Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Software & Technology
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #721  
Old 05-23-2019, 08:54 PM
Egghead's Avatar
Egghead Egghead is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,113
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by George Frankly View Post
He and I have the Model 200, I bought seven of them at a really great price. Egghead has two, three went to a friend in STL, I have two. One of mine stopped working though, I should probably see if it's repairable and I could use those. 200wpc into 8 ohms, and I suspect they are rated much more conservatively than my receiver.
Aren't most receivers rated in terms of running power only through 2 channels? So, the power drops off with the more speakers you're running?

Outlaw, meanwhile, prides themselves on only showing ratings with all channels running. Of course, with a monoblock, that's not really an issue.
Reply With Quote
  #722  
Old 05-23-2019, 10:15 PM
George Frankly's Avatar
George Frankly George Frankly is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CO
Favorite beer: Sam Smith Oatmeal
Posts: 10,959
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Egghead View Post
Aren't most receivers rated in terms of running power only through 2 channels? So, the power drops off with the more speakers you're running?

Outlaw, meanwhile, prides themselves on only showing ratings with all channels running. Of course, with a monoblock, that's not really an issue.
Exactly. And not only are most receivers rated that way, itís often at higher levels of THD. And most high-ish end amps are tested to handle harder (capacitive) loads. Mac amps will do rated power at something like 0.05% THD, for 24 hours straight.

I know when I started down this road I had a cheap receiver (Sharp maybe?) that was rated at 100w, and I think that was just a lie. Moved to a Denon with 70w and it was a huge leap forward. And then onto a 50w NAD with more power still. I ran Magnepan SMG that were about 86dB efficient off of that and it wasnít half bad. I donít think you need Mac, but I totally think itís worth it to buy NAD, or Emotiva, or Outlaw, or whatever.

Back in my car audio days, competitions put people in classes based on total power. But it was rated power, and eventually manufacturers just started lying, but the other way round. Make a 400w amp, but rate it as a 100w amp to stay in a lower class. It culminated with an Orion amp rated at one watt. It was about two feet long with 1/0 gauge power/ground connectors and I think a 200A fuse.

So yeah, some manufacturers will lie. Or at least stretch things.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by NerdAlert View Post
Butt-chugging seems like the best solution.
Reply With Quote
  #723  
Old 05-23-2019, 10:44 PM
Egghead's Avatar
Egghead Egghead is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,113
Default

I decided to test the value of quality amplifiers tonight, by taking those Outlaw monoblocks out of my system, rerunning Audyssey, listening to a number of songs, and then putting things back the way they were (including a rerun of Audyssey.) As I think through how I would describe the differences, it seemed to resonate well with what the guy described in that review of the Outlaw 7720:

- fuller, more seamless soundstage
- cleaner transients

Right now, I only have those on my L/R fronts. So it would be fun to see what difference it would make to run my whole system through something of that quality. And it sounds like the 7720 might even be an upgrade over the current monoblocks, though I'm sure we're entering the territory of rapidly diminishing returns...
Reply With Quote
  #724  
Old 06-07-2019, 05:15 PM
Egghead's Avatar
Egghead Egghead is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,113
Default

Off and on, I've toyed with the idea of buying a sixth and seventh JBL 590 tower speaker. The 4th and 5th were a huge upgrade on the JBL 230 bookshelf speakers I had. I'm pretty happy with my DCM floor-standers as rear speakers, so I've resisted.

But then the JBL Studio 530 bookshelf speakers just came back after a long period of being unavailable (2 years, maybe?) Not only that, but they were sold at half off for a poorly advertised Father's Day sale. Regardless, they sold out quickly. I've heard for too long how perfect these are as surrounds to complement the 590 towers, so I thought, "Why not?" Especially since they offer free returns.

I got them today and plugged them in. I can't believe it. They actually sound BETTER (at least, as surrounds) than my 590 towers! I listened to the scene in "Dr. Strange" where he is transported to the ethereal dimension (?) and the Ancient One (I could be botching all of this with my poor memory) is speaking to him, with her voice moving all around the room. The effect was actually even more seamless than with the matching towers. That shouldn't be possible. But these bookshelf speakers are in the same Studio 5 series, so it's not surprising that they would be an excellent match. It's just weird that they would be better than identicals.

Kind of wishing now that I'd bought two pair of these suckers. I see now why they are so popular. People were paying $1k a pair for these things, used off eBay. I got them for $300. Couldn't be more pleased.
Reply With Quote
  #725  
Old 07-03-2019, 12:07 AM
Egghead's Avatar
Egghead Egghead is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,113
Default

I went back to the 590 towers for my surrounds. As amazing as they 530 bookshelf speakers are for surround duty with movies, they just can't match the 590 towers for perfectly matched multichannel stereo sound. I will continue to pull out the 530s for times when I want the absolute best in movie sound that I can achieve with my current setup. Also handy for times when I want to listen to music recorded in 5.1, where the surrounds are supposed to be behind the main listening position, rather than at the +/- 80 degrees from center location I currently use for my surround towers. I don't want to go moving those towers, partly because they're heavy, and also because I've got them very nicely dialed in.

In other news: I've been reading how to make nice improvements to my bass using the Audyssey app, which allows tweaks to the room correction curve. What I've done (using the suggestions of others):

* Built in a curve for bass under 150 Hz, peaking at 55 Hz, +6 dB
* Adjusted the curve for the subwoofer, so that it mirrors the peak at 55Hz, with the same gentle curve to 150 Hz. That peak is sustained from 20 to 55 Hz
* I still only apply room correction up to about 200 Hz. The sound science folks seem to generally agree that room correction is necessary below this frequency (which varies, based on room dimensions) to deal with nulls and peaks created by the room barriers. But a fair amount of science suggests that the human mind can "hear through the room" above that frequency. So as long as your speakers are pretty flat in an anechoic chamber, that's how your mind will hear them in a regular room. Regardless, I'm getting a sound I like by limiting room correction as I have.

The approach above boosts bass in a way that prevents it getting muddy. It's been a very nice improvement from simply bumping up the sub +6 dB. I guess because of the smoother transition from bass to mid?

Last edited by Egghead; 07-03-2019 at 12:14 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #726  
Old 07-12-2019, 01:05 AM
Egghead's Avatar
Egghead Egghead is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,113
Default

I've mentioned before that I had my center speaker (a tower) behind a 55" flat screen, and have always been surprised how good it sounded. Well, we upgraded that TV to a 65" (my in-laws' TV got wiped out by lightning, and they have very limited income, so it gave me an excuse. ) I had to bump up the volume of the center a few decibels, but otherwise, the sound quality was not compromised. Heck, I think it sounds better, if anything.
Reply With Quote
  #727  
Old 08-13-2019, 01:08 PM
WhatsGolden WhatsGolden is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 751
Default

Started on a nice second system a little bit ago. Had some older speakers that I wasn't using (JBL Stadium Venues) and a Sonos Zoneplayer (I will want to move away from this at some point, but my Connect has been acting up and I listen to music quite a bit so the simplicity and Sonos environment is nice). To go with that I added a JTR Captivator 2400.

At some point I want to go with a direct comparison of the Cap2400 and the Seaton Submersive. The Submersive seems more musical, but the Captivator seems more powerful. This is severely limited right now though as the different rooms, different speakers, and different power driving the speakers is definitely playing into what I'm hearing. Also the crossover of the Sonos isn't my favorite (fixed 80hz...and doesn't tell you much about it either).
__________________
FSA
Reply With Quote
  #728  
Old 08-13-2019, 01:19 PM
George Frankly's Avatar
George Frankly George Frankly is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CO
Favorite beer: Sam Smith Oatmeal
Posts: 10,959
Default

I suspect youíre right, regarding the subs. The Submersive is sealed, and sealed subs are really musical. They have way less group delay, whatever signal you feed them, they pretty much follow it.

The Captivator is vented, so more delay, especially as you approach the tuning frequency. Now, the Captivator is tuned very low, which helps. Some argue that the delay isnít enough to be audible, but I think it usually is. BUT, you get more output with a vent, and at a given SPL you need less excursion - so at higher SPL that can reduce distortion.

No free lunch and all that.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by NerdAlert View Post
Butt-chugging seems like the best solution.
Reply With Quote
  #729  
Old 08-14-2019, 11:30 AM
George Frankly's Avatar
George Frankly George Frankly is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CO
Favorite beer: Sam Smith Oatmeal
Posts: 10,959
Default

I'm a big fan of Magnepan, and I've owned three pairs previously. Yes, they are hard to live with, but they are pretty magical. There is a pair of MMG for sale locally, very good condition, for $325. Typical price on eBay is ~$400, so I don't think I can lose, and I don't know if I have the willpower not to buy these.

I have a 15" Monitor Audio sub I'm not using, that would pair well with these for the bottom octave.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by NerdAlert View Post
Butt-chugging seems like the best solution.
Reply With Quote
  #730  
Old 08-14-2019, 09:37 PM
WhatsGolden WhatsGolden is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 751
Default

I've never heard Maggies myself, but have only heard good things about them. I also hadn't kept up with them and just realized the MMGs are no longer in production.
__________________
FSA
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.20160 seconds with 10 queries