What should I hear?

[Scottmoose]

The point of my post (indeed the point of 90% of my posts) was to ask those who know more than me what I should listen for that would show me the folly of not using a x over. So I could learn either way .

Then you've had plenty of answers on that point, including mine. There is no generic 'folly' to not using a crossover, as I said in my first post, where I in fact (partly) supported the idea. In some cases, it can work fine. Unfortunately, there are also plenty of cases where it doesn't, so as noted, it ultimately depends on exactly what you're doing. Perhaps you could explain exactly how and why you interpreted that as 'idiotic', 'ego[tistical], and 'having a go [at you]'?

You may think me unkind but I think the only point of your post was to enhance your guru status. I don’t require your synopsis of the debate or your opinion on the success or otherwise of my stance .

I don't actually waste my time wondering what other people think of me, so no. However, for reference, for many years I've said these exact words in many places, on many occasions:

Any person who considers themself to be an expert on any subject is not one.

That's my view on the matter. End of.

You may think it is a ridiculous question without knowing drivers and box ,then just say so , god knows I ask enough ridiculous questions

I don't. There is no such thing as a ridiculous question if the person asking doesn't know the answer. Since you say you didn't, it wasn't. QED. But you've obviously got the idea now, and the answer is (as I said from the outset) that without knowing what the drivers and box are, we don't, and can't know what you might hear. If you tell us what they are, we might be able to make a guess at some possible characteristics. The key words being 'might' and 'guess', since it's never more than that. Over to you: what are the drivers and box?

[Daniel Quinn]

I’ve come to the conclusion Richard used to much doping for my tastes . I’ve nicked an idea from scanspeak and put 6 lines of glue from dust cap to edge . I much prefer this .

At the moment I’ve no damping on the mid range and prefer it that way in one v one audition . Now I’ll move on to listening to both that way

[rowuk]

My aversion to x overs is simple . Side by side they don’t sound as good . If they did I keep them . Though simple x overs and good parts makes it closer.

When I fist experimented the difference between nothing and a cheap mission x over was staggering .

A loaded - very much disqualified answer. Obviously you are not sensitive enough to the "warts" that a good crossover prevents from happening. You even bring a "bad" crossover (first experiments usually means that we have no idea what we are doing) into the discussion. That should cause questions about your level of listening perception more than just dumping working concepts down the drain. Basically good crossovers lower distortion, allow drivers to work in their sweet spot, no crossovers just pass the problems through.
Our mind is the biggest variable as it can be open to learning or continually feed us with bogus reasons to argue. If at the end of an "argument" we have learned something, then all is good. Maybe not the fast track, but good.
When semantic smoke is blown, those in the know usually just give up as there is no reason to continue. Nothing to share, nothing learned.

[rowuk]

I’ve come to the conclusion Richard used to much doping for my tastes . I’ve nicked an idea from scanspeak and put 6 lines of glue from dust cap to edge . I much prefer this .

At the moment I’ve no damping on the mid range and prefer it that way in one v one audition . Now I’ll move on to listening to both that way

Damping changes the frequency response, resonance, efficiency and distortion curve of a driver. That makes AB testing "weak" at best. In any case, it would make the level matching required for a proper AB test impossible.

Random process, random result. Since you "prefer" 6 lines of glue, some measurements could perhaps give you insight into what changed - reducing conjecture for future measurements.

[Daniel Quinn]

There for listening to Genesis not for changing the world.

And your assuming a transparent relationship between what you measure and what you hear. When in reality the relationship is so opaque you may as well ignore measurements and go straight to listening .

If I enjoyed version a , but version b is more enjoyable and version c is even more enjoyable . That is a satisfying trajectory and I can live with till I die

Finally I confess your initial post with its homespun cod psychology made me laugh

[rowuk]

...
And your assuming a transparent relationship between what you measure and what you hear. When in reality the relationship is so opaque you may as well ignore measurements and go straight to listening .
...

I am assuming nothing except that we can learn something with every measurement that we take (which is not always the case with turning on the hi fi and just playing something). If measurements are opaque to you, you basically have discovered all by yourself where you need to invest time. In any case, good luck with whatever pile of random audio that you end up with.

[steve s]

I’ve come to the conclusion Richard used to much doping for my tastes . I’ve nicked an idea from scanspeak and put 6 lines of glue from dust cap to edge . I much prefer this .

I had a good chat with Richard on this subject, really it's a trade off in design, there's always more than one way to do every job.

The really difficult thing in my view, is the judging/listening bit.
For me I've been lucky enough, even before our meets started to have others skilled enough that will lend an ear, or just come and listen, as long as you dont get too offended by other views, you can develop your skills

Luckily for me that Scott and Ed live close by and been a great support in some my off the wall efforts, and have been honest regarding feedback
As have many others on the forum.

But in isolation its quite difficult to judge.

I remember one time at the wam show entering a packed room which a couple of speaker designers telling every how this system removed some sort of distortion and resonance.
I listen and asked why it was so coloured.
It wasn't they said, so walked up to the front, felt around the speakers and the cabinets where playing their own tune, the vibration was quite serious.
And I could clearly hear it..
As could a few others did once pointed out.
My point is we all don't hear everything. The 'actual listening' for faults is a challenge for most of us, and I include myself in that.

[chris661]

And your assuming a transparent relationship between what you measure and what you hear. When in reality the relationship is so opaque you may as well ignore measurements and go straight to listening .

An unfortunately common misconception.

Floyd Toole is someone who actually did the studies on this. He invited listeners to rate speakers according to their fidelity, and compared the fidelity ratings with acoustic measurements.

For listeners with normal hearing, the speakers with more extended bass, smoother response curves and smoother directivity patterns were rated higher than those lacking in bass, having ragged response, or a dis-jointed off-axis response.

There's some light reading here: https://www.pearl-hifi.com/06_Lit_Archi ... _Prefs.pdf
Part 2 is more relevant to our current discussion.

Chris

[Daniel Quinn]

I’m a bit perplexed about about mentions of difficulty and getting it wrong . As a lawyer you get something wrong and thier are real consequences .

Getting something wrong in hifi you ruin a driver or get a cloud of smoke . That’s why it’s a hobby , getting it wrong is fun .

And somebody trying to tell me I’m having fun wrong , sorry I ain’t reading that

Seems to me there is a fundamental difference in motivation . I just want something to listen to Genesis to and piss about with till I go back to work . You lot want something to impress at owston.

[chris661]

I've tried to present useful information that might allow you to explore new facets to this hobby, and I've been met with "anathema" and "I'm not reading that". Why should I bother?

I'm done. Best of luck to you.

Chris

[Daniel Quinn]

The premise of the article was I was doing it wrong .

Have you read any articles pointing out your failures as a lover recently ?

[rowuk]

I really wonder why some people ask questions, get sincere answers from people with first hand experience - and then argue with everyone - even although there is ample evidence that the only one missing the point is the original poster.

The major misunderstanding is that no one here is interested in converting non-believers. We have peaceful coexistence between analog/digital, horn/dynamic/electrostatic, wide band/multi way, high and low efficiency as well as Class A/B/AB/D.

On Facebook we have a block function for these hopeless cases. I wonder how long it will take Mr. Quinn to wake up? In any case, like a couple of others, there will be no more engagement from me. His questions appear to be only a foundation to argue, not to learn (or teach). Now his insults have a greater word count than the Audio-Talk. Life is too short for warm beer.

My personal system is the result of many years of listening, measuring and comparing live (mostly acoustic) concerts to playback. Every step is documented and even the warts in the current system are known. The effects from personal preference to bias confirmation are very clear and demonstrable. Without knowing how weak our hearing really is, we can not know where we stand and what should come next.

Random process = random result.
What should Mr. Quinn hear (his original question, adequately answered by many)? A voice telling him that we are in this for fun and that when the fun stops, so does community. Good bye!

[Daniel Quinn]

Read the bloody thread before you give your wide of the mark opinion , it would stop you being an idiot .

And not replying to my threads is a promise I can get on board with .

[Cressy Snr]

The premise of the article was I was doing it wrong .

If you are unsure about it, or you are convinced it's wrong, or maybe you're saying to yourself, 'it can't be this simple, surely!"
Just remember this:

"You can't go wrong if you just go right, 'cos right's the proper way.
That's what my dear old grandad always used to say.
And that I will remember, until my dying day,
Oh you can't go wrong if you just go right 'cos right's the proper way."

Freddie & The Dreamers (1970) Oliver in the Overworld. LP, Track 4.

R-3066576-1314185061.jpeg (191.02 KiB) Viewed 10310 times

I think that general truth covers all the bases.

[Daniel Quinn]

I’m going to search out that record .

Addendum: 1 copy on eBay for £40 !