|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: Re: Tubes with B&W speakers? posted by Michael F on September 19, 2001 at 19:02:07:
Thanks for info. At least I know you're not some guying trying to plot the speaker's frequency response using a Radio Shack sound meter in his living room.BTW, were the speakers broken in? What about the amp? I own Nautilus 802's and 805's and have heard some of the CDM speakers. I haven't detected the anomaly you've described in *any* of those speakers, which is why I am suspicious about your findings. I've detected high-frequency overemphasis in DM series speakers, but not with CDM series and higher.
For the record, I'm not saying that the CDM speakers cannot be perceived as bright because there are certainly a good number of people that "think" they are.
One published measurement from Audio magazine shows the N802 to be near the average level at 10khz. (I put blind faith in those measurements because Audio is a "respected" magazine.) The CDM series use the same tweeters as the N802, albeit with a lessor crossover, so the 4-5db deviation you claim does not seem right.
I'm sure there are other published results for the CDM speakers, but I don't have them readily available.
Follow Ups:
I've owned the CDM 1NT and A/B'ed it with N805. Indeed, the 1NT seems to have more mid-treble energy than the N805. Since the latter is regarded as the better-balanced speaker (as it should be considering its price), I think the 1NT is relatively brighter.I find that the 1NT is very revealing in the treble, so with bright electronics it is definitely annoyingly bright. But with good electronics (tube or SS), not necessarily dark-sounding ones, these speakers can sound detailed in the treble in a pleasing way... airy presentation of ambience.
About the tweeters, I already verified this with my dealer before I bought the 1NT: the CDM NT series does not use *exactly* the same tweeter as the N800 series. They are very similar, but not to the point that it is impossible for one to be brighter than the other. And besides, even the *voicing* of the speaker during design stage can make a tweeter sound brighter than it normally would.
> About the tweeters, I already verified this with my dealer before I bought the 1NT: the CDM NT series does not use *exactly* the same tweeter as the N800 series.I've been trying to figure this out ever since the CDM series came out. When I asked my dealer, he told me the tweeters were "identical". However, I never take what a dealer says at face value anyway, and this discrepancy between different dealers is just another example of why.
I'm going to write B&W and get the real scoop.
My guess is the tweeters are very similar. Since the rear of the tweeter is hidden in the CDM series, B&W may have taken steps to skimp on the rear portion of the assembly, perhaps using a shorter tube.
The tweeters within the Nautilus 800 series are "identical" for the most part, with a few cosmetic differences. The tweeters on the Nautilus surround speakers are "identical" to the N805 speakers, but with a shorter tube. The N802 tweeters use a slightly longer tube than the N805 tweeters and are encased in a more glossy and durable mylar material. The drivers are essentially identical, however.
This is what I meant when I said the CDM speakers use the "same" tweeters (I did not say they were identical or interchangeable). One person a while back wrote that the CDM 1NT tweeters were indeed "the exact same tweeters used in the N805", but I would not go about spreading this bit of info without first checking with B&W.
Ultimately, different crossover designs will make the same driver sound different. But I still can't see how the CDM tweeters can deviate so abornormally in sound from Nautilus speakers. Like I mentioned in my earlier post, I haven't detected the alleged "abnormal peak" on the CDM series.
Hello again,
At the time the measurements had taken place, there were well over
a hundred hours on them, with both music and noise as sources.
Some may argue that is not nearly enough time, where the manufacturer claims only 15 hours would be necessary.
I did notice changes as the surrounds and spiders loosened up,
but none in the top end.
It is my understanding that the NT tweeters are a Nautilus derivative,
and certainly not the real thing.
I also heard the 805,4 and 3 share a common tweeter, as do the 802
and 801.
It is interesting that you find the DM series top end over-emphasized.
I went from the 603.2 to the nt7 and 9, and found them brighter.
You must believe me when I say that I really tried hard to like
the CDM`s, but that never happened.
M.F.
Let me get my $.02 in here. I have a pair of DM 602.2's and they are not particularly bright IF they are matched up with the right pieces. (NAD C350, Sony XA1ES CD player, 12 gauge cables, Paradigm X-30 crossover, and the "right" interconnects) The sonic "signature" is very smooth in the highs, so I doubt the presence of a 4-5 dB peak at 10 kHz. I tried adding 5 dB with a graphic equalizer at 8 kHz and it ruined the sound. I, too, suspect an artifact of the measurement technique.You said it was a "semi-anechoic" environment. Like what? Outdoors? Sound absorbing panels around the speaker? Please give more detail. Next, where was the microphone aimed, and how far from the speaker was it? Also, which model of B& K microphone? Actually, I'd like to know the capsule diameter and whether it was a parallel or random incidence model? (directfield or reverberent field)
Hello Bald Iggle,
The speaker in question is the CDM-7NT, nothing at all like the DM series. Infact, I find the top end smoother on the DM`s, but less
detailed.
I conducted the test outdoors on a quiet night. Since the objective
was to measure the tweeters behavior, the shockmounted microphone
(omnidirectional capsule) was directed 0 degree`s @ 1 metre, with
test sources 20DB spl above noise floor.
M.F.
Michael,Thank you. Sorry if I sounded pushy. I'm not all that fAfamiliar with the CDM series, but I do know that the intro of the Series 2 DM's caused a sales problem for B&W on both the CDM and 800 series. Not enough improvement (if any) for the extra $$. Also the DM tweeter is recessed in a short elliptical horn where the CDM's is sort of semi recessed. A peak at 10 kHz implies a reflection at 1/2 or 1.5 wavelengths, or about 16 mm or 48 mm. Just about the edge of the tweeter housing or the top edge of the cabinet. I wonder? It would be interesting to place a baffle of sound absorbing foam or felt just in front of the tweeter with a 1" aperture to fire through and then measure the on axis response with any edge reflections eliminated.
I do have a test report on the CDM-9NT from the June issue of Hi-Fi News. They show a 1 dB dip at 10 kHz, but a peak of about 2 dB at 15-16 kHz. I(nterestingly, they thought the overall balance was a bit thick and slow, and the highs lacked something. No mention of brightness.
I have found my DM602.2's to be a little bright for my taste which was cured by cable and interconnect selection. I use the NAD C350 and dropped my Arcam 7SE in favor of my older Sony XA1ES which with the proper interconnect was smoother and tamed the highs. Since the CDM's are considered brighter than my DM602's, I probably could not bring them to the tonality I want. Doesn't square at all with Hi-Fi News' review.
Hi Again,
During the time spent with the CDM-NT`s, several inmates responded
to my distress call with some interesting advice.
After a while, I just admitted that they were not for me, and rather
than tweak, I traded them in for some JMlab Cobalts and havent looked
back since.
A speaker, or any other component HAS to put a smile on your ears
from the get go.
M.F.
Hey Michael, I remember your earlier posts now. :-)I'm glad you enjoy your new speakers.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: