard her before..now the voice is pretty mesmerizing.
Was thinking of adding a REL Strata to it (As I had heard at the dealers), but currently just want to wait for the speakers to break in and enjoy the music..Will think of the sub later :)


Here’s a good alternative to the REL. The PMC TLE1. This one is supposed to be very musical and built especially for music playback with the immensely popular PMC monitors.
http://www.pmcloudspeaker.com/tle1.html
More info.
http://www.bryston.ca/pmc_rev/lineup_tle.html
square_wave
Inventar
#42 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 10:48

abhi.pani schrieb:

square_wave schrieb:
Dear Abhipani,
I am not talking about dynamics or high-current capabilities. All hi-res / high quality amps will have loads of this. I am talking about voicing of the amp. All amps are voiced in a certain way. The klipsch is voiced to be forward sounding.


Hi Square_wave,
I totally agree with you regarding voicing and one cannot neglect it at any point of his amp hunt but my concern is something else.
Like I said when one has "dynamics" high on priority then whats the way to go? Your statement that all hi-res amps have loads of wattages and current is not as accurate IMO. If you consider AA Puccini as hi-res then I would have to say that it does'nt have the kind of characteristics you have mentioned. Its very good on mids but when ot comes to bottom end its just average. I am not talking about amps costing a Lac and above. I am just considering the mid end amps available in India.
Unfortunately I havent got the opportunity to listen to a valve amp so cant comment on that. But considering SS amps only I rarely find amps (mid-end) which are detailed as well as dynamic. I still feel, even if klipsch are ultra-high sensitive, to get its low end grunt to fire one needs good high-current amps (keeping in mind the voicing of course). For that matter a Puccini or Marantz are not yet there.

P.S I am concerned with low end dynamics here. :)


Hi Abhi,
Low end dynamics or dynamics for that matter has more to do with system synergy than anything else. There is no guarantee that any high power amp connected to a klipsch is going to get it done. This is where knowledge about system synergy or good consultants comes into play……… I have heard Marantz and Puccini producing good detailed low end dynamics. This again depends on how you define “BASS”. To hear good bass, you need a well treated dedicated listening room with bass traps. In typical homes and 90 percent of dealer/listening rooms we hear muddy bass. So when you hear a properly designed amp which has highly detailed bass in a bad/average room, it won’t impress but we tend to get impressed by amps designed to work in such rooms………this is like “BOSE” philosophy. Bose designed speakers which work in typical rooms (this forms 90 percent of the buying public) and he minted money.
SUB_BOSS
Gesperrt
#43 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 11:02

So when you hear a properly designed amp which has highly detailed bass in a bad/average room, it won’t impress but we tend to get impressed by amps designed to work in such rooms


We can have music sysems in plae where we live and can't really put up a seperate room for Hifi..at least so far as I've seen 99% of people do it former way..BTW even you know places where you audition are not treated but in raw state...AA Puccini is weak in low end and many reviews also speak of this...
abhi.pani
Inventar
#44 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 11:41
Hey Square_wave,
I know when we are talking of bass it means quality bass associated with quantity as well. There is no point talking about ideal room or ideal bass because its way too unachievable with our limited resources.
Talking practically people who like Bose normally dont have exposure to other brands, otherwise its easy to distinguish which is better.
Secondly I dont mean to say that any powerful amp is going to gel well with Klipsch, that can be the last inference one can make out of my statement. Its a simple analogy from my limited exposure to hifi that Dynamics is not easy to achieve and is not common either even in mid-end amps (forget about entry level). A Puccini or Marantz can hardly match a Rotel or Nad Pre-power when it comes to bottom end.

Again system synergy is important but then when we are discussing audio we comment on lot many things just out of the box even if we have not auditioned it.....e.g you said that a Puccini should do well with Klipsch but you might not have exactly auditioned the combo right..your comment might be based upon the fact that a forward sounding speaker should be partnered with a laid back amp and so on. Thats how my comment goes as well.
I found the grunt to be lacking. It may be adequate to drive a Bookshelf well but not heavy floorstanders like Klipsch.
square_wave
Inventar
#45 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 11:45
This is the sad truth in audio………….the room is one of the most important components in audio. Imagine we tweak our speakers with cables, sources, interconnects, amps and finally achieve a balance in our average listening/drawing room. If we then move this entire system to a good listening room, the entire equation changes. We may have to start all over again. What I am trying to say is that, unless you evaluate an amp in a good listening room with the rest of the audio chain setup properly, you can’t really evaluate an amp. Especially bass. Bass is very difficult to manage and evaluate. The conclusion you reached in somebody’s drawing room might not hold in a well treated listening room.
SUB_BOSS
Gesperrt
#46 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 11:59
Dear Sq wave what if i felt MF class A was perfect to my taste in present set up with no changes to room environment..yes it actually sounded the way I wanted the sound to be with no other changes than placing MF in place where my old amp was ....
abhi.pani
Inventar
#47 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 12:03
Agreed but then whats the way out...ultimately we have to choose what sounds good in a normal living room than researching about its performance in a well treated room right ??
SUB_BOSS
Gesperrt
#48 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 12:12

Agreed but then whats the way out...ultimately we have to choose what sounds good in a normal living room than researching about its performance in a well treated room right ??


yes thats true..you can't blame the roads for your car being bumpy...better buy one which can give you the best performance..or buy one which only performs on a flat strech and ride it in your backyard..
powersupply
Ist häufiger hier
#49 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 13:09
Hi, for Rock Puccini is not impressive at all. Definitely we feel weak in bass, it may be tuneful bass but that impact wont be there.

As other members mentioned, Puccini's power is not at all sufficient to drive Klipsch's dual 8" cerametalic woofers. I had listened to this puccini+RF3 combo long back. You can feel the bass physically from RF3s provided you drive them with a muscular amp
Arj
Inventar
#50 erstellt: 14. Sep 2005, 15:42

powersupply schrieb:
Hi, for Rock Puccini is not impressive at all. Definitely we feel weak in bass, it may be tuneful bass but that impact wont be there.

As other members mentioned, Puccini's power is not at all sufficient to drive Klipsch's dual 8" cerametalic woofers. I had listened to this puccini+RF3 combo long back. You can feel the bass physically from RF3s provided you drive them with a muscular amp


I have listened to a klipsch RF3 with a 8 W amp with the volume kess than 50% mark and it had no problem pushing those dual 8" cerametalic woofers.

So I would not agree with you there.. Their impedance does not fall below 6 (If i remember) at low freq hence it does not need a high instantaneous current as other speaker might..

You do not need high current for these.. In fact its much larger brother the RF7 with 10" ers is run by so many people with 2W amps to insane levels..
abhi.pani
Inventar
#51 erstellt: 15. Sep 2005, 04:34
In that case...its simply the weak bass representation of Puccini...as square_wave mentioned "voicing", I would still say its not the right amp for RF3.
Suche:
Gehe zu Seite: Erste 2 Letzte |nächste|
Das könnte Dich auch interessieren:
Lithos Kontras - First Impressions
Krish am 19.12.2008  –  Letzte Antwort am 30.12.2008  –  15 Beiträge
yamaha ax 396 problem
dcn290 am 28.01.2004  –  Letzte Antwort am 30.01.2004  –  4 Beiträge
Bangalore Audio labs
srikeerthi am 12.03.2005  –  Letzte Antwort am 18.03.2005  –  7 Beiträge
Indian Speakers - Lithos
Azzy am 03.01.2007  –  Letzte Antwort am 08.01.2007  –  11 Beiträge
Yamaha AX-596
babuu am 03.07.2004  –  Letzte Antwort am 14.07.2004  –  6 Beiträge
Recommendations for audio setup
Nagaraj am 18.11.2004  –  Letzte Antwort am 22.11.2004  –  9 Beiträge
Any imputs on Carver CM-1090 integrated amplifier
Ronnie22 am 06.09.2005  –  Letzte Antwort am 16.11.2009  –  15 Beiträge
a good stereo system
kishore am 31.07.2004  –  Letzte Antwort am 12.08.2004  –  6 Beiträge
Lithos- Noah1-Auditioned
roshan am 03.03.2005  –  Letzte Antwort am 04.03.2005  –  14 Beiträge
Marantz 1072 amplifier with a weird noise
jeroentje am 30.01.2005  –  Letzte Antwort am 31.01.2005  –  4 Beiträge
Foren Archiv
2005

Anzeige

Aktuelle Aktion

Partner Widget schließen

  • beyerdynamic Logo
  • DALI Logo
  • SAMSUNG Logo
  • TCL Logo

Forumsstatistik Widget schließen

  • Registrierte Mitglieder925.509 ( Heute: 6 )
  • Neuestes MitgliedSöby
  • Gesamtzahl an Themen1.550.279
  • Gesamtzahl an Beiträgen21.520.714

Hersteller in diesem Thread Widget schließen