Clipping does it bad!

Oldwriter

Hello, hello, great Forum Helpers! I write this with red face and high hopes. As to the Great speaker distortion problem: ahem, well, this is what happened.
I was noodling around with the speakers (again) hoping for better sound - and suddenly, into my aging and probably thicker-than-normal head pooped a Grand Thought!
While my surround speakers (wired from wall, over the attic and down the opposing wall) had Monster Cable - the MAIN SPEAKERS DID NOT! I was, as the politicians say: "shocked and dismayed!" Why had I not noticed this horrible error?
Well - fortunately, I'd purchased some new Monster XP cable, and thought to myself (nobody else cared) "will this do as most everybody says it will do - help my sound?"
Unrolled requisit lengths - put gold banana plugs on amplifier end, bare wires on speaker end - and installed.
I know, I know - I WANTED TO HEAR BETTER SOUND. Well, the psychological points aside, I actually DID hear better sound! After another glass of wine, the sound was even better! GRIN
No - really - the new wiring did seem to help. Now if y'all are reading this with skeptical minds, please tell me I'm full of male cattle manure. However - I'm hoping for some educated responses such as: "it helped my system, too."
If y'all are even reading this - I'd love to hear from you who have given me such help and hope. THANX ---LR

F1nut

Wire does make a difference, no question about it. I'm glad you decided to try some out.

Oldwriter

Yo - F1Nut - thanks for the get-back. It appears that the Monster XP is 16-gauge - seems smaller than the (blush) 14-gauge electrical wire I was using. Would even larger Monster or other cable help even more? Hope springs eternal. LR

F1nut

Yo....LOL, I think you've had enough wine for the night.

I'm not a fan of Monster cable, but it is better than generic cable. There are many cable manufacturers out there, some work better than others with related gear. My personal preference is MIT, but don't you need to get a new receiver first?

Oldwriter

Yes, sir - I DO need that new receiver, but my wife says I first need the last of three crowns. At a thousand bucks each, the stereo has to take "back seat" for awhile. The wires SEEM to help, and they're here, and affordable at the moment. Sigh. Thanx for caring. LR

danger boy

but did the new Monster wire. help with the distortion problem? or just improve the sound on your fronts?

so now you don't have anymore distortion or your distortion now sounds better than ever?

scottnbnj

Originally posted by Oldwriter
While my surround speakers (wired from wall, over the attic and down the opposing wall) had Monster Cable - the MAIN SPEAKERS DID NOT! LR

this is good news. finding ways to enjoy what you have beats the daylights out of listening over and over to the things that your gear doesn't do well and getting heartburn over it. maybe, stick with baroque until this is settled.

until then, you might also hear slight improvement by getting rid of the stock jumpers, either by making your own with a few inches of your monster cable or bi-wiring w/ another run of monster.

i can't say what would happen with your kenwood and rti's, but with lsi9's bi-wired with just another run of acoustic research 16 guage oxygen free, i did hear slight improvement(lsi9/carver receiver/slightly better than dirt cd player).

since i didn't bother changing the jumpers before bi-wiring, i can't say that upgrading the jumper wouldn't do the same thing. though, not knowing a thing about the mechanics, just having a larger pipe could make sense of the types of changes i am hearing.

also, i say "slight" not knowing your listening (and/or drinking) habits. what i heard would be a major benefit for active listeners who sit near their speakers, massage the sweetspot and focus on dissection of minute details. though, i believe, for listening while wandering around the house looking for corkscrews, writing bills or admiring sunsets,..the difference, at very best, would be slight.

for sure, if you ~did~ hear a difference in your cables, you're a candidate for the next step. if nothing else, it will give you something to do other than listening to screeching.

)

Oldwriter

Had to laugh at the last posting, guys - and I'll have to admit I never THOUGHT about the jumpers, assuming that "gold-plated bars" would be fine - at least Polk thinks so! I could try a short length of 12-gauge Monster cable. . .
Drinking habits directly related to amount of screech and distortion heard in speakers - California wineries must love me! G R I N.
As of now, the RTi6s sound a BIT better - and I'm still tweaking the setup. As to listening habits - for jazz and classical I tend to wander, sip, and admire sunsets. For opera and chamber music, I tend to sit and get immersed in the sound. Guess my Gemini horoscope fits, eh?
Anyway - thanks to all for the help! Larry R

scottnbnj

Originally posted by Oldwriter
I never THOUGHT about the jumpers, assuming that "gold-plated bars" would be fine

i don't know. folks say it makes a difference. personally, i just think the setup easily lends itself to error aside from any straight forward sonic signature differences. the side of the jumper with the hole, i have no problem with but the side with the spade bends and distorts easily if overtightened, which ihb could lead to a poor connection.

)

Oldwriter

Hmmm. . . just didn't think of that. Will take speakers away from their stands and look closely - but I doubt that Polk would put anything except quality connections on, would they? Then again, there's always a "weak spot" in most products. Do you really think that, say, 12-gauge jumpers would be any better? I'm afraid I'm dealing with centimeter-growth here, but maybe I'm wrong (hey, I was wrong in, um, 1973 also! GRIN) LR

Oldwriter

Hey, gang - did another bit of surgery today - replaced the old low-end Monster Cable digital optical cable from CD player to receiver - and whadda you know! My CDs sounded better - more mid and low-range and though the distortion still drives me nuts, the overall sound improved markedly.
Is this possible? Or have I (again) dipped too deeply into the pool of grape-squeezings. Hmmm. . .
Even my "super-problem" CD - London 421315-2 - analog-to-digital master of Puccini arias - well, it sounded ALMOST decent!
OK - I think the cable change improvements are all in my head, but a tiny part of me wants to believe that it helped. Old cable crimped, or bent? End caps somehow marred?
Anyway - I'm working! And until I get that pie-in-the-sky new receiver, I'll just plug along. Any comments, acid or otherwise, are always appreciated! Thanx - Larry R

PolkWannabie

IMHO the best way to objectively tell whether or not any of this stuff is of value is to have a friend over and have him switch the cables and/or interconnects while you listen and/or vice versa so you aren't "wanting" some particular set up to sound better.

Oldwriter

No close friends - but I had the "ultimate critic" take a listen, and she allowed as how the music sounded, in her words: "fuller, and like you could hear the individual instruments." She, like me, likes opera and chamber music, and she - UNLIKE ME - has VERY good ears. (but then, she's MUCH younger!!!shhhhh) So - though I want it to sound better, she came into the room and pronounced it better, before she knew that I'd changed out the cables.
Bummer that all our neighbors listen to Country or Easy Listening, and thus would have no idea what I'm even talking about! Thank Goodness y'all do! GRIN LR

Willow

I find it a bit odd that you thought the 100w receiver sounded better......there is not much diff between 100w and 85w........there may have been other factors but 15w wont (I don't think) make it sound better....funny i went from 16awg monster to HD 12awg.....I found the HD much better than monster

F1nut

It's not the watts, but what's behind them.

Oldwriter

The old brain strains - but what I'm hearing from y'all, from Polk, and from my (respected) wife is this: cables make the difference, amplifier specs make the difference, speaker placement makes the difference, and - last and maybe least - people make the difference in what they perceive as "good sound."
Yes, I've still got the distortion - yes, I'm working on it - yes I deeply appreciate ALL your comments!
So - do I go out and get from Home Depot some of their el-cheapo 12-gauge "speaker wire?" Who knows - it may, indeed "sound" better than the Monster Cable 16-gauge stuff. Hey, I'm not snobbish about this - if K-Mart sells a product that works better - I'm there! (welllll, I may be a BIT snobbish about the type of music I listen to - sigh)
OK - still working, and listening to you all - gratefully!!!! Will post more when or if I make any further changes. THANX!!!! LR

gregure

Would have posted on private message, but they won't let me send one so long.
Larry,
Glad to hear things are improving for you without too many expenses. As far as cables go, I'm glad your new optical creates an improvement. If you read a lot of threads on this forum, you may find the one about optical vs. coaxial. Many here on the forum feel that coaxial is better for music than optical. The coax is also cheaper. I personally have not noticed a difference, but I use optical for movies and coax for music so as not to overuse either cable.
Ahh, the glories, or horrors, of recorded orchestral/opera music. Even older recordings can sound marvelous on a great system, but a great system will also expose the flaws of older recordings more prominently. For example, Karajan's "The Planets" with the Vienna Phil on London sounds incredible with my system, but I certainly notice the analog hiss more during the quieter passages. Of course, opera is the most inconsistent in terms of quality from one recording to the next. Decca and EMI seem to remaster their pre-digital recordings pretty well, but occasionally (especially with Decca) you will get a lot of crackling or distortion in the recording itself when voices get loud and high. I think the majority of my opera recordings are from the digital age, but I certainly have plenty from before then. I do a little research with recordings most times, to make sure it is a good performance and a good recording. Despite the variable results, it is still the most rewarding music I know of, and certainly worth the risks of the occasional poor recording. I've been reading your progress on the thread, and will continue to check your updates. Good luck!
Greg

Oldwriter

Hi, gang: Had a chance to listen to a comparable sound system at a friend's house last night - had the RTi10s and a Sony receiver that he's NUTS about! So - we listened to some opera, and some string quartets, and an Ashkenazy Mozart piano concerto, then Renee Fleming's "The Beautiful Voice" CD.
Well - I came away VERY impressed! Clean and clear, and from what he said, the price (he paid $415) is very right.
Hadn't considered Sony, but in checking, this is part of their new "hi-end" series - and seems to be getting fine reviews.
Sooooo - any thoughts here? It's one I can afford (really want the $999 NAD) and it would seem a good deal.
Thanx in advance - but please be kind! GRIN Larry R

Oldwriter

Yo - the old brain is numb! The Sony is model STR-DA1000ES. Is the brain the second thing to go? Hmmm. . . LR

F1nut

You should check this out before buying one of those.

http://clubpolk.polkaudio.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=19146

Personally I'd steer clear of those new Sony's. The older Sony ES gear is pretty good.

Oldwriter

OK - taking any and ALL suggestions and comments here, and welcome all.
Personally, the 1000ES receiver I heard yesterday with a pair of RTi10s in a rather large (25x36) living room - well, they sounded great, and the amp was never turned up more than about a third of the way. Very nice opera and classical presentation.
With my little RTi6s (and soon a subwoofer?) it would seem that 100 watts/channel is quite enough for me and my 16x24 living room. My wife won't hear of any larger speakers - but she did allow as how the RTi6s look very nice! (whew!)
Before we down-sized several years ago I had Carver amps/receivers and big Kef speakers - with enough wattage to light up Chicago (where I worked). That was when I was "gainfully employed," and in need of good gear to review music. Now, just need good, CLEAN power so I can browse through my 1,000-CD collection at will. And keep my wife happy with no "stereo-clutter" as she puts it. (sigh) Larry R

scottnbnj

Originally posted by Oldwriter
OK - taking any and ALL suggestions and comments here, and welcome all.

sorry i don't know anything about the sony larry, but if you're still looking for tweaks,.. i don't know how your gear is set up but if there is any chance that your cd player is getting rattled by your rti's or resonates at the same frequency as the vocals, maybe something to dampen the vibrations or isolate the player might help.

)

Oldwriter

Yo - thanks for the reply - and the GOOD suggestion. The RTi6s are on 16-inch wood stands, spiked thru carpet to cement floor, about three feet away from the equipment cabinet, thus, probably no chance of speaker vibration causing the trouble - BUT - to make sure, I have set the CD player on four pads of "isofoam" material. It's closed-cell foam often used in the broadcast business (which I retired from). I'll see if that makes any difference. Appreciate it! Larry R

Bob F.

If your speakers sound very thin and tinny then pehaps you should look at how your tone controls are set and if your receiver does in-fact have proper sound controls (bass, treble, etc.) as an example: about 3 years ago I purchased a Sony DA777ES receiver
and when I hooked up all my speakers to it, it sounded extremely harsh, extremely bright and tinny and it wasn't the speakers it was HOW this receiver "sound contore" was set up (bass, treble, etc.) and I almost put it back in the box and sent it back. It was the harshes sounding piece of crap I have ever heard in my live. Well, I calmed down, thoroughly read the manual and I tweeked the "hell" out of it, changed the tone controlls, roll over points (it has a built in equalizer) etc. Well, after about 3 weeks, it sounded pretty good but not quite right. I further tweeked it throughout the months that I have had it and it sounds great now.
I was running Polk RT7's which are a "darn" great speaker but now I'm using Polk LSi 9's (mains), Polk LSiC (Center Channel), and Polk LSif/x (Surrounds) and the Sony DA777ES is doing okay. It's built to handle a 4 ohm load at extremely low distortion but again, this Sony, out of the box, could make ANY speaker sound like CRAP until you heavily treak it.
As for the Polk LSi's.....I am now basking in 5.1 and DTS HEAVEN. Nice, real nice indeed Polk.
Thank you Mathew!

Oldwriter

Wellll - - - I don't know anything about the Sony DA777ES, so I can't really compare it with my Kenwood 309. I don't have equalizer values - just bass and treble, which are usually set at flat. I've tried various settings, but the "thin" sound remains at all of them. I hate to "tweak" tone controls too much - I figure if a receiver is good, and the speakers are good, then flat settings ought to sound good. Too naive? Well, maybe so. . .
This week, I'm taking the RTi6s "out for a spin" to a local HiFi shop, to play them on various receivers. Will post the results later in the week. (and no, I won't put a single scratch on those beautiful cherry cabinets!!!!)
The very strange thing is that sometimes, on some kinds of music, the speakers sound great! It's when I play opera or orchestra with heavy strings - and at higher volume - that the distortion kicks in. I'm still of a mind that the receiver is putting out distortion at higher levels, and with complex sounds such as voice and strings. Simple piano or single-instrument recordings sound fine. (again, until high volume comes, when the top notes get ragged) Quite a frustrating experience. . .
As others have strongly urged, I'm running the speakers many hours a day - to see if "breaking them in" helps. Some say yes, others say it's hooey. Sigh.
Another glass of wine will surely help! Larry R

dcarlson

If you're happy with the surround duties of your Kenwood and if it has pre-outs for your fronts. I'd like to suggest getting an integrated amplifier instead of a new receiver. You'll get much better performance in 2 channel with an integrated (all depending on the quality of integrated of course. ) All you need to do afterwords is hook up the front preouts to an integrated and a set the integrated's volume at 12:00 and it then becomes an amp for your fronts while running in surround. That was my setup until I dismantled my surround and have gone 2 channel. It works great.

Oldwriter

Sorry - the Kenwood is a bit more "basic" than that - no pre-outs on it - plus, I'm afraid the distortion problem is something I will never "kill" unless I dump the Kenwood and go with a Denon, NAD, Onkyo or Sony 2000ES. stuck in a ditch, fer shore!
Thanx for the idea, though!!! Larry R.

Bob F.

Old Writer,
I general have bad results using all of the sound contour controls (Bass, Treble, equalizer, etc.) set to a "null" position (off). This is what had happened with my Sony DA777ES out of the box. Every control was set to a "null" (off or no effect) position and it sounded extremely bright, tinny and extremely harsh. It also sounded terrible playing CD's. Again, I had to tweak the "hell" out of it and it wasn't easy. I even own a pair of old (1985) Klipsch Forte Speakers and the untweaked, out of the box Sony DA777ES made these Forte's sound like they were worth about $29.00 per pair. Bad, real bad. Now, I own a pair of 15" definitive subwoofers because I don't expect any powerful, extremely deep bass out of ANY bookshelf speakers but, even having a pair of 15" Definitives, setting all my contour sound controls on "null" (off), makes my system sound extremely bright and tinny regardless of the speakers I use. The LSi are outstanding speakers. They are very well balanced but you need to do what I did and experiment with tweaking the sound contour (bass, treble, etc.) until you feel that the sound is right for you. I had a tough time with my Sony but in the end, it was worth the pain of tweaking it and listening to it for a few days and tweaking it again and again and again. It was a major "pain in the ****" but I like it now. It sounds great on music versus DVD films. Be careful. I had a receiver that I paid $300.00 for and it could not carry a 4-ohm load and the distortion was quite audible. The only reason why I purchased the Sony DA777ES is because it can carry a 4-ohm load at extremely low distortion BUT many Sony receivers CAN NOT carry a 4-ohm load and the distortion is quite high as well. What you could do is to set your receiver at a reasonable low setting and try tweaking the sound controls and see what difference it makes. As for any distortion, that may be a characteristic of the power amp in your receiver not being able to handle a 4-ohm load. Experiment and see what happens.

Dennis Gardner

Larry,

Try turning down the bass tone control to nothing and listening for the distortion on the highs with your Kenwood driving just the high frequencies at precisely the same volume setting that produces the distortion in full range use.

If this lowers your distortion clipping, your short term answer may be a powered sub to take the bass off your receiver. It could be that driving the full frequency range with the Kenwood, may be too taxing for it.


Just a thought,

Dennis

Oldwriter

Yo - good Polk Forum folk ("Polk folk?" nah) Thanks again for comments and suggestions - really appreciate all.
Yes, I've tried all sorts of tone control settings - but one setting for FM does not work for CD/DVD - so I have to change. Also, turning bass down to minus whatever still gives me distortion on vocal and strings at even slightly elevated volume.
The speakers are on - being "run in," and I constantly change tone controls just to see what's happening. Boosting bass muddies the sound. reducing treble on CDs is something I automatically do, anyway, as I'm one who considers all CDs too tinny and bright. Running the speakers generally at minus 2 treble and flat bass - but I boost 2 to 4 db on some music and movies. Gets confusing, eh?
With all the tweaks, I still believe that the Kenwood just isn't up to my music - and today I'm going out to a high-end audio store to do a lot of comparing and listening. Will post results, if my ears don't give out on me!! GRIN
The specs for the Kenwood read: "100 watts per channel minimum RMS, both channels driven, at 8 ohms, from 40 to 20kHz, no more than 0.7% total harmonic distortion." And I run the Kenwood on stereo (music) about 90% of the time.
It should sound better, but may have developed a problem over the years (bought in 1999). Sigh. We'll see. . . Larry R