Thanks, Skip, for the info. Researching these things turned up catalogs and spec sheets and its just like you said they are rated in kV, thousands of volts. Which stands to reason, being as they are trying to insulate high voltage lines, and in all kinds of weather.
Learned enough to know the curves are there because charges don't like to migrate around corners and curves. There are some that look the same from the top but have extra skirts underneath, and they all have higher kV ratings. Stands to reason.
If you come you will be welcome any time and you will be amazed- and the most amazing thing of all is when you realize its not the stuff you can see that makes it so good, but the things you can't. |
If I visit Seattle again you're getting a call for a visit...
The speaker cable elevators, the ones with the black tops, are what we called F & J Neck Insulators..
Insulate the conductors @ voltage from 7.62kv-23kv... that's phase to phase voltage.
They're rated by size of the insulator and the number of skirts that are underneath, where they screw into the PTP's.
Spent many a years at the tops of 40'-100' foot poles tying in conductors....
Happy I'm now retired :)
Carry on, a top-notch system to you... hoping to hear one day.
Skip
|
Mike (goes by oregon here) came by and heard the system last week. Here quoted in its entirety (and also on the System page) is his review: "From a recent visit"- that was me! I happened to be in the Seattle area, so I made contact with Chuck to see if he’d be available for a listening session. I belong to a group of audiophiles (better known as Audiofoos by our friends and spouses) and I have the pleasure of listening to some very high end systems. Folks who have dedicated serious time and money to get the best music/sound into their lives. Walking into Chuck’s dedicated listening room, I immediately sensed that it was special. ( Kid in the candy store feeling). Our voices had no echo as we discussed equipment and tweaks. His enthusiasm was calm and controlled. I could see that his objective was to allow me to relax and to listen for myself. After we agreed to a few selected LPs, Chuck graciously allowed me to sit in the sweet spot. We listened to a dozen LPs. Never was I distracted from the sound by comments or discussion. I was laser focused, my mind and ears totally engrossed in the music. Excellent tonal balance and wide, pinpoint soundstage! Bass was tight and articulate and seemed to be coming from everywhere, but well integrated with the music, band, performance. Never boomy or out of control. Crystal clear highs and vocal midrange brought the band into the room, or, when my eyes were closed, I was transported to the venue. In my opinion, Chuck has achieved audio nirvana- that thing about being drawn into the music and hearing more and more detail, hearing the inflection of the voice whether it’s pain, joy, or spite (Cry Me a River). Horns were smooth, never harsh. The sound was wide and big, speakers disappeared. Room is surrounded by 4 small subwoofers and one in front. Lots of tweaks that is common among the most dedicated audiophiles I’ve known (personally, I’m kind of lazy and I don’t have the patience). But, it is truly impressive how everything works and one realizes the it is the sum that makes this system sound fantastic. Chuck knows exactly what works. Look closely at his system notes for details. Each time he played an LP, he carefully attended to each record and a process of order. Cleaning the stylus, demagnetizing... Of course, I am not an expert, but I am a music lover. I loved what I heard. If you are ever in the Seattle area, invite yourself to Chuck’s place. He might be available and you can hear for yourself the results of one crazy, seriously dedicated audiophile. Thanks Chuck. I hope to hear the music again. Mike millercarbon- You are welcome any time. Hopefully next time warmed up, and in the evening, when it will be even better. https://systems.audiogon.com/systems/8367 |
If you like the looks, you should hear the sound.
Thanks! |
|
Thanks. Tweaks are just like components, they are not created equal. Some are much more effective and high value than others. The trick is to cover all the bases bringing everything up to around the same level. Everyone has their favorite. Its the speakers. Its the amp. Its the source. Its the room. Its.... whatever.
In reality its.... all of it. Together. Like you have found. Like everyone finds when they bother to try. Every little thing, and no one really any more important than any other, because it all adds together. It really is as simple- and as hard- as that.
|
@millercarbon - great system and great thread! Totally agree that solid value components and tweaks are the way to go. I’ve owned MANY components over the years including a six figure Shindo based system. After much listening and experimenting, I now use SR HFTs, ECTs, Atmosphere, Acoustic Panels, Fuses, Tranquility Bases, Black Box, etc. I started using PPT products as well. I’m finally to the point where I realize the actual components do make a difference but not as much as the room acoustics or how the signal and power are tweaked. Keep up the good work (battle) and congrats! |
Well, Acoustic Fields and Vicoustic sell superior quality and higher cost quadradic diffusion as well as other acoustic treatments. The HFT on the back of my Legacy Focus has to be placed between the two upper ports and the lower subwoofer driver. It is less critical, about an inch up or down to adjust to the room. The HFTs on the side walls, rear wall and corner front walls are also less critical in my room.
I was thinking about trying SR GCTs and UEF Cable Risers next. I found the SR Blackbox sucked the life out of recordings by cutting off frequencies above 8Khz.
The UEF Cable Riser demo may indicate a similar effect using a type of ECT on each riser, or they may just focus the sound better. The Atmosphere XL4 is more of a toy and the default is mostly not better than no Atmosphere XL4 at all.
I use the former Perfect Path Omega E- and E+ Mats, E+Cards and Stop-Its to great effect (waiting to add a mini-gate). They do electrically what the Black Box is supposed to do mechanically/acoustically, diminish distortion.
Upgrading my A/C cables to GroverHuffman Pharoahs made the biggest difference to my DAC, Transport, Turntable motor and controller. I already had the Pharoahs on my Bryston BIT-20 isolation transformer, amps and pre-amp/phono since I moved into my custom listening room. |
Yeah. As if its not amazing enough how well this stuff works, its maybe even more amazing how such tiny movements tweak the sound so noticeably. I never was able to get anything even close to too bright or hard with any of them, but was able to tweak the amount of sizzle on cymbals just by moving the ones on the front wall an inch or so at a time. My system isn't anywhere near hard or bright but a lot are and I can see how that could happen.
One that blew me away the most is on the back of the speaker by the port. Why these things work at all is a puzzler. Why moving them even a small amount is even more puzzling. How one on the back of the speaker pointed away and into a corner not only matters but makes a huge difference moving it just an inch or so is a mystery indeed.
Sounds like you have a few more than me. Have you tried ECT? Very similar looking only optimized to go on electronics. They are even harder to understand as they have a very similar effect on sound quality even though they go on (or even inside!) components.
Quadratic diffusion, eh? To wield language and numbers like that, I'm gonna guess... architect? Lol!
|
@millercarbon I want to comment on the use of HFTs. I installed 32 on walls and speakers. I found the basic set up to Level 5 on walls excellent. However, on my speakers, no matter which HFT was placed near my dome tweeter and ribbon supertweeter, the sound became too bright and/or hard. So, I eliminated that one. The other extremely important HFT were the HFT 2.0s on the sides of the speakers. They had to be adjusted to within 1/8" up or down to balance bass/fullness and the upper frequencies. That was a trial and error which took a while in my new room as it did in my prior room. Overall, the use of the HFTs eliminated my need for a full out quadradic diffusion system set up on the front and rear walls, quoted at $25,000+ by my audio room designer's company. I already have built-in wall/floor/ceiling bass control and ample side wall and suspended ceiling absorption panels. My friends also prefer the use of SR HFTs for their more difficult to adjust rooms. |
Right. There are in fact some very good technical reasons why this is so.
The reasoning behind the center channel is its for dialog which is supposed to be coming from the screen which is assumed to be centered between the speakers. But, as anyone who has ever watched a movie would know, the characters aren't always dead center in the middle of the frame. Dialog can be coming from anywhere and in fact may not even be on the screen at all.
With stereo this is no problem at all. Everyone with a properly set up stereo knows perfectly well there is no problem whatsoever with sounds coming from anywhere in 3D space, which sometimes if the system is really good seems to extend even well off to the sides beyond the speakers. This happens naturally without any need for special processing effects.
With multichannel HT on the other hand and especially with a center channel this cannot happen without putting a processor in the signal path. The processor has to pan and scan and shift the sound around trying to emulate what is happening on screen. Even if it works, its still an extra component in the signal path. Putting unnecessary circuits in the signal path is never a good idea. |
Millercarbon ...
You are exactly correct in your statement that a center channel is not necessary. In fact, we found that a center channel actually screws up the imaging.
I learned this at an ultra-high-end store I worked at for a few years. We had a dedicated A/V room with the best projector available at the time. The electronics were all manufactured by Goldmund as were the speakers. Totally a mega-buck audio/video system. We never used a center channel, nor would we sell one. We sold the customer on the idea of saving some money and enjoying better sound by eliminating the center channel. The system was glorious.
Frank |
I can certainly understand why your butt is so sore. Ouch! Have you tried sitting on ice packs? 🤗 |
Dang, front row seats for once.
Pass the popcorn! |
Right. Some guy in Sweden bought your preposterous nonsense about a Firestone air spring made for trucks being the ideal 6 axis blah blah yada yada word salad and then paid for shipping exercise weights across the Atlantic. Good one. With every Numnuts SubHertz platform you get an autographed copy suitable for framing of your fake on-line university diploma too no doubt.
My system pics are up. Where are yours? From what you say it should be easy- just hold your iPhone up to a mirror and click. Or is it Android? |
That’s not my system, it’s some guy’s in Sweden about twenty years ago. But thanks for thinking of me anyway. 😬 I’ll show you mine if you show me yours. |
|
slaw
@geoffkait , Just kick-started my Honda....it needs a Tune-up. Give us a glimpse of your system. >>>>What good would that do, pray tell? Please don’t tell me you believe you can tell what a system sounds like from a photo. Or by the names of the components. 🥱 |
@geoffkait ,
Just kick-started my Honda....it needs a Tune-up.
Give us a glimpse of your system. |
Acoustics are often overlooked? Yeah, right. Maybe by rank beginners. I thought this was supposed to be a high end audio forum. Come on, people! Let’s try to get out of first gear.
First gear, it’s all right (Honda, Honda, go faster, faster)
Second gear, I’ll lean right (Honda, Honda, go faster, faster)
Third gear, hang on tight (Honda, Honda, go faster, faster)
Faster, it’s all right.
An ordinary man has no means of deliverance. - audiophile axiom |
Yes. The acoustics are so often overlooked as well. This needs to be addressed first IMO. |
Many people dont have the resolution necessary with their system to bother about cables impact because they cannot even hear it in their system Yes and its a shame because many times its the cables that are holding them back. But for some reason anything that's not a speaker, amp, or other big box component gets short shrift. Even when people do go for cables its almost never with the same degree of effort they would put into speakers. Not a week goes by we don't hear someone say they listened to lots and lots of speakers. They travel to hear them. Compare that with how many times we hear about the guy who flew to a show to hear some cables. Never. Even though they are equally important. I put a huge amount of effort into these things. The Synergistic CTS cables alone, hours of research selecting and getting them was followed by more hours of research on the MPCs, which even after having Michael Spallone modify them with better diodes and caps then I still modified them further being hard wired into my power center and connected to an isolation transformer and finally coated with TC. The whole process stretched out over months. All that for one cable! Which granted is one fine cable. When I got it, right off the bat, wow. Impressive. Just an incredibly fine cable. But now? Night and day. The CTS is so much better with these mods you wouldn't believe. It is true that now its just so incredibly revealing its easy now to hear all kinds of otherwise buried in the mix kind of things. But they are there and always were. So I kind of wonder if its really just they are easy to hear because the system got better, or the listener got better at listening. They do tend to go hand in hand you know. |
Especially when the differences are slight. Even if you’re one who thinks this is all BS, think of it this way. Imagine there is a difference. But not "a" difference, but a whole range of differences. Because there is. So there is a range of changes when cables are moved around. I think you are right...My audio system is good, now really good, but I bet that the one you owns and which I can see and imagine, with the 3 embeddings taken care of, is better than mine ...Each system has his own peak limit of resolution...Many people dont have the resolution necessary with their system to bother about cables impact because they cannot even hear it in their system... I am happy with what I have but I am not so fool to think that my audio system is the best... :) But I listen music et dont care to the same degree than yesterday with the sound...This is the sign that a system is satisfying... My friendly salutations... |
The idea that "Home Theater industry has chosen to pursue quantity over quality" is misguided. No, its a fact. Unless you think 7.1=2. With few exceptions less expensive equipment, designed to bring affordability to the market, should generally not be compared to components costing far more. Right. Which is why I always talk value. I bet if you read through all my posts- which you should, its highly educational (and that’s not just me, I get PMs, okay?)- you will find I am borderline OCD on budgeting and value. It wasn’t more expensive gear that got me dissing HT. It was better sound for less. HT is a wasteland of bad sound- at every price point. George Lucas has always maintained that sound represents 50% of the motion picture experience and music has always been a major contributing factor. Yeah whatever. All the big video guys know people rate video quality higher when the sound is better. Just one more reason why if you want the best HT possible you need to ditch the HT dogma and go stereo. |
By the way millercarbon has one of the most good looking audio system I have seen here and with good sound I bet...I am a bit envious :) ...Hopefully my sound is amazing also, if not, I would kill myself after looking at it... I like the way cables are cleanly guided to the gear particularly Thanks. It is indeed quite good. Has been for quite some time now. But the last year or so- Herron, Koetsu, Swarm, Atmosphere, and the acronyms CTS, ECT, HFT, PHT, and finally PPS - its on another level now. The cables weren't always like that. Speaker cables yes, for like 20 years. The rest was a more gradual process. The one constant is they all started went from spacing/routing, to using wood or tape or whatever to hold them in what looked like it might be better routing, to finally replacing the jury-rigged stuff with ceramic insulators. Then because I am such a pain, even to myself, I took it all out and put it back, just to see if it was worth it. This really is a pain. First because I love it when the sound improves but feel physical pain when it goes the other way. Which it always does whenever cables are moved around. Even being careful there's still at least several minutes of settling and it could easily be hours. That part is a pain. Especially when the differences are slight. Even if you're one who thinks this is all BS, think of it this way. Imagine there is a difference. But not "a" difference, but a whole range of differences. Because there is. So there is a range of changes when cables are moved around. And there is a range of differences when they are routed or elevated. So let's say elevating a power cord is an improvement. But its improved by an amount that is less than being moved around makes it worse. In that case you did something better, but it sounds worse at first, and only after an hour or so are you able to be sure it really is better. All these things I have done. Over and over again. It really is better. |
The idea that "Home Theater industry has chosen to pursue quantity over quality" is misguided. With few exceptions less expensive equipment, designed to bring affordability to the market, should generally not be compared to components costing far more. There are exceptions. Companies like Boston Acoustic offer a nice product that performs quite nicely against many over rated and far more expensive alternatives. The term "Home Theater" should never be a synonym for poor quality at any price point. Sound is sound. In reality good execution of a multi-channel system can more difficult to achieve than a simple 2 channel system at any price point. Multiple amplifiers, speaker placement, effect channel processing, advanced room correction, the list is long. The Lucas Film THX project headed by Tomlinson Holman did much to advance realism as it pertains to all types of sound. George Lucas has always maintained that sound represents 50% of the motion picture experience and music has always been a major contributing factor. |
geoffkaitI know you are often right...This is the differences between me and some others about your sayings... :) Remember that I dont pretend my audio system is absolutely optimal, but that it converge asymptotically to this peak yes I know it... Is there other fields than the mechanical one, the acoustical one, and the electrical one ? Yes there is... Belief in ones own handiwork is a very powerful antidote to getting the best sound possible.
I quote one of your best observation to date for me...This quote I makes mine deserve to be a classical one...My goal is the best musical experience possible and comes a times when I forget about the best sound...I am in this time or near it indeed... I listen more than I study now I confess... :) And to makes thing worst I am very proud of my homemade low cost solutions effectivity... :) For the Helmholtz resonators, I know what you speak about, i had to do several tests...For the wires you are right, but actually it is impossible in my space to do better... The end is near , the base camp is under my eyes, the summit over my head for sure...But compared to most at least I had taken the journey... :) " Why are you mute? Because I have choosen to believe my ears" - Grumman Marx My friendly salutations... |
Belief in ones own handiwork is a very powerful antidote to getting the best sound possible. Two obvious examples I can think of are Helmholtz resonators are easily overdone. And wires running together even though they don’t touch are still affecting each other electrically.
“Because it’s what I choose to believe.” - Harpo Marx
“You may think you know what’s going on Mr. Geddes, but believe me you don’t.” - Noah Cross to the detective Jake Geddes in Chinatown.
|
uberwaltzYour description made me rethink about my room... :) Perhaps mine was not so bad from the start.... :) One thing is certain Any room can sound good, not perfect, but good yes... It takes acoustical non conventional methods and conventional one... It takes the ears to guide you step by step... One at a time...Without my non conventional methods my room will not be so good now tough... And congratulations for the most difficult room to treat contest and new thread to comes.... By the way with my 6 inches bass drivers Mission speakers, in my treated room, i had so much good bass that I connect my Kreisel subs one hour before disconnecting it without using it anymore....I dont miss 20 or 30 hertz vibrations so much...40 hertz is enough for clavichord and for almost all organ notes ….Without my non conventional acoustical room treatment at the times i have bought this Kreisel subs with excitation... But it is very difficult to adjust subs with speakers also in a rightful manner to gives homogeneous and clear mid frequencies, but we all love rumbles, the reason why I bought the Kreisel at the times :) Good and powerful room treatment sometimes eliminate the need for a sub... This was my case....And in my experience, cleaning the electrical grid of the house "makes room" for the acoustical optimal treatment of the room... All three embeddings are linked together... :) My friendly salutations... By the way millercarbon has one of the most good looking audio system I have seen here and with good sound I bet...I am a bit envious :) ...Hopefully my sound is amazing also, if not, I would kill myself after looking at it... I like the way cables are cleanly guided to the gear particularly...I cannot use this method here tough...All my cables are separated but on a wall near each other without touching ... My friendly salutations... |
Mahgister
You think YOU have a bad room?
You need to try and tame mine...lol.
About 16x12 with a heavily sloped ceiling about 12 ft high at the speaker end down to about 9ft at listener end.
All glass walls, seriously its a converted Florida sunroom, double large French glass doors back into main house.
Tiled floor but it is on solid concrete bed.
Wooden blinds on every window, three large squishy sofas with cushions and throws, large near full size floor rug. Helps tremendously with taming all the stray reflections.
Equipment is all off to the right had side corner due to the double French doors opening in. Speakers are out about 3ft from back and side walls.
However that speaker positioning really works well with the Maggies, add a couple of subs front left and rear right and tbh the SQ has no right to be as good as it is considering the appalling room starting point.
Be interesting to see what Miller could do with this room and I am not being facetious.
|
I will add the famous citation that resume all:
" The ears command, you obey" Groucho Marx
|
mijostynIt is difficult to have a bad room like mine... 2 windows, small room of 14 feet by 14 feet by ten with one speakers in a corner, all electronics at near one feet of the speakers ( few inches for one).... My point is precisely that non-conventional methods to modify the acoustic are very useful, not only gluing on the walls so called acoustic material...My room is not perfect now, but sound great for all ears to listen... But without my 20 Helmholtz resonators, without my 50 "singing" reflectors and resonators, without my 8 heavily modified Schumann Generators, and without my homemade acoustic materials, not so much, I forget my stones grid and my modified speakers :) Then if my room can sound good, any room can sound good....That is my experience....But being good does not equate with the " state of the art " room or theater conceived by the best acoustic engineers in the world, is it necessary to say so? And cleaning the electrical grid of a room and house is not straightforward, if you are not electrician and if you had no money to implement that.... But it is possible I made it... The more easy to treat at low costs are the mechanical resonance-vibrations problem... The test is that in this treated room I can listen to the lived atmosphere of a recording in an immersive way in 2 listening positions, with natural instrumental timbre... Not bad for a 500 hundred dollars system in a bad room... with 500 hundred dollars tweaks :) My best to you …. |
Geoffkait, I think you have been reading Shakespeare again:)
Mahgister, On thinking about it I made one mistake. While dealing with the acoustics of a room is pretty straight forward there are some rooms that are never going to sound great. Most of us do not have the opportunity to build a room specifically designed for audio. We are stuck with whatever came with the house we bought and with whatever our spouse will tolerate. So, in this regard coming up with a top notch audio room is difficult and for some of us impossible. You can tame things but you can't cure them. |
Wow! Lots of generalizations in that post. Why, if I didn’t know better I’d think you were channeling the dude from Stereo Review who famously opined all amplifiers that measure the same sound pretty much the same. Also, I’m pretty sure everyone and his brother have been aware of the electrical system issues and vibration issues ever since. Perhaps they didn’t realize how pernicious and extensive they are, I’ll grant you that. I never wanted or dreamed to say something so stupid that all amplifiers sound the same; but if they are on the same rung they are, nowithstanding their real differences in sound, in a relative equivalence compared to the upgrading powerful effect of a rightful implementation of the 3 embeddings...This was my point... And if you read me correctly,(but you sometimes loves too much makes a punch ), I never said that nobody knows about these 3 embeddings, I said NOBODY POINTED TO THEM SIMULTANEOUSLY in the same article like the KEY to audiophile experience, instead of the acknowledged quality of some superior electronic components... But thanks at the end to coming back to my point: Perhaps they didn’t realize how pernicious and extensive they are, I’ll grant you that. Thanks for your generosity...:) In exchange I will include you in the rare small group of people who knows and had known already that... :) I apologize for using the expression"nobody", I must have said "few"... You are right on that...But very few... For the other embeddings than these 3, I know there exist others , but I want to begins somewhere, in an evident locus for all... My best to you, like always... |
Wow! That’s a lot of generalizations!! If I didn’t know better I’d think you were channeling the dude from Stereo Review who famously opined all amplifiers that measure the same sound the same. I’m pretty sure everyone and his brother have been aware of the electrical system issues, Including RFI/EMI, room acoustics and vibration issues ever since Ghandi was a Boy Scout. Perhaps they didn’t realize how pernicious and extensive they are, I’ll grant you that. To suggest these three “embeddings” have not been explored quite throughly by others might be a little misleading. In that regard you might as well say the sky is blue. To suggest those are the ONLY embeddings is quite incorrect, actually. But one thing they all have in common is they are INVISIBLE. One must be on guard not to fall into the trap of STOVE PIPING - working too independently like a lot of little smokestacks 🏭 and drawing conclusions that might be orthogonal to reality. ✖️
|
mijostynThank you mahgister. I have the picture. Yes, these are all important considerations that need to be addressed for the best performance but neither are they a mystery or all that difficult to deal with. When I start my audiophile journey from zero component, 7 years ago, this was a "mystery" indeed, because nobody talk about these 3 embeddings for what they are really: the ONLY key to transform your electronic components into their real peak potential... Almost all were speaking about the qualities of the electronic component of their choice... Most reviewers reviews, they dont say: never mind the components, look for a good one and after that, the really only important thing is to resolve the triple embeddings equation...Nobody has ever said that to me... Sometimes marginally, this one speaks about vibrations to sell you something... Sometimes those others will advise about the necessity to treat the room but in only one way road, with only conventional means and materials that’s all...And those who will advise you about the electrical noise floor, will never confront all the extensive problem in itself, they wanted to sell you an out of the box solutions ( in general costly)… This is the "mystery" part of my answer to you, because I know and you know, if you read forums, that most people believe that buying ready made solutions solve these 3 problems... It may be true in some case, but only at a cost that was very, very, high indeed...Like the "virtual section" of audiogon reveal with systems and dedicated room at 100,000 dollars and higher... The other part of my answer is your affirmation that it is not to difficult to deal with... :) It is not so difficult for sure, but it takes me 2 years to figure out by myself this puzzles, and the difficulty was not the figuring "per se" but the implementation at a very low cost... Most people, me included, dont have this kind of money...The difficult part is with no money is it possible? In my thread I explain why it is possible and how... Point to me an article in audio where someone address the 3 embeddings problems with explicit solutions at low cost and effective enough to transform any audio system in a top peak audiophile one? I will wait... :) This is the mystery part, it seems that there is nowhere a triple low cost solutions to this triple embeddings equation... In audio the truth is, most of the times, it is not important the brand name you owned, it is the embedding of the gear that is important...All relatively good amplifiers are equals, never mind their difference, if they are located in one rung of the scale: low, mid, high... The implementation and installation of a dac or amplifier, or speakers, in the triple embeddings will makes them able to go one rung over their original one and in some case more if rightly done.... The difficult part is : at which cost in dollars? My triple solutions cost nothing or very low cost and are almost all homemade...See my thread and virtual system page...And dont be fooled by the mere appearance of my "cheap" system, solutions, and room...My sound is more than good, I can listen the particular atmospherical resonance of any room, theater, or stadium where the files were recording...Cost 500 dollars for the electronic components...The same amountfor the triple solutions to the triple embeddings... My best... |
Thank you mahgister. I have the picture. Yes, these are all important considerations that need to be addressed for the best performance but neither are they a mystery or all that difficult to deal with. |
Should probably say something about my record clamp. Its my own design.
Built from some cut up BDR Shelf material. Look real close at the platter, there's a small black washer that fits around the spindle. Made from laminated carbon fiber in my shop, its just thick enough to hold the record about a millimeter higher than the platter. The underside of the record clamp is dished out.
The way it works, as the clamp is screwed down it pushes the record down onto the platter. But since the center is higher it pushes the edges down first. So even a warped record is forced to lay flat. Also the whole record is pressed into the platter evenly from center to edge. Holds the record flat like the VPI ring clamp, without the ring.
This clamp works so well its almost like a vacuum hold down. Whatever air was between the record and the platter is pressed out. The effect is so strong that when the clamp is removed the record stays stuck to the platter for a second until finally air rushes in and it pops up.
Its not a fancy 2 piece design like a lot of reflex clamps. Basically it is nothing more than a 1/4-20 thread insert in a piece of carbon fiber. Not counting the BDR Shelf, which was scrap, it cost next to nothing. Yet it sounds better than any other record clamp I have tried. |
No compromises. One man’s “no compromises” is another man’s misunderstanding. 😬 |
mijostyn- Oz, I could make an incredible combined system with absolutely no compromises. I would just turn off the theater stuff for serious listening.
Steward Screens are extremely well made and are well dampened. Hung correctly they do not buzz, rattle or affect the sound in any way. You could do a retractable screen but I am sure mc will tell you that there is no way you can get a retractable screen perfectly flat leading to some distortion of the picture.
The only problem is that doing it in a manner compatible with a high end Hi Fi system is very expensive and I feel no need to spend that money. My Hi Fi system is in no way compromised by the screen on the wall or the projector hanging from the ceiling it is just another sound source on the inputs of my preamp. The last guest I had over to watch a movie wondered where I had hid the surround speakers. Right. No compromises. Whatsoever. Meanwhile, like Mike implies, if I tried to have five or 7 or 7.1 or whatever instead of 2 that would definitely involve a whole slew of compromises. In fact, my system actually got better as it evolved over time, even with the big screen. Look at the old system, back when most of the components were on a rack with the TV on top. The rack was big and high, and I had to drape a thick blanket over the TV to damp the reflection off the screen. Yes you could hear the difference. Oh, interesting story. Someone said you need a center channel. Ha! I had a guy over one time get up and look under the blanket. Why? "I was sure you had a speaker in there." Safe to say you do not do that unless you are really convinced there’s a speaker in there. So yeah you do not need a center channel. Not if you know how to do stereo right. Anyway when the screen replaced the TV that was huge. The rack went off to the side. The turntable did have to move a bit further to the side but it already required a long interconnect so no compromise there. The equipment in the center went on the floor which being spread out and low improved the acoustics. Big screen. Big sound. No compromises. Just like Mike said. |
mijostynThe 3 embeddings of any audio system : 1-mechanical environment of the audio system (vibrations-resonance controls methods) 2-acoustical field of the room treatment with varied materials and resonators (Helmholtz one and others), reflectors, Schumann generators etc... 3- electrical grid of the room and of the house Rightly done these embeddings are the key to audiophile experience, not buying costly engineering gear "per se"... Any already good electronic components will be so much transformed by that triple embeddings controls that it will perform at a level of S.Q never known possible before... The audiophile marketting industry is not built on this truth, but my experience is a confirmation of this disturbing truth for some... |
Mahgister, I must have missed something somewhere. What do you mean by the "controls in the triple embeddings?" |
Oz, I could make an incredible combined system with absolutely no compromises. I would just turn off the theater stuff for serious listening.
Steward Screens are extremely well made and are well dampened. Hung correctly they do not buzz, rattle or affect the sound in any way. You could do a retractable screen but I am sure mc will tell you that there is no way you can get a retractable screen perfectly flat leading to some distortion of the picture.
The only problem is that doing it in a manner compatible with a high end Hi Fi system is very expensive and I feel no need to spend that money. My Hi Fi system is in no way compromised by the screen on the wall or the projector hanging from the ceiling it is just another sound source on the inputs of my preamp. The last guest I had over to watch a movie wondered where I had hid the surround speakers. |
mijostynI get your point and you are right for sure...Minor physical changes can affect astoundingly the perception of sound...Same experience here... But the changes affecting my system in the last 2 years were a cumulative increasing transformation in minors and not so minors improvement, one at a time, that culminate in a final S.Q. without any comparison with the original S.Q from the same electronic components... One of my great discovery is contrary to most audiophiles I know for sure that the relative quality of electronic components is not the first and most important factor in audio, but the controls in the triple embeddings, acoustical, mechanical and electrical, are... :) The rule is simple: Buy good electronic components and after that forget any upgrade, but look for the right controls of the 3 embeddings... And you will lived a peak audio experience on all counts even at a very low cost...This is my experience....And you will forget to upgrade for a very long time indeed even if you have the money... :) I apologize for repeating this mantra and i know that you know that already i think but no so much people know that....My best to you... "God smoke cigars and listen to music, why not? " -Groucho Marx " Harmonics of sitar cannot lie" - Ravi Shankar "Truth manifest itself musically " - myself |
Yes, mc I am kidding in one way but serious in another. We all have different perceptions of how our systems should be and this is on display. I find it interesting in the variety of solutions. You have your way and I have mine. In no way am I saying one is better than the other. Theoretically it should make no difference whether your equipment is visible or not (other than the lights:) as far as sound quality is concerned but it does! Whatever makes you happiest sounds better. None of us can separate our emotions from our perception of sound. Why does music make us happy?!
Mahgistar, I am not saying that there are not meaningful improvements you can make in a system and some of them can be dirt cheap. I once had a pair of loudspeakers that I could not get to image (Allison One's.)
One day out of frustration I turned them sideways and darn if the image did't snap into focus. Placebo is really not the right term in this case. Placebo infers a false effect. Sound affects our emotions and emotions affect what we hear. We hear what we hear. Nothing false about it. It is just that what affects what we hear is a complicated issue and hard to fathom. Adding just one dB to the volume, a barely noticeable amount can make things sound surprisingly different. I believe you have to appreciate this when evaluating equipment especially when dealing with minor differences.
|
All of these posts are making my point. I never said the OP's system couldn't sound good with movies and music. I'm sure it does. All I said is that when you combine the two, there are compromises to be made. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional.
So you accept which aspect of the system you want to focus on and let the chips fall where they may for the other aspect.
Years ago I had a a home theater/two channel room. It started off mainly as HT, but as time went on I tuned it to be more geared to two channel listening. I still watched movies, but I had separate preamps for each task. And I removed the screen and center channel completely away from the system when not in use. I realized I could get it to sound better for movies only, but I didn't care about that. I accepted the compromise.
Oz
|
shkong78 Nice system OP
It would be nice to have a chance to visit your listening room.
Thomas Thanks, and you're welcome any time. Its on Rose Hill in Redmond, just east off the 405, Kirkland-Redmond Exit 18. Tonight we are into 30 days since the first Total Contact, it really does open up, just exceptionally good tonight. I know its a good 90 minutes but PM for details if you can. Chuck |
auxinput said: Also, while the equipment was purposely chosen to be poor sounding equipment with hiss and ground humm, it actually sounded better with all that other Synergistic equipment "turned off".
millercarbon said (regarding tweaks vs. equipment upgrades and not in obvious response to auxinput's post): "No one who's ever sat and listened would say that. Quite the opposite." ?????? |
Nice system OP
It would be nice to have a chance to visit your listening room.
Thomas |
I totally agree...
Good night to you...
|
