[martyo]

I'm showing my ignorance here, in addition to frequency response specs such as "25-20,000 + or - 3db", there is sometimes an addition spec such as "F3 = 35Hz, F10 = 29Hz". Could someone please explain what it means? 

[WEEZ]

George,

True, but if you like what you hear at an audio show in one room compared to another...seeing that they're all the same size with the same sonic obstacles...it can be quite telling. It certainly can narrow the field for a future in-home trial, and eliminate some mistakes.

As always, ymmv

WEEZ

[WEEZ]

Marty, that would make a good topic for a new thread....

WEEZ

[Marbles]

I'm showing my ignorance here, in addition to frequency response specs such as "25-20,000 + or - 3db", there is sometimes an addition spec such as "F3 = 35Hz, F10 = 29Hz". Could someone please explain what it means? 

It tells where the bass starts to drop off, F3=35hz means it is playing at 35hz when it is down 3 db, as it drops off by 10db it is still outputting bass, just not nearly as loud as when it is playing flat, in your case it's down 10 db at 29hz.

[WEEZ]

..down 3db ref. to what...ahhh, that is the question

WEEZ

[JLM]

F3 and F10 are in reference to the "average" frequency response, which for speakers can be all over the place.  F3 and F10 are terms specified for woofers and often used in speaker design.

[martyo]

WEEZ is correct, I should have started a new thread. Actually I googled a speaker mentioned in this thread which had the F3.....specs.

The Veracity HT3 is essentially ruler-flat from 34Hz to 25,000Hz, with an F3 of 29Hz and an F10 of 23Hz

So the above spec from the Salk means at 29HZ the response is -3db from flat, and at 23Hz it's down by 10db?

Thanks guys

[JLM]

You got it!

Now, the next question should be:  Is that stated response measured anechoic (a special completely isolated echo-free room with very deep sound absorption panels in all directions and a suspended wire "floor") or in-room (realizing that everyone's room sounds different).

Anechoic measurement provides an industry standard.  Those rooms are really weird.  Besides walking on a trampoline of wire, you only hear direct sound (and a lot more of your own voice via your own bones), approximating an infinitely large room.  OTOH they don't relate very well to the "real" world we listen in.  Because sound waves get bigger as frequencies go down, even anechoic chambers are only used down to 200 Hz.

Bass frequencies are more suspectible to room interaction, so speaker designers turn to mathematical models to predict "free space" response, typically below 200 Hz.  Small rooms start adding gain at higher (midbass) frequencies.  Square rooms have more standing wave problems.  Some speaker designs (bipole, dipole, or in a way infinite baffles) minimize room effects.  Other designs (like sealed or transmission line) account for room boost to compliment performance.  Ported designs are perhaps the worst to interact with rooms as they trade some bass frequency (and sometimes add a "hump") for a sudden drop in response that doesn't match room gain.

[Marbles]

Read Dennis Murphy's and Jim Salks posts in this thread for more info on the HT3 measurements and how they were done.  On Page 3, Jim shows a computer generated plot that corresponds to the F3 and F10 figures.

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=37010.10

[macrojack]

I believe it was Einstein who defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over and over again with the hope of achieving different results. Crossovers are insanity.

No matter how beautiful the veneer or how much you like the designer, you are still running on a treadmill if you ignore the option of crossoverless design.

[zybar]

I believe it was Einstein who defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over and over again with the hope of achieving different results. Crossovers are insanity.

No matter how beautiful the veneer or how much you like the designer, you are still running on a treadmill if you ignore the option of crossoverless design.

Hate to say it Macrojack, but the Salk HT3's were less colored and provided more detail than the crossoverless Zu Definitions IMHO.

I will say that my opinion is based on owning the HT3's and having a 45 minute listening session to the Definitions at last year's RMAF.

Not a fair comparison, but the only one I have.

George

[BrianM]

The problem with going this route, is that many of the rooms sound bad to god awful!!

This isn't necessarily the fault of the equipment, but rather what can happen under show conditions.

I wouldn't base any serious conclusions (positive or negative) solely off what you hear at any show.

Unfortunately, anything short of an in-home audition is a crap shoot.

Tend to agree with this.  But "crap shoot" maybe isn't as bad as it sounds...

I actually think it's possible to make a pretty reliable, reasonably educated decision about speakers without hearing them, if you have an idea of what you're looking for, of what will be physically compatible with your room and your system, and an intuitive sense about separating wheat from chaff in what you read.  When you have a spending limit on top of that, you can probably narrow it down to a few very solid choices.  The three at the top of this thread tell me you've done that.  Question is, do you prefer 3 solid choices, or 3 dozen?  There's this phenomenon in our consumer culture called choice overload.  Someone even wrote  a book: The Paradox of Choice: Why More is Less.  (Are you a "satisficer" or a "maximizer"?...)

The other good news: you're getting electronics that will allow the speakers to speak for themselves.  I find AVA gear to be very neutral. One less thing to obsess about!  The speaker will essentially sound like the speaker and not like the gear, so you'll be judging it on its own merits.

So you can go to RMAF and be presented with potentially dozens of choices, or you can content yourself with the knowledge that you're choosing between 3 or 4 very good choices and can't really go far wrong.  Depends on how much you're a "appreciate what you have" guy as opposed to a "have to know what else is out there" guy.  (Zybar/George, incidentally, strikes me as the latter!  Nothing wrong with that, and no doubt fun as hell, but it will mean you're swapping gear a lot.)  3 months without new speakers is a long time.  Me being a peace of mind guy, I'd rather get something good now and enjoy it.  If you go to the show and hear something that rocks your world you can probably trade up without too much $ loss.  A brand new pair of Songtowers for resale?  Shouldn't be a huge problem.  JMO...

[BrianM]

I believe it was Einstein who defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over and over again with the hope of achieving different results. Crossovers are insanity.

No matter how beautiful the veneer or how much you like the designer, you are still running on a treadmill if you ignore the option of crossoverless design.

Actually it was Benjamin Franklin who said that (though he may not have been the first).  I think this kind of comment is unnecessary.  Crossovers can be done well or not well, and well-executed crossovers give a great deal of satisfaction to many very discerning people. That doesn't rise to the level of insanity.

[AB]

I agree that show conditions may not be the best audition environment and three months is a fair time to wait for an upgrade and listening to several pairs of speakers you've never heard or heard of before might make your decision more complicated but I still suggest attending the show.
If you are like most of us here, you will be upgrading again - sooner than later? - and the RMAF is a not to be missed opportunity to check out your future.
 

[T37]

I really want to be that responsible guy that makes a wise purchase and then calls it a day.I've livedwith my current set up for 6 years.Though I lived in smaller apartment at the time it was sufficient until the move to a bigger apartment with a larger listening room.

Obviously I had heard much better systems, but fought the urge to up grade until ow.The original purchase was done with out as much attention to system matching and auditioning as well as advice seeking. Can I wait until RAMF? ,it would be wise I could hear AVA with Salk products!?.

I think that the Salks will fit the bill based solely on the comments that I've read my listening experience is what matters most ,However the descriptions you have given me seem to norrow the Field.

[macrojack]

BrianM - If Ben Franklin said that, he most certainly did so before Einstein did.

Every speaker designer who employs a crossover strives to make it sound as if it isn't there.

In the beginning, all speakers were single driver. They were used for voice transmission and they did that adequately. When the reproduction of music was attempted, it was discovered that a single driver could not convey a wide enough bandwidth, so specialized drivers emerged. Larger drivers could reproduce lower frequencies convincingly but were too slow to reproduce high frequencies. Tweeters were designed for higher frequencies, etc.

In order for this system to be optimized it was necessary to limit the reach of specialized drivers so that they performed only in their area of specialization and didn't muddy the sound of other specialists. This became more important as the number of drivers in a system increased. Three way, four way and five way systems were created. For this purpose a frequency dividing network was devised. However, new problems arose because it was difficult to synchronize the launch time of the various drivers and nearly impossible to guarantee that they all operated in phase at all times. That is still very difficult and it remains one of the most daunting obstacles a designer must overcome.

All of this can be circumvented by returning to the single driver and addressing the original problem of insufficient bandwidth. Zu has created a driver that provides seamless reproduction from 40 Hz to 12 Khz. That range represents almost all of the bandwidth of your music. However, even their entry models provide a supertweeter which performs from 12 Khz to inaudibility. Their larger models incorporate subwoofers to reach from 40 Hz. down.

George has said in this very thread that one cannot experience anything conclusive in a show demo but he has dismissed the Zu Definition on the basis of a brief show encounter.

I haven't ever been to a show as a visitor (except for Chicago in 1976) but I know that listening when I am the only one at home seems like a more profound and defining experience than when my family is here. This may say something about my ability to concentrate, but I think that the crowd energy and the ambient noise fatally compromise show evaluations.

There is also a tendency, which I am exhibiting right now, to adore what you own. This validates your decision to buy it but it also makes sense that you would want others to be as satisfied as you are.

All I can say about Zu is that they are doing something different and doing it well. To me the other suggestions sound like going further down the wrong road. Even though you are moving forward, your movement can hardly be seen as progress.

[zybar]

George has said in this very thread that one cannot experience anything conclusive in a show demo but he has dismissed the Zu Definition on the basis of a brief show encounter.

I haven't ever been to a show as a visitor (except for Chicago in 1976) but I know that listening when I am the only one at home seems like a more profound and defining experience than when my family is here. This may say something about my ability to concentrate, but I think that the crowd energy and the ambient noise fatally compromise show evaluations.

There is also a tendency, which I am exhibiting right now, to adore what you own. This validates your decision to buy it but it also makes sense that you would want others to be as satisfied as you are.

All I can say about Zu is that they are doing something different and doing it well. To me the other suggestions sound like going further down the wrong road. Even though you are moving forward, your movement can hardly be seen as progress.

Macrojack,

I am not dismissing the Zu Definition, I am simply giving my opinion.

I would love to hear the Definitions in my room, but what I heard wasn't to my liking enough for me to line up an audition.  Again, this is to my ears...this is in no way saying anything negative about the Definitions.

My listening of the Definitions was done after show hours and I was by myself.  No crowds, distractions, or fighting for the sweet spot. 

I agree that Zu is doing something different and for many people, something very well.  However, I do think it is quite off putting to many members when you criticize anything other than Zu and try to make it sound like it can't work well.  If the Zu speakers were perfect, we would all own them...

As for you defedning what you have...we are all guilty of that at some point and level. 

I can't wait to meet you at RMAF.  Maybe we can go hear the Zu room together and compare notes.   aa

George

[Cacophonix]

T37,

Why not check out line array by selah audio?
Rick had an ad for his RS8 demo for around $2500.
Or for a little more, you can get LS6 from AV123 that is designed by Danny.

[Daygloworange]

I believe it was Einstein who defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over and over again with the hope of achieving different results. Crossovers are insanity.

No matter how beautiful the veneer or how much you like the designer, you are still running on a treadmill if you ignore the option of crossoverless design.

Asking a single driver to cover all frequencies from 40 Hz to 12 KHz or beyond, and do all of those frequencies at the same time without hysteresis is not realistic. I think the concept of expecting a fullrange single driver to perform as well as a multi way design is wishful thinking. If you ask me, that borders on insane thinking. I think that a lot of times, people's fundamentalist thinking influences their perceptions too much. There is nothing inferior in a speaker that employs a well designed crossover. The concept of using a driver to cover the range it does extremely well, with good response, speed, control and then cross over to another driver that's perfectly suited to it's frequency range and so on, is by far the best method in concept and in practice.

It shows up in measurements, and more importantly, it really shows up in listening. This has been my experience, as I had no preconceived notions as to which was the best method at sound reproduction.

Cheers

[macrojack]

George - I don't mean to imply that no other speaker is good. What I am saying is that all speakers that incorporate a crossover network have set themselves an impossible goal. There is no such thing as a crossover that is better than no crossover. I'm not a screaming lunatic purist about this. I'm sure I could return to my Goldmunds with their incredibly steep crossover slopes and live happily ever after. It's quite possible that the Salks and others being considered are better performers than my Goldmunds were but I think   unlikely as the Dialogue is one of the all time classics.

Zu has accomplished something very special and many people who have brought them in for the free audition have reported that it took some time to get used to the different presentation. Some don't keep them long enough for that to happen. Many pick it up right away as I did. Many of them soon sell their Druids and move up to Definitions as I did.

Zu is a much bigger and more successful worldwide company than most of you know. Check out their website. Get in touch with them by phone. You will be very surprised by how knowledgeable and accessible they are.

As for RMAF, I'm not sure I can make it but I'm starting to think that if I show up I should wear Kevlar.