"Music stranglers" in reference to NVA

[Ashley James]

Going Active is a good idea if it's done by people who understand the requirement and who know how to design the electronics.

Going Active using proprietary bits won't have the desired result, there are loads of active speakers around that haven't convinced people of the benefits and it's with good reason.

[WikiBoy]

I've just seen this post on PFM on a thread about NVA amplifiers from a chap called 'adieadie':



LOL. What utter tosh!

I use Spendor SP100s and the last thing you could call them is "music stranglers". Any ATCs and Harbeths I've heard certainly do not come into this category either.

Apparently 'adieadie' is getting this nonsense from Richard. Care to comment, Richard?

Marco.

This comes from 1992 interview with a Taiwanese Hi-Fi rag. The whole inteview is at www.nene-valley-audio.com

"The prominent point, the No 1 guideline for me is simplicity. After simplicity, I look at what is required for the amplifier to actually `live' in the real world. Now, living in the real world is having to drive a speaker, and an amplifier has to live with a loudspeaker as a partner, so I have to design an amplifier to drive loudspeakers. Now, I cannot, I am not responsible for what loudspeakers people design. If I were to design an amplifier that could drive any loudspeaker, then I would design an amplifier that was highly compensated and band-limited, etc. So again, you have a situation that this is not a universal amplifier. There are situations that will make this amplifier not necessarily be distressed or damaged, but will make the amplifier not sound as good as it should. Now, it normally works out OK if my No 1 principle has been applied, a loudspeaker should be simple because again, all forms of cabinets, all forms of crossovers, all forms of capacitors, all forms of drive units, or resistors, they are all filtering, all holding information, all doing things. My own mind tells me, if you can design the HF driver to work with simple 1st order low frequency roll off, if you can design a bass driver to work with no crossover network, if you can design a cabinet that will work properly without any form of damping, that is a good loudspeaker. So if you mix a simple speaker with a simple amplifier, you've got it. If you mix a complicated speaker with a multi component, multi order crossover network that is making phase changes all over the place, and highly damped cabinet, OK, maybe you will end up with the situation that the only thing you want to listen to is the human voice, the way BBC design their speakers, you get the voice sounding right. OK, if that is what you want, but it kills the music, it kills emotion, kills the surge, kills the separation. So, that is the load I want to drive"

What Jerry says is right, people try to do too much with loudspeakers. I call the process "in order not to do anything wrong, they kill the chance of doing anything right". Too much damping, not enough rigidity unless it sets off resonance (what the hell is a loudspeaker but controlled resonance), far too much crossover complexity - once you get past 3rd order filters you are making the amplifier drive current out of phase with voltage. If you have a voltage drive amp (valves) you have far less sonic reaction to this than with current drive circuits.

BTW you can add Kef to that list. For me it is a question of design principle. Speaker companies have a habit of designing in isolation as they are the last link in the chain. They design for what they want to see on charts mostly and if that make the amplifier complain, then "tuff sort your amps out as my speaker are right" - a form of arrogance. The opposite are people who deliberately "voice" speakers for their amps or their prefered amps. Linn and Naim are classic examples, in Naims case to the point that they turn some their speakers into a complete anathema. This voicing for amps used to go on with every speaker until the BBC type design came along which the (in my terms) guilty companies got off on "reproduction of spoken voice". Back in the golden days of Altec - Electro Voice etc they were voiced for very simple valve circuits, to the point that now if you use a modern solid state with them they sound *dirty*. This is used by many valve fanatics to show the inherent superiority of valve, not so!! it is just another form of voicing.

Everything in music reproduction is compromise, and one mans good compromise is another mans anathema. I *do not* design and build for everyone. I design and build *for me* if others agree with me I sell product, if not too bad I will listen too them and do something else to make a living. I am not and these products are not ruled by marketing men

[Marco]

Good post Ashley (at bloody last). I think Marco was thinking of going active with them by buying another 4 ECS monoblocks and an active crossover. At 200 Watts and a 1500 VA transformer per box they would have done the job. However, subjectivity took over and a more musical sound (including better dynamics) was derived from a 30 wpc Chinese valve amplifier costing buttons.

Indeed. Would you describe the SP100s as "music stranglers", Steve - especially the last time you heard them with the Yaqin and your Spectral preamp?

Marco.

[Marco]

Interesting post, Richard, and thanks for that

I won't challenge any of your technical observations because I'm not in a position to do so.

However the only thing I would stress is that this:

OK, maybe you will end up with the situation that the only thing you want to listen to is the human voice, the way BBC design their speakers, you get the voice sounding right. OK, if that is what you want, but it kills the music, it kills emotion, kills the surge, kills the separation. So, that is the load I want to drive"

is definitely not what I'm hearing with the SP100s in my system. If they sounded like that they'd be in the bin.

Can I ask if you've ever heard a current pair of Spendors such as the SP100s, or are you basing your opinion on old designs such as the BC1, LS35a, etc?

Incidentally, this isn't just a Spendor 'thing'. I wouldn't attribute the characteristics you describe to ATCs or Harbeths, either. I've heard ATC 50s and 100s, and Harbeth Compact 7s, and neither exhibited the traits you describe.

Maybe it would be better, and more accurate, to say something along the lines of "BBC designs aren't the most compatible with my amps" or "BBC designs aren't to my taste" than classifying all Spendor, Harbeth and ATC speakers as "Music stranglers"?

Just a thought!

Marco.

[NRG]

Of course what the industry needs is to move to high powered amps 200W min, better 1KW to give the head room needed. No way should manufactures try to design or even think of designing lighter and more efficient drive units that need less power to drive them because that would mean they wouldn't be able to use Class B bridged SS amp topologies with 35db or more of feedback to keep it all linear.

[WikiBoy]

Interesting post, Richard, and thanks for that

I won't challenge any of your technical observations because I'm not in a position to do so.

However the only thing I would stress is that this:



is definitely not what I'm hearing with the SP100s in my system. If they sounded like that they'd be in the bin.

Can I ask if you've ever heard a current pair of Spendors such as the SP100s, or are you basing your opinion on old designs such as the BC1, LS35a, etc?

Incidentally, this isn't just a Spendor 'thing'. I wouldn't attribute the characteristics you describe to ATCs or Harbeths, either. I've heard ATC 50s and 100s, and Harbeth Compact 7s and neither exhibited the traits you describe.

Maybe it would be better, and more accurate, to say something along the lines of "BBC designs aren't the most compatible with my amps" or "BBC designs aren't to my taste" than classifying all Spendor, Harbeth and ATC speakers as "Music stranglers"?

Just a thought!

Marco.

Do you work for The Sun????

I never called anything a music strangler, I wrote what I wrote, adieadie read what he read and interpreted what he needed.

[Ashley James]

I agree with Richard that some loudspeakers are silly loads and as a result they force amplifier manufacturers to make much larger and more expensive ones to cope.

In an Active speaker where only a single drive unit per amp is being used, a pair of transistors, lots of volts, not many amps, not much heatsink and a moderate Toroid can be designed that will actually perform better than a stand alone alternative that needs lots of output devices, huge expensive heat sinks, massive power supplies and so on.

The British Hi Fi Industry has continued to make low powered amplifiers that don't have sufficient dynamic range for modern recordings and can't cope with awkward loads. Meanwhile transducer designers have increased the dynamic range of loudspeakers and these simply show the limitations of outdated amplifiers. In the old days, loudspeakers Boomed and Tizzed and didn't have much mid, you could get by on low powered amps. Now that Bass is better controlled, you can't, which is why Naim has become so controversial.

Modern low powered amplifiers realise loudspeaker problems and not only clip tidily, but also often have a "soft" clipping arrangement so can sound pleasant if lacking clarity and punch. They are not hi fi.

[Marco]

LOL @ the Sun!

Thanks for the clarification about "Music stranglers", Richard.

Have you ever heard a recent pair of Spendors, or in particular, the SP100s?

I'm sorry to 'go on' about this but I would just like it made absolutely clear in the public domain.

Once done, I will contact 'adieadie' and ask him to retract his comments about "Music stranglers" because you didn't say it, and the term is not representative of your opinion on the speakers he described. Factual accuracy is very important on forums (and I insist on it here), as false information can lead to all sorts of problems!

Marco.

[jcbrum]

Of course what the industry needs is to move to high powered amps 200W min, better 1KW to give the head room needed. No way should manufactures try to design or even think of designing lighter and more efficient drive units that need less power to drive them because that would mean they wouldn't be able to use Class B bridged SS amp topologies with 35db or more of feedback to keep it all linear.

Something like that, but your heavily veiled criticisms are rather out of date. Thats why I don't like most old kit.

Also you need to think more about the whole signal path and the relationship between gain and power.

In spite of the bad press the term got in the late sixties and seventies, and recently with toy computer stuff, what actually matters is the true "peak power" capability. The amount of "gain" required to achieve a desired spl is often relatively modest, and the modern tendency to use audio compression to make things seem louder disguises things even more, and causes many amps to distort far too easily.

The cleanest sound is provided by an amp with at least 300w peak capability and 30w jobs are awful, even though some may like the clipping and distortion which occurs.

I should have put this in "musings" really, but it would be out of context.

[jcbrum]

p.s. horns don't help they're crap too.