I know they prefer the IB sub to my drumming
I have decided I don't need surround sound, ever
- Thread starter Flint
- Start date
team_tsp
Active Member
Gotcha, yea when I said "2.1" I kind of meant crossing over the L/R channels to the sub, but I realize that wasn't clear from my post haha. Glad to hear you'll still be using the IB subs, as those are amazing!
This is an important point for me and Jeff and I argued the definition of the term, "subwoofer," in another thread. But, if you are building a speaker system with a highly integrated set of drivers and a crossover to split the audio signal between them, having a driver which operates starting at 50Hz and goes down to 15Hz as a part of the total system, that isn't exactly the same as a x.1 channel in a surround system. the whole x.1 thing is about the LFE channel in soundtracks, and we often redirect bass from other channels to the LFE output, or the x.1 output. That isn't the same as highly integrated sub-frequency bass drivers in a stereo set of speakers.
So, no, I am not going with a 2.1 system consisting of two three-way stereo speakers and a subwoofer. Instead, I am going with a 2.0 system with two four-way stereo speakers. The sub-frequency bass drivers just happen to be mounted in an infinite baffle situation.
As it turns out, I don't need time alignment, though phase adjustment is often helpful. So, just crossover and gain for the most part. But that is also true of the woofers, the midrange drivers and the tweeters. So, the sub-bass woofers are just one more driver in the four way speaker.
In my plans for new rig, I have realized one of the options I have for a crossover (the MiniDSP 4x10 HD) has one stereo analog input and three digital inputs which can be switched easily with their optional remote control which also provides a volume control.
As I look at my vision for the rig, I have two digital sources (TV optical output and BluRay coax output) and a non-critical analog source (Echo Dot). I am now considering forgoing the traditional preamp and instead purchase the MiniDSP 4x10 HD and relying on it for input switching and volume control.
Hmmmmm…..
As I look at my vision for the rig, I have two digital sources (TV optical output and BluRay coax output) and a non-critical analog source (Echo Dot). I am now considering forgoing the traditional preamp and instead purchase the MiniDSP 4x10 HD and relying on it for input switching and volume control.
Hmmmmm…..
Last edited:
Okay... so here's what I am talking about when it comes to simplification of my rig.
In 2004 I built my big acoustically ideal home theater room and installed at least a $1K worth of cables to accommodate everything. At it's peak complexity, I had a wiring setup like this:
I was using the PS3 as my BluRay player and in total I had 4 sources and tons of cables to support all my needs, including a separate PC monitor for the disc player when I was listening to CDs. There were 4 high quality HDMI cables, three of which were long (one of them running from the preamp in the rear 30 feet to the primary TV in the front). This doesn't show the wired IR repeater system and all of the power filtering and power cables, 12V triggers, and other miscellaneous cables I made use of.
I am currently pulling out all this wire, and it is a proper chore. I am extremely impressed at how carefully I assembled the wiring harnesses and put flexible sleeves over the bundles. Still, this is several pounds of copper I no longer need.
When I complete my new two channel system (no surround), this is what it will look like:
Look at how simple that's going to be. No more IR extending wires and gear, much less power routing and conditioning, and a much simpler 12V triggering system. In total I am going from over 30 power outlets to a mere 12 outlets all located in one area. The remote needs are also going to be significantly simplified.
I cannot wait.
In 2004 I built my big acoustically ideal home theater room and installed at least a $1K worth of cables to accommodate everything. At it's peak complexity, I had a wiring setup like this:
I was using the PS3 as my BluRay player and in total I had 4 sources and tons of cables to support all my needs, including a separate PC monitor for the disc player when I was listening to CDs. There were 4 high quality HDMI cables, three of which were long (one of them running from the preamp in the rear 30 feet to the primary TV in the front). This doesn't show the wired IR repeater system and all of the power filtering and power cables, 12V triggers, and other miscellaneous cables I made use of.
I am currently pulling out all this wire, and it is a proper chore. I am extremely impressed at how carefully I assembled the wiring harnesses and put flexible sleeves over the bundles. Still, this is several pounds of copper I no longer need.
When I complete my new two channel system (no surround), this is what it will look like:
Look at how simple that's going to be. No more IR extending wires and gear, much less power routing and conditioning, and a much simpler 12V triggering system. In total I am going from over 30 power outlets to a mere 12 outlets all located in one area. The remote needs are also going to be significantly simplified.
I cannot wait.
team_tsp
Active Member
Curiosity is getting to me haha, so a few questions, but if you're starting a new thread you can hold off on answering these -
Is the rendering of your new speakers accurate or just for illustration purposes? More specifically are you going with an MTM layout again for the upper portion of each speaker? I remember you were wary of the cost (understandably).
Also are you going with two woofers per speaker this time (not counting the IB subs)?
Also I know electronics are generally a very low priority, but based on some recent threads / discussions, since in general your room and speaker designs are dialed in extremely well, it sounds like you're at the point where you do take into consideration the performance of the electronics you're using?
I'm not sure if this is helpful or not, but I found this thread where measurements were taken with the miniDSP 2x4 HD, which I know is a different product than the 4x10 HD you mention, but it may give a clue on performance? It's unlikely the "doesn't match the best-in-class" performance of some of the measurements would be audible, so this might be a discussion in academia rather than real world performance... (for the cost, it seems like an excellent product):
https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...urements-and-minidsp-2x4-hd-dsp-and-dac.2674/
Here's another site that has measurements of the 4x10 HD, but I haven't had time to review / absorb the results very well yet:
https://www.neurochrome.com/minidsp-4x10-hd/
I've seen professional lab tests for the MiniDSP products and they perform on par with most high-end digital products. There are lower noise products out there, and they could be important, but in this case the benefits of the active crossover circuit, low-ringing digital EQ, phase compensation, and delay adjustment provides vastly more benefit than something like a slightly higher noise floor (which I can compensate for using careful gain adjustments of the system through the gain control on each amp).
Basically, what is the weakest link in my system? It is by far and will remain by far the speakers followed closely by the acoustics. These new tweeters can brag to have extremely low THD with perhaps the lowest 3rd order harmonic distortion measured from a soft dome tweeter, but at 94dB SPL at 1 meter it is still below 0.4% - a shockingly low level, but orders of magnitude higher than the MiniDSP or amplifiers.
But, your initial question is worth considering: If I have the best speakers I can attain and the most ideal room acoustics I am capable of installing, when do I start looking at higher end electronics? Well, I am. The MiniDSP is significantly better than my old Behringer DCS2496, even the modified version I used for my stereo channels (I replaced the output section with an upgraded system and replaced the system clock with a better module). I am removing the active preamp entirely. I am going with a single amplifier for each loudspeaker transducer. Overall, the electronics are being upgraded across the board. I am even bypassing the DAC in the CD player and remaining digital from the source into the digital crossover.
So, this upgrade is about more than speakers already.
And... I will add, the review and testing for the MiniDSP 2x4 HD is stupid. He was tainted from the beginning and I don't trust a word of it. Even his measurements don't compare reasonably well to the industry measurements I've seen. I think he either has no idea how to use his test gear, or he wanted to write a bad review from the beginning.
team_tsp
Active Member
Gotcha, glad to know the MiniDSP performs well enough with those added features. I too like the idea of staying in the digital domain from the CD player to the MiniDSP for crossover, etc, purposes. When we met up I had asked if you had any concerns about the multiple DAC -> ADC -> DAC conversions of your current (now previous) setup, and you didn't, but it seems like staying in the digital domain for as long as possible simplifies things
Was there anything obvious about the way he did his measurements that indicate how he might not have set up his test gear properly? Or are the results just way off? One of the issues with the audio industry is measurements still aren't very common, with Stereophile and a few blogs carrying the load. So it's a let down if measurements aren't done in a meaningful way.
I understand quite a few of the measurements, but I'm not quite at the point where I can mentally compare them to other measurements very easily yet. It seemed like the second link's measurements were better?
I cannot prove it, but his measurements of the 2x4 HD all appear to be for 16bit signals. If they are for 16 bit signals, then the results are pretty darn good. However, he implies they are subpar, which isn't fair. Looking at the jitter+noise measurements - all of the noise is well below -120dB, which is extremely good by any standard. The effective limit for almost any piece of gear with a resistor in it (which is all of them) is about -112dB (unweigted), so, again, that isn't as subpar as he might suggest.
As for my rig, it is important to remember that I am completely removing every single passive crossover component from the system and using an active crossover arrangement. This vastly improves the performance of the speakers, especially with large cone drivers like midrange and woofer components. When considering the damping factor of an amp, the instant you insert a parallel component in a passive crossover, especially an inductor or capacity, the results are a decoupling of the amp from the speaker and thus the ability for the amp to control the motion of the cone and shunt back current to ground is limited. That introduces ringing and all sorts of distortions that are a significant issue to performance.
Once again, it is about eliminating the weakest link in a chain. With all passive speakers, the first weakest link is the passive crossover. Eliminate the passive crossover and you introduce improvements which are almost impossible to ignore.
I am pretty certain that removing DAC/ADC transitions is as big a deal as removing the crossover. There are improvements, to be sure, but not at the level of other things I have done in my rig. My point in that statement about removing conversion steps was that I am making minor improvements with the new rig, not that it is a giant leap in improvements. I mean, I could drop a few grand and go with the DEQX crossovers which do incorporate better ADC and DAC sections and slightly higher quality algorithms for the crossover and phase functions.
TitaniumTroy
Well-Known Member
So just checking, sealed bass or bass reflex on the woofers? Open baffle on the midranges and tweeter? I like the tweeter wave guide, excellent looking job my friend.
So what is the name for this set of fine looking speakers, Sofia, as in Sofia Vergara?
So what is the name for this set of fine looking speakers, Sofia, as in Sofia Vergara?
