Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
once my initial mistake of placing the networks close
to my preamp has been corrected the slight buzz is gone;
now each small network is connected to each of the four IC's
at just 1 inch of each amp inputalso, the initial impression of darkness has decreased
considerably, so i've to assume some breaking in has been
taking place with so minute resistors & capsi believe the resolving power of my maggies is now
increased about 30%, and the consequences are clear in
every department: more low level detail & ambience, no more
brightness (even when listening at deafening vol), much better
bass & dynamics, better, more cohesive imaging, etc, etc,
so in a word much more musicalityyesterday i was listening to particular orquestral recordings which
formerly were difficult to me: 1st act of Karajan's Die Walküre
(now Vicker's beautiful, big, very expressive voice no
longer does any harm to my ears), Hogwood's Bach's Orquestral
Suites (no longer unbearably bright and harsh), and Lindberg's
recent Aura (now perfectly listenable and enjoyable in all
its higly dense orquestral complexity & power)summing up: vertical biamping with a well designed passive
line xover (thanks once again Davey!!) is able to allow
my 1.6 to offer even much more musical pleasure & emotionnext? to replace my present junk resistors & caps by much
better onesbest, paco
Follow Ups:
i already noticed that by connecting the woofer directly to
the bass amps (no coils!) the bass & dynamics performance of my maggies
was much better; with more attention i now hear that there
is more bass, in the sense that i even think that my 1.6 are
going somewhat deeper than before, so i've adjusted the sub
(strata III): less volume and deeper xo point (from 34hz to 32hz)
best, paco
.
Paco, sounds like you're very happy with your new setup! Are you still using your Melos preamp with your new amps?Now that I've settled on my bass amps (no vertical biamping yet) I'm going to construct my low-level low-pass circuit. I'm going to try both of the circuits that Davey posted (thanks Davey!) and see what works out best. Although I haven't tried either yet I'm concerned that my preamp may have difficulty driving two amps that have low input impedence in addition to a passive RC network. Anyway, until I try the circuit I won't know. Time to get busy (again)!
> > Paco, sounds like you're very happy with your new setup!well, not yet! while i can easily recognize the great benefits
of this new way to drive my maggies, i still feel i've
passed from the bright side of neutral to the dark side;
hope the new components will fix this, but they are not easy to get> > Are you still using your Melos preamp with your new amps?
still? i'm not yet using it, as it's being fixed
> > Now that I've settled on my bass amps (no vertical biamping yet) I'm going to construct my low-level low-pass circuit. I'm going to try both of the circuits that Davey posted (thanks Davey!) and see what works out best.
that sounds fun! i assume you are using a pot to equalize levels
> > Although I haven't tried either yet I'm concerned that my preamp may have difficulty driving two amps that have low input impedence in addition to a passive RC network.
with my present 7.5 dbs loss on both drivers i still have to use
attenuation on most recordings; what is the input imp of your amps?best, paco
> still? i'm not yet using it, as it's being fixed
Oh. If you don't mind me asking, what are you using now? You're not running a passive with two amps and the network, right?
> i assume you are using a pot to equalize levels
The bass amps has level pots built-in and I'll probably use a set on the RM200 until I figure out the appropriate attenuation; then I'll replace it with some good Caddock resistors.
> what is the input imp of your amps?
The RM200 is spec'd at 15K per leg and the AudioSource is supposed to be 10K.
> > > Oh. If you don't mind me asking, what are you using now? You're not running a passive with two amps and the network, right?i'm temporarily using a Nad S100 until my beloved Melos come back home;
i think it's a very good piece of gear, very musical and transparent> > > The bass amps has level pots built-in and I'll probably use a set on the RM200 until I figure out the appropriate attenuation; then I'll replace it with some good Caddock resistors.
level pots on the amps? hmmm that means more degradation, though
i've to confess it's must be very convenient; do you think Caddock
is more transparent than Vishay? i was myself wondering about this> > > The RM200 is spec'd at 15K per leg and the AudioSource is supposed to be 10K.
well Mike these seem to me really low values, so unless your
present preamp has a lot of gain you may well gonna need go activebest, paco
Sounds like Arbelos has more experience pertaining to resistor sonics than I.I've used the Caddock MK-132 and TF-020 as upgrades from Dale and Holco in several equipment upgrades. I've always been pleased with the results. I had Vishay in my prior amplifier but never did any A/B comparisons to other resistors.
Since you only need a few resistors to build your network, maybe try both and let us know. Keep us posted...
My experience with res. so far:Vishay most neutral and extended, but (only) in comparison with a certain cult-res. (Shinko tantalum) a slightly recessed midband, and very good but not huge dynamics.
Caddock very transparent too, slightly less coherent, a trace brash in the highs, but very lucid, very dynamic and good bass, makes fun.
Shinko tantalum: A very smooth and expressive midrange (very SE-y), slightly reticent highs and IMO a vibrant, but not tight enough bass. Dynamics on the whole excellent, and very good inner detailing but a feeling of less transparency than the Vishay. A friend finds these the best though.
Welwyn (preliminary impr.) very transparent too, maybe not 100% up to
Vishay niveau, but close, and very coherent and balanced, less expensive than either of the above. (IMO not cheap, but very good sevice and delivery by Erno Borbely).Holco, very famed, but IMO not dynamic enough and not extended enough, specially in the highs. Complete absence of glare, but (too) high price payed in liveliness. Spatially also less open.
Roederstein (ERO MK) Resista: Very nicely balanced with a certain sheen or silvery haze which sounds nice. Dynamics more restricted than above, but probably still very good in comparison with standard res. Does not sound compressed and glary. Balance is slightly tipped to the midrange/high frequencies. Bass kick reduced compared to the above.
power resistors:
Caddock, and Alpha excellent, Vishay most probably too.
Roederstein (ERO WK) metal-oxyde: Very nice, well balanced dynamically coherent, but a bit foggy on the whole, but probably a very good price / value rel. Sounds somehow similar to the ERO Resistas.
Golden alu-fined wirewound resistors: Sounded strained and lacked micro-dynamics and resolution: Not comfortable.
standard wire-wound: Tends to squash dynamics too and creates glare in the process.
I suspect that steel wires or sub-optimal substrates and coverings play a role in the sound. Magnetic connections or lead would be theoretically worse on high currents, and this seems to be confirmed by the ear.
this is an impressive, very useful comparison, so thanks
a lot for posting it!! you should repost it on the tweakers
asylum IMO, for more general knowledge (most people don't
care about us --the planar asylum-- i'm afraid)best, paco
.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: