A ? regarding amplifier/speaker

[mys_iii]

matching. I have a 150W amp hooked up to a pair of speakers that are fairly sensitive at 91 dB. These speakers are supposed to be easy to drive yet the sound seems "thin" at low volumes so I have to crank it up a bit to get a "fuller" sound. Does this mean that I need a more powerful amp to drive the speakers or is this pretty much normal?

Thanks

[markw]

Adding a more powerful amp won't do a thing.

Some speakers don't really "bloom" until they are driven to certain volume levels. You might employ a bit of bass boost (loudness compensation) to overcome this.

[mys_iii]

Adding a more powerful amp won't do a thing.

Some speakers don't really "bloom" until they are driven to certain volume levels. You might employ a bit of bass boost (loudness compensation) to overcome this.

How do you boost the bass? Thx

[Resident Loser]

How do you boost the bass? Thx

...these clever things colled tone controls...Perhaps you've heard of them...

Human hearing is funny...as overall volume levels decrease, the need for levels at the frequency extremes to be boosted increases...Some earlier hi-fi components had switches (some even knobs) marked "loudness compensation" modeled after the related Fletcher-Munson data on the subject...(although I have seen some newer stuff that has "night mode" settings)...and now, tone controls get a bad rap from the audiophools who must only listen to their program material at the same dB level all the time and only to specialty recordings...goodness, must be a perfect world out there!

jimHJJ(...not really...)

[markw]

How do you boost the bass? ThxMost* preamps, integrated amps and receivers offer some sort of rudimentary tone controls. These could be as simple as bass and treble control knobs on the front panel or they could be hidden on some sub-menu buried deep in the bowels of a HT receiver. You need to check your manual for this.

* Not all. Some "high end" stuff eschews these in favor of a "pure" sound. If this is your case, you just have to accept that the powers that be have determined for you that what you are hearing is exactly what you should be hearing. Either get used to it, get different speakers, or get a setup that allows you some freedom for personal preferences.

[Resident Loser]

...Either get used to it, get different speakers, or get a setup that allows you some freedom for personal preferences...

...my PTFE- coated, bi-wire, continuous crystal, Zoebel-networked $90 per ft. wire won't boost my bass?!?!?!?!?

jimHJJ(...but my wife swears she heard a difference, even tho' she was at the mall...)

[mys_iii]

does not believe in equilizers. To effectively change different frequencies in music, the equilizer has to be very good in order to correctly filter or amplify the different frequencies. Most equilizers introduce distortion which defeats the whole purpose of having good sources and amplifiers for low distortion sounds production. Just my opinion.

I believe one reason why most speakers have the characteristic I described is that the tweeter tends to be more sensitive and easier to drive than the mi-range and bass drivers which means the tweeter dominates the sound spectrum. Hence the "thin" sound at low volume levels.

[markw]

But, by golly, what you complain about sure could be cured by one.

In theory I agree with your basic premise but, in the real world of differing recordings, speakers and acoustic environments, a tweak here and there is not against my religion. What you are saying is like forgoing needed medicine because it alters the body chemistry.

Well, I guess you'll be learning to love that thin sound. Either that, or you'll up your listening levels. In either case, You'll get used to it in time.

But, you might want to investige the previously mentioned Fletcher-Munson curve before espousing your beliefs much more.

[Resident Loser]

...this is really futile, ain't it mark? Once more for Auld Lang Syne...

Sounds like a fact: "To effectively change different frequencies in music, the equilizer has to be very good in order to correctly filter or amplify the different frequencies."

Is that a fact? How exactly does an EQ work? Is it a filter or an amplifier? Big diff between a simple band-pass filter and full parametric...

Sounds like a fact: "Most equilizers introduce distortion which defeats the whole purpose of having good sources and amplifiers for low distortion sounds production."

Is that a fact? Even DSP? How much distortion is audible? What kind of distortion is most audible? What is a good source? Certainly not the multiple mono mix-down that passes for stereophonic sound. What's a good amp? Vacuum tube based? Now we're talkin' distortion!...

"Just my opinion."

Which is it fact or opinion? Or a factoid?

Equalizers (or some sort of tone shaping) are/is used in nearly every step of the recording process...

Equalizers get a bad rap because they are misused...think "smiley face" (one of markw's)...by bass hungry boobs...

Equalizers, semi-parametric, need to have a very narrow Q and need to be used judiciously, preferably in the "cut" mode...

Equalizers were never mentioned, we're talking tone controls, a gentle, linear upward tilt of the bass freqs <100Hz...perhaps a max boost of 6 dB@ 32Hz...

And contrary to your tweeter-based premise, it ain't the originating transducer, it's the recieving one: the ears.

jimHJJ(...both Fletcher and Munson must be slowly revolving on their respective axis...perhaps Robinson and Dadson or ISO226:2003 are more to your liking...)

[mys_iii]

...this is really futile, ain't it mark? Once more for Auld Lang Syne...

Sounds like a fact: "To effectively change different frequencies in music, the equilizer has to be very good in order to correctly filter or amplify the different frequencies."

Is that a fact? How exactly does an EQ work? Is it a filter or an amplifier? Big diff between a simple band-pass filter and full parametric...

Sounds like a fact: "Most equilizers introduce distortion which defeats the whole purpose of having good sources and amplifiers for low distortion sounds production."

Is that a fact? Even DSP? How much distortion is audible? What kind of distortion is most audible? What is a good source? Certainly not the multiple mono mix-down that passes for stereophonic sound. What's a good amp? Vacuum tube based? Now we're talkin' distortion!...

"Just my opinion."

Which is it fact or opinion? Or a factoid?

Equalizers (or some sort of tone shaping) are/is used in nearly every step of the recording process...

Equalizers get a bad rap because they are misused...think "smiley face" (one of markw's)...by bass hungry boobs...

Equalizers, semi-parametric, need to have a very narrow Q and need to be used judiciously, preferably in the "cut" mode...

Equalizers were never mentioned, we're talking tone controls, a gentle, linear upward tilt of the bass freqs <100Hz...perhaps a max boost of 6 dB@ 32Hz...

And contrary to your tweeter-based premise, it ain't the originating transducer, it's the recieving one: the ears.

jimHJJ(...both Fletcher and Munson must be slowly revolving on their respective axis...perhaps Robinson and Dadson or ISO226:2003 are more to your liking...)

At the risk of sounding ignorant, I must say that 'basic' tone controls ( usually 'Bass', 'Midrange', 'Treble' with += some dB ) are effectively generalized built-in equalizers. That's why I mentioned 'equalizers'.

As far as my comments regarding distortion are concerned, I can tell you that I CAN tell the difference between a $200 CD player and a more expensive one. I can also tell the difference between a cheap amplifier and a good one. A few minutes of listening to bad electronics, assuming you have a good ear, will send you running to the door thanks to the non-linear distortion (aka harsh sound) that is on top of the 'intended' sound. This is also true of speakers. That's what these HiFi magazines spend their time measuring. It definitely affects how much of the 'real' music you can hear. If you don't think so, then you should just spend a few hundred $s and not even bother to come on this "Audioholics" site.

As far as my 'deep' knowledge of equilizers is concerned, it's not all that deep. I figure if the controls show a +10dB to - 10dB, it implies there is amplification or dampening going on. I'm sure the ones they use at most recording studios are pretty good. Any secondary electronics you add must match your system. You probably wouldn't spend $10000 on speakers and an amplifier and get a $100 CD player. It would sound horrific.

[zumbo]

At the risk of sounding ignorant, I must say that 'basic' tone controls ( usually 'Bass', 'Midrange', 'Treble' with += some dB ) are effectively generalized built-in equalizers. That's why I mentioned 'equalizers'.

As far as my comments regarding distortion are concerned, I can tell you that I CAN tell the difference between a $200 CD player and a more expensive one. I can also tell the difference between a cheap amplifier and a good one. A few minutes of listening to bad electronics, assuming you have a good ear, will send you running to the door thanks to the non-linear distortion (aka harsh sound) that is on top of the 'intended' sound. This is also true of speakers. That's what these HiFi magazines spend their time measuring. It definitely affects how much of the 'real' music you can hear. If you don't think so, then you should just spend a few hundred $s and not even bother to come on this "Audioholics" site.

As far as my 'deep' knowledge of equilizers is concerned, it's not all that deep. I figure if the controls show a +10dB to - 10dB, it implies there is amplification or dampening going on. I'm sure the ones they use at most recording studios are pretty good. Any secondary electronics you add must match your system. You probably wouldn't spend $10000 on speakers and an amplifier and get a $100 CD player. It would sound horrific.

You have a great deal to learn. Most members here have many, many years experience. Hang around. Don't do so much talking. Read a little. Check-out all the information on the homepage. There, you can get many answers without looking like a newbie.

http://www.audioholics.com/

BTW, my speaker system retails for: $4797.99
My amp retails for: $1098.99
My receiver/pre-pro retails for: $799.99
Total of: $6696.97

I paid $99.97 for my 5-disc Yamaha cd player about 10+ years ago. It sounds better (with cd's) than my expensive Yamaha dvd/dvd-a player.

[markw]

then you should just spend a few hundred $s and not even bother to come on this "Audioholics" site.Is it just me, or were Jim and I just told we don't know enough about audio to post here?

But, I do have one question for the master, though. If your system is all that pure, pristine and great, why are you posting here asking why is sounds so thin?

[mike c]

umm, these guys were helping you mys iii . that's a good way of driving away people who can help you. (not that I know anything audio)

[mtrycrafts]

I believe one reason why most speakers have the characteristic I described is that the tweeter tends to be more sensitive and easier to drive than the mi-range and bass drivers which means the tweeter dominates the sound spectrum. Hence the "thin" sound at low volume levels.


No, most speaker's sensitivity is linear. When you decrease volume, all frequencies volume is affected, period.
What you seem to not accept is the human hearing at lower sensitivity alters how loud you hear the low frequency and the high frequency sounds. You need it louder for both lows and highs compared the the mid section of the audio band where your hearing is the most sensitive.
http://www.webervst.com/fm.htm

[Resident Loser]

At the risk of sounding ignorant, I must say that 'basic' tone controls ( usually 'Bass', 'Midrange', 'Treble' with += some dB ) are effectively generalized built-in equalizers. That's why I mentioned 'equalizers'.

As far as my comments regarding distortion are concerned, I can tell you that I CAN tell the difference between a $200 CD player and a more expensive one. I can also tell the difference between a cheap amplifier and a good one. A few minutes of listening to bad electronics, assuming you have a good ear, will send you running to the door thanks to the non-linear distortion (aka harsh sound) that is on top of the 'intended' sound. This is also true of speakers. That's what these HiFi magazines spend their time measuring. It definitely affects how much of the 'real' music you can hear. If you don't think so, then you should just spend a few hundred $s and not even bother to come on this "Audioholics" site.

As far as my 'deep' knowledge of equilizers is concerned, it's not all that deep. I figure if the controls show a +10dB to - 10dB, it implies there is amplification or dampening going on. I'm sure the ones they use at most recording studios are pretty good. Any secondary electronics you add must match your system. You probably wouldn't spend $10000 on speakers and an amplifier and get a $100 CD player. It would sound horrific.

...more to learn than I have the time or patience to provide...simply put, tone controls are not equalizers and vice-versa...

As to this:

...As far as my comments regarding distortion are concerned, I can tell you that I CAN tell the difference between a $200 CD player and a more expensive one. I can also tell the difference between a cheap amplifier and a good one...

Under what protocol did you arrive at this epiphany?

Sighted? Blind? Double-blind?

Do you mean to infer that price is automatically indicative of performance?

You need to re-evaluate the doctrine spewed forth by those HiFi magazines who spend more time in subjective evaluation using audiophool jargon-based phraseology, steeped in factoid, with not just a soupçon of hype...

jimHJJ(...mtry...a belated Christmas gift...he's all yours...)

[mys_iii]

No, most speaker's sensitivity is linear. When you decrease volume, all frequencies volume is affected, period.
What you seem to not accept is the human hearing at lower sensitivity alters how loud you hear the low frequency and the high frequency sounds. You need it louder for both lows and highs compared the the mid section of the audio band where your hearing is the most sensitive.
http://www.webervst.com/fm.htm

My apologies for coming across as an "arrogant know it all". I don't claim to know alot when it comes to HiFi electronics. I came on here expecting some good help and information so I could learn more but what I saw from some members was a "you know nothing you embicile" attitude in their responses. I don't appreciate that at all. I may not know alot but I do have an electrical engineering degree so I do know a thing or two about electronics.

When I was referring to the sensitivity of the different drivers, I was referring to the ability of each driver to produce a certain decibel level of sounds given the same inputs. As far as I understand it, sensitivity is defined as how loud a sound the speaker will produce for a given power input. When an amp feeds in a certain amount of current to the speakers, this current is split between the different drivers since they are in parallel. The volume level is really irrelevant here. I'm assuming that the current will be split equally between the drivers. If the tweeter is more sensitive than the other drivers, it will produce a louder sound than the other drivers given the same amount of current going through it. I've made some assumptions here which may or may not be true. I just wanted to throw it out there to get some feedback on it knowing well that some of my assumptions may not hold.

Thanks for all your help.

[markw]

My apologies for coming across as an "arrogant know it all". I don't claim to know alot when it comes to HiFi electronics. Well, yes you did. When confronted with a solution you didn't "believe" in, you jumped in, both feet first, with technojargon as to why you don't "believe" in it. If you don't see that, then you're only deluding yourself.

I came on here expecting some good help and information so I could learn more... ... and you got it. It's not our fault that you didn't like the truth when presented with it. How you think you can correct those deficiencs without altering the response curve is beyond me.

...but what I saw from some members was a "you know nothing you embicile" attitude in their responses.Let's be honest shall we? You presented a problem. We offered solutions. You 're the one that didn't have a clue as to how to apply a little bass boost. And you claim a EE degree?

For reasons that depend more on "belief" than "fact" you don't like those solutions. Now, if you have alternative solutions, please share them. fancy ables perhaps? :rolleyes: Wouldn't that be another form of a tone control if it works?

I don't appreciate that at all.Obviously. It's kinda like having cold water thrwn on onesself to wake them up.

I may not know alot but I do have an electrical engineering degree so I do know a thing or two about electronics.Don't even think you're the only one here who can make that claim. Add a cumulative several hundred years of real world experience in audio and electronics to us here as well. As you progress in your learning, you'll learn that what looks good on paper doesn't always hold true in the real world. One would think that with the chops you imply, applying a little bass boost would have been a no-brainer unless, of course, your courses didn't include audio amplifiers and feedback circuits.

When I was referring to the sensitivity of the different drivers, I was referring to the ability of each driver to produce a certain decibel level of sounds given the same inputs. As far as I understand it, sensitivity is defined as how loud a sound the speaker will produce for a given power input. When an amp feeds in a certain amount of current to the speakers, this current is split between the different drivers since they are in parallel. The volume level is really irrelevant here. I'm assuming that the current will be split equally between the drivers. If the tweeter is more sensitive than the other drivers, it will produce a louder sound than the other drivers given the same amount of current going through it.Theoretically true, but read on...

I've made some assumptions here which may or may not be true.Now that I can get behind. Keep reading.

I just wanted to throw it out there to get some feedback on it knowing well that some of my assumptions may not hold.You want feedback? Ok, here goes. Nice words that on initial reading look impressive to those that don't know how this stuff works, but did you ever hear of something called a crossover and how it's implemented in a speaker system? It sure doesn't appear so. So much for that EE degree, eh?

[mys_iii]

Well, yes you did. When confronted with a solution you didn't "believe" in, you jumped in, both feet first, with technojargon as to why you don't "believe" in it. If you don't see that, then you're only deluding yourself.

... and you got it. It's not our fault that you didn't like the truth when presented with it. How you think you can correct those deficiencs without altering the response curve is beyond me.

Let's be honest shall we? You presented a problem. We offered solutions. You 're the one that didn't have a clue as to how to apply a little bass boost. And you claim a EE degree?

For reasons that depend more on "belief" than "fact" you don't like those solutions. Now, if you have alternative solutions, please share them. fancy ables perhaps? :rolleyes: Wouldn't that be another form of a tone control if it works?

Obviously. It's kinda like having cold water thrwn on onesself to wake them up.

Don't even think you're the only one here who can make that claim. Add a cumulative several hundred years of real world experience in audio and electronics to us here as well. As you progress in your learning, you'll learn that what looks good on paper doesn't always hold true in the real world. One would think that with the chops you imply, applying a little bass boost would have been a no-brainer unless, of course, your courses didn't include audio amplifiers and feedback circuits.

Theoretically true, but read on...

Now that I can get behind. Keep reading.

You want feedback? Ok, here goes. Nice words that on initial reading look impressive to those that don't know how this stuff works, but did you ever hear of something called a crossover and how it's implemented in a speaker system? It sure doesn't appear so. So much for that EE degree, eh?

I appreciate the solutions you suggested for my original question. I didn't realize that I "had" to accept those solutions. Here you go again with the "attitude". I just love it when people try to complicate simple concepts so they can look sophisticated. Ooooh. Crossover. Wow. What a complex concept. Who cares about nuclear physics. This is mindboggling stuff. I don't try to impress others by comlicating concepts in case other people don't quite know what I'm talking about. Ever heard of Richard Feynman. The great Caltech physicist who tried to teach the layperson physics? I know what a crossover is. It still doesn't change the basic concept that you have a power source, three circuits in parallel each of which will get a certain amount of current going through it. The current is what controls the sound coming out of the drivers. The impedance of each circuit controls how much current goes through it. In the real world, I doubt that the impedance of the three are exactly the same.

[mys_iii]

"Tone Controls and Equilizers are not the same thing".

http://www.answers.com/topic/tone-control-circuits

Here's a nice quote from there.

"More elaborate tone control circuits can elevate or attenuate the middle range of frequencies too. Really elaborate tone controls provide elevation or attenuation in 1/3 octave bands spanning from approximately 30 Hz to 18 kHz. These units are called graphic equalizers because their controls are in the form of sliders that are arranged so as to graphically display the amount of boost or cut being applied at any frequency of interest."

[Resident Loser]

Here you go again with the "attitude". I just love it when people try to complicate simple concepts so they can look sophisticated...I don't try to impress others by comlicating(sic) concepts in case other people don't quite know what I'm talking about...

...ignorant slut" says Dan Akroyd...

...Gee, the sound is thin at low levels...

...Turn up the bass, Jane...

Simple concept, why it's an answer even an Einstein could appreciate...but then again, you're no Einstein...talk about much ado about nothing!

Hint: electronics isn't acoustics and vice-versa...there are things that remain constant in the equation, but only within its' respective realm. Nominal impedance anyone?

I get this feeling I have ties older than you...

jimHJJ(...Hey jneutron, maybe you want a piece of this...)

[AVRat]

Just curious mys, what gear do you have?

[Resident Loser]

"Tone Controls and Equilizers are not the same thing".

http://www.answers.com/topic/tone-control-circuits

Here's a nice quote from there.

"More elaborate tone control circuits can elevate or attenuate the middle range of frequencies too. Really elaborate tone controls provide elevation or attenuation in 1/3 octave bands spanning from approximately 30 Hz to 18 kHz. These units are called graphic equalizers because their controls are in the form of sliders that are arranged so as to graphically display the amount of boost or cut being applied at any frequency of interest."

...quoting from the web, that bastion of uncompromised, accurate and factual authority...

First off pup, an equalizer is used after the loudspeaker/listening-room synergy has be optimized by mechanical means...once these are exhausted, careful measured analysis using a calibrated pink-noise source and SPL meter will provide a frequency response curve identifying trouble spots such as standing waves. An inverse curve is applied via graphic, parametric or digital equalization to smooth out the overall FR. Using RTAs is a more current (and more expensive) SOTA method. Whatever the method, it is a set it and forget it affair...of course that is if you listen at the same reference level at all times, deviate too far north or south of that dB level and all bets are off, since human hearing has those little foibles mentioned earlier...Additionally EQs should not be used as gain-stage devices...that's where folks get into trouble...

Tone controls are the answer to your problem since, as the well-documented and widely accepted loudness compesation research from the 1930s indicates, as SPLs decrease the need for bass boost increases...Since the web is your omniscient guide, go Google the aforementioned Fletcher- Munson, Robinson and Dadson or ISO 226:2003...TCs also come in handy for making less than stellar program material (a nice bit of audiophool jargon which should make you all warm and cozy) at least listenable...referring to them as equalizers is a misnomer as they usually apply to far too wide a Q which tends to affect adjacent frequencies ultimately "equalizing" nothing...they should not be used to take up the slack of poorly performing speaker systems.

With a properly EQd system, played at the measured reference level and with pristine software, TCs aren't needed and should be set to 0 or otherwise defeated...

So yes Virginia, equalizers aren't tone controls and vice-versa...

jimHJJ(...you can put your boots in the oven, but that don't make 'em biscuits...)

[allsop4now]

No, most speaker's sensitivity is linear. When you decrease volume, all frequencies volume is affected, period.
What you seem to not accept is the human hearing at lower sensitivity alters how loud you hear the low frequency and the high frequency sounds. You need it louder for both lows and highs compared the the mid section of the audio band where your hearing is the most sensitive.
http://www.webervst.com/fm.htm

Here is another article about loudness:

http://www.extron.com/company/article.aspx?id=loudnesscontrol_ts

[mys_iii]

Here is another article about loudness:

http://www.extron.com/company/article.aspx?id=loudnesscontrol_ts

Oh no. Not another 'web' article. It must be garbage.

Just kidding. :) Thanks for the link. That's a good article. The filtering going on in my ears completely escaped my genius mind. :D

[mys_iii]

Just curious mys, what gear do you have?

My gear is pretty modest. I have the old Acurus pre-amp and amps. My CD player is a California Audio Labs.

[markw]

The filtering going on in my ears completely escaped my genius mind. :DIt took this long for you to figure this out? Well, duh! Obviously, you didn't even bother to read up on Fletcher-Munson at all. That what this whole thread was about. That, and ways to compensate for it.

[highfihoney]

does not believe in equilizers. To effectively change different frequencies in music, the equilizer has to be very good in order to correctly filter or amplify the different frequencies. Most equilizers introduce distortion which defeats the whole purpose of having good sources and amplifiers for low distortion sounds production. Just my opinion.

I believe one reason why most speakers have the characteristic I described is that the tweeter tends to be more sensitive and easier to drive than the mi-range and bass drivers which means the tweeter dominates the sound spectrum. Hence the "thin" sound at low volume levels.

If you plan on taking "the pure signal path"approach to your audio system your in for a long & extremely expensive ride on the audiophile express.What good is an ultra pure signal if the sound from your speakers isnt what your looking for?

The signal is pure but it sounds like crap:confused:

Trying to keep the signal path as pure as possible is not the most sensible approach to putting together a system,if you like everything about the system you have now & the only area that you feel needs changing is the bass at lower listening levels you should be looking at switching your current preamp out for a preamp that has tone controls & a loudness contour control or a good eq.

Buying a bigger more powerfull amplifier would make sense if you were experiencing a lack of bass at high listening levels because the amp couldnt deliever the needed wattage to the woofers but this is not the case you have a lack of base at low listening levels & getting a bigger amp will not resolve this.

Even a monster krell amp that runs 100% in class a mode will not correct your lack of low level bass response.

[highfihoney]

So yes Virginia, equalizers aren't tone controls and vice-versa...
(...you can put your boots in the oven, but that don't make 'em biscuits...)

Thats some pretty good stuff:D

[mys_iii]

If you plan on taking "the pure signal path"approach to your audio system your in for a long & extremely expensive ride on the audiophile express.What good is an ultra pure signal if the sound from your speakers isnt what your looking for?

The signal is pure but it sounds like crap:confused:

Trying to keep the signal path as pure as possible is not the most sensible approach to putting together a system,if you like everything about the system you have now & the only area that you feel needs changing is the bass at lower listening levels you should be looking at switching your current preamp out for a preamp that has tone controls & a loudness contour control or a good eq.

Buying a bigger more powerfull amplifier would make sense if you were experiencing a lack of bass at high listening levels because the amp couldnt deliever the needed wattage to the woofers but this is not the case you have a lack of base at low listening levels & getting a bigger amp will not resolve this.

Even a monster krell amp that runs 100% in class a mode will not correct your lack of low level bass response.

Thanks for the info. Now that you mentioned it, I may be lacking some of the bass even at high volumes. My speakers do go down low but not that low. When I listen even at high volumes, the base is lacking some authority I would say. I'm not sure if my use of a power conditioner is robbing my amp of some current. That would affect the bass output as you say. That's why I was considering perhaps upgrading my amplifier. Would 150W be enough to drive most speakers?

[markw]

Thanks for the info. Now that you mentioned it, I may be lacking some of the bass even at high volumes. My speakers do go down low but not that low. When I listen even at high volumes, the base is lacking some authority I would say. I'm not sure if my use of a power conditioner is robbing my amp of some current. That would affect the bass output as you say. That's why I was considering perhaps upgrading my amplifier. Would 150W be enough to drive most speakers?Just curious...

lessee... you've got incredibly efficient speakers and, as you say, they sound "thin" at low levels and lack bass at high levels. So, you're thinking about getting a more powerful amp? What school did you attend?

big hint... you're getting colder.

bigger hint... It doesn't take a whole lotta watts to get good sound out of speakers with a 91 db sensitivity.

[mys_iii]

Just curious...

lessee... you've got incredibly efficient speakers and, as you say, they sound "thin" at low levels and lack bass at high levels. So, you're thinking about getting a more powerful amp? What school did you attend?

big hint... you're getting colder.

bigger hint... It doesn't take a whole lotta watts to get good sound out of speakers with a 91 db sensitivity.

OK. OK. You got me. I was just trying to talk my way into upgrading my amp. :D

The speakers are Triangle Antals.

[no. 5]

bigger hint... It doesn't take a whole lotta watts to get good sound out of speakers with a 91 db sensitivity.
true, it may not take a lot of watts, but if the speakers have say, a 52 degree capacitive phase angle with a 3 ohm dip in impedance, it would take a very capable amplifer to do the job.

[markw]

OK. OK. You got me. I was just trying to talk my way into upgrading my amp. :DAny excusre is as good as another, at least if it passes wifey's muster. But, all things considered, 150 solid Acrus watts is quite a lot.

The speakers are Triangle Antals.Nice speakers, but you can only get so much bass out of a 6 1/2" driver in a thin tower, no mater how glowing a review Soundstage gives them.

Remember "astounding bass" is a fairly relative concept and perhaps, just perhaps, your concept differs from the reviewers. That does happen...

[mtrycrafts]

true, it may not take a lot of watts, but if the speakers have say, a 52 degree capacitive phase angle with a 3 ohm dip in impedance, it would take a very capable amplifer to do the job.


But, his original Q was getting enough bass out when he lowered his listening level. That is what all this was about.
When the master volume goes south 20dB, so will the bass and everything else. Hence, the effects of the hearing sensitivity at lower volume, which you know well.
Now, it seems he has another issue.
I bet his speakers cannot do what he is expecting it to do. He should take a good FR measurement at say 85dB? Oh, well.

[mys_iii]

But, his original Q was getting enough bass out when he lowered his listening level. That is what all this was about.
When the master volume goes south 20dB, so will the bass and everything else. Hence, the effects of the hearing sensitivity at lower volume, which you know well.
Now, it seems he has another issue.
I bet his speakers cannot do what he is expecting it to do. He should take a good FR measurement at say 85dB? Oh, well.

My original ? was really that the mid-range and bass 'seemed' to need a little more ooomph at lower volumes as the speakers sounded like the tweeter was dominating at those volumes. I've tried other speakers and it seems that they also sound a bit thin at lower volumes. Combined with the human hearing factor, I guess this is all normal.

As far as the bass capabilities of the speakers, they are pretty decent so I'm fine with that. My question related to bass at higher volumes had to do with being able to extract the most out of the speakers, which a more powerful amp would probably help me do. Since I also use a power conditioner, I was pondering how much current it may be robbing from the amplifier, if at all.

[mtrycrafts]

[QUOTE=mys_iii] My question related to bass at higher volumes had to do with being able to extract the most out of the speakers, which a more powerful amp would probably help me do.


Only if you know for sure that speaker is capable of high volume output in the bass region and at what frequencies. One reason they make subs as that is what they are designed to do, a good number of them, certainly not all.




Since I also use a power conditioner, I was pondering how much current it may be robbing from the amplifier, if at all.

Why would it rob any? If it is rated for 15A at 120V, that is what it should do, or trip early. Probably easy to test with a portable heater or a big toaster.

[Resident Loser]

...an answer to our little mys_3...

If the review of the speakers is to be believed (and I usually put little credence in the jargonistas of the audio world) they would seem to have some placement issues...

But even still, once one finds a placement scenario that will provide the low frequency extension that these units can supposedly provide, once we attenuate from a normal listening level the ugly issue of loudness compensation is still there.

Period.

Power isn't an issue...There are folks out there in audio-land who quite happily run loudspeakers of similar sensitivity on approx. 8Wpc using SET amps...Our old friend from AR, MikE Walsdor, comes to mind.

And you just can't violate the laws of physics...that size woofer, no matter how it's loaded, isn't going to move the same amount of air as a larger driver, which BTW, is still going to demonstrate the inherent roll-off of our hearing at less than spec'd levels.

Then we have the issue (as markw noted) of "there's bass, and then there's bass"...what may be perfectly fine for light jazzy stuff and/or classical chamber music, may not quite cut it for electro-techo-pop-o stuff...although to my way of thinking, any speaker system that particular doesn't really come up to true hi-fi standards.

jimHJJ(...Step #1: find out where the speakers perform their best...)

[Swerd]

Nice speakers, but you can only get so much bass out of a 6 1/2" driver in a thin tower, no mater how glowing a review Soundstage gives them.Where do you place your speakers in the room? How close are they to the wall behind them? The closer they are to that wall, the greater the bass is relative to the mid and treble. Many people follow the standard audiophile recommendation to move their speakers at least 2-3 feet away from the wall behind them. Try moving them around and see what difference it makes.

Look at the SoundStage (http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/todd24.htm) review of these speakers and scroll down to "Act 3", where the reviewer, at last, deals with the bass problem by using a different speaker location in his room.

All speaker designers must decide where a speaker should be located relative to the wall behind them. A 6¼" woofer in a narrow vented cabinet can only do so much. I believe the SoundStage article said they have an f3 (the frequency at which bass response falls 3 dB below the speaker's standard level) of 40 Hz which is not bad. This bass response will be affected by location relative to a wall. If the designer intends the speakers to be located away from a wall (rather than near it), bass compensation must be included, usually in the crossover. See Martin King's article on Baffle Step Compensation (http://www.quarter-wave.com/General/BSC_Sizing.pdf) where he describes this better than I can. I don't know what the designers of your Triangle Antals intended, but I can guess that they lack this bass compensation, and might benefit from being moved closer to a wall or a corner.

[mys_iii]

Where do you place your speakers in the room? How close are they to the wall behind them? The closer they are to that wall, the greater the bass is relative to the mid and treble. Many people follow the standard audiophile recommendation to move their speakers at least 2-3 feet away from the wall behind them. Try moving them around and see what difference it makes.

Look at the SoundStage (http://www.soundstage.com/revequip/todd24.htm) review of these speakers and scroll down to "Act 3", where the reviewer, at last, deals with the bass problem by using a different speaker location in his room.

All speaker designers must decide where a speaker should be located relative to the wall behind them. A 6¼" woofer in a narrow vented cabinet can only do so much. I believe the SoundStage article said they have an f3 (the frequency at which bass response falls 3 dB below the speaker's standard level) of 40 Hz which is not bad. This bass response will be affected by location relative to a wall. If the designer intends the speakers to be located away from a wall (rather than near it), bass compensation must be included, usually in the crossover. See Martin King's article on Baffle Step Compensation (http://www.quarter-wave.com/General/BSC_Sizing.pdf) where he describes this better than I can. I don't know what the designers of your Triangle Antals intended, but I can guess that they lack this bass compensation, and might benefit from being moved closer to a wall or a corner.

Thank you very much for that link! :) That was very useful. I think that article covers alot of the issues I'm experiencing even though the speakers I have are the new Antals and look nothing like the one in that review. The new ones have a horn loaded tweeter, a 5.2" midrange, and 2 6.5" woofers. They're supposed to be more refined but since I have never heard the older Antals, I can't comment on that.

I've been experimenting with the positioning of the speakers and here's what I've found so far.

Distance from the wall
I tried distances from 1' to 2' so far and if they are closer than 1.5' to the wall, the bass gets too boomy and muddy. If I put them closer to 2' then the bass is cleaner but loses some of its presence. For now I left it at 1.5' from the back wall.


Toe-in
The distance between them is about 6'. If they face straight out (i.e. 0 toe-in), the soundstage is a bit wider but the sounds don't quite seem to mesh well enough so the music doesn't sound full. If I toe them in too much, the sound is fuller but the sounstage is very narrow. I've settled for somewhere in between for now.


Sitting distance from the speakers
Unfortunately, the way I have them setup is probably not ideal as my living room is long and narrow. I have them against the long wall which limits my sitting distance from the speakers which is about 5' to 6'. I realized last night that this may be a contributing factor for the thinness I'm hearing. The wall is also not symmetric in that the right side has a stairway opening. I will try to change this so that the sound goes down the length of the room.


The other 'possible' factor I wanted to ask about is speaker break-in. A few articles claimed that these speakers take a long time to break-in. I've read the speaker break-in sticky on here and most seem to think this is a myth. I don't really have a strong opinion on this but I 'can' see how break-in is a possibility as chemical properties of materials can change over time (e.g. rubber band loses elasticity, sound-deadening materials lose some of their ability over time, etc. ).

[markw]

When you get speakers placed for best soundstage and imaging, which is generally away from any room boundaries, it's generally at the cost of bass, which is enhanced by proximity to room boundaries.

From your seacripotions of your predicament, what I think you're referring to as "booming bass" is actually mid or upper bass, or in the range of 60 - 200 hz or so, and this is highly augmented by placement near the walls.

Not to offend, but I think you would be well served by placing the speakers for best soundstage/imaging and using a decent subwoofer, properly placed, to fill in the lowest octave or two.

[Resident Loser]

...the Triangle site, the only model I can find is the Antal Esw...I can only assume it may be an improved model as it seems to have dual woofers and not the single as shown in the review...

Stated FR spec is 50Hz-20kHz (+/-3dB)...now 50 Hz is roughly a 'G' two octaves below middle 'C' of a piano, so any low freq info below that is reproduced outside that tolerance...and I'm gonna take an eduamcated guess it's in the negatory direction...without seeing a FR graph we'll give it the benefit of doubt and say that it's 3dB down @50Hz after a gentle roll-off...although it could be -3dB at a higher freq and may just shelve the lo-freq response in a more or less linear fashion.

In any event, this is definitely a loss of info (including fundamentals) below 50Hz and there is a lot of bottom e.g. lower registers of piano and keyboards, bass, drums, etc. in that real estate...

jimHJJ(...As markw suggested, go for soundstage, etc. and augment with a sub...but it still won't help much at lower listening levels...)

[mys_iii]

...the Triangle site, the only model I can find is the Antal Esw...I can only assume it may be an improved model as it seems to have dual woofers and not the single as shown in the review...

Stated FR spec is 50Hz-20kHz (+/-3dB)...now 50 Hz is roughly a 'G' two octaves below middle 'C' of a piano, so any low freq info below that is reproduced outside that tolerance...and I'm gonna take an eduamcated guess it's in the negatory direction...without seeing a FR graph we'll give it the benefit of doubt and say that it's 3dB down @50Hz after a gentle roll-off...although it could be -3dB at a higher freq and may just shelve the lo-freq response in a more or less linear fashion.

In any event, this is definitely a loss of info (including fundamentals) below 50Hz and there is a lot of bottom e.g. lower registers of piano and keyboards, bass, drums, etc. in that real estate...

jimHJJ(...As markw suggested, go for soundstage, etc. and augment with a sub...but it still won't help much at lower listening levels...)

The specs you saw on the website are actually incorrectly stated for the Antal Esw. If you look at the other lower end speakers, you'll also see that one of them also has 50Hz as the 3dB rolloff point. The correct frequency is 43Hz for the Antal and 40Hz for the Celius which is the next higher model.

[Swerd]

The new Antals have a horn loaded tweeter, a 5.2" midrange, and 2 6.5" woofers.Do they look like the attached picture? I looked but did not find any more details about these speakers. They look like a 3-way with twin 6¼" woofers. Does Triangle not sell this model anymore?

As you are already finding, room placement can have a big effect on bass response. But not all these effects are pleasing, and not all room placements are practical. Good luck, I'm sure you'll find some decent compromise.

When you've exhausted the various realistic room placement options, I think that markw's other general advice about a subwoofer may be the best solution. Getting a subwoofer to seamlessly integrate with speakers is not trivial, but it is not impossible. I think that will get you a lot more than going for a more powerful amp when you already have a very good 150 watt/channel amp. To notice a difference, you would have to at least double that power, which will cost big bucks. Room placement is free, and decent subwoofers can be had for less than 300+ watt amps.

[mys_iii]

Do they look like the attached picture? I looked but did not find any more details about these speakers. They look like a 3-way with twin 6¼" woofers. Does Triangle not sell this model anymore?

As you are already finding, room placement can have a big effect on bass response. But not all these effects are pleasing, and not all room placements are practical. Good luck, I'm sure you'll find some decent compromise.

When you've exhausted the various realistic room placement options, I think that markw's other general advice about a subwoofer may be the best solution. Getting a subwoofer to seamlessly integrate with speakers is not trivial, but it is not impossible. I think that will get you a lot more than going for a more powerful amp when you already have a very good 150 watt/channel amp. To notice a difference, you would have to at least double that power, which will cost big bucks. Room placement is free, and decent subwoofers can be had for less than 300+ watt amps.


These are a relatively new line of speakers from Triangle and they do sell them. If you click on the "Antal" link on their page, you'll see a menu at the top left of the menu which has a "Technicals informations" link. You can get some more info there.

I will definitely experiment with placement before considering the sub route as I am not really a bass nut. I like to feel the bass but I don't want it to be too dominant.

Thanks

[markw]

..I am not really a bass nu. I like to feel the bass but I don't want it to be too dominant.That's like saying that that only rotty race car drivers use turbochargers.

I do wonder where you're picking up some of your ideas. They reek of inaccurate and unflattering stereotypes.

Deep bass is part of the music. It's not an add-on. A well integrated subwoofer is virtually (acoustically) invisible. It's only contribution should be below the main speakers effective range and it's contribution should not be consciously noticed.

HT is a different creature but we're not talking HT, are we?

In fact, the correct way to tell if a properly integrated subwoofer is employed is when it's removed from the equation. You simply notice a sudden lack of a visceral bottom end* that was otherwise perfectly natural and simply blended in with the rest of the music.

*Particularly on material with a solid bottom end such a organs, tympanis, a well recorded bass, either acoustic or electric, synths, etc...

[Resident Loser]

The specs you saw on the website are actually incorrectly stated for the Antal Esw. If you look at the other lower end speakers, you'll also see that one of them also has 50Hz as the 3dB rolloff point. The correct frequency is 43Hz for the Antal and 40Hz for the Celius which is the next higher model.

...brings us back to...DOH!...an 'F' (43.654Hz), give or take a few cents (as in hundredths of a semi-tone)...two octaves below middle 'C'...the cheese stands alone...still doesn't negate my post...

jimHJJ(...see, I told you about that web...)

[mys_iii]

That's like saying that that only rotty race car drivers use turbochargers.

I do wonder where you're picking up some of your ideas. They reek of inaccurate and unflattering stereotypes.

Deep bass is part of the music. It's not an add-on. A well integrated subwoofer is virtually (acoustically) invisible. It's only contribution should be below the main speakers effective range and it's contribution should not be consciously noticed.

HT is a different creature but we're not talking HT, are we?

In fact, the correct way to tell if a properly integrated subwoofer is employed is when it's removed from the equation. You simply notice a sudden lack of a visceral bottom end* that was otherwise perfectly natural and simply blended in with the rest of the music.

*Particularly on material with a solid bottom end such a organs, tympanis, a well recorded bass, either acoustic or electric, synths, etc...

Come on Mark. Please stop being petty and criticizing all of my opinions. I've heard integrated subs before and just don't like them. That's all. What's the big deal. I'm not stereotyping. Why couldn't you have made your comments without the

That's like saying that that only rotty race car drivers use turbochargers.

I do wonder where you're picking up some of your ideas. They reek of inaccurate and unflattering stereotypes.



:)

[markw]

Come on Mark. Please stop being petty and criticizing all of my opinions. I've heard integrated subs before and just don't like them. That's all. What's the big deal. I'm not stereotyping. Why couldn't you have made your comments without theBy the same token, you could have easily made your point without implying that only "bass nuts" use subwoofers. If that's not stereotyping then I don't know what is.

Your posts indicate that you think all subwoofers are overused to the point of boom boom thud, overwhelming the rest of the music, which ain't the case, particularly here. Again, this is a misconception that you are basing on either what you've read somewhere or some people's abuse of a useful tool. I think we just went through something similar to this with equalizers, at least until Jim disabused you of their true purpose.

Now, I can come to either of two conclusions:

1) You've never heard a properly set up (integrated) subwoofer in a musical application. If you did, you wouldn't be so adamant about not investigating them.

or

2) You simply refuse to accept their place in a musical system, which bespeaks a preconceived prejudice, which is even more of a problem than # 1.

# 1 could be allayed with an open mind and a willingness to learn. # 2 can't.

[zumbo]

I am going to go with markw on this one. I do believe, in the current situation, a mild sub will be worth every penny. It took me a good while, months actually, to properly fine-tune my system. Placement, set-up, gain, and so-on. My sub cannot be located. It blends with the mains/system perfectly. I listen to the mains without the sub. I listen with the sub. Sounds like the same system, just complete with the sub. However, my mains do make it down to 33Hz. I have the system x-over @ 60Hz.

[no. 5]

Originally Posted by no. 5
true, it may not take a lot of watts, but if the speakers have say, a 52 degree capacitive phase angle with a 3 ohm dip in impedance, it would take a very capable amplifer to do the job.But, his original Q was getting enough bass out when he lowered his listening level. That is what all this was about.
When the master volume goes south 20dB, so will the bass and everything else. Hence, the effects of the hearing sensitivity at lower volume, which you know well.
woops, forget I said anything. :D

[Nick250]

I might add here that two bass traps (GIK Tri-Traps in my case) turned my boomy and muddy bass into tight punchy bass. Another benefit I found was that I much greater latitude in sub placement. At $200 or so for two of them they are the best cost/benefit ratio I can imagine for my system. A real night and day improvement.

Nick

[mys_iii]

placing them facing the length of the room has greatly improved the soundstage. I never realized just how much speaker placement AND room acoustics affect sound coming out of speakers! :eek:

Here's a ? for you 'bass' setup gurus. I have tried different positions for my speakers ( closer to the walls and further away from the walls, etc. ) and now have the following issue. I sit about 7' from the speakers and bass is greatly improved. The issue now though seems that if I go back to about 10', the bass is very good. If I sit at 7', it's just okay. I can't really sit 10' back as that would put me in the middle of the living room. Is there a way to control this at all via the positioning of the speakers? The bass seems to radiate upwards so if I go 10' back and stand up, I really hear and feel it.

Thanks

[Swerd]

placing them facing the length of the room has greatly improved the soundstage. I never realized just how much speaker placement AND room acoustics affect sound coming out of speakers! :eek:I'm glad to hear that suggestion paid off for you. It's always amazing to me how big an effect room acoustics can have compared to many of the more commonly tried but less effective tweaks that fill the audiophile market place. Unfortunately, I often find that the best sounding arrangement of speakers can be impractical or impossible to live with in the real world. So compromise is the game.
Here's a ? for you 'bass' setup gurus. I have tried different positions for my speakers ( closer to the walls and further away from the walls, etc. ) and now have the following issue. I sit about 7' from the speakers and bass is greatly improved. The issue now though seems that if I go back to about 10', the bass is very good. If I sit at 7', it's just okay. I can't really sit 10' back as that would put me in the middle of the living room. Is there a way to control this at all via the positioning of the speakers? The bass seems to radiate upwards so if I go 10' back and stand up, I really hear and feel it.What you are describing sounds very much like the common problem known as standing bass waves. In bass frequencies (below 200 Hz) reflections from the walls, floors and ceilings in many rooms cause additive peaks and subtractive cancelations to occur at various frequencies and different locations within the room. If you have a CD with various single-tone bass signals recorded on it, play a single tone, such as 60 or 80 Hz. Walk around the room and listen for the spots where you can and cannot hear the tone. Often these spots are not where your favorite chair is located ;). In my room the best bass response is located near the back wall!

Most rooms I've known have suffered from variations of this. What most of us hear as "bass" is usually the one (or several) frequencies where the reflections add up to a large standing peak that is much louder (by as much as 20 dB) than any of the rest of the bass. While standing waves and cancellations can be partially smoothed out in a room by effective use of bass traps and other wall treatments that absorb reflections, most people do not go this route. It can be expensive, awkward, and often ugly. There is a page at Audioholics devoted to these problems http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/roomacoustics/index.php. There was one article I remember called Crawling for Bass, but I don't see it on the list. Maybe someone can point it out.

Another way to improve this problem is with a powered subwoofer and the judicious use of a parametric equalizer. You have to be able to measure the bass response in your room (with the microphone located where you intend to listen), draw a plot of the loudness vs. frequency, and you'll see on that graph where the worst peaks and valleys are. Use the equalizer only to flatten the worst peaks. Leave the valleys alone. Then adjust the volume of the subwoofer so the new bass level is balanced with the rest of the audio spectrum. This should produce bass that is much smoother and more widely localized throughout the room. Many people recommend a Behringer Feedback Destroyer DSP1124P for this. They are widely available and should cost about $100. If you look at the Parts Express web page, under part #248-656, you can download the user's manual and learn more about this digital parametric equalizer.

[Nuglets]

My opinion...You can think that MarkW is being an ******* all you want but that doesn't change the fact that he is giving you some of the best advice you could ask for. Everything that he has said, besides the sarcasm, in his post's is completely useful and if I were you I would reread them, omitting anything that offends you, and experiment with his advice.