Not 180, Jez and I measured it at 228. It recovered a little later on after peak demand time had passed to 233, which was enough for the regulated supplies in Nick's amp.
Printable View
Not 180, Jez and I measured it at 228. It recovered a little later on after peak demand time had passed to 233, which was enough for the regulated supplies in Nick's amp.
My take would be that it was mainly due to the room, Marco. I've heard Ken's Yamaha's at his place and they can boogie - and going active should make them boogie even more. I think the same applies to Richie's JBLs which were set up next to Ken's. Both these speakers were facing out into that massive room which is going to take some driving. I think the bass for most of the speakers in that room was a bit ill-defined, including my own. Except for those Missions of course... the bass just boogied along with no effort...:scratch: to paraphrase Alex Ferguson ...Hifi, bloody hell! :D
Gordon
Hi Gordon,
I get that, and it almost certainly was an issue.
However, it didn't seem to stop folk (including me) revelling in the superb sound produced in that area of the room later, when the JBLs were swapped for Colin's Eddingdales, and the amps replaced with a combination of either my Croft preamp/Ali's Slagle and Gary's valve amp, or the Radford.
That done, there were no 'suck out' issues whatsoever, and Steve's Pioneer PL-71 was thus allowed to show its true potential. IMO, after your superb system, the sounds produced there were the next best we'd heard on the day - and that wouldn't have been possible if the issues in that part of the room were as bad as suggested :)
Marco.
Yeah I'd be a bit surprised if the Eddies turned up at my place...For me..They don't sound half as good as they look....waited most of the day to hear them..and a big anti-climax....The smaller stand mount Norge..were very nice with the less involved tracks..but as the busy stuff started..they were very muddled..could have been the room considering these are a very small enclosure...and the crossovers ain't in yet...perhaps in a much smaller room these might sing...but that big room did nothing for them..they are a bonny looking speaker too..with their Sonus Faber-ish type looks..
I would have to agree with you to a degree Alan. Having set the Edingdales up at home and farted around with positioning and source components I can tell you that the room they were played in did them no favours whatsoever. As Richie mooted earlier the best area was the dance floor. Something I will really have to consider in future. Hey how.
Having attended similar do's for many years, most gear won't sound anything like how it will sound in your living room. A main reason for this is the volume levels are way higher than would ever be used at home.
We've also found that OB's do much better at these types of do's than box speakers, part of the reason the active system sounded as good as it did.
No worries. However, I'm not sure what point you're making with that last bit... :scratch:
The point I was making was that if the acoustics of the room were so bad in the areas where both Rich's and Ken's system were, how were the Eddingdales, which were used later in Rich's system (in that same area), not as affected by room issues as the JBLs and Yammies appeared to be?
Marco.
Yes, Ali's point was what I was trying to say. The Eddingdales and Linkwitz speakers will have a much narrower polar response and therefore their interaction with the room was way less.
After playing around with Digital Room Correction for a couple of months now it's really made me realise how much we listen to our rooms.
Gordon