System Synergy

Serendipity

Just got done experimenting with acoustic treatments, and the biggest difference I noticed was in the vocals. Clearer, more distinguishable, and separated from the music. However, I didn't notice any difference in the highs. Looks like more experimentation will be necessary.

I have to say - acoustic treatments changed the sound of the room, for example listening to an answering machine or talking on a speakerphone sounds different. But the sonic signature of the speakers is still roughly the same, not sure if that's to be expected or what not.

Also can't decide on the sub's phase setting. At 180' there is more output, but it is definitely muddy. At 0' there is less output, but the sound is crisp and the transition point between the sub and speakers is crystal clear. I have it set to 0' right now.

Face

That's because that room treatment you're playing with is next to useless, build or buy something better and the difference will be more substantial.

As for setting your sub, do you have a SPL meter?

tonyb

Have to agree that the room is playing an important role for you. Have a question or 2 though.

You have a ton of gear in your sig, is all of this hooked up to the Def Techs ? Does the sound ever get warmer depending on what source your using ? Have you thought about different cableing ? Quality room treatments as Face suggested is a good idea but I'm thinking in the end, you may just not like those particular speaks. Some suggestions have been given for warmer sounding speakers, anything in the British made side of things will be a tad more laid back. Sonus Faber is also a good one to look into. No shortage of warmer sounding speakers out there for sure.

Also, as I have found myself, as you age you become more sensitive to higher frequencies so I understand where your comming from. With that in mind, Legacy speakers have worked well for me, no listening fatigue at all. Everything matters in the change though, so maybe it might be more prudent to look at your sources, cableing, room, before kicking the Def Techs down the road.

Unless your all jacked up on Mountain Dew to go speaker shopping....thats another story.

Serendipity

tonyb wrote: »

Have to agree that the room is playing an important role for you. Have a question or 2 though.

You have a ton of gear in your sig, is all of this hooked up to the Def Techs ? Does the sound ever get warmer depending on what source your using ?

Yes, sources like cassette tapes, XM Radio, video tapes (both VCR's), even my lowly 80GB iPod!! are warm.

But on high quality sources, DVD-Audio for example, or ordinary CD's, the sound is more fatiguing. Yes, I have many sources hooked up so I can pop a CD into another player (even one of the PCs) but the sound is close. Face said my rig is "too complicated," but I like the flexibility of trying different source material on different machines. I have noticed subtle differences in sound, even amongst the game consoles!

If a CD doesn't sound good on a particular player, I just pop it into the Toshiba HD-DVD (for example) and get more detail. For a more laid back sound, I use the Onkyo.

tonyb wrote: »

Have you thought about different cableing ?

Yes. And I found that on some players, optical sounds worse than analog (because the device has a high-quality DAC). For example, the HP Digital Entertainment Center z560 has a dedicated sound card that sounds quite good on most source material.

You can follow my cable progress here:
http://www.polkaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?128503-And-it-begins

Dawgfish

If you are open to bookshelfs like you were saying, I suggest putting the LSiM703s on your short list. They are very smooth and laid back in the highs, while retaining detail. I love mine. They could be just what you are looking for.

Serendipity

The LSiM703s are bright to my ears. Too much tweeter "glare."

Joe08867

I also think the LSiM's and the LSi's are a bit bright. But that has a lot to do with the type of amp on them. I have heard them on B&K and on a Jolida tube amp and they sounded awesome without the glare or fatigue.

The weak spot in your system might be your receiver. Do you run separate amps for anything?

Serendipity

Joe08867 wrote: »

The weak spot in your system might be your receiver. Do you run separate amps for anything?

No, see post # 1. When I had an Onkyo receiver, I hooked the pre-outs to an Adcom amp and it sounded worse than the receiver alone. Too harsh, bloated, and "busy" sounding.

steveinaz

I absolutely agree about simplifying. All that "crosstalk" can't be good, not to mention I can't imagine how you don't have a ground-loop hum with that many components connected. Simplicity is key. CDP-->Rec-->Speakers.

FWIW, if you were considering 901's, I'd recommend a minimum of 250watts/rms @ 8ohms. I ran mine with 600watts/rms, and they opened up nicely. Get them at least 8 feet apart, a minimum of 3ft from any corner, and about 9" off the backwall from the apex of the rear of the speaker. Make sure to run the EQ in a processor loop, or "record out" connection (line level), never run it in line between pre and amp (although you can do this). The EQ works much better at line level. Keep cables to the EQ as short as possible. Since the 901 tops out at 13kHz, don't be afraid to use a little treble boost on the EQ. This limitation on high frequencies is also why 901's don't suffer from digital glare. THIS is the core of the 901's popularity---they sound the same with everything. Now that makes audiophiles cringe--but the average person (or treble sensitive people) like this "sameness" consistency in the sound. 901's are predicatble--and predictable SELLS.

Traditional high-end speaker=good recordings sound GREAT.
Bose 901=everything sounds "good" nothing sounds great.

Serendipity

steveinaz wrote: »

I absolutely agree about simplifying. All that "crosstalk" can't be good, not to mention I can't imagine how you don't have a ground-loop hum with that many components connected. Simplicity is key. CDP-->Rec-->Speakers.

I guess when I see the back panel of a high-end receiver, I'm tempted to use all the inputs:

Below is a Denon AVR-5805, I have the 5800, similar back panel...

steveinaz

Good lord, that's like an audio control center! LOL

Seriously though, I don't mean to be a dick. It's just a lot easier to keep a system quiet when it's simplified. I think you just have an unusual sensitivity to treble--I still think the easiest, most effective fix is different speakers. Look for something featuring high quality, soft dome/fabric/paper tweeters (SEAS, Scanspeak, Vifa, etc).

dBx used to make signal routers for multiple sources, if you can find one--a good solution could be to connect all but your best source into this, then connect your best source into the receiver directly. This way, during critical listening you could even disconnect the dBx unit completely--if you wanted to.

Serendipity

No, I understand completely where you are coming from.

I unplugged some of my unused sources, such as the VCRs, so this is where I am at:

steveinaz

Is that a "switching" power supply plugged into your receivers outlet? That can be real noisy to other components....

Serendipity

Not a switching power supply, just a fan power supply. I know, it's a mess back there, even with a good number of components disconnected, but it was much worse before. I literally went to remove some cables and like 6 other cables got pulled along with it because they were tangled...

Anyways, thanks for all the help so far!!

Dawgfish

Joe08867 wrote: »

I also think the LSiM's and the LSi's are a bit bright. But that has a lot to do with the type of amp on them. I have heard them on B&K and on a Jolida tube amp and they sounded awesome without the glare or fatigue.

The weak spot in your system might be your receiver. Do you run separate amps for anything?

Bingo. I'm running mine with a tube pre and a tube/ss hybrid amp. There is not even a hint of harshness.

Erik Tracy

Joe08867 wrote: »

I also think the LSiM's and the LSi's are a bit bright.

Wha??????

This is a first - never before have I read that the LSi's are bright.

Laid back, warm, sleepy under the sheets is all I have ever heard from here (and my own experience with LSi7s which I owned for awhile).

PolkClyde

AsSiMiLaTeD wrote: »

I like bananas[/QUOTE

Now that's saying it all... to each his/her own.

Serendipity

Erik Tracy wrote: »

Wha??????

This is a first - never before have I read that the LSi's are bright.

Laid back, warm, sleepy under the sheets is all I have ever heard from here (and my own experience with LSi7s which I owned for awhile).

They were bright to me, at least with my CDs.

I guess the biggest mistake I made in this hobby was buying stuff on different formats instead of building one large collection (a large vinyl collection, for example). This resulted in connecting so many different players to the system and having a huge rat's nest of wires. Concerts were purchased as VHS tapes and DVD's, music is on cassette tapes, CDs, DVD-Audio, and 96/24 discs, then I have some iTunes (legal) downloads on the PC.

tonyb

For you 901 fans....over priced though.

http://chicago.craigslist.org/chc/ele/2822235911.html

Serendipity

tonyb wrote: »

For you 901 fans....over priced though.

http://chicago.craigslist.org/chc/ele/2822235911.html

Haha, no way I am buying those... 901 Series VI is when they started looking nice, IMO.

I went to the Bose store in a local mall and they said I need to "special-order" the speakers and wait for the 901's to arrive? WTF? Apparently they don't have them in stock.

Dawgfish

Erik Tracy wrote: »

Wha??????

This is a first - never before have I read that the LSi's are bright.

Laid back, warm, sleepy under the sheets is all I have ever heard from here (and my own experience with LSi7s which I owned for awhile).

This was also the first time I've ever heard either the LSi or LSiM described as bright. I've got to believe what you are dealing with that is causing the brightness is the cds themselves, the source players, cables, using the reciever as amp/pre, etc. If you really want to get serious about a music only system, I think getting a good pre and seperate amp is eventually going to be the direction you want to head in. I know you tried the Adcom with your reciever and didn't like it, but that's not necesarily indicative of all amps. I myself and several others tend to find many Adcom amps to be a tad on the bright side. It sounds like a warmer amp like B&K or something with tubes would be much more to your liking. I also used to play my music through my avr and HT system. Eventually I went to a dedicated two channel system and the difference is like night and day. I can assure you that LSis or LSiMs played through a more neutral system are anything but bright. Having said all of that, everybody's ears our different and you may still find them bright. YMMV, but if you want to step up your music listening pleasure, running a good two channel pre and amp is going to be the direction you want to head in.

In the meantime, it sounds like you really like the Bose 901s, so as others have suggested, why not go with those with your current system. That may very well get you where you want to be.

Serendipity

Dawgfish wrote: »

I've got to believe what you are dealing with that is causing the brightness is the cds themselves, the source players, cables, using the reciever as amp/pre, etc.

Does anyone have the following CD's?

Phantom of the Opera
Sarah Brightman - Time to say Goodbye
Duffy - Rockferry

And do they sound bright on your system? These are the worst offenders for me right now.

Serendipity

Not really my type of music, but Adele - 21 / Set Fire to the Rain is unlistenable too.

Some others:
Sarah Brightman - Harem
Sarah Brightman - La Luna
Michelle Branch - Hotel Paper

steveinaz

Serendipity wrote: »

Haha, no way I am buying those... 901 Series VI is when they started looking nice, IMO.

I went to the Bose store in a local mall and they said I need to "special-order" the speakers and wait for the 901's to arrive? WTF? Apparently they don't have them in stock.

Series VI is also leaps & bounds better than the IV. If it hadn't been for the series VI, I would have never bought them. Far less distant sounding, more punch, better efficiency. The EQ was greatly improved as well.

cnh

Serendipity wrote: »

They were bright to me, at least with my CDs.

I guess the biggest mistake I made in this hobby was buying stuff on different formats instead of building one large collection (a large vinyl collection, for example). This resulted in connecting so many different players to the system and having a huge rat's nest of wires. Concerts were purchased as VHS tapes and DVD's, music is on cassette tapes, CDs, DVD-Audio, and 96/24 discs, then I have some iTunes (legal) downloads on the PC.

Serendipity wrote: »

I think most speakers sound a little too forward-sounding and bass heavy to my tastes.

The only speaker that I truly liked the sound of on Classical/Opera/NewAge was the Bose 901, I was told at PolkFest that the 901's really need to be set up properly and that most impressions of the Bose 901 are due to poor setup (aka no highs or lows, etc.)

I really like the sound of 901's, despite what people have to say about them.

Get some "tubes" in that mix. Bright CDs are not necessarily your speakers or even amps.

I run some Adcoms...they are not really "bright" but neutral. Want them to sound better with CDs. Whip a Jolida or other decent quality tube CDP on them and you're good! Or get a Yaqin tube buffer in there.

Or, you could just get a set of Monitor 7As with the peerless. There is NO way they're going to sound bright to you or any other sane person.

LSis Bright! Well, that is possible on a cheaper or even moderately priced CDP. Those things bring out digital glare in most speakers.

Bose 901s? I spent quite a bit of time with those in a good listening room back in 1990 when I eventually bought my JBL L80Ts and the JBL L100ts bumped them out of the running (higher model above my means), while my JBLs could hang with the 901s no problems and had more 'detailed' highs due to that cutting edge (at the time) pure titanium dome!

901s probably sound "less" bright because they "bounce" their sound off so many many surfaces before they get to your ears that the sound is fairly "smeared". But if you like them, hey they're your ears.

I'd look to your CDP as the offending member, and though Denons are generally warm. Some of their digital processing can sound bright on some CDs. I've certainly experienced that with my Denon.

Have fun!

cnh

Serendipity

So I purchased a large rug and have it in the center of the room - you can view the updated pics in the other thread. There was a very slight difference in the sound, not "night and day" like I was expecting. I honestly think it is either a speaker issue, or a problem with the source or the CD's I am using.

I also re-read my manuals and didn't see anything about room treatments or acoustic panels. The Denon manual for the AVR-5800 spends numerous pages talking about speaker placement, with emphasis on carefully and properly placing the speakers, also connecting the speakers properly (in phase, for example), but not about room treatments.

I would think Definitive, or any speaker manufacturer for that matter, should include instructions on how to build, incorporate, or point out specific room treatments that are necessary for the best sound. It is a "tweak", for sure, just not sure why I am still hearing the same basic sound even after re-arranging furniture, adding expensive carpeting, etc...

Edit: The warmest sounding piece on CD's has to be the HP Digital Entertainment Center z560. Yes, I know it's a PC, but at $1800 I would assume it comes with a decent sound-card (and going by the fact that it has nice, quality RCA's on the audio output section). Most sound cards have a measly headphone jack on the output.

Joe08867

I felt the LSi's were very bright on my HT system. They sounded a thousand times better on my Exposure but they weren't what I was looking for. The LSiM's sound smoother but still a bit bright to me. Not nearly as bright as the RTi series but much brighter than SDA's or monitor series especially with the RD0 tweets.

I still think some of the issue is the receiver, there are more processors than any one piece should ever have in it. You would be so much better off with a scaled back pre and amp combo and your ears would thank you.

I listen to Phantom of the Opera as a testbed on my systems. It is anything but bright or shrill. A very good recording for really hearing the dynamics and listening for noise in a system.

steveinaz

Speaker placement instructions are about as useful as specifications. They work great in a controlled laboratory environment---but not much else. Use instructions as a broad guideline, but by all means experiment with alternatives. Try aiming the speakers straight forward (no toe-in); try spreading them farther apart. I always like a minimum of 8ft between stereo pairs (center-to-center). Maybe even try (cringe) cutting the treble a bit. But all of this is simply a compromise on what really needs to be done---different speakers.

One pitfall I have learned to avoid---the "Reference recording" approach. Here's why; excellent recordings tend to sound excellent on most everything. I would lean to a method where you run as much "average" recordings as possible, and judge from there--because lets face it, the vast majority of records are just average.

Face

Joe08867 wrote: »

I felt the LSi's were very bright on my HT system.

What on earth are you powering them with?

heiney9

LSi's are not bright. Look elsewhere for your issues. I have listened to all the LSi's extensively and even owned a pair running them off an Adcom 545. They were like butter, but I had a really good source, pe-amp and cables.

H9