NEW! diffractionbegone results

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 77220 times.

satfrat

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 10855
  • Boston Red Sox!! 2004 / 2007 / 2013
Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #120 on: 23 Feb 2008, 03:05 am »
Ya'know Jim, there's nothing like going w/o your woolies for 4-5 days to relearn how much your product opens up the sound stage while at the same time sharpening up the imaging. As much as I love my Lorelei's, for the last 5 days I've been left wondering why I liked them so much. I really find it hard to believe considering I've enjoyed them for 4 years before your woolies but after reinstalling the woolies, I've come to realize how much my system has progressed in just the last few months but it takes your woolies to really make it come to life.  :o :o :o  :thumb:

OK, the reason I took them off to begin with was as much as I tried, I simply couldn't stand that gray against my golden oak veneer of my Lorelei's. Finally I had had enough and decided to dye these darn things.  :duh: Well even tho Jim had given me strict instruction to dye them my hand in a lone pan, I completely forgot about it and went ahead with the washing machine instructions on the label. I used the gentle agitation but I ran the cyle thru 4 times to make sure the dyes completely soaked thru the thickness of the wool. I also soaked the woolies in hot water til they were completely soaked thru before even tossing them into the washer. For dye I went to http://www.spinnerschoice.com/Jacquard%20Acid%20Dyes.htm for Jacquard Acid Dyes for wool. This dye is actually a powder, comes in a 1/2 oz jar for like $4.75,,,the shipping was more than that. This dye takes white vinegar for the acid. I had 4 woolies to dye and I started with 1/2 the bottle as this is suppose to be enough for 2lbs of wool but after the first cycle, I dumped the whole bottle in the mix. For the color, I chose Golden Ochre.


Well because the base color was gray and not white, the end result was darker than my golden Oak veneer but I was actually afraid the color would have come out brighter which wass the reason I started with only 1/2 the bottle. Unfortunately with a base color of gray, anything other than black will turn out darker than the intended color. For me, the darker gold was much more desirable than the brigher Golden Ochre would have been anyways so I'm very much satisfied. Wish I had a camera but the color reminds me of burlap Twine as shown in this picture;


OK, don't use a washer to dye these woolies. Mine got twisted up pretty good and I ended up  using 2 polished marble plates with 75lbs to flatten them back out. Doing this straighten them out but made the holes slightly elliptical horizontally. Not real bad but slightly neverless. This also was the reason it took so darn long to dry. Surprisingly tho, there was very little loose threads that needed trimming. This is a credit to the density of this wool.  :notworthy:

Thanks to Big Red Machine, I reinstalled these woolies using small bits of painters tape under the velcro and instead of using 2 large pieces, I  used 6 smaller pieces, 3 on the top, 3 on the bottom. Considering I totally screwed up the proper way to safely dyes these woolies with minimal problems, I really got thru this better than I should have, another testament to the durability of this wool.  :thumb: I would highly recommend dying these woolies if you're not happy with the gray. Just don't use the washer method, trust me on this one.  :green:

Cheers,
Robin


jimdgoulding

Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #121 on: 7 Mar 2008, 05:21 am »
Ya'know Jim, there's nothing like going w/o your woolies for 4-5 days to relearn how much your product opens up the sound stage while at the same time sharpening up the imaging. As much as I love my Lorelei's, for the last 5 days I've been left wondering why I liked them so much. I really find it hard to believe considering I've enjoyed them for 4 years before your woolies but after reinstalling the woolies, I've come to realize how much my system has progressed in just the last few months but it takes your woolies to really make it come to life.  :o :o :o  :thumb

Sat has told me privately that he likes the way his work dyeing his "woolies" turned out.   Recommend no one tries it this way, however.  Let me advise anyone who may want to do this for a risk free way.  Regards Sat's comment above, the “gestalt” of his system (to swipe a pet word from HP), just needed a little help staying together in it's final form.

jimdgoulding

Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #122 on: 20 Mar 2008, 03:58 pm »
I’ve been having some success in Australia at stereo.net.au.  There is ongoing conversation about my “man pads” under Speakers and Subwoofers/Protecting Time and Phase Using Box Speakers.  What’s novel about this market is that I’ve fitted for several Dynaudio’s to include a pair of Confidence C4’s, some speakers that I’ve never heard of (there are pictures on pages 4 and 5, for example), some British speaks and, most recently, some little Acoustic Energy’s (below).  All with very positive feedback which you can see if you would.  Inquiries have dried up here on Audio Circle which is why I’m posting this information.  I am hopeful that it will rekindle the interest of those of you who haven't tried this yet.  Your price is $39.95 a pair (unless there is a lot of custom work involved as in the case of those Austral speakers) plus shipping and your satisfaction is guaranteed.  I am about to introduce this in a do-it-yourself kit form to mass market with a thinner wool at a higher price on the coattails of an upcoming review in a major publication.  I invite you to engage me now at the AC price with a higher grade wool.   

Here is a personal message from down under I received just yesterday . .

Jim,

What can I say? I hope you are not a speaker builder. Because as a consequence of your speaker surrounds, I cannot envisage changing my speakers for a long, long time. Yes, they are that good.

The tweeter surrounds arrived yesterday afternoon, and I brought them straight inside and fitted them to my Acoustic Energy AE1 speakers. Immediately I noticed a reduction in the sibilance which is evident at times from my system. Well, reduction is the wrong word – the sibilance was gone. The top end was now very smooth, akin to swapping from a solid state amp to a valve amp (I use a Marantz SR-18 Reference Series receiver). I then played a number of my favourite recordings. Was I imagining things? Play a few more CD’s. Before I realised it, I had played about 12 CD’s. And the difference was clear. Instruments were far better focused than before. Each instrument was clearly separated and clearly located in the soundstage. Snares and cymbals in particular were very enjoyable and distinct whereas before they were more of a background ‘noise’. I was hearing chord changes on guitar work as the guitarist moved his fingers, where I had never heard them before. And, one of the most amazing things of all, in CD’s I had heard hundreds of times, I was hearing instruments I had never heard before.  Most of all I was hearing more music and enjoying it more. 

If I had heard my speakers with and without the tweeter surrounds in a blind testing, the difference would be clear and I would have been willing to pay the hundreds of dollars to upgrade to the ‘superior model’. Fortunately, Jim, you have charged me only $50 for this major upgrade. This is the best $50 anyone can spend on their system. Before even contemplating an upgrade they should try these tweeter surrounds. The upgrade, like mine, may not be needed.

Thanks
2sheds


Thank you, all.  I'll happily answer any questions you may have.  Jim

rockadanny

Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #123 on: 20 Mar 2008, 08:06 pm »
I have done a little bit of research on the use of felt and came across this: http://www.speakerdesign.net/home.html. This person states that it is best to NOT have the felt any closer than the edge of the driver mounting plate (i.e., not on the plate at all, or at least covering as little as possible). I did not see where he stated his reasons for this restriction, but I assume he probably came to this conclusion based on test measurements, as all of his other conclusions are based on test measurements.

Jim - Do you adhere to this methodology?
How do you determine the optimal size of hole to put in the felt pad, or do you make them all the same (i.e., one size hole fits all)?
Thanks.

jimdgoulding

Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #124 on: 20 Mar 2008, 11:19 pm »
RockinD-  Greetings.  That would be David Ralph’s article.  I know it without lookin.  Don’t know if he arrived at his conclusion by measuring or not.  He did publish some measurements but not at different distances, I don’t believe.   Danny Richie of GR Research, Bill Schuchard (a speaker builder), and a tweaker from down under using DEQX on some Dynaudio Special 25’s have provided me with frequency and/or time domain studies using my product.  All show greater improvement than Mr. Ralph’s studies, actually.  One of Danny’s using monitor speakers of his choosing is in my avatar at the moment (blue line) and Mr. Schuchard’s is in Stereomojo.

It does make sense that you wouldn’t want to encroach too closely to the driver to grab anything vital.  It also makes sense that you would want it to begin working as immediately as possible with regard for that.  I chose a 2.5” diameter for three quarter, one, and one and a half inch drivers. What I make is an aftermarket product, after all, and has to be versatile.   Green Mountain Audio appears to be about the same and Vandersteen on his 5A’s is even more snug.  Not any argument that I know of that these meisters don't make great speakers.

I custom made some for Austral speakers that can be seen at the site mentioned above (page 5) with 3” cutouts cause his mid drivers are 2” domes with good feedback.  Take a peek.   

What I hear from customers, RockinD, what I hear every night when I listen :shh:, and the resources above, all tell me that I selected well. 

If I can answer any questions for you at anytime, I will, gladly.  Cheers
« Last Edit: 21 Mar 2008, 12:47 am by jimdgoulding »

rockadanny

Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #125 on: 21 Mar 2008, 12:27 pm »
Thanks Jim. You guys!! ... Jim, Satfrat, y'all are gonna make me pull out my wallet AGAIN!!! ...

jimdgoulding

Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #126 on: 23 Mar 2008, 10:23 pm »
I am in awe of your system.  It will be my pleasure.

jimdgoulding

Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #127 on: 28 Mar 2008, 11:26 pm »
Rockadanny, your surrounds are in the wind.  I enjoyed making them specific to the shape of the top of your Fontaines and would like to hear what you think.

That Charles Lloyd CD (above) is a big disappointment, BTW.  CL makes pretty lines alright, altho Coltrane derived for the most part (sometimes to the note), but still can't connect them into a constructive whole.  And ECM's recordings are all sounding alike.  This is a live date but you'd only know it by the applause.  Close miked, little depth of field, no stage.  CL's flute playing IS likeable.  I get much more feeling from him on this instrument.  Not nearly as self indulgent and meaningless.  FYI and IMO.   


MerRev

Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #128 on: 29 Mar 2008, 04:30 am »
hi Jim,

much like Satfrat I hate to have the Woolie's in place but I have to admit things sound much better with them in place.  I too have tried the painters tape on my speakers and used super glue along with the velcro to keep the diffractionbegones in place.  It's been a phenomenal tweak for me and obviously reasonable enough for many to give it a shot.  Thanks again Jim!!!

 

satfrat

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 10855
  • Boston Red Sox!! 2004 / 2007 / 2013
Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #129 on: 29 Mar 2008, 04:39 am »
hi Jim,

much like Satfrat I hate to have the Woolie's in place but I have to admit things sound much better with them in place.  I too have tried the painters tape on my speakers and used super glue along with the velcro to keep the diffractionbegones in place.  It's been a phenomenal tweak for me and obviously reasonable enough for many to give it a shot.  Thanks again Jim!!!

 

As a suggestion, if you're only using 2 strips of Velcro and your woolies are the size of mine, even superglue won't keep the velcro from coming loose from the wool. Mine were always coming off from the wool itself. Since I increased the Velcro strips to 6, I not only used smaller strips but I've had no issues with them pulling off. Smaller velcro strips but more of them is the ticket imho.  :D

Cheers,
Robin

jimdgoulding

Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #130 on: 1 Apr 2008, 05:29 am »
I've begun to make the Velcro tabs larger for larger size pads.  Even to add a third one to tack the bottom and more evenly distribute the weight.  Thanks, Sat the frat, Charles Lloyd fan (duly noted), I needed that.  I'm glad to mail new ones to anyone who needs them.

ebag4

Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #131 on: 1 Apr 2008, 02:02 pm »
Has anyone tried these on a GR Research OB5/7?  If so, how well did they work on the Neo3PDR?

Thanks,
Ed

jimdgoulding

Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #132 on: 2 Apr 2008, 02:07 am »
Ed-  Permit me to share some info with you.  Went back over my records to see how many customers with vertical ribbons are using my product.  There were six with one of those having returned his as he felt the effect wasn’t positive.   I would have to say that I think the jury is still out on the effect with ribbons unless they are round as in Acoustic Zen Adagios, for example, then the effect is way positive according to several customers.  Going forward, rather than adapting my base pads to accommodate the height of vertical ribbons, I am custom making them from scratch using some raw material I have acquired.   This will enable me to come closer to the ribbon as was suggested to me by a reliable source.  Such is the case for a fellow from The Art of Sound forum in the UK who should be receiving some for audition this week.   I expect he will report his findings for fellow members in the Artist's Palette column after a short while.   Hope this helps.  PM me if you have any questions I haven't answered.   Cheers
« Last Edit: 2 Apr 2008, 03:08 am by jimdgoulding »

rockadanny

Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #133 on: 17 Apr 2008, 11:35 am »
Finally able to sit for an extended session with pads in place (EgglestonWorks Fontaines). I am very pleased with them!  :thumb:

I really like what they do for the sound. In the sweet spot it was immediately obvious the sound was cleaned up and more focused. And I love what they've done for intimate vocals - enhanced the intimacy.  aa 

Off-axis, at first I thought they muffled the sound. But the more I listened, the more I realized that the sound was more true, better defined – not as “splashy”. I do plan on dying them black. Thanks for a great product Jim!


kyrill

Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #134 on: 23 Apr 2008, 02:43 pm »
yes

my addition

although i have not heard them yet on my future speakers, which will be OB self made
i heard them on my heavily modified kitchen speakers, i listen to in the mean time.

These are 100 doll a piece bookshelves with probably the cheapest tweeters in the world

but the difference could be heard within the first 20 sec of listening
highs are more 3D more belonging to the objects of their source: "floating/being 3D objects in space.

for instance the drumsticks sound more "dry" , knock on tables sounds more wood like. This "dryness" is i think because of lesser echoing/disturbing high flutter freqs around the original signal, less "splashy" as rocadanny wrote it.
So its effects are not only more focused highs or a bit more transparency, its effects are also in midbands
they are very much worth their price soundwise

the difference becomes more obvious if you remove temporarily the pads
they do not look nice though, i think i am going to paint them carefully not to alter the damping effect of the wool

satfrat

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 10855
  • Boston Red Sox!! 2004 / 2007 / 2013
Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #135 on: 23 Apr 2008, 04:57 pm »




they do not look nice though, i think i am going to paint them carefully not to alter the damping effect of the wool




LOL  :lol:,,,,, Ya'know I said the same thing and I'll tell ya just what Jim told me, don't paint them,,, dye them. Jim's recommendation for dyeing his surrounds is somewhere in here along with my way for not doing them. But definitely dye them with a quality wool dye. They will look 100% better. I got mine to match my oak Lorelei's and I've come to actually like the looks now.  :thumb:

Cheers,
Robin

kyrill

Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #136 on: 23 Apr 2008, 08:58 pm »
thx
 Robin
for the English lesson
as Engl. is my 2nd language i meant dying  :oops:

I have read yr excellent advice on it and you are right  :D

satfrat

  • Restricted
  • Posts: 10855
  • Boston Red Sox!! 2004 / 2007 / 2013
Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #137 on: 23 Apr 2008, 09:05 pm »
thx
 Robin
for the English lesson
as Engl. is my 2nd language i meant dying  :oops:

I have read yr excellent advice on it and you are right  :D

WellI only mentioned it cuz I was originally thinking about using shoe polish and boy did I hear about it from Jim. Guess he didn't think too much about my idea.  :lol:

jimdgoulding

Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #138 on: 25 Apr 2008, 06:22 pm »
Got this earlier this week from a surprisingly perceptive young bloke in the UK that I would like to share:

"Well, I've enjoyed getting to know these wooly wonders a lot. I think my earlier observations are more or less right, but on-off comparisons have been interesting.
I feel the effect of these additions as opposed to playing the same music with them off is more profound than even speaker placement, though I'm sure everyones experience will be unique and peculiarly their own. I am using small standmounts as you can see, in a room with heavily compromised acoustics and setup possibilities; my bass drivers are also odd, I dont really know much about this design (any info will be greeted with interest)*.
I mentioned earlier in a discussion about different passive pre amps that I like listening mostly at lower volumes, and only ever really up to medium. I had found the bass (although clean and defined) to be weaker at low volume: It is now in proportion, strong when required, soft when appropriate. This, coupled with the quite delicious mid range produced by Richards finest makes for an utterly involving, even captivating experience which defies me to not pay attention or to even try walking past when it is singing.
Ive just been on - offing to Ray Lamontagne's 'empty' from his 'Until the Sun Turns Black' album, and the contrasts were greater than I imagined they were, even being quite stark. Notably the cello timbre was warmer with the 'wonders' on, I enjoyed hearing the wood resonate, the air inside really moving about which was sucked into the mic in all its glory. With the 'wonders' off, it was harder, two dimensional and distant again, although I previously had no issue with it. It also became harder to distinguish between the 'attack' of strummed acoustic guitar strings and more delicate drumming work (he may have used nylon tipped sticks which would have contributed to this). When they went back on, everything seperated out again in terms of definition and timbre: Guitars were warm, even lush, drumming intricate, loose (his style really, but it was almost lost in the mix before) and Ray's vocals warm, powerful, and about six feet in front of me. I have also noticed the gorgeous singing tone of a decent ride cymbal that is well mic'd (yes I was a drummer, once).
Things have become so real, life like. The emotions the artist tries to convey are so much more readily apparent because of the detail now here.
Detail - that is not to refer to digital detail or harshness of any sort. These make music so easy to listen to, involving not because each detail is in stark seperation/relief but because it isnt. Yet you can still follow the detail if you want, but what is being accomplished here allows each detail of each musicians playing to contribute to the layers, the whole. Well done Jim.
Perhaps his new slogan should be: Try it. What's the worst that could happen? Oh wait , that one is already taken, but nontheless I urge everyone to have a go. They work out about £28 now through paypal - chicken feed! You wouldn't think twice if they were interconnects or isolation pads now, would you?
You may be more suprised than I was. Thanks Jim."

He's welcome.  I'm very happy for him

jimdgoulding

Re: NEW! diffractionbegone results
« Reply #139 on: 9 May 2008, 01:58 am »
FredT300B is hosting the Houston Audio Society at his house Saturday morning and is turning over a room to me to demo his new production standmount two ways featuring diffractionbegone tweeter surrounds.  I'll be bringing a few discs to show off their effect and meet the members.  A new one (for me) . . Flor de Piel (Cantes de la Otra Orilla) by Martirio should manage to raise a few goose bumps.  I expect a good time will be had by all.  I know I will  :thumb:.