That's why being used is a good idea. Reduces the risk and lessens the loss
when you resell.
It's never too late.
Buy the Ohms and bring them in for the 120 day home trial. If they really float
your boat, then the enjoyment you gain from them will far outweigh the
monetary loss of reselling the Arros.
Life's too short for "what ifs"... |
10-06-08: Rebbi
Well, guys,
I cannot believe I did this, but I actually ordered a pair of Micro Walsh Tall's today! Glad you finally made the decision. |
10-06-08: Rebbi
By the way, how have you folks found the fit and finish on the Ohms to be. The fit and finish of the Ohm speakers I auditioned two years ago was fair at best. |
This is a kind of like a three panel comic in the paper each day.
We're on pins and needles for the box opening...
ZOIKS! |
10-21-08: Rebbi
... and they've got less than 10 hours of time on them. You made a decision to change speakers after hearing the Arros for less than 10 hours, and without allowing them to break in for at least 100 hours? |
With only 10 hours on them, the bass drivers on the Arros have not even begun to break in. As bass drivers become more flexible with playing time, their response lowers and tonality becomes better defined.
You have not yet heard what these speakers are capable of doing. |
Jaybo, whether the Arros will dramatically change to resemble the Micro Talls or not, you must agree that 10 hours on any speaker is insufficient time on which to base a judgment on their performance. |
The Arros are known for their imaging prowess. If the image seemed flat to you, then you hadn't set them up properly.
Because you haven't set up the Arros correctly and you haven't allowed them to break in beyond the 10 hours, then your comparison between the Ohm and Totem speakers is not particularly helpful to readers looking for insight. IMO.
You should absolutely keep the Ohms if you prefer them. I just don't believe making comparisons is worthwhile at this point. |
As the very least, I think I can conclude that:
1) The Ohm's sound better to me out of the box than do the Arro's, in terms of imaging, "holograpy" and bass extension.
2) The Ohm's are easier to set up than the Arro's: because of the large sweet spot, they're quite forgiving of placement, and will actually tolerate and even appreciate being fairly close to the rear wall (mine are currently only 19" out). And, although this may seem trivial, it's nice not to have to mess with floor spikes when you move the speakers around... really nice.
3) The Arro's are prettier than the Ohm's, and their fit and finish is more refined, although the Ohm's are far from bad in either regard.
4) The Ohm's present a 6 ohm load, the Arro's a 4 ohm load, for what that's worth.
5) The Arro's are around $350 more than the Ohm's.
Rebbi (Threads | Answers) I agree that's a reasonable conclusion. |
Excellent point! Glad I did! |
|
10-26-08: Mapman
In general I think they "open up" further in terms of weight and impact and become more "natural sounding" ... A description that applies to most cone speakers as they break in. |
There are many speaker setting guides. The following method works well, and was posted by member Treitz3 in October: Iron Chef Speaker Set Up Protocol
Proper speaker set up requires music. John Hunter of Sumiko uses a Rob Wasserman song featuring Jennifer Warnes called "Ballad of the Runaway Horse". You will find this on his Duets cd and his Trio CD as well. This is the best set up song I have ever found. So get a copy of this. You will always be glad you did. Another tool I like to use for fine tuning the speakers is Bob Chesky's Jazz Sampler Number 1. Cuts 10 and above really help you nail it down solid.
Step 1 will be to remove whatever removable sound absorbers you have. Take them out of the room. Anything that is permanently fixed and all your furniture and stuff are ok to leave alone.
Step 2 recommends you either remove the speaker stand spikes to make moving the speakers easier, or at least level all the spikes so the speaker is completely level. If you own heavy speakers you are probably better off adjusting the speakers with the spikes in place and set level.
Step 3 is to establish your listening seat. Optimally you will set up the speakers and your listening seat in the shape of an triangle. I like my speakers at least 8-12 ft apart and the listening seat 12-15 ft back. When properly set up, the speaker will be out at least 18 from the rear boundary wall. Your listening seat likewise should be at least 24 inches from a back boundary.
Step 4 places both left and right speakers directly against their wall facing straight out into the room. No inward toe in angle should be attempted yet.
The left speaker is going to become the anchor for the set up.
Step 5 gets you grooving. Now you can begin playing the Ballad. What makes this song so effective for set up is that the plucked string bass is at realistic volume at realistic timber. So the goal is to get the bass properly coupled to the room and the drivers.
Play this track at volumes where you can easily detect bass quality. I am usually between 80-95 db when I do a set up. Sometimes you will need to crank it up a bit. Just make sure it is loud enough to fully engage the room.
Step 6 involves a buddy. Have your buddy slide your left speaker (the anchor) out into the room until the bass becomes solid and authoritative. Mark this spot with some masking tape.
Now slide the speaker right and left to find the best bass quality. Mark this spot.
Now slide the speaker further out in the room to find other points where the bass couples properly in your room. There are likely to be a dozen spots within a 3 ft diameter of your first spot. Be patient. 1/3 of an inch is all that differentiates a good bass quality from a lifeless bass sound.
Listen to all of these good bass points until you find your favorite bass spot.
All this is done with just the left speaker playing straight out. The right speaker is playing straight into the room from the back wall. Each speaker playing at the same volume.
Step 7 establishes the toe in angle of your left speaker toward your listening seat. You want the widest possible sound stage without the sound being too thin. I usually end up seeing about 2/3 of the inside wall of the speaker when I have this about right. Do not toe in excessively, you will just ruin your sound stage. A little dab will do you! If the toe in is right, the sound will be very natural, if it is too wide the sound will be thin, and with too much the sound will seem to come from two speakers not from the space in between.
Your anchor is now set. Mark this spot carefully with masking tape.
Step 8 requires reinsertion of the left speaker's spikes leaving the speaker level at this time.
Step 9 is to set up the right speaker position. Simply slide or move the right speaker out into the room. Move it slowly listening for the sound stage to line up equally before you. By this I mean a stage is flat in front of you. The sound stage should not sound tilted, like one speaker sounding closer to you than the other. Remember to keep the speaker oriented directly straight ahead. No angle yet.
Step 10 involves moving the speaker right and left until you hear the soundstage become cohesive, and Jennifer should sound like she is right dab in the middle.
Step 11 Then toe in the angle the speaker very slighly until you hear Jennifer Warnes voice become a body centered in the sound field. You will hear the sound congeal nicely at this time. Things are really beginning to sound better now.
You should now have accomplished sound coupling of the speakers to your room boundaries. To test if this is the case, you should be able to stand directly over either speaker and clearly hear the other speaker.
It may be necessary to make very minor angle adjustments of the right speaker to get her voice centered. Be patient and you will be rewarded.
Now if the sound stage is not linear, meaning one speaker sounds more forward than the other, then simply slide that right speaker front or back until the sound field is "level." (Moving it right or left adjusts the centering of Jennifer Warnes voice).
Make sure you mark the final location of both speakers with masking tape.
Insert the right speaker spikes.
Step 12 begins with adjustments to the rake angle of the left speaker. You accomplish this by adjusting the spikes to get the speaker level across the front, and raked back to get the beam of the tweeter firing above your ears. You need to listen to the quality of Jennifer Warnes voice. She should appear to be ear level or slightly above ear level in the sound field. This is a personal choice. Many of my friends prefer ear level because it is a slightly fuller sound. I prefer a little above ear level cause I like the voice to sound ultra natural, like a live musical event.
Carefully listen to the tweeter response of the left speaker and make sure that the "beam" is at least an inch or two above your ear when you are seated in your listening seat.
Step 13 begins by adjusting the spikes on your right speaker to match the "height" of the left speaker.
At this time, you should hear her voice almost as a whisper, when originally it may have sounded shrill and harsh. Her voice should be centered in the sound field now, with solid and good quality bass.
Step 14 suggests you take measurements of the speaker location to the walls. Take digital photos. Someone will mess with your set up some time. You need to have these so you don't have to repeat the process unnecessarily. When you have this locked in, don't let anybody touch your set up!
I like to follow up the set-up with some confirmation tests. I prefer the Bob Chesky Jazz Sampler 1 CD. On cut 10 the speaker starts out 2 ft from the microphone in center stage. Then he moves midway right, full right, and off-stage right. He then repeats this on the left. Simply slide your right speaker right or left to get the sound staging perfect. Then use cut 11 which is Over, Lateral, Under and Up to verify your rake angles.
Your friends will be amazed. Just two CDs let you make the magic. Rob Wassermans Duo or Trio CD, and Bob Cheskys Jazz Sampler 1.
Step 15 bring back any sound absorbers and reflectors to see if you can improve upon the sound. But don't touch the speakers location.
What you have done, in short, is to couple the speaker's response to your room based upon your listening seat.
This process will take me 20-30 minutes or longer. On your first dozen set ups it may take longer.
Let me know if you have any questions about this process. I can do this all alone. Having a buddy slide your speaker is much faster and easier. If you have hard floors instead of carpet, you can set the speaker on a soft towel to assist in the sliding.
Make sure your buddy stands behind the speaker when he/she moves it, because their body will affect the sound if they stand along side of the speaker. If you follow this procedure carefully, then you will have done just aout everything possible to dial in your speakers. After that, it's up to you. Let your gut tell you which pair you would regret selling the most, and that's the pair to keep. |
It seems to me, Rebbi, you're using a hit-or-miss approach to speaker set-up rather than one that will get you properly dialed without guesswork. With the hit-or-miss approach, you may get something you believe sounds right, but you'll never know for certain if it's the correct set-up for your room. The result is constant uncertainty.
IMO.
Did you ever try the Iron Chef or Sumiko set-up procedure? |
So, Rebbi, are you any closer to eliminating one pair of speakers, or are you now a permanent owner of two pairs? |
Anyone heard Wolcott Audio Omnisphere's? Pretty good specs: 90db sensitivity, 6 ohm impedance (minimum 4.5 ohms), flat impedance curve, 30Hz bottom end.
Pair for sale now in the listings. |
John told me the 100s liked 150+wpc.
You're going to want more than 80wpc.
Perhaps be satisfied with what you have? |
I sit nearfield (about 8 feet) from full range floorstanders (down to 25Hz). There is a significant difference between full range and not-quite-full-range...even in a nearfield set-up.
More weight to the music makes the experience more lifelike, IMO. |
Go to the 300s and skip two steps... |
Imagine if you had put the Arros wherever they sounded best... |
If you don't need a phono section, the Juicy Music Peach I (or II) has a selectable output impedance with a low Z option of 50 ohms. It's a heck of a preamp if you can be patient and fine one used.
IMO, the 3.5k Ohm output impedance of the Blueberry is too high to match with most solid state amps because of the risk of rolled off bass. |
|
The best indicator is bass extension and response (clarity, control).
I've found that 200 ohms or lower works best with most solid state amps having 23k ohm input impedance or higher.
Most preamp manufacturers I have asked have said that an output impedance of up to 500 ohms would be fine, but what I have heard in my system has not confirmed the advice.
In all cases regarding preamp output impedance when used with a solid state preamp, lower has been better.
I have found John Atkinson's test measurements section of Stereophile reviews extremely helpful on this topic. He always addresses output impedance in preamp tests, and input impedance in amplifier tests, and he suggests impedance matching thresholds. |
11-06-09: Mapman
Have you found the better clarity and control extends into the upper frequency ranges as well?
Any downsides that you can identify to go along with the benefits? Yes, but it depends on the components, and the difference is more subtle than it is in the bass region. No downsides to better impedance matching. |
is it the absolute value of the preamp output impedance, or the ratio or magnitude of amp input impedance to pre-amp output impedance in the end that matters?
Mapman (System | Reviews | Threads | Answers) The manufacturer's stated specs are a starting point, but impedance output and input varies across the frequency spectrum, and sometimes greatly beyond the nominal spec. This is why reading the Stereophile test measurements can be valuable. Atkinson addresses the impedance measurements across the frequency spectrum, and bases his matching recommendations on what he discovers. |
Dante7, that's months old news.
Nevertheless, if a used Juicy Peach I or II comes up, it's a good candidate for Rebbi, IMO, provided he doesn't require a phono stage. |
I disagree that a 10:1 ratio is a consensus minimum. IMO, people who state that ratio are either repeating what they've read in a thread somewhere, or they have limited experience hearing what different impedance ratios produce, or they simply don't know what they're supposed to hear. Consensus by repetition is an uninformed consensus.
The Bel Canto amps may work well with an SP16, but I'd still look for a lower output impedance to get the optimal performance from the amps. However, if you can find a good price on a used SP16, then it's certainly worth a try.
FWIW, a Burson buffer will correct impedance mismatches. Reviews state there is no sonic degradation when putting a Burson in the signal chain. I've not tried one. |
Kristian85 hit the mark, IMO. Perceptive and succinct. |
04-20-10: Kristian85
This thread...emphasizes perfectly how audiophiles are nearly unable to seperate better from different sound. Note the OP's initial OTT excitement over the MWTs, as followed by the rollercoaster ride that was the ensuing months of public anxious wrangling over what was really best, those or the Totems. After all the Ohm gushing, the OP finally decides he doesn't really like them. Bullseye. |
I remember one time using an Audio Control C-101 equalizer to EQ my system's room response so it measured flat. The Audio Control unit came with a microphone and automatic EQ software to enable this to be done.
The funny thing is the results absolutely sucked, and the Audio Control manual (which is perhaps the best manual I've ever read...helpful and humorous at the same time) said they'd probably suck.
I'd be very surprised if most listeners would really prefer flat room response given the opportunity to A/B the options. |
Mapman, I understand your comment, however my point was (I think) slightly different.
Kristian81 has commented that he was buoyed by the fairly flat in-room response of the Ohm loudspeakers. Even an ideally mated loudspeaker and amplifier may not produce a flat *in-room* response when measured with a meter. This would most often be a product of the room, not the speaker/amp match.
My point is that while a flat in-room response may be what audiophiles are told to seek (resulting in a transparent, un-colored reproduction of the source material), many listeners will not prefer the resulting sound to one that is "bumpier" (that perhaps has a midrange bump, etc.).
Unless one has tried the experiment of setting their system's response to be flat in the room, then it's difficult to comment without it being speculative. It goes around again to going by what we're often *told* we should want without ever actually hearing what the result of a flat in-room response sounds like.
That said, it will not surprise me if a few contributors here say that they prefer a flat in-room response because it's more faithful to the recording.
Different courses... |
a setup that produces measured flat frequency response at the listening position is wrong "a priori."
Best regards,
-- Al
Almarg (Answers) By *set up* are you referring specifically to the EQ I used, or by *set up* are you including any system that measures flat at the listening position? |
|
Al, what you describe seems to me to be an argument against the goal of a system that measures flat in-room since the measuring is inaccurate, unless there's some measurement device that avoids or compensates for reflected sound. Otherwise, the measuring exercise seems futile.
Why do we bother with our Radio Shack decibel meters and test tone CDs?
Personally, I haven't bothered with mine in more than a year. I just listen and go with what pleases me.
I'm an anti-audiophile, I suppose. |
Try the old test of listening normally and with hands cupped behind the ears to see how much difference can be heard in response to a small change.
Mapman (System | Reviews | Threads | Answers) I much prefer the ear-cupped sound. Someone should make an ear-cup audiophile tweak. |
Kristian85, putting aside the issue of the Audio Control C-101 (I sold it five years ago after owning it for two months), did you thoroughly read Almarg's post wherein he stated that frequency response cannot be accurately measured with the tools that most of us own, i.e. a Radio Shack (or similar) decibel meter and a test tone CD?
How do you measure your room to determine if you have a flat response? I am interested to learn from your experience. |
It's why I don't really bother with room correction or damping; I optimize speaker positioning and go directly to enjoying music. I'm far less interested in tweaking about than I used to--I'm a red giant in astronomical terms, at the end of my long audiophile life.
Kristian85 (Reviews | Answers) What I'm having trouble understanding is this statement taken with your previous statement about the desirability of a flat in-room response. 04-23-10: Kristian85
In-room response is absolutely desirable. What I cannot abide are speakers with messy FR and dispersion curves as that can only worsen in-room FR. How do you know after you have positioned your speakers that you have attained the desired flat in-room response? Do you measure the in-room response to verify that it's flat, or do you go by ear? |
So you did EQ to flat and it does not sound good, I would agree with that statement. Then you said "the oppurtunity to A/B the options"
What are the options? If you do not want a flat response, what do you want?
Bob
Acoustat6 (Threads | Answers) The option at the time I owned the Audio Control C-101 (with calibrated mic) was to press a bypass switch that took the EQ out of the system, thereby enabling me to hear the music with and without the EQ...hence the statement about the opportunity to A/B the options. Bob, I own a Radio Shack Db meter as well as a Stereophile test tone CD and the Rives Audio test tone CD with corrected test tones for use with the RS meter. See Almarg's post earlier in the thread with his explanation of why the RS meter is not useful for measuring in room response. In any case, I'm no longer interested in measuring frequency response in my system. I've been there, done that, and much prefer setting up my system and speakers to produce sound that I find pleasing rather than what might be more technically correct for an objectivist, which I am not. |
"How do you measure your room to determine if you have a flat response? I am interested to learn from your experience."
Bob
Acoustat6 (Threads | Answers) Bob, I appreciate your desire to be helpful, however this question was directed to Kristian85. I would like to know specifically how *he* does it. |
Just to set the record straight, in an earlier post I mentioned using an Audio Control C-101 to do an auto EQ of my room so the response was flat. The Audio Control C-101 was not the unit I used. It was a Behringer Ultracurve Pro DEQ2496 with a Behringer ECM8000 microphone.
Not that the specific unit makes any difference to this discussion, but I wanted to correct the record. |
BTW, it looks as if Rebbi, the OP, is still on his speaker hunt. I see he is now looking at the new Merlin monitors. I wish him luck on his speaker quest.
Finsup (Answers) I see he posted on AudioAsylum on 5/9 about ordering the Merlin TSM. I thought he was agog about the LSA Statement speakers... ...after he was agog about the Ohm loudspeakers... He has a comfy new seat on the Merry-Go-Round. Next to mine. :) |
08-16-10: Finsup
I saw that review. Driving them with a Fisher 500C tube receiver? And his jaw drops? Varied degrees of looseness among audiophile's jaws is a well established variable. |
08-24-10: Mapman
This is interesting.
GP DDD speakers can't possibly go for much lower than this can they? In this economy...no one knows where the bottom is. |
