Danon X4700H, Arcam sa30 and 2 Subwoofers.

[Trebdp83]

 

[Eppie]

It call it "processor mode" because it is the selection for using the unit (the integrated amp) with a preamp/processor. Nothing wrong with that, just slightly confusing to people who for some misguided reasons (myths, hearsay, placebo influence, misconception etc.), want to use an integrated amp with preamp/processors or AVRs.

Yes, that's pretty confusing nomenclature. I read over that section of the manual and there is nothing that clearly states that the pre-amp is being bypassed. As Genchic mentioned, you can set the gain level on the input. That implies that there is in fact some processing going on before the signal is sent to the amplifier. Whether that is truly a "bypass" is open to debate.

 

[Swerd]

It might be a long shot, but if Focal would give you the T/S parameters of the drivers and the crossover circuit, there is a high chance I could design impedance correction for the speakers, with a crossover mod.

@Genchic
That may be possible even though it's probably a long shot. Properly designing a good speaker always involves a number of trade offs. TLS Guy is able to do that work. However, the OP should know there are a number of possible reasons why it might not be possible:

1. Focal won't provide the T/S parameters of the Aria 926 drivers and the present crossover circuit. That isn't a complete show-stopper, but TLS Guy would then need one of those speakers to make his own measurements.
2. It may depend on how high a frequency those woofers can go without producing breakup noise, as well as how low those mi-range drivers can go without distortion. That may be why Focal chose such a very low crossover frequency of 290 Hz. Those things are usually one of the first things a crossover designer needs to know. T/S parameters alone won't help – it requires direct frequency and impedance response measurements of the drivers when mounted in their cabinets.
3. Usually, woofer-to-mid-range crossovers below 400-500 Hz are avoided in passive crossovers. They can create low impedance problems. They also usually require physically large & expensive inductor coils & capacitors. So large that they can't easily fit on the speaker's original crossover board(s). A typical DIY solution for that is to build a new larger board.
4. It is also possible that some of the low impedance of these speakers results from Focal choosing too small a cabinet size. It would be less expensive to build and ship, but it can also produce louder but muddier sounding bass. Focal's marketing people may have over ruled the design engineers by insisting on a smaller cabinet with a smaller foot print, which also produces exaggerated bass and a higher sensitivity value. The only solution for that is to choose different bass drivers or build a different cabinet.

 

[TLS Guy]

@Genchic
That may be possible even though it's probably a long shot. Properly designing a good speaker always involves a number of trade offs. TLS Guy is able to do that work. However, the OP should know there are a number of possible reasons why it might not be possible:

1. Focal won't provide the T/S parameters of the Aria 926 drivers and the present crossover circuit. That isn't a complete show-stopper, but TLS Guy would then need one of those speakers to make his own measurements.
2. It may depend on how high a frequency those woofers can go without producing breakup noise, as well as how low those mi-range drivers can go without distortion. That may be why Focal chose such a very low crossover frequency of 290 Hz. Those things are usually one of the first things a crossover designer needs to know. T/S parameters alone won't help – it requires direct frequency and impedance response measurements of the drivers when mounted in their cabinets.
3. Usually, woofer-to-mid-range crossovers below 400-500 Hz are avoided in passive crossovers. They can create low impedance problems. They also usually require physically large & expensive inductor coils & capacitors. So large that they can't easily fit on the speaker's original crossover board(s). A typical DIY solution for that is to build a new larger board.
4. It is also possible that some of the low impedance of these speakers results from Focal choosing too small a cabinet size. It would be less expensive to build and ship, but it can also produce louder but muddier sounding bass. Focal's marketing people may have over ruled the design engineers by insisting on a smaller cabinet with a smaller foot print, which also produces exaggerated bass and a higher sensitivity value. The only solution for that is to choose different bass drivers or build a different cabinet.

Your points are well taken.

However I don't agree with PENG on this.

A speaker may not blow up a robust costly amp immediately, but it will stress it. This will more likely than not make it fail sooner than it would have if driving a load without dips around 2 ohms with harmful phase angles.

As I think you all know, I am highly trouble averse, and that gives me continuous pay days.

You can and should design for reliability/longevity. That is just basic good economic planning. That way you get to enlarge and increase the capabilities of your system over time instead of paying for replacements and trips to your local recycling center.

If I can design and build speakers that don't make amps as hot as a toaster, then the likes of Focal can as well.
It is easier for them, than me as they can design the drivers. Doing this properly would also save them money.
They could easily design a decent mid, and save on crossover components and not take bad rap for blowing the customers equipment. One again, hats of to my mentors, like Peter Walker and Raymond Cooke, who taught me better and more professional ways of design.

This is the impedance curve of my three way Raymond E. Cooke memorial speakers in our family room. They have been in use since 2006 and have not blown an amp or let get one getter hotter than somewhat warm to the touch. They sound great and are a personal tribute to Raymond. Those designers at Focal would have had to mend their ways, or be long gone from Tovil, Kent.

 

[Genchic]

We are not going to convince you Arcam amps are not design to have it's own sound that is audibly different to humans than just being transparent. That's because Arcam knows how to design amplifiers that simply literally amplifier the input signal, i.e. what goes in, what comes out, the only change is the magnitude. So in a blind listening session, it will sound the same to you as the Denon, but again, we cannot convince anyone who believe such well designed amps will sound different when used well within their limits. That said, if there is an outside chance that you could be convinced, or partially convinced, and you want to make sure you are getting the best out of those Focal speakers, you need to grab a power amp that is truly rated about at least 300 W into 4 ohms. Any cheap class D amp that Amir tested and manage to have SINAD>80 dB will do, as it will be as transparent as the relatively weak Arcam amp that seem to like (it's "sound").

So, that's it for amps, all up to you obviously, but as for the speakers, with due respect, TLSGuy is knowledgeable in crossover design, but he can be very biased, so I would suggest if you like what you got, keep it, it just need amps that can deliver the current it needs and it will sound very good. KEF reference class speakers will be better, more neutral/accurate, but that does not mean you prefer them, and pretty much all KEF reference, even some R series speakers will be more demanding (in current/amperes) than your Focal Aria speakers so that little Arcam amp still won't do it. It will do, just not getting the best.. You got pretty of facts now, objectively only though lol..

I will get a stronger amp, the decision is made. It is a matter of which one and when.
Eppie had question about the Arcam sa30 amp settings. So I was not trying g to convince myself to an idea of Arcam is the best. I did a blind test of Denon X4700H and Arcam SA30, my wife was the listener, she has a great ear too, probably better than mine, by nature being a woman. She was listening the Denon for 3 years before I brought the Arcam. To keep long story short, she liked the Arcam better. She was not in the room when I was switching the amps. I used different music janr

@Genchic
That may be possible even though it's probably a long shot. Properly designing a good speaker always involves a number of trade offs. TLS Guy is able to do that work. However, the OP should know there are a number of possible reasons why it might not be possible:

1. Focal won't provide the T/S parameters of the Aria 926 drivers and the present crossover circuit. That isn't a complete show-stopper, but TLS Guy would then need one of those speakers to make his own measurements.
2. It may depend on how high a frequency those woofers can go without producing breakup noise, as well as how low those mi-range drivers can go without distortion. That may be why Focal chose such a very low crossover frequency of 290 Hz. Those things are usually one of the first things a crossover designer needs to know. T/S parameters alone won't help – it requires direct frequency and impedance response measurements of the drivers when mounted in their cabinets.
3. Usually, woofer-to-mid-range crossovers below 400-500 Hz are avoided in passive crossovers. They can create low impedance problems. They also usually require physically large & expensive inductor coils & capacitors. So large that they can't easily fit on the speaker's original crossover board(s). A typical DIY solution for that is to build a new larger board.
4. It is also possible that some of the low impedance of these speakers results from Focal choosing too small a cabinet size. It would be less expensive to build and ship, but it can also produce louder but muddier sounding bass. Focal's marketing people may have over ruled the design engineers by insisting on a smaller cabinet with a smaller foot print, which also produces exaggerated bass and a higher sensitivity value. The only solution for that is to choose different bass drivers or build a different cabinet.

Or sell the Focal ans buy another set of speakers. However, I will give the Focal another chance with a more powerful amplifier, and another blind test using my wife's trustworthy rears.

 

[lovinthehd]

Curious, just how do you conduct your blind tests of different amps?

 

[Genchic]

Curious, just how do you conduct your blind tests of different amps?

I do the best as I can with in my livingroom walls.

 

[lovinthehd]

I do the best as I can with in my livingroom walls.

That doesn't answer the question nor lay out your procedure. Were you able to setup an instant switching a/b test? Level matched?

 

[Genchic]

That doesn't answer the question nor lay out your procedure. Were you able to setup an instant switching a/b test? Level matched?

No, it does not. I do not have an instant switching ability between the amp and AVR. That is why I said: "I did the best I could" and I will do the same comparison between integrated and amp only setups. "Some musicians tune their string instruments with electronic tuners for every string, every note. When I played piano, we had a professional piano smith tuning our piano with just a tuning fork sound "A". And he tuned the whole piano using his ears. I participated in this process and heard all the divination I sounds. I tune my guitars only using a tuning fork with sound"A". What I'm saying is, there are a lit of music lovers use room/speaker/avr readings and graphs, I use my ears. I don't deny usefulness of readings and graphs, but after that I still would fine-tune it by my ear.

 

[lovinthehd]

No, it does not. I do not have an instant switching ability between the amp and AVR. That is why I said: "I did the best I could" and I will do the same comparison between integrated and amp only setups. "Some musicians tune their string instruments with electronic tuners for every string, every note. When I played piano, we had a professional piano smith tuning our piano with just a tuning fork sound "A". And he tuned the whole piano using his ears. I participated in this process and heard all the divination I sounds. I tune my guitars only using a tuning fork with sound"A". What I'm saying is, there are a lit of music lovers use room/speaker/avr readings and graphs, I use my ears. I don't deny usefulness of readings and graphs, but after that I still would fine-tune it by my ear.

It's just a poor method is all and really doesn't tell you a lot due long switching times and not even being level matched.and even the sighted thing can be compromised without control. It's not that its the best you could or not, it's just not a method that would produce reliable results. As to one vs the other being "out of tune" is pretty far out there....unless actually broken somehow.

 

[Trebdp83]

Gonna’ pick the bones clean on this f#%ker I guess.

 

[lovinthehd]

Gonna’ pick the bones clean on this f#%ker I guess.
View attachment 69265

We still need someone beating the crap out of the bones with a bat or something....full Office Space!

 

[Genchic]

It's just a poor method is all and really doesn't tell you a lot due long switching times and not even being level matched.and even the sighted thing can be compromised without control. It's not that its the best you could or not, it's just not a method that would produce reliable results. As to one vs the other being "out of tune" is pretty far out there....unless actually broken somehow.

I don't want to get too scientific with it. If I had a dedicated listening room, it would worth doing all the measurements, where I could make changes with room treatment, speaker positioning etc. In my case, I set both units to direct, to listen to unprocessed sound quality, the Loudness level is the same for each musical piece I use as the test, from (-40) to (-10). Depending on a song.
I did run Audyssey on Denon, and I didn't like the results. I had to do a lot of tweaking afterwards and still did not like it. It sounds much better in Direct or stereo mode.

 

[PENG]

No, it does not. I do not have an instant switching ability between the amp and AVR. That is why I said: "I did the best I could" and I will do the same comparison between integrated and amp only setups. "Some musicians tune their string instruments with electronic tuners for every string, every note. When I played piano, we had a professional piano smith tuning our piano with just a tuning fork sound "A". And he tuned the whole piano using his ears. I participated in this process and heard all the divination I sounds. I tune my guitars only using a tuning fork with sound"A". What I'm saying is, there are a lit of music lovers use room/speaker/avr readings and graphs, I use my ears. I don't deny usefulness of readings and graphs, but after that I still would fine-tune it by my ear.

Good to know you did try, and thanks! Tuning piano using tuning forks is very different, those are pure tones! It also is proof to you that frequency response is the main factor, you basically tune for frequency, not much else. Different pianos will have different harmonics, but how many/often concert goers would say different pianos in different concert halls sounded different to them, surely they sound different, but the overwhelming influence/enjoyment is the music itself, that's the focus. The frequency response between 20-20,000 Hz, the well established audible range for humans are typically ruler flat for almost all amps at the level of mid range AVRs and "separate" preamps and power amps.

So when their total harmonic distortions plus noise are also well below the widely accepted threshold of audibility (again, humans). With these two main metrics sorted, many decades ago, there aren't much left that could explain why people hear those differences (so claimed..), other than biases of all kinds, and of course Placebo effects and that's why our respected PhDs in the field stressed the need for DBT!!, without that, experts like Dr. Floyd Toole don't care what we think/hear.

It's all well understood science, the understanding of which by scientists/engineers, under things like coid, viruses, has not changed for decades. To save time, effort, and money, the sooner hobbyists focus on values based on features, practicality factors such as space, weight, aesthetic, and output capabilities (for amps), the better they can just focus on enjoying the music and movie sound tracks lol..

 

[Genchic]

Good to know you did try, and thanks! Tuning piano using tuning forks is very different, those are pure tones! It also is proof to you that frequency response is the main factor, you basically tune for frequency, not much else. Different pianos will have different harmonics, but how many/often concert goers would say different pianos in different concert halls sounded different to them, surely they sound different, but the overwhelming influence/enjoyment is the music itself, that's the focus. The frequency response between 20-20,000 Hz, the well established audible range for humans are typically ruler flat for almost all amps at the level of mid range AVRs and "separate" preamps and power amps.

So when their total harmonic distortions plus noise are also well below well accepted below the threshold of audibility (again, humans). With these two main metrics sorted, many decades ago, there aren't much left that could explain why people hear those differences (so claimed..), other than biases of all kinds, and of course Placebo effects and that's why our respected PhDs in the field stressed the need for DBT!!, without that, experts like Dr. Floyd Toole don't care what we think/hear.

It's all well understood science, the understanding of which by scientists/engineers, under things like coid, viruses, has not changed for decades. To save time, effort, and money, the sooner hobbyists focus on values based on features, practicality factors such as space, weight, aesthetic, and output capabilities (for amps), the better they can just focus on enjoying the music and movie sound tracks lol..

Absolutely right. Enjoying the music is the bottom line, enjoying a good quality music is a plus, and privilege of just a small percentage of people. At 1st: you have to hear the difference in quality, "there are lots of people who are satisfied with their music coming out of their iPhones/Samsungs. 2nd: you have to have finances to do the best what you can... and willingness to spend your hard earned money on a piece of audio equipment vs a better watch or a diamond ring for your wife.
Tuning any instruments is not just tuning pure frequencies, you're tuning harmonics as well. After you tune strings individually, you play chords and fine tuning the strings that they sound in chords right. If you cannot get harmonics right, you start replacing strings, with new ones or to get your satisfactory results with different kind and/or even materials. That is what I'm going through in my search for a better sound in my stereo setup. Only it is much cheaper and quicker to replace a string in a guitar vs auditioning different amplifiers and speakers.

 

[lovinthehd]

Absolutely right. Enjoying the music is the bottom line, enjoying a good quality music is a plus, and privilege of just a small percentage of people. At 1st: you have to hear the difference in quality, "there are lots of people who are satisfied with their music coming out of their iPhones/Samsungs. 2nd: you have to have finances to do the best what you can... and willingness to spend your hard earned money on a piece of audio equipment vs a better watch or a diamond ring for your wife.
Tuning any instruments is not just tuning pure frequencies, you're tuning harmonics as well. After you tune strings individually, you play chords and fine tuning the strings that they sound in chords right. If you cannot get harmonics right, you start replacing strings, with new ones or to get your satisfactory results with different kind and/or even materials. That is what I'm going through in my search for a better sound in my stereo setup. Only it is much cheaper and quicker to replace a string in a guitar vs auditioning different amplifiers and speakers.

You'll do far more with your speakers/room as far as how it affects the sound rather than the electronics. The electronics are not musical instruments.

 

[Genchic]

You'll do far more with your speakers/room as far as how it affects the sound rather than the electronics. The electronics are not musical instruments.

Yes, and no. There are too many things in electronics may affect sound, besides the room and speakers, which are the most essential to the sound. Different phono preamplifiers can dramatically affect a turntable sound, they are electronics. I prefer Arcam phono preamp to Denon, and if you use some cheap Chinese preamp, it will not give you a good sound at all. Plus, the Arcam SA30 has a dissent MC phono preamp built in, and Denon only has MM. I truly belive that different amps give you different sounds. I experienced it in my years when I played in different bands using different amps for our microphones and guitars. I've had 4 different amps in my home stereo system: Onkyo, and 2 different Denons and now I'm test driving the Arcome, they all have their personal sound signature. Eventhough the difference is not that critical, but there is a difference that I can hear, and it persuade me to the sound improvement.

 

[lovinthehd]

Yes, and no. There are too many things in electronics may affect sound, besides the room and speakers, which are the most essential to the sound. Different phono preamplifiers can dramatically affect a turntable sound, they are electronics. I prefer Arcam phono preamp to Denon, and if you use some cheap Chinese preamp, it will not give you a good sound at all. Plus, the Arcam SA30 has a dissent MC phono preamp built in, and Denon only has MM. I truly belive that different amps give you different sounds. I experienced it in my years when I played in different bands using different amps for our microphones and guitars. I've had 4 different amps in my home stereo system: Onkyo, and 2 different Denons and now I'm test driving the Arcome, they all have their personal sound signature. Eventhough the difference is not that critical, but there is a difference that I can hear, and it persuade me to the sound improvement.

A phono stage isn't that difficult. MC being more demanding perhaps. Production amps, particularly tubed and driven into distortion deliberately of course would have a sound. You don't want to add to that on reproduction, though. I think you just have poor comparison methodology myself.

 

[Genchic]

A phono stage isn't that difficult. MC being more demanding perhaps. Production amps, particularly tubed and driven into distortion deliberately of course would have a sound. You don't want to add to that on reproduction, though. I think you just have poor comparison methodology myself.

Perhaps, you're right, I try to send a point across, we have different hearing ability. What some people can hear, others don't even know those sounds exist. Good example will be how oriental people "now descrimination" don't have sound "Ch" they hear it as "ck" they say "switch" as "swick" I worked with Vietnamese and Chinese people and this is how they speak, because this is how they hear American people speak. In their language the dont have that sound, and this is why they dont hear it, and dont prononce it right. If I say I hear the difference and other people don't hear it, it doesn't mean there is no difference, all it means is that that person doesn't hear it. The most reviling musical piece I use in my tests is "Romeo and Juliet," Dance of Knites" played by London Symphony Orkestra, conducted by Gergiev. In the beginning a snare drum is playing right into my face in the middle of the stage. It shows a good amp. a snare drum is muffled and barely heard, it means the system is not so good. This particular part of the ballet also has a big frequency range, good bass.

 

[arberda2]

It's going to be needed to be replaced in a few years anyways. Always new formats and features coming out.

Kodi​