eddie-baby

Wammer
  • Content count

    1,694
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Community Reputation

170 Excellent

1 Follower

About eddie-baby

  • Rank
    Wammer

Personal Info

  • Location
    Pembrokehsire
  • Real Name
    Eddie

Wigwam Info

  • Digital Source 1
    DVD/SACD PC/Tablet
  • DAC
    Trichord Pulsar One
  • Integrated Amp
    Naim/Marantz/Sony
  • Pre-Amp
    Little dot
  • My Speakers
    ProAc/epos (+others)
  • Headphones
    Grado/Audio-Technica (+others)
  • Trade Status
    I am not in the Hi-Fi trade
  1. Pembrokeshire Bake off.

    I know this is a bit of a cop-out but you really need to try a good sealed unit and a good ported to see what suits you best. BK usually advocate the sealed sub being better for music but they are both good. I'm sure they let you try both as long as you don't mind paying return costs.
  2. Pembrokeshire Bake off.

    I thought the cheap one was a bit naff in my opinion. It did the job superbly and was feature rich but I found it degraded the signal quality past through it a little. I suppose you could say its fine for subwoofers and maybe not mains, but I just didn't like the fact it did it. I moved mine on! but I did just have the basic model. I haven't got a DSP at the moment I just integrate my subs at the moment without, I use the good old fashioned method the knobs on the side and my ears but I maybe will look again in future. And subs are just like any other speaker, they are a personal preference and also they are not all the same. You might like what some do over others, but as a general rule better drivers, better construction and better amplifiers 'usually' do give better results, but usually come at a cost. But don't kid yourself a budget sub set up well with cheap DSP is never going to be as good as a better quality sub, its just not going to be the same. And 'the very cheap subs' in general well, I would rather not have one even up to some of the more expensive Rels. BK's are good value for money as they sell them directly, personally, the minimum I would go with is an XXLS400 or a Monolith, I wouldn't look at the rest. I did own a smaller BK XLS200 for a bit but even then I moved it on, and they are better than your Rel quakes etc. Those smaller subs are ok but Id put them in maybe a smaller sub/sat set up or a good desktop pc system at best. But there are people who use them with good speakers/ floorstanders, and Im sure they add something to the sound but Im as much an audiophile (and bit of a snob) with subs as I am with others speakers, I like the good ones Depending if large/smaller, sealed or ported suits you better go with either a xxls400 or a monolith for a decent sub and value for money, but perhaps get a better DSP if you can afford it.
  3. Pembrokeshire Bake off.

    Ok Fred, I'll add a to that . I'm just glad I got to compare the two, I been meaning to try something like this for some time. Even though it was a quick and dirty test really, the comparison was still informative. And no problem Martin, I'm like yourself I like to find as much information as possible before I go outlaying any cash. There is clearly no better sub here (unless you have a major preference) but I would say you are talking two different options. The JL does cost a considerable bit more and 'may' have a better drive unit (its certainly more expensive, the drive unit alone would probably be around 2-3x the cost of the BKs) and the speaker itself is actually moulded into a metal faceplate. There may be fancier electronics in the JL also, but as for build quality the BK is of a 'very' high standard and its drive unit is far from 'cheap' either. If you are talking value for money for what you get, then there is absolutely no contest BK every time! The biggest difference apart from the ones I have mentioned is that one is a big ported and the other a much smaller sealed. I supposed a direct comparison between the smaller sealed BK XXLS12 would have been a fairer comparison. But then the JL would have probably shown clearly why it is the more luxurious sub, even though the XXLS12 is a good sub also and does also use good components. JL doesn't make many ported subs for domestic use as far as I can see, they do some huge ones but they are mostly sealed, but if they had one the equivalent of the monolith + apart from paying the price for it you would probably be getting more. The engineering and R&D over the years have made JL Audio one of the best subwoofers specialists in the world, possibly thee best. I think the only other one to match them at they're level (and price) is as Fred said is Velodyne (and I did try an SPL1000 also, IMO it wasn't as good as the JL). The Velodynes DD+'s range will be different, but these are 4 grand each! Back to our bake-off, as I said these are two totally different subs, they both play low frequencies but that's where the similarities end. If you like moving air around the room and into cinema with some big whooshing effects then the BK is a bargain, it has 'a lot' of depth and lots of bass you can feel (over what you can hear sometimes), but it is a large unit to accommodate. However, it does sound very good with music as well IMO, but it is a deep ported sub and you're going to get some of that effect in your music. Personally, I do actually really like ported subs a lot as well they're great fun. The JL we used it against is tiny in comparison, and this one was just a 10 inch as well. It shakes my walls here at home fine if you turn the gain up enough on it but its only when you compare directly to a big ported you see the difference. It won't give you as much of the whoosh, depth & feel of the bottom octaves as the big ported. However, it can (beyond it size) hit hard, go deep, play very tight fast and articulate and is a fraction of the size of the BK. And most of all it does just play some gorgeous sounding bass which is what JL Audio have become masters at.
  4. Can't argue with that, getting the best from an 'entire music collection' (the good and bad) is very appropriate to having a hi-fi you can really enjoy. In my opinion, its what more people should be aiming for (or maybe they are ) than getting other certain aspects from a system or expecting it to sound a certain way.
  5. iso pucks for standmount speakers

    ProAc's studio range confuses me and I haven't heard any side by side with Response so I can't really comment how they compare A/B. I even asked Mr Tyler what they were about at a show and his words were, 'I designed the Studio as a tool for work, and designed them with a slightly rolled off treble so that engineers could work comfortably with them all day.' He also said that they were really exclusively for studio work but people would hear them in studios and just love the sound and want them to take home, and customers demand different designs and models and let's face it who's he to argue he's in the business of selling speakers after all. So that's how I understand their popularity and sound to be. This is what I have always thought (and experienced) to be the case with studio monitors though, their main focus being the midband accuracy and information above all else whether its pleasing or not, and not so much about producing a pleasing colourful euphoric sound, shimmering treble or how far the bass can go. It just happens that ProAc's from their design do make music sound good. The finishes might be another factor but I know nothing about that. As much as I like ProAcs speakers those others you have mentioned are fantastic options as well, ATC are another world-renowned speaker and so are Dynaudio, as you say it would be great to try all of them at the same time before coming to a conclusion on which would be the best for you. And even short demo's don't always let you have the best picture of how your going to like them, extended ownership is always the best but its even more impractical.
  6. iso pucks for standmount speakers

    Well arguably those b&w's in those photos are out and out floorstanders but I know what your saying. I don't think Ive seen any tall slim floorstanders in recording studio's but I think that might just be a case of not being as practical as a standmount type of speaker. Proacs make a studio floorstander some of which Phil has some variants of now, not sure what that was all about when they were designed, perhaps they are used as a studio monitors by some but I doubt it, those variations are more of a domestic use speaker I would have thought but voiced similarly.
  7. iso pucks for standmount speakers

    Really nice speakers Harbeth, I got a lot of time for those, they're a bit like but not quite as good as old school epos (just joking, each to their own anyway). I wouldnt say no to a set of Harbeths! Always fancied trying the 3s myself, would have to use a sub with those tho.
  8. iso pucks for standmount speakers

    Think I might just have ticked that box, whilst not even working in a hi-fi shop, ( perhaps I should have looking back, it wouldn't have felt like work then ). I think its pretty impossible to generalize about a speaker but I do agree with what you say about standmounts. They are usualy easier to accommodate (in general) and more often they can give you a better sound than a floorstander because of the environment they are used in. Floorstanders sound superb as long as youve got the right space for them, get it wrong and they just sound all wrong. Both have their merits I think. Tiny boxes image amazingly as well but miss out the real low stuff. But subwoofers are a great option with those (as well as floorstanders). Speakers are just the most variable component, you can have hours of fun messing with different types. It might be more a case of standmount speakers being easier to accommodate in a studio, as a lot of the time it involves a desk. Even if its a huge desk they still plonk them on the desk somewhere. Sometimes is deliberate and sometimes its just wherever they can fit then in as best they can. And floorstanders are used in studios lots, just as long as you got the room for them! Some examples of floorstanders and boxes just plonked on a desk not a stand in sight Dont know how many times Ive heard AE1 should only be used on their dedicated stands, how about on their side plonked on a desk
  9. iso pucks for standmount speakers

    Lets see a few photos of these performance enhancing car parts in use then
  10. An interesting set of mission 75?

    As I said an interesting variation (modification) on the original designs. It is Alan Partridge country so maybe he contributed https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Mission-Floor-Standing-Speakers-Same-Woofer-Tweeter-as-751-752-753/182958434227?hash=item2a992c27b3:g:3hYAAOSwNWxaLtrc
  11. iso pucks for standmount speakers

    fairy nuff. Those are neat 'professional' looking stands I have to say. Interesting what you say about the Dynaudios as well over the B&W, Ive always thought Dyn's were pretty bland anyway unless you go for some of their really expensive or rare'r models.
  12. iso pucks for standmount speakers

    I have to say I think Tony's upgrade was better value for money (I shouldn't encourage him really ) Tastefully covered/protected concrete blocks cut to the required hight may have had a similar or even better effects though. They're nice little stands you have there all the same but Im just saying
  13. I love guys like you but you really should be thinking of upgrading now (just joking) If it is true, just how? I did own 2 tho