Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
165.109.1.240
In Reply to: RE: Magnepan 1.7 high frequency harshness posted by CJmag on June 20, 2011 at 10:00:51
Try Rear Wave Attenuators, the attenuating resistor, and simply time (day night cycles) before changing electronics.
Follow Ups:
I agree the attenuator may do the job but I already own the two preamps : one is a passive (TVC) and the other (active) is a tube unit (a Conrad Johnson). While I prefer the passive, my wife prefers by far the "Lushness" of the CJ. Result is : if I use the passive, I have to reduce the volume to a "non acceptable" volume level. She will "tolerate" at least a 7 dB higher volume level with the CJ (I measured it with a SPL).
Conclusion : When I am alone, I put on the passive and when she is at home, we put the CJ "online". Must say I don't mind since I enjoy the CJ me too. It is different. The CJ is relaxing while the passive makes you feel like to "analyse". Both nice, but quite different.
What CJ preamp model do you use and what amp are you running? I have SS McIntosh separates and have toyed with the idea of using a tube preamp to sweeten the sound.
My Preamp is a PV15 (supposed to be pretty "neutral" compared to other CJ's models). The amp is a SS MF2250 - warm mids - plenty of power for my needs but again, more "neutral" than its "tube's brothers".
With a MC amp, I guess I would not look for a CJ pre. Like CJs, MCs have a "distinctive" sound signature (which is different than CJ's). I would try to stay in the same "brand" or maybe look for something a bit more "flavorless" (AR maybe ?).
Electronics are only a part of the whole thing. A too lively room may "ruin" your whole system. Jitter or an impedance mismatch could also do that (have you checked that - your impedance match ?). I myself was surprised to see the specs of my CJ preamp. It has a very low impedance sensitivity at the input compared to other preamps. My DAC has a very high impedance at the output. Lucky me, I already had a buffer at the DAC's output (I guess most users of passive preamps have or should have one of those buffers somewhere on hands). Without it (the buffer), I would probably have put for sale the PV15 the minute after I plugged it.
There may be other solutions more effective (and cheaper) than changing preamps. But again, it could be that (the preamp). One thing I have a hard time to believe (sorry guys, I read that kind of comments here and there and I disagree) is that a "good quality" cable would be responsible for harshness. If another cable "reduces that harshness", it is doing some roll-off (so it does not let the entire signal go through) and I don't accept that as a proper solution. Adding "warmth" and "flavor" is one thing; deliberately removing part of the signal is another (not acceptable to me). We spend too much money trying to "get the whole real thing" to finish the job by cutting some of the signal at the end (I would feel like throwing the towell when just about to make it).
One of the reason I like my 1.7 better than the 1.6 is because I believe they are "better" at handling high frequencies. I love that new tweeter and no way that I personnally would agree with a "roll-off" solution.
I am with you 100% with respect to not doing anything that would roll-off any of the high frequencies in order to make the sound more enjoyable. The bite in the HF that I am trying to solve is really minor, but still something I want to tame. I hope to take delivery on some Mouser chokes this week that many people (thank you) on this thread have suggested.
As a further experiment while I am waiting, I took the supplied attenutors that I tried early on and didn't like and gave them another listen. I may have tried them way too early before everything broke in. Listening with them on this weekend I found that they really did help manage the HF harshness. I was also really trying to see if they cut or rolled off anything, because that as you said is an anti-improvement regardless of what it may cure. I can't say that I noticed any drop in HF. It just seemed to take the edge off slightly.
For those who have experimented with the attenators and the chokes I would like to hear if you stayed with one solution or the other, or if you used both. I will certainly try my own experiments as well.
May I ask which chokes did you buy Bourne> ? What grade? thanks
J.W. Miller/Bourns (sold by Mouser):
5502-RC Desc.: Shielded RF Chokes 10uH 10% (9Amp)
5522-RC Desc.: Shielded RF Chokes 10uH 10% (20Amp) - Al Sekela's original rec.Have fun!
Edits: 02/18/12
Well, the Mouser chokes finally arrived and I put those in place of the attenuators. Thanks to all that suggested these. I'm no electrical engineer and I certainly wouldn't have even known about these without this forum. Nice improvement.
I tried both. I thought the 5522 had more impact than the 5502 and what Magnepan provided. It was particularly noticeable with live Jeff Beck (Live at Ronnie Scotts) and Larry Carlton (Last Night).
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: