Transcendent Sound Forum
Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Alex993
Reply with quote  #1 

Hello everyone,[smile]
I'm new user.
I already have two extraordinary SEs connected to the bridge and I am very happy. I want to buy a pre and another amp for my particular system.
I'm undecided between the Grounded Grid Preamp and the Maesterpiece ... who can give me some advice? I would use it as a line stadium.
I wanted to buy the Beast but it's out of production [rolleyes] why? I'll choose Son of Beast [love]
Best Regards
Alex

SONDEK
Reply with quote  #2 
Alex

Good on you for wisely selecting to build one of the two best kitset preamps on the planet.

To help us to help you, perhaps you can tell us a bit more?

What are you looking to achieve?

What are your priorities?
  • Lowest price?
  • Easiest build?
  • Best sound quality?
  • Something else?

If you tell us a bit more about your decision, we may be of greater assistance.

Welcome aboard!
[biggrin]

-SONDEK

Alex993
Reply with quote  #3 

Hello Sondek !! [wink]
I look for the highest quality ... I am an acoustic researcher and I study live music and their correct reproduction. All my acoustic projects are bizarre and directed towards what I call Sound Realism for the perfect reproduction of fondamental note and harmonics. I really like the OTLs of which I own several Atmasphere and 2 Transcendent Single Ended for the bridge that I use with my Rehdeko base system with a superstructure tweeter built with a violin.

the big system makes use of a unique system in the world ... resonant wood loudspeakers without loudspeakers ... they only use special woods powered by magnetic motors and with a double horn dipole loading .... what I wanted to use with the Beast but that I now use with an Atmasphere Novacron but its power of 60watt is insufficient in some types of music.

Attached Images
Click image for larger version - Name: IMG_20180317_210436.jpg, Views: 30, Size: 2.45 MB  Click image for larger version - Name: quartetto italiano sublima.jpg, Views: 27, Size: 53.12 KB 

Vapour
Reply with quote  #4 
Interesting speakers! I would recommend the Masterpiece, no question.
Tubemon
Reply with quote  #5 
The Gounded Grid is a great preamp but The Masterpiece is way better hands down.
SONDEK
Reply with quote  #6 
It seems you have your answer...

[thumb][thumb][thumb]
Alex993
Reply with quote  #7 
THANKS!!! [thumb][wave]
Achim
Reply with quote  #8 
Hello Alex,

take a look here, I think this will be interesting to you:
http://www.matthewrkennedy.com/techbriefing/

Special speaker enclosure geometry that profits from thin walls.

Cheers,
Achim
Achim
Reply with quote  #9 
Practical experiences with that design decribed here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/265053-hypercube-loudspeakers.html

Alex993
Reply with quote  #10 
Hello Achim ,
Thanks! [smile]
Wolfgang
Reply with quote  #11 
The most obvious flaw in "The Projected Tesseract Loudspeaker" is that this theory doesn't consider or reflect  that we as listeners are still  sitting  in just another  "loudspeaker"  -our listening room - which is worse in its acoustic qualities than any loudspeaker design. And it  has rectangular shape with all the standing waves, nodes, reflections. Moreover furniture, doors, and windows work as uncontrolled resonating surfaces. The same is of course true for all these companies that make special acoustically dead speaker housings and charge a fortune for it. Then we put them in regular living rooms and it's over with (questionable) benefits of almost resonance free speakers.
The solution for these problems can be found  somewhere else.


Achim
Reply with quote  #12 
Hi Wolfgang,

what are you thinking of?

BTW, as I understand it, the "hypercube" enclosure is not about being resonance-free, but quite the opposite, being an almost perfect resonator. Therefore no padding needed, etc.

Hope to be trying this out myself.

Cheers,
Achim
Wolfgang
Reply with quote  #13 
Achim,

the concept works of course and it was an interesting article.

The "Hypercube"  achieves its typical sound benefits by working along the lines of  physical laws rather than against them which has been explained well in this article.

My point is that for high quality home reproduction there are two more things necessary to be mentioned together with any speaker we want to use: the listening room and the listener with his/her taste. Without looking at the interaction of these three components together we go where all loudspeaker designers/companies go: praising and selling a product that is taken out of its main context, looking at numbers, frequency curves that don't exist in a the context of a normal living room/listening room. And we completely ignore or forget to mention  the fact that we NEVER listen to some miraculously "neutral" or "original" live sound but to a very personal sound concept of the mastering engineer in combination with the ideas of the performers whenever we listen to any vinyl or digital format. And this "concept" ( a thing in his mind, his taste) has been shaped with real world studio monitors/DACs/amps in an acoustically treated studio listening environment.

What we have "transferred" into our (personal) acoustical environment if we listen to music is a package of another acoustical environment where it had been mixed with goals - nothing is "neutral" here - to achieve a certain "sound". That's why all recordings sound different. Add to it how studio technology and its possibilities to shape the original recording has changed over the decades and is still rapidly changing and how the need to commercialize the product defines listening levels, compression levels during mastering, often against all better knowledge and personal feeling of the mastering engineer and the performers, and it's obvious that it needs a lot more than just putting a new and better speaker design in the old listening room with the hope to get better SQ or solve problems.

Practically speaking we have to adjust the speakers and the room to our musical taste and the music style we listen most of the time considering also the time and style of the recording. Unfortunately there is no such sound system that plays all musical styles equally well in a given listening environment. Rock music of the 70ies for example will need a different adjustment of the  room/sound system to sound really good  compared to Jazz recorded after 2000. Whenever we hear about some amp, cable,or speaker that sounds "thin", liveless, or too boomy, bass heavy etc we should first ask: with what style of music, when recorded,  and where are the problem zones of the listening room?

Getting rid of the problems of regular speaker designs - like with the Hypercube - doesn't mean automatically and necessarily better sound. Actually it could even sound worse if our brain and its expectations have finally adjusted to the typical  "sound" of our listening environment.

This was the "context" I was missing while I was  reading the article. Because one could get the impression the Hypercube would solve all those problems just by itself which would include the assumption that acoustical problems are based on wrong or not ideal speaker concepts/performance. The coloration and problems come to a much higher degree from listening room in combination with recorded music, music genre, which form together with our - often unreflected - expectations what we call: Good or bad sound.

Wolfgang

Robbert
Reply with quote  #14 
I can agree with wolfgang on his thoughts.

I have build numerous loudspeakers. I also believed once in the hypercube and similar theorys. I  build a complete ball shaped loudspeaker, also build the egg which was promoted in the 80's by focal.
They sounded off course different but better ? Worse ? I can not tell, the placebo effect can take over. Now fast forward to 2018, I am building again rectangular boxes, learned that a big baffle often get me more live like sound than small baffle. I also used rounded baffles could not hear a bettering in sound.

What I learned though is that a speaker system is an instrument, deaden it completely and you have accurate sounds but not live like sounds.

My favorite depending speaker for my ears, back horn loaded or closed correctly dampened, both their distinct sounds the lather a bit more accurate. And always build from baltic birch. And yes I take care that that the sound behind the speaker is dampened so no sound from within the box will come out loudly over there. (It will do though to same extent)

At the end I come back to my current believe system, a speaker is an instrument, now the question do you like the sound in your listening space.

I have 3 different speaker systems now, I listen to all of them to all kinds of music from all year but depending the music, (and as wolfgang said) the year recorded I have my favorite for each of them.

Make the hyper cube and make a rectangular box. Listen a while to one, move the speaker to the other and let your ears decide.

My music hobby is about experimenting and trying stuff out. And once and a while burn things.

Happy listening and building. 

Robbert

Wolfgang
Reply with quote  #15 
Spot-on, Robbert!

"At the end I come back to my current believe system, a speaker is an instrument, now the question do you like the sound in your listening space."

And because real music instruments radiate  sound in all directions:

"What I learned though is that a speaker system is an instrument, deaden it completely and you have accurate sounds but not live like sounds."

With this in mind I can imagine that the Hypercube would sound more natural than other speakers if it can be perfectly integrated  into an existing acoustical environment.

Wolfgang


Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.