Announcement

Collapse

Midwest Audio Fest

It’s that time audio enthusiasts! Registration for the 2019 Speaker Design Competition is now open! Visit midwestaudiofest.com for details and to list your speaker project. We are excited to see all returning participants, and look forward to meeting some new designers this year, as well! Be sure your plans include a visit to the Parts Express Tent Sale for the lowest prices of the year, and the Audio Swap Meet where you can buy and trade with other audio fans. We hope to see you this summer! Vivian and Jill
See more
See less

Soldering xo change sound?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mountainman Bob
    started a topic Soldering xo change sound?

    Soldering xo change sound?

    I got my voicing zeroed in nicely on my Burhoes but wanted to try a different inductor....trying to see if I could bring the upper bass/lower mids a little more fwd by using a ‘super q’ of the same value because it had it little lower dcr.

    Well long story short I changed out from the jantzen 15ga solid wire air core for the super q , after a couple hours listening found I didn’t like it at all so it came out and jantzen went back.....I went ahead and soldered the jumper wires back on, the same jumper wires that were used before....cut new ends on wire to solder....cleaned the jantzen ends....the only thing different was the caps were still connected to the other end of the jumpers. Caps are 3” of 14ga wire away from solder joint so it did not overheat anything, and yes they were discoed from the amp. Same wbt solder.

    The sound was concerning when I fired it up.....lost all micro detail and pushed the soundstage way back....acoustic guitars now sound like the pick with no pluck.

    Checked and double checked everything.....it’s all the same.
    the sound is coming back gradually but is still not all the way back.

    so could this be something along the lines of the soldering gun ‘upsetting’ the caps?

    bob

  • Mountainman Bob
    replied
    My highly oxidized speaker wire seems to have been my problem.....once replaced, what was missing from the sound returned.
    Imaginary? Dunno but it worked so it’s real to me.


    see the new post ‘speaker wire’ for a pic of the wire.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountainman Bob
    replied
    Originally posted by wogg View Post
    So there's nothing inherently wrong with what you're doing Bob. You can easily end up with speakers that you enjoy for many years. And if you like them, go right ahead. I have speakers that I enjoyed for a long time with off the shelf crossovers, couldn't find fault with them at all with my ears.

    They weren't accurate though, and I didn't know that until I learned a lot more about the science behind crossover designing and the availability of measurement tools to examine them. That's what I think you're missing out of this whole conversation. Do they have to be accurate? Nope... not if you like them.

    The engineering folks have a goal to make them accurate though, which can be done through measurement. The trick with your ears for this is that you may not notice a 5 or 6 DB dip here and there, and depending on what you're listening to it may not matter. It could just take a particular song, with a particular instrument or voice to hit that frequency band. And then you may not notice until you compare to another speaker set with a different response in that same frequency band. Coming from the audio recording and engineering field, accuracy is important during production so you don't inadvertently plop a big peak in some annoying frequency band because your monitoring setup didn't let you hear it.

    Ultimately, back to this point: Your speakers do not have to be accurate. This hobby is ultimately about enjoying listening to music. If your process suits you, then go for it.

    You won't convince the engineers here that you'll be able to hit accurate using only your ears, though I think myself and many others will concede that you can absolutely hit enjoyable. So to you, I hope you can stop arguing that. And to the engineers arguing back, Bob will learn the tools we use to get accuracy if he chooses. I'm hoping for a mic drop thread ender here, but won't go holding my breath.
    Yep, the arguing does get pointless.....don’t know why people just can’t have civil conversations even if they don’t agree with something.

    you , say your a recording engineer.....at one point I was heavy into live recording, did it D.A.D. style, had some decent equipment(still have it)....tascam,aphex,marantz pro, rode mics etc. I knew my playback system may introduce anomaly’s so I would make a master then mix a version, I then I took that version to a half dozen different systems (promising a final cut for putting up with me) taking notes sometimes just mental notes then coming back to tweak......I knew I was good when I would start chasing my tail (you know what I’m talking about!) sometimes it would take wks and dozens of attempts but all by ear.
    I relate this experience to working on crossovers.....if you train your ears they will eventually listen.

    some of the best guitar players I know cannot tune without a tuner of some sort.......then others that are just as good tune by ear like it’s nothing.
    is it to be assumed the ones who tune by ear are wrong? I think not.

    Yah.....the powers that be are more than welcome to close this, mainly because like you say wogg I’m unlikely to convince any engineer of anything they don’t wanna hear and they will never convince me that it’s all in my head.......40+ yrs of paying attention to sound reproduction even if on a amateur level without measurement has at least culminated in me wanting to further my education.

    I have conclusively found (by process of elimination) the solder was Not the cause of my distress.........i’ll See ya on the next go round!

    bob

    Leave a comment:


  • fpitas
    replied
    wogg is right about accuracy. Some people care about it, some don't. I do, so I measure, and I have a pair of reasonably flat headphones (AKG K601) as a final sanity check. Sorry I picked up the mic, wogg!

    Leave a comment:


  • wogg
    replied
    So there's nothing inherently wrong with what you're doing Bob. You can easily end up with speakers that you enjoy for many years. And if you like them, go right ahead. I have speakers that I enjoyed for a long time with off the shelf crossovers, couldn't find fault with them at all with my ears.

    They weren't accurate though, and I didn't know that until I learned a lot more about the science behind crossover designing and the availability of measurement tools to examine them. That's what I think you're missing out of this whole conversation. Do they have to be accurate? Nope... not if you like them.

    The engineering folks have a goal to make them accurate though, which can be done through measurement. The trick with your ears for this is that you may not notice a 5 or 6 DB dip here and there, and depending on what you're listening to it may not matter. It could just take a particular song, with a particular instrument or voice to hit that frequency band. And then you may not notice until you compare to another speaker set with a different response in that same frequency band. Coming from the audio recording and engineering field, accuracy is important during production so you don't inadvertently plop a big peak in some annoying frequency band because your monitoring setup didn't let you hear it.

    Ultimately, back to this point: Your speakers do not have to be accurate. This hobby is ultimately about enjoying listening to music. If your process suits you, then go for it.

    You won't convince the engineers here that you'll be able to hit accurate using only your ears, though I think myself and many others will concede that you can absolutely hit enjoyable. So to you, I hope you can stop arguing that. And to the engineers arguing back, Bob will learn the tools we use to get accuracy if he chooses. I'm hoping for a mic drop thread ender here, but won't go holding my breath.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountainman Bob
    replied
    Originally posted by dlneubec View Post
    Confirmation bias

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses.[1] It is a type of cognitive bias and a systematic error of inductive reasoning. People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. Confirmation bias is of particular current interest because of the increasing polarization between left-wing and right-wing political viewpoints, and the gullible acceptance of the current rapid spread of fake news.[2]

    People also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).

    A series of psychological experiments in the 1960's suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people's conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way. However, even scientists can be prone to confirmation bias.[3]

    Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence. Poor decisions due to these biases have been found in political and organizational contexts.
    Quibbling over semantics is tiresome.........I know these things, why is it so hard to grasp that one might be able to work around these phantoms in their heads without the bias?

    its not that big a reach.

    edit... i’m Not political, i’m Not affiliated to any certain religion, I Can assess the difference between good,bad, and indifferent even in the face of persuasion......does this make me special? I would certainly hope not!

    Leave a comment:


  • dlneubec
    replied
    Confirmation bias

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Confirmation bias is the tendency to search for, interpret, favor, and recall information in a way that confirms one's preexisting beliefs or hypotheses.[1] It is a type of cognitive bias and a systematic error of inductive reasoning. People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. Confirmation bias is of particular current interest because of the increasing polarization between left-wing and right-wing political viewpoints, and the gullible acceptance of the current rapid spread of fake news.[2]

    People also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).

    A series of psychological experiments in the 1960's suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people's conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way. However, even scientists can be prone to confirmation bias.[3]

    Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence. Poor decisions due to these biases have been found in political and organizational contexts.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountainman Bob
    replied
    Thanks Tom,

    i suppose that’s as close as Im gonna get to recognition/understanding that indeed one could tune by ear.....as difficult as that might be compared to the ‘right’ way.

    decent results in sound are certainly possible without measurements..... I listen to it every day. I’m just not sure that what I’ve done would measure “correctly” if one of you were to measure it!

    i find it interesting that my questions seem invalid without proper measurements. Almost as if the sounds don’t exist until they are measured. And yes I do understand it’s difficult to diagnose a problem without the tools.....but certainly not impossible.

    I suppose I’ve put the cart before the horse.......Someone should make a list of required equipment before joining! lol
    the measuring equipment would allow me to verify a problem in a process of elimination much the same as I do by ear.......it’s a shame some find it insulting that its possible for one to have the ability to do that. And don’t get me wrong I’m not saying I can do it better......just that I can do it.

    And I do want to be able to measure correctly taking it to the next level.....so no bias.



    I wish I could bring my ratrod burhoes up for someone to measure ......i’m not able to make it this yr but aim to see(hear)the light in 2020

    bob

    Leave a comment:


  • fpitas
    replied
    Originally posted by philthien View Post
    I read a forum post about speaker cables today, that mentioned a particular product checked all the boxes including, "pace, dynamics, symmetry, a riveting sense of touch, and of coarse unsurpassed musicality."

    I thought that was pretty awesome.

    I need solder that works for both pace AND touch.
    I'd take it easy on the musicality, though. Too much and it can get overwhelming.

    Leave a comment:


  • fpitas
    replied
    Originally posted by djg View Post

    Best experienced by dropping a large hot blob on your jeans.
    I thought that was for curse and ouch?

    Leave a comment:


  • djg
    replied
    Originally posted by philthien View Post

    I need solder that works for both pace AND touch.
    Best experienced by dropping a large hot blob on your jeans.

    Leave a comment:


  • fpitas
    replied
    Originally posted by tom_s View Post
    When I joined this forum many years ago, nearly every discussion was about the science of building a good loudspeaker. So far, I have seen no FFT measurements of drivers, impedance graphs, or any mention of phase integration or relative acoustic offset with regard to your project. Those are the fundamentals that many (most?) here use every time we embark on a new design. Unless you have the means to measure (or simulate from existing measurements), you have absolutely no idea what's happening, especially in the time domain with regards to driver summation. Sometimes you do get lucky, but it is very, very rare.

    Maybe it is better/easier to not know what one doesn't know. I do know I struggled for a few years to build a successful speaker - all because of what I didn't know at the time. If you can, attend a DIY event. It's amazing what some of these guys can do with very modest drivers and astonishing when premium drivers are in the right hands.
    This. All of this. It took me a long, long time until I got my speakers to sound decent, despite measurements etc. Capacitors may make a difference (solder probably not), but without the fundamentals it's a guessing game at best.

    Leave a comment:


  • tom_s
    replied
    When I joined this forum many years ago, nearly every discussion was about the science of building a good loudspeaker. So far, I have seen no FFT measurements of drivers, impedance graphs, or any mention of phase integration or relative acoustic offset with regard to your project. Those are the fundamentals that many (most?) here use every time we embark on a new design. Unless you have the means to measure (or simulate from existing measurements), you have absolutely no idea what's happening, especially in the time domain with regards to driver summation. Sometimes you do get lucky, but it is very, very rare.

    Maybe it is better/easier to not know what one doesn't know. I do know I struggled for a few years to build a successful speaker - all because of what I didn't know at the time. If you can, attend a DIY event. It's amazing what some of these guys can do with very modest drivers and astonishing when premium drivers are in the right hands.

    Leave a comment:


  • philthien
    replied
    I read a forum post about speaker cables today, that mentioned a particular product checked all the boxes including, "pace, dynamics, symmetry, a riveting sense of touch, and of coarse unsurpassed musicality."

    I thought that was pretty awesome.

    I need solder that works for both pace AND touch.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountainman Bob
    replied
    Originally posted by Liberator of Magic Smoke View Post
    Everyone is biased. People who insist they are not are apt to make all sorts of other foolish statements too. In my experience. The people who understand their own biases end up being the most reasonable, and often the most successful people I know.

    Long ago, a cousin of mine who was really into WWII history and all the escape-from-prison-camp stories that were popular then, got interested in the tricks spies use to remain undetected. He read a lot about it. He showed me some ways to sneak around people who had no reason to expect us to turn up in gorilla masks and scare the crap out of them.That sort of thing. It was fun, but also a revelation. It was my first introduction to the ways our expectations affect our perceptions. Of course there are countless videos on the net now, demonstrating how our attention is manipulated in various ways, and I'm not talking about conspiracy theories and all that silliness either. There are lots of videos demonstrating how human hearing works. It's fascinating. Most of the fans of pixie dust just seem to ignore it though. Or pretend they are somehow immune. I usually end up thinking, "Yes, you are special all right."
    i'm not quite sure bias plays into it as i really dont have prejudice of one answer or result over another, but of course thats just bias against bias!

    do y'all mean that i've predermined that measuring is bad and my hearing is good? because now that is so wrong its funny.


    i may have a couple post-determinations of some characters on here though! ; )

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X