Yeah, and Renee Fleming . . . . wait, no that's not right. There's definitely a payoff there with a system that's working.Originally Posted by Ducatista47
Yeah, and Renee Fleming . . . . wait, no that's not right. There's definitely a payoff there with a system that's working.
Even if I never try tubes on the top of my 4345s, I'll always be indebted to Clark for the pointer to Bill Evans. Quintessense is still one I reach for to show-off how delicately the 4345s can handle soft volume. I haven't owned a tube amp in almost four decades though I still have my C-20 Mac pre-amp.
Not a devout Renee Fleming fan from what I've heard. Maybe more interest in Dawn Upshaw who is the Artistic director for the graduate program in Vocal Arts where my daughter is currently an undergrad singer studying under Rufus Muller, FWIW.
". . . as you have no doubt noticed, no one told the 4345 that it can't work correctly so it does anyway."—Greg Timbers
I like Dawn Upshaw too. I recently got a copy of Voices of Light because of my interest in Messian, and she was a bonus discovery. I've been listening to lieder and the difficulty is finding recordings in which the song is not spoiled by the performer's penchant for bravura. She is one who does not do that, and I'm really grateful.
The bravura business is what you may have heard about Renee Fleming. That's what you get with albums of aria's. The aria's are in the operas to show off the voices. It's all well and good, but it gets old, unless you listen to the whole opera, which who does anyway? I heard R. Fleming in recital at Zellerbach a couple of years ago. The program was almost all lieder, and it was exquisite.
Excuse me for my jump in.....
Totally agree "the truth is the 4345 is not at all hard to amp". I use JBL 6290 before and found that the sonic performance is acceptable.
I like that amp. I don't use mine much for experimenting because I don't like moving it around.
The 6290 is the big UREI I was referring to. I am afraid that acceptable is how I consider it as well. Next to what I use now, it sounds like sound reinforcement gear, not hifi. It has always been thus. I love what I hear until I hear something better.
Dave, I remember someone here describing how they went through their 5235 and upgraded everything but the chassis. Might be worth a try.
Clark
Information is not Knowledge; Knowledge is not Wisdom
Too many audiophiles listen with their eyes instead of their ears
'Pends what you want. Using an amp like the 6290 you can work the 4345 for slam and drive, wailing guitar, screaming vocals. You know--rock and roll, fusion, Mahler. All the things that make your neighbors miserable. You can do this with tubes; it's just that tube amps that big are many bucks. With an amp like the VT60 ( I wouldn't call it a sweet fart amp) you can listen to music that offers nuance and subtlety. With a proper crossover you can use both amps and get both. Using a crossover, the gains in the bass are usually readily apparent. The problem comes with the added layer of electronics in the treble, and the non-standard slopes in the handoff.
I've long been a sceptic of the dotage for ss for bass, tubes for treble. I think it's more important to operate amps well within their power capacities, both tube and ss. I think the best full range compromise I've tried is adequately sized 2nd generation Autoformer McIntosh. Later is probably much better.
I just found the thread (5235 mod) and read it. Unfortunately it descended into perfectly pointless squabbling. The issue seem to be whether posters should be guided and encouraged to take a step forward that may not be SOTA or whether they should be told their proposed measures are a waste of time and money because something else exists which is better. I think there is confusion here between that idea and heading someone off from a mistake, which should be done, if you can.
Someone once remarked that a sign of intelligence is the ability to hold in mind more than one idea at once, whether they are contradictory, complementary or unrelated, without melding or confusing them. The lack of that ability is what often leads to the ridiculous bickering.
I happen to own a Bryston 10B, and I have tried it in the circuit for my 4345. Sure it sounds better in a general way than the 5235--on the used market it costs about ten times as much--but it does not exactly fit the bill. It's very close, but it does not do as well in the handoff from woofer to midrange as the correct card in the 5234A. If that device can be improved, since it is ubiquitous and inexpensive, and card loads are known for some of the various legacy speakers we all are so fond of, it is a very suitable project for these forums, and I hope more members will work it and share their experiences.
Meanwhile, I would be interested to hear from 4344 or --45 owners who have tried running the upper three elements without HP roll off as suggested by Ian in that thread. I should think it would take some EQ or a digital process like the Velodyne subwoofer controller.
There are two commercially available "active" crossovers that are set up that way. Both the LP-1 from Dahlquist and the Symmetry AC-1 or AC-2 crossovers designed by John Curl used a simple passive 6dB filter for the high pass and an active low pass. They both offer variable turnover points for the low pass and it is quite possible either could be made to work quite well in this application. I will say that both are absolutely top drawer sonically, especially the Symmetry.
Widget
That is terrific stuff, 4313B. I had an email exchange with Mr. Elliot once and he is as helpful as he is knowledgeable. One of his articles I find a nearly definitive myth dispelling treatise on bi-amping. It also reveals bi-wiring to be a nearly complete waste and I agree.
http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm
I really love this take on break-in of audio components:Clarkeither allow the system to 'break in' (which actually means that you get used to the new sound after a while)
Information is not Knowledge; Knowledge is not Wisdom
Too many audiophiles listen with their eyes instead of their ears
That looks helpful if, the 4345 actually does not need a non-standard crossover, which is not what I understand GT's 4345 post to say, and one has concluded that the 5235 is nothing more than a project box.
Otherwise, maybe I'm missing something.
I've just spent an hour at Rod E's website. I've been there before and find it helpful reading.
As for biamping the 4345, for the time being it looks more promising to filter through the 5235 mod thread and try to isolate the useful information. The 4345 is not the only speaker under consideration for this. If a clear path to improving that device can be shown, then improved biamping will be accessible to everyone who has a legacy speaker for which card loads were worked out by JBL--4345 and 44, 4355, 4430/35 come to mind; I don't know if there were others. Besides that there are all the standard cards for which the loads have been published. Then it also might be possible to devise cards for other combinations of drivers. The 5235/DX-1 concept seems like a very useful one to me if implementation could be improved (and we could rebuild coral reefs with something else).
The voltage drive graph looks like 24 dB/ octave to me, unless I'm misreading it.
"Myth dispelling"??? What myths?
As for biwire? I feel it should go by the acronym BS.The only situation where bi-wire is really a success is if you use brand XYZ unobtainium cables costing well over a grand each... then considering the typical 70% mark up of cables.... you've made the dealer extremely happy.
Seriously though, there are very good reasons to go passive and equally though different good reasons to go active multi-amp. While I do tend to agree with Mr. Elliot, "Biamping is not a simple tweak, and is not to be taken lightly. Make no mistake though, its application will improve almost any loudspeaker available, with very few exceptions." His first statement about it not to be taken lightly hints at the care one must take in "getting it right." Bi-amping with crap electronics, like the 80's era pro audio crossovers or less expensive modern digital models can easily be a giant step backward. More over simply buying good gear won't make a better system. Great care must be taken. In many, many cases due to these reasons, while an active system might technically be potentially better, there are no guarantees.
Widget
Widget, I totally agree with you and did not mean to imply otherwise. The main myths I was thinking about were it being simple or inexpensive. Like Ian once said, it is a great idea but it is next to impossible to get your hands on an active crossover that is hifi enough to make it worth while.
As I once posted here, I wince when I read a post that begins with "I am starting a speaker project. It will be a four way and I am going to tri-amp it with..."
Clark
Information is not Knowledge; Knowledge is not Wisdom
Too many audiophiles listen with their eyes instead of their ears
Dat wascally wabbit.
I think both the amp and the active filter have a profound effect on bass (and HF) sonics.
The chips used in these Pro active filters tends to scrub the sonic texture out of the music. The sound quality is very dependant on the actual gain devices. With the NE5532 or the TL074 they have dozens of transisters and bifets that produce massive open loop gain that is reduced to a gain of (1) when 100% negative feedback is applied. Its intuitive to compare the tonal differences of these chips...neither are right...therefore both are wrong.
Its generally acknowledged that over zealous use of feedback simply hammers the life out of the bass and everything else and it becomes sterile. Of course if your CD player uses these types of chips then its all downhill after that...
With right equipment its not hard to make music with the 4345.
I have found Pass labs to work very well and there is no going back once you have tried these amps.
I knew I should have saved this post before 4313B delete it...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote