[John Casler]

Hi All,

As most of you know I am an eternal "tweaker".  While I love to play with new electronics and wires, I find far greater improvements from tweaking and room treatments.

I have three tweaks that I have been "re-tweaking" (Yes, I am re-tweaking the tweaks!!!)

Where do I begin?

How would all of you like to make your 626R, RM1, RM2, RM30, or RM40 models sound more similar to the RM/x?

Some time ago, I posted a tweak I called the "Sonic Lapels".  I suggested taking some 3-4" wedge foam and placing on each side of the neopanels to reduce baffle defraction and lateral dispersion.

The RM/x has the reduced baffle defraction by virtue of the fact that "there is no baffle" to speak of.  It is scooped out on each side of the sculpted cabinet.

This lack of diffraction makes for an incredible "soundstage and image" projection.

Now the Neopanels have a reduced dispersion and defraction pattern by virtue of their normal character, but the "Lapel" tweak made it even better.

Recently B, commented on the "foam mask" on the FST forming an "acoustic lens" for the tweater.

Also recently, Ethan from Real Traps mentioned that the "Foam by Mail" foams weren't as effective and claimed.

So, tweaker that I am, I revisited my lapels tweak.  This time however I took a "slightly denser" open cell foam, and instead of using a "wedge", I cut it in a block.  The block was 3" x 3" x 7".

I also took care to mount it all the way up to the "very edge" of the neopanel.

The results are in a word "unbeleivable".  I assume you get tired of hearing this, but, that is the deal.

What did it do?

It added a "SONIC ADDITION" on to my room!!!

While I had 3-D depth to die for before, this added to it.

It also made a "Soundstage, and Imaging" that I thought was "un-improvable" better.  

I listened to the SACD of Cafe Blue, last night.  I only intended to listen to the first cut, and the next thing I knew, the whole SACD had played.

Same with SONGBIRD by Eva Cassidy.

I was virtually speechless. (but smilin' like a Chesire )

I can't say "exactly" why this works so well, but again, I assume it reduces defraction, reduces excess stray dispersion, and it may even have some type of acoustic lens property that makes it sound so "pure".

Yep, "pure".  The sound gained an added "purity" that I can't describe, but tell me if you hear it.

And one additional comment.  I have been experrimenting more with "on axis/off axis" listening and have tended over the last year to prefer the B, suggested "off axis" convergence of about a foot or two in front of the listening area.

I found that this gave more of a 3-D depth to the center stage area.  I also found that the direct "on axis" sonic was a bit "hot", especially for my friends with "sensitive" hearing.

Well for "shits and giggles", after trying this tweak, I moved back to the "full Monty" of directly on axis, and it is sweet and pure and deeper (3-D deep) than anything I have heard from these speaker yet.

I would implore any and all of you with "ANY" VMPS model to try this tweak ASAP.

Don't worry about "permanent" installation right now, just try it.  I "temporarily" scotch taped the foams in place.  If you find the same improvment I did, then you can design a more permanent solution.

Where can you get such foam?  Well I cut mine (beleive it or not) out of some charcoal foam I had lying around.  It was in fact "packing foam".

If you have anything like that to do a "temp" set up make sure and use a "bread" knife to cut it into shape.

Later if (when) you find you cannot live iwthout it. Search the acoustic foam sites for "corner blocks" and they usually come in 3" x 3" x 36" or some such size.  That should work.  Just cut it (again with a bread knife) to size.

Trust me, I have never heard a VMPS speaker sound this good before.

I have the 626Rs (not for long) but as I said this can be used on "ANY" VMPS speaker with the neopanels.  Just make sure the foam is butted up to the edge of the neopanel as earlier suggested, and that it runs the full length of all the panels.

Now as Paul Harvey says, here's the "rest of the story".

If you have an 8' or 9' ceiling, you have an enormous amount to "ceiling bounce reflection".  In fact it is probably "more damaging" than even side reflections, depending on how far you sit from your speakers and how far your side walls are from your speakers.

But in any event, if you want to see how bad they are, try this little experiment:

If you have one, go to the linen closet and "steal or borrow" a flannel/soft fabric  blanket.

Get at least 6-8 of the "map pin" type thumbtacks and tack the blanket to the ceiling starting 3 feet in front of your listening seat.

Don't tack it "flat" on the ceiling, let it "hang" down in the center at least a foot or so in the center.

Stick on your favorite CD and get ready to hear what it really sounds like.

Now I have gone a step further and have a assembled a "temporary" LISTENING TENT

That is, I have two blankets (but this time only one end is tacked to the ceiling and the blanket hangs down like a flag) on each side of me, and two blankets directly behind me. (about 3 feet away from my ears on each side and to the rear)

This arrangement forms a "tent" open only to the front.

OK, OK, OK, I know it sounds dopey looking, and it is , but these are "try it tweaks", to see if it works, and then I'll fashion something more "finished".

Well, all I can say is "call me and come over" or raid your linen closet, because this too is beyond description.

Now for those who use the living room or some other, "non-dedicated" room for listening, you probably can't get away with this, unless you are like me, and have no SO to answer to, but man if you can just get this into place, you will hear things in your music that "NO" component will allow you to uncover by itself. (it can't cause the room interaction will mask it no matter how pure it is)

What I mean by that, is that you can spend multi-thousands on components, and if your room is producing "sonic haze" you "WON'T" hear what your system can do.

These room tweaks, move you a little closer to "sonically transparent" room boundaries, which means you don't have to listen through the "room haze" as much.

The "Sonic Tent" works on the same principle as "on wall" treaments to reduce reflected sound, but it simply absorbs/blocks it closer to you, and you get the affect of covering your whole room.

It is absolutley "ear opening"  (I know "over used" audio phrase )

If anyone tries these.  Let me know what you think, or if you have any questions just ask.

Suggested recordings:

Cafe Blue - SACD Patricia Barber - All cuts
SongBird - Cut #1 and #4
Amused to Death - Roger Waters - All cuts
Hope - Live album by Hugh Masekela - Stimela (Coal Train)
Your Favorite Reference cuts

[zybar]

John,

You are the ultimate tweaker!  

BTW, I only recently started listening to Hugh Masekela, but he is heavy in the rotation.  Highly recommended.

George

[KJ]

This time however I took a "slightly denser" open cell foam, and instead of using a "wedge", I cut it in a block. The block was 3" x 3" x 7".

John,

Did you tinker with the thickness and width of the foam at all?  Does 3" make a substanial difference compared to 2"?  The only reason I ask is because I always replace the grills after I'm done listening.  At 3", the foam will push against the grills and also stick out beyond the edge of the RM30's sidewall due to the already narrow baffle.

-KJ

[John Casler]

This time however I took a "slightly denser" open cell foam, and instead of using a "wedge", I cut it in a block. The block was 3" x 3" x 7".

John,

Did you tinker with the thickness and width of the foam at all?  Does 3" make a substanial difference compared to 2"?  The only reason I ask is because I always replace the grills after I'm done listening.  At 3", the foam will push against the grills and also stick out beyond the edge of the RM30's sidewall due to the already narrow baffle.

-KJ

I did and the 2" was 85-90% as good.

If it is less density, it loses some of its effect in the defraction area.  If it is too short (depth wise) it loses some of its "dispersion" control characteristic.

It should be "wide enough" to cover the baffle as much as possible.

I assume this will also work on conventional cone (dynamic) drivers and their baffles, and might likely work "better" since they have "much broader" dispersion patterns and certainly more baffle defraction.

Alternatively, cone drivers "might" put out too much dispersive energy and it might sound like "butt"

Look here for 2" x 2" foam strips under "corner blocks"

http://www.foamdistributing.com/products/cornersolutions.html#bass

and here: (again scroll down to "corner block noise control")

http://www.foamandupholstery.com/CornerKits.htm

[John Casler]

Someone please HELP ME!!!!!

I just listened to Norah Jones' old album (re-visited) which I have heard literally over 200 times, and it is like I had never heard it before.

No hardness to her voice (admitedly I was only around 82db) and no icyness to the piano peaks.

Soundstage and "images" like I have NEVER heard in this CD.

Was it Buffalo Springfield who sang":

"Something's happening here, what is ain't exactly clear"

"You gotta STOP children, whats that sound?"

"Everybody look what's going 'round"

Well something is "going round" and I like it.

I can't say it is all due to the "improved lapels", since I did the blanket on the ceiling too, but somebody please give this a try (until your wife makes you disassemble it) and let me know if you get the same thing.

I should say that if you already have a LEDE, forget the ceiling trick

[Marbles]

Could be flashbacks to your Timothy Leary Daze

[brj]

Are any of the VMPS speakers designed with some degree of baffle step compensation?  Wouldn't this tweak affect that?

[John Casler]

Could be flashbacks to your Timothy Leary Daze

Strange you bring up Leary, since I had two quite unique and very special encounters with him.

One involved smoke and the other involved the Moody Blues.

One was in 1968 and the other in 1982 or 83.

Maybe someday I'll spin a yarn or two.  Right now, I'm too busy re-visiting all my CDs

I should also say I never "exhaled".    

[John Casler]

John,

You are the ultimate tweaker!  

BTW, I only recently started listening to Hugh Masekela, but he is heavy in the rotation.  Highly recommended.

George

Thanks George,

Glad you like the Masekela cut.  Played at nice high levels, it is killer.  It has just about everything needed for a reference cut (except a female voice and a piano)

The soundstage and imaging is particularly amazing.  All the things you can distinctly pick out clearly hear, including some of the best onstage singers and crowd sonics on any live recording.

He is no doubt an African Miles Davis who can also sing and tell a story, not to mention making some very interesting sounds (train).

[John Casler]

Are any of the VMPS speakers designed with some degree of baffle step compensation?  Wouldn't this tweak affect that?

While Brian can answer that question better than I, I would doubt that there is any compensation in the equation.

Just look at the variance from the width of the RM2 to the reduced baffle of the RM/x and RM30s.

I can only imagine what an RM2 owner will experience with this tweak.

I would advise them to cover the full area from the neopanel to the edge of the cabinet, which might take a double wide version.

[Marbles]

Could be flashbacks to your Timothy Leary Daze

Strange you bring up Leary, since I had two quite unique and very special encounters with him.

One involved smoke and the other involved the Moody Blues.

One was in 1968 and the other in 1982 or 83.

Maybe someday I'll spin a yarn or two.  Right now, I'm too busy re-visiting all my CDs

I'd love to hear the stories...in private or
 public  

[drystream]

Someone please HELP ME!!!!!


Was it Buffalo Springfield who sang":

"Something's happening here, what is ain't exactly clear"

"You gotta STOP children, whats that sound?"

"Everybody look wha ...

You're right about it being Buffalo Springfield--a Stephen Stills song, "For What It's Worth".

http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&token=ADFEAEE4791FDD4DAC7F20C09B3A40C0B177FB0CFE53F58C11380456D3B82D6BA33A40C45BE09881B4E574B266ADFF2EA1160ED3C0EF57F6DF652D4CF0&sql=10:oe8j1vkjzzha

I liked the Muppet's version.

[brj]

Are any of the VMPS speakers designed with some degree of baffle step compensation?  Wouldn't this tweak affect that?

While Brian can answer that question better than I, I would doubt that there is any compensation in the equation.

Just look at the variance from the width of the RM2 to the reduced baffle of the RM/x and RM30s.

Presumably, the RM2 and the RM30s have different crossovers and thus would have the BSC implemented accordingly, no?

[BrunoB]

Also recently, Ethan from Real Traps mentioned that the "Foam by Mail" foams weren't as effective and claimed.

So, tweaker that I am, I revisited my lapels tweak. This time however I took a "slightly denser" open cell foam, and instead of using a "wedge", I cut it in a block. The block was 3" x 3" x 7".

I also took care to mount it all the way up to the "very edge" of the neopanel. .

John,

It could be that the reason  that your new tweak works better than the first version has nothing to do with foam density. I have noticed that foam reflects sound. So with a block instead of a wedge, you might have less reflections to the listening position.

Bruno

[John Casler]

John,

It could be that the reason  that your new tweak works better than the first version has nothing to do with foam density. I have noticed that foam reflects sound. So with a block instead of a wedge, you might have less reflections to the listening position.

Bruno

Hi Bruno,

That was one of the "key" ideas in using a "block" instead of the wedge.

The smaller cross-section and lower density of the tip of the wedge, was letting some lateral HF dispersion through.

Although there is much more at play here, since I have my system set up on the long wall and the closest sidewall to either speaker is over 14' away.

Additionally, you would probably appreaciate my "Listening Tent" which then blocks/absorbs most wall and ceiling reflections before they can get to the listener. (Mostly HF and upper mids - NOT BASS)

I just listened to "Little Fugue in G Minor", which is one of ifn not my all time favorite classical peice.

It was recorded in the early 70's late 60's and it NEVER sounded as good as it just did.

While the miking left a bit to be desired, it still rendered an incredibly accurate soundstage and instrument placement and imaging.

Biggest miking/technical flaw is that "massed strings" homogenize a bit, but this does sound closer to really being there, than hearing the detail of closer miking.

[ctviggen]

John, are you using double-sided tape to put the foam on there?

[John Casler]

John, are you using double-sided tape to put the foam on there?

Hi Bob,

At the moment, I simply used "Scotch" tape since it is a temporary tweak (I sold the speakers), but double sided tape is what I used in the past.

I am still "tweaking and re-tweaking" this tweak and may have some other findings soon.

I always like to make sure that the differences heard are actually real improvements sonically, and not just "differences" that can be heard.

So far they seem to be.

I might also mention that my more sonically treated listening space, may allow me to hear things that less treated areas might not allow.

It is kind of like being in a "well lit" room and trying to see a pinhole of light.  You may not be able to see it.

But turn out the lights so you are in a completly dark room, and a pinhole of light becomes a "beacon".

In my room, I have lowered the room generated "sonic energy" (equivalent of light energy for this example) quite low in the mids and highs. so I can hear "small" details and delicate sonics that are sometimes "washed out".

[ctviggen]

Thanks, John.  I'm thinking of buying some of the (good) foam for a few corners and the ceiling, so I could also buy some to make the lapels.  I also saw some foam used for dispersion/diffusion, and I was thinking of buying some of that and messing around with it, too.

[John Casler]

Thanks, John.  I'm thinking of buying some of the (good) foam for a few corners and the ceiling, so I could also buy some to make the lapels.  I also saw some foam used for dispersion/diffusion, and I was thinking of buying some of that and messing around with it, too.

The Foam by Mail will still work, but it just doesn't live up to its "specs".

Probably means it will need "more" foam (maybe 2 x as much)  to do the same job.

As far as diffusion devices, I am not a big fan.

On the scale of best to worst, they are better than a bare wall reflection, but they still take reflected sound and randomly spread it (diffuse it) around the room.  That sonic energy is still "ringing" and traveling to intersect the direct sound and to create "busy noise" (some call air)

Diffused light is great for one purpose in photography.  It is great for "wiping out" shadows and contrast.

Diffused sound does the same thing to your music.  It softens the edges of images, dynamics and sound in general.  It basically "wipes" things out.

So it is better than bare wall reflection, but if you have the choice between absorption and diffusion, always go absorption. (IMHO)

[ctviggen]

I was thinking of using diffusive elements on the "live end" of my room.  I also want to try them just to see what happens.  Most of the "fancy" dedicated listening rooms have a high degree of diffusion.  I'm not sure if that's because it costs a lot, so people think it works, or whether it really does work.  Plus, the Handbook of Acoustics has an entire chapter about diffusion and seems to regard it highly.  As expensive (and large -- if you want to go lower in frequency) as many of these diffusive elements are, I won't be ordering too many of them!