constant non stereo imballance

everpress

danger boy wrote: »

Krazyz1, i too have been having trouble with left/right stereo imbalance. seems like every CD i listen to is heavy on either left or right. esp the Beatles remasters. I never used to have this problem.

then I played a track off of Fleetwood Mac remaster and it sounded in balance again... it's hit or miss with my 2ch SDA rig.

In my case.. I believe my integrated amp is the culprit. I'm not getting any signs from the amp that anything in wrong... like static or crackling.. but, when I work the balance knob left and right then press the CD select button a few times.. things seem to go back into balance on some CD's. but not the Beatles remasters.

So in my case... I think my amp is the problem. In the next few days i'll be removing that amp from the system and trying another amp. if I have the same problem with a different amp and pre amp combo.. then it's for me room acoustics or a possible bad interconnect.

if you have a second amp or a way to remove your current amp from the mix and try out another one.. i suggest that to you.

I think it's the Beatles mixes themselves... I keep feeling the main vocals are more right of center, and lower. But since it was consistent with them and not so much my other music (it is variable depending on who the hell is behind the mixing board, I think), I just figured it was a Beatles thing?

But I have noticed they still manage to fill the sound stage; center/ directly right of center= Vocals, one guitar, drums. Left of center= secondary guitar; sometimes small solos, piano/strings and backing vocals.

That's my ear on my rig... Of course, when set on 5 channel, everything seems balanced too, which is just another reason I think it's the way the Beatles recorded/mixed....

danger boy

agreed everpress.. the Beatles mix is way off to me.. very left or very right. on some songs you can hear the voice begin in the right ch and pan over to the left. i'm sure it was an "effect" done during mixing at the time.


I need to find me a mono audio signal on CD or one that I can burn to CD. Anyone know of a mono source, such as 100% tone?

F1nut

Al, the early Beatles were recorded in mono, so playing them back on a stereo rig is going to sound like what you're hearing.

everpress

F1nut wrote: »

Al, the early Beatles were recorded in mono, so playing them back on a stereo rig is going to sound like what you're hearing.

That would explain much... But why when remixing to stereo, did they leave things off center so much? Was it because of the equipment, or because instrument interference on vocal tracks?

I guess no one really knows... To me, it's not a bother. It might not be "correct" but it's a trait that seems signature, and I'm alright with that.

F1nut

They remastered, they did not remix any of the Beatles material. The original mono recordings were done on a 2 track tape, hence the left/right results on stereo playback.

Krazyz1

Mr. Danger boy. Go to Crutchfields web site they have single test cd's with TONS of stuff on them , but it is cheaper to buy the 5 disck set. I beleive the one disc does have a mono on it. I will check in to it. If it does , I will see if I can burn a copy and if I can I will contact you further on getting it to you. Some one earlier mentioned room treatments. I know what they are and look like. But how do you determine optimal place to put them?

reeltrouble1

hhmmmmmm..........so if Krazy were to stack two speakers in the middle both the Beatles remix and Steve Miller would be.......

Stuck in the Middle with You......

Al you seek a TT and appropriate records at 78 rpm for a mono source or set your pre to mono and it will down mix but cannot say if you will like it.........for you only if you need it I will give up the very first Polkfest pre featured at the Texas fest......a NAD 1130, I wasn't there but the pics dont lie, its got a mono setting and its got a fantastic TT circuit and its on the cheap to you.

RT1

jm1

Krazyz1,

How’s your experimentation proceeding? I am interested to find out if the suggestions have addressed your issue.

I made the comment regarding the subs you currently use as both the speakers and subs are -3dB rated at 30Hz. I use dual subs with an active crossover for my monitors to achieve a true full range sound.

Are you trying to extend the bass capabilities of your system with subs or trying to achieve a higher bass level than the speakers can provide? My intent was to make you identify what you are trying to achieve. Once this is realized, maybe these were the correct choice, maybe not.

EQs are a tool seldom utilized to benefit the sonic characteristics of the music within a room. When I see this, I always suggest going cold turkey for a period of time to reset your preferences. If after this period you still feel the need for additional EQ, hopefully it will not be as extreme as the original setting.

Regards.

reeltrouble1

jm1 wrote: »

Krazyz1,

I made the comment regarding the subs you currently use as both the speakers and subs are -3dB rated at 30Hz. I use dual subs with an active crossover for my monitors to achieve a true full range sound.

I have read two post today that left me smiling and believing the Audio Intelligence Quotient at CP is back on the rise, the above is one of them. If you are going to use subs for a music rig the stated advice is priceless.

RT1

everpress

Delete

everpress

jm1 wrote: »

I use dual subs with an active crossover for my monitors to achieve a true full range sound.

Wouldn't that make any vocals sound like the teacher from all the Charlie Brown cartoons?

mmadden28

**EDIT** Doh!!! I posted this before I realized there was a whole second page---sheesh--well since I already typed it all up-here is some redundant info for ya--Somebody correct me wheer I am wrong.

F1nut wrote: »

Ummm sorry, but that's called a wall of bad sound due to cancellation issues.

I've just seen this thread so coming into it late in the game, but +1000.

You've got frequency cancellations/phase issues, and the term I 've heard Polk CS mention anytime somebody wants to run two center channels together, a comb filtering issue (or something like that).

You should also consider the subs as well. If they aren't crossed over perfectly to blend with the speakers, wherever the sub bass frequencies overlap, they could cancel each other out. Magnify that issue with two subs, and super magnify that with two subs and twice the fronts. :eek::eek:

WAF means nothing if it doesn't sound good (how a wife would approve two sets of speakers up front is beyond me).

Even if its only temp--and I apologize if this has been suggested already, disconnect both subs, and one set of speakers. Move the chair out as Face mentioned, and see if that makes a big difference. If so and you insist on having that setup, start with just one sub, and get them crossed over correctly and then take it from there. Process of elimination-simple as that--start simple.

If you want something visual to show you if the room or cancellation is your issue, then try RoomEQ Wizard (free from Home Theater Shack), very low cost solution (if you have a laptop and a Radio Shack SPK meter already then even less costly) to measure your room acoustics. Or if you know somebody with a Velo SMS-1 Sub EQ--borrow it.

I'd post more info on the Room EQ but I am in a rush-gotta run...

Good luck/

jm1

everpress wrote: »

Wouldn't that make any vocals sound like the teacher from all the Charlie Brown cartoons?

No. I don’t see any smiley faces so I will elaborate.

The active crossover is an external component like the one included in most subwoofers plate amps. This one is of very high quality and resides between the line level connection of the preamp and power amp. It’s currently configured to have 3rd order low-pass and 1st order high-pass crossover slopes at 80Hz. The low-pass is sent to the subs and the high-pass is sent to the monitors.

The sub output levels have been matched to the monitors. Most importantly, the sub’s CONTINUOUS PHASE has been adjusted to properly integrate the two sound distinct sources (sub and monitor) together. IMO, continuous phase is absolutely necessary for subs in a two channel configuration. I wouldn’t use a sub without this adjustment.

If you have the skills and hardware configuration adjustments necessary to properly integrate subwoofers, it works extremely well at creating full range sound.

Krazyz1

Update: CHAIR and end table IN BARN. Things have been progressing S L O W . I HURT LIKE HELL. ROTATOR CUFF SURGERY IN AM on the 6th. Process of disconnecting Crown and going back to my Carver's. Seemed to be starting point of issues. EQ'S are OFF and I HATE the way it sounds but will be PATIENT. Got nothing else to do while recovering from surgery.As to refference on SUBS they need more break in time before making any adjustments futile. The purpose for the subs is to fill in any lacking in the low end of the A9's. Laugh all you want , I don't care , but I am a CERTIFIED VELODYNE SUB PRO. In class they they always say 2 subs , 4 max. and I don't feel it was based on a cash in theyre pocket scenerio I feel I have been given some competant advice at which I am trying to employ and is appreciated. I know I left the door open for ALOT of negativity and name calling, but the vast majority I felt were genuinly trying to give good advice. I have a PHONIC PAA6 RTA. I just wish I knew how to use it more compentely and could save my self some headaches. Any of you that have or have used a RTA and would like to offer some operating advice SHOUT LOUD. Or know of a web site in laymens terms that could be helpful would be open to that. I have plenty of test cd's that cover ANYTHING one might need.The input has been great!!!!

concealer404

^Where in Indiana are you located? If you're relatively close, i'd like to come take a look and see if i can help you out at all... I'm no pro, but i've spent hours upon hours tweaking my setup to great results. (In my opinion, of course)

everpress

jm1 wrote: »

I use my subs as subs.

Oooooohhhhh......

Now I get it.

jm1

everpress wrote: »

Oooooohhhhh......

Now I get it.

Glad you figured it out.

everpress

jm1 wrote: »

Glad you figured it out.

C'mon, don't get bent out of shape about it; seriously, I'm learning a lot here. I dumbed it down for me to show you what I was reading, not to poke fun at you or be offensive. If I' wrong, I'd rather know that then go about thinking I'm right and making mistakes (maybe costly ones).

In short: It was not my intent to offend.

Krazyz1

Mr. concealer404 . I live in Bristol. About 8 miles from MI BORDER. sT. rD 120 & 15 INTERSECT IN MY TOWN. cURRENTLY BETWEEN 20 & 120 BLOCKED OFF FOR ROAD CONSTRUCTION. **** can't type. The Percoset must be kicking in. LOL!

concealer404

Ah yeah.... that's far.

I do have friends in Bremen that i may be visiting soon, though. If i do that, i'll definitely let you know.

I'm on the south end of Indianapolis. If you're ever in the area, you're more than welcome to stop by, listen to some tunes, critique/drool as you feel necessary, drink a few beers, etc etc etc...

jm1

The purpose for the subs is to fill in any lacking in the low end of the A9's.

My point is that BOTH the speakers and subs have the same low end response. Both have the -3dB limit at 30Hz. If you are trying to produce below the 9’s lower limit (30Hz), these subs will not do it for you.

Yes, more subs are beneficial. Having more than one sub distributed throughout the room at certain locations helps to even out room modes.

When you get a chance, I am wondering how are the subs are connected.

1. Are you using one set of preamp line outputs directly to the amp inputs and the second set of preamp line outputs directly to the subs line level inputs?
2. Are you using the active crossover in the sub by having line level cables to the sub and cables from the sub line outputs to the amps inputs?
3. What do you have the subs crossover set to?
4. Speaker level connections?
5. Other?

No laughing. Just trying to help.

I will keep an eye on this thread for any updates you post once you recover from surgery.

Regards.

Krazyz1

I have 2 dedicated outputs on my ROTEL for purposes of bi-amping. The L sub is connected toL RCA on back of sub and fed by L off of secondary output from the ROTEL. Phase and crossover I would have to con firm. EQ setting on subs is set for mid room. R sub connected same as L. Wich esentially gives me a L&R sub senario. They barely have 30hrs. on them. I may be wrong , but untill I get ATLEAST 80hrs. on them any adjustments would be in vain do to driver stiffness. If I go any where I load up CD player and leave playing while I'm gone to get play hours on it quicker. If you find any statements in error feel free to educate me.

Krazyz1

Mr. concealer 404. Appreciate the invite and will keep that in mind. Thanks for your genorous offer....................OK!!!! More Percoset and I am done. Current set up. 1 M-400 feeding center A9's wich are 82" center to center spacing on tweeters. 2nd M-400 hooked up to outer pair of A9's. By how I have the amps plugged into the power conditioners I can choose inner , outer or all 4. EQ's OFF. Inner pair BEUTIFUL sound stage . WHOLE room filled with music and non directional. Play outer pair only sound stage covers whole wall. Not quit as good as running inners but close. Running all 4 just a smidge heavy on left but dependent on what CD and what part of the song. Some songs center up after lead in. ALL speakers within 1/16 distance to axis point. Against all logic and odds I will re check level of cabinets axis angle and distance. Damit I had it PERFECT before and gonna give set up ONE more try. Definanantly tells me the CROWN was a GREAT contributor to the off axis. NOT NEARLY as prominant as when running the CROWN. NEVER SAY DIE IS IN NOT MY VOCABULARY.....ofcourse unless I am LOL!!!. I miss the POWER of the CROWN but the sound quality is the issue. What I really need is a amp in the 300-400wpcrms realm. Open for some sugestions in that power arena without going to the poor house.To ALL that have contributed , I hope to be as helpful to you all the same. IF I cant reproduce all 4 working perfect again , I'll find a place to set up a second system. To the 1 who commented they didn't know anyone whos wife would let them run 4 , my wife said " PICK ME!!!!! ". IF you can get it set up to run 4 and make it work.....It's the cats meow hands down. Tricky as hell to do and it takes time , and it CAN be done but sometimes weigh out is it worth the effort. It's a personal choice , and this will be my LAST stab at it but DAMMMMM! It is soooooo close.I know by feedback it goes against all that is proper , and if I can't duplicate what I had before I will humbly bow to all that said it couldn't be done. THANKS TO ALL!!! Best regards. Krazy

Face

Paragraphs, paragraphs, thanks!

treitz3

Krazyz1 wrote: »

Can someone in laymens terms explain the issue with 2 speakers per side.

Lobing. Google it and you will be enlightened. Then there's the FUBAR'd sound stage, image smearing..........it goes on and on.

comfortablycurt

face wrote: »

paragraphs, paragraphs, thanks!

+1...

Krazyz1

jm1 . Wasn't reffering you to be laughing. You've seem to be the one most interested in helping solve issues and suggesting. Others have also , but somehow I feel you would like to be as much help as possible to solve the issues or my ignorance. Somehow Thank you doesn't seem to cover it!!! But DAM it's appreciated!

Krazyz1

To Face Broken and Treitz3. Sorry it didn't meet your expectations or standards.

Krazyz1

Food for thought. Scientificaly it is IMPOSSIBLE for a bumble bee to fly. Be careful and don't get stung. On paper a Learjet CANNOT fly. Had a **** of a time finding a test pilot during R&D.

comfortablycurt

Krazyz1 wrote: »

Food for thought. Scientificaly it is IMPOSSIBLE for a bumble bee to fly. Be careful and don't get stung. On paper a Learjet CANNOT fly. Had a **** of a time finding a test pilot during R&D.

If it's been proven that both bumble bees and Learjets can fly, wouldn't that be a scientific fact? I'd say the fact that both examples can, and do fly, would be indisputable, scientific proof of the fact that they can, indeed, fly.