Meridian Unplugged - Powered by MrTechGuy.co.uk Forums Discussion Meridian - Systems 568 and dsp6000 vs. 568 and analogue speakers?

Hi George,

unfortunately, I'm not rich . Why ? I don't understand it......

If I would have the cash, I might be owning the above mentioned setup. I used to own a complete digital setup on a cheaper level, but as talked about before in here I had my problems with the volume control on the 565 and the digital active speakers I used.

The point I was trying to make is that if you really take the time to setup an A/B test as good as possible, take a pink noise signal and calibrate with a SPL meter both processors to the same loudness level (although this is not satisfying some perfectionist who argue about a fraction of a db on the processor'S outputs) you might come to the conclusion that the difference among processors is there, but to what extent....... I'm not saying that there is no difference. I found the 861 to be more stable than the TAG, probably because of it's superior de-jittering system, but the TAG was therefore a little more punchy sounding in the treble and vocals (which was a taste factor).

When you take 2 different speakers the differences will come out much faster. You notice that the one speaker is imaging much more precise and the stage is more stable focused. The other might have a better extended bass ro might sound dull due to a poor treble responce.

What I found interesting is that some people rather decribe the diffrences between the processors as less hum and less noise. I thing this is sustaining that the difference between processors is not that big, once you touched a certain price point and set up the units well. Now, this is my impression, not more.

So when DC said he was thinking about all the processors, but also told us about his customized speakers, I was wondering whether he would have a greater benefit from different speakers, also because of his audition.

As I understood bi-poles or di-poles to work is that they radiate sound also into the back plane of the room. With a dipole however you wind up with sound in the back that is 180 degree phase shifted. It is a fact that by using such "sound patterns" you are using reflections to increase the image. However, any kind of reflections have nothing to do with the original signal, as they are produced by the reproduction chain and not in the studio. Acoustic treatment can help, and help "not so good speakers" as well, what ever that means.

Better designed speakers know of room problems and honestly probably 90% of us have some or more. I do.

Many professional monitors have oval shaped sound dispersion patterns. They will bundle the sound in the vertical plane, trying to avoid fist reflections with the ceiling and the floor and leave a good dispersion = coverage in the horizontal plane. They also have a defined linear bundling pattern.

Speakers I like will minimize such first reflections endangering the maximum phantom image localization ability. Phantom images are the images between two speakers. They use always active designs, meaning no passive x-over in the signal path, with active or digital active x-overs in front of their bi/tri/quad amplification build in. Many alss use the benefit, like Meridian does, of DSP correction or EQs/delays to further enhance the linearity of the responce.

I don't want to talk about brands now, since this is the Meridian forum. DC asked about whether what he heard was due to the processor or the sepakers. I simply said the speakers, which were also Meridian and this shows of their good quality.

Without an a/b comparison to some extent in quality always be aware of whether there are really the "huge differences" some people believe to have experienced. I simply doubt the word huge, because I expect something different from that word.

Regards,
Andreas

[This message has been edited by Andreas (edited 11-24-2001).]