u want nice audio?
Locked
 
|
I found a pair of model 970A KLH speakers at Sears. They were $22.97 plus tax for the pair. Each enclosure has three speakers. These are nice sounding, good looking and are black matching the K3. These are 3 - way bookshelf black textured plastic speakers. Power: use with 5 - 40 watt equipment, Impedance: 4 -6 ohms average, response: 90 Hz to 20 Khz, sensitivity: 86 dB 1 W - 1 M, woofer: 4" w/ polypropylene cone, midrange: 2" w/ polycarobonate cone, tweeter: 5/8" mylar piezo dome, crossover: first order high - pass, terminals: quick connect, size H 7 3/8", W 4 3/4", D 4 3/8". Audio fidelity is very good considering the price. Roy Morris W4WFB
_______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In addition to the KLH 970A at Sears (still available on-line at $29.99), Sony SS-B1000 (pair) is often available at Radio Shack or Best Buy in the same price range. Best Buy also has a pair of Insignia brand speakers that appear to be identical to the KLH 970A in the under $30 range. The small "bookshelf" style speakers are every bit as good as the much more expensive "specialty" speakers. 73, ... Joe, W4TV > -----Original Message----- > From: [hidden email] > [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Roy Morris > Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 3:30 PM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: [Elecraft] u want nice audio? > > > I found a pair of model 970A KLH speakers at Sears. They > were $22.97 plus tax for the pair. Each enclosure has three > speakers. These are nice sounding, good looking and are > black matching the K3. These are 3 - way bookshelf black > textured plastic speakers. Power: use with 5 - 40 watt > equipment, Impedance: 4 -6 ohms average, response: 90 Hz to > 20 Khz, sensitivity: 86 dB 1 W - 1 M, woofer: 4" w/ > polypropylene cone, midrange: 2" w/ polycarobonate cone, > tweeter: 5/8" mylar piezo dome, crossover: first order high - > pass, terminals: quick connect, size H 7 3/8", W 4 3/4", D 4 > 3/8". Audio fidelity is very good considering the price. _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
Warning - tongue is firmly planted in my cheek!
If you want really, really good audio from the K3, go to your audiophile emporium and get a pair of Vanderstien speakers (or other comparable high fidelity speakers) and an audio amplifier suitable for driving them. Connect the amplifier input to the K3 output - of course, there may be some impedance/drive level interfacing to be done, but the K3 will really sound full range on those speakers. Yes, I know those speakers are floor standing, and are pricy and heavy as well as being low efficiency, but if you really want to hear the true sound of the K3, that is the way to go. The sound of those computer speakers will pale in comparison. Yes, I tried it once just to see how it would sound, but that is not my normal hamshack setup - compromises must be made, each to his own. My Vandesteins are back in the home theater system where they belong - but do try it if you want to convince yourself how good the K3 (or any radio) can sound. 73, Don W3FPR 73, Don W3FPR Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: > In addition to the KLH 970A at Sears (still available on-line > at $29.99), Sony SS-B1000 (pair) is often available at Radio > Shack or Best Buy in the same price range. Best Buy also has > a pair of Insignia brand speakers that appear to be identical > to the KLH 970A in the under $30 range. > > The small "bookshelf" style speakers are every bit as good as > the much more expensive "specialty" speakers. > > 73, > > ... Joe, W4TV > > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [hidden email] >> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Roy Morris >> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 3:30 PM >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: [Elecraft] u want nice audio? >> >> >> I found a pair of model 970A KLH speakers at Sears. They >> were $22.97 plus tax for the pair. Each enclosure has three >> speakers. These are nice sounding, good looking and are >> black matching the K3. These are 3 - way bookshelf black >> textured plastic speakers. Power: use with 5 - 40 watt >> equipment, Impedance: 4 -6 ohms average, response: 90 Hz to >> 20 Khz, sensitivity: 86 dB 1 W - 1 M, woofer: 4" w/ >> polypropylene cone, midrange: 2" w/ polycarobonate cone, >> tweeter: 5/8" mylar piezo dome, crossover: first order high - >> pass, terminals: quick connect, size H 7 3/8", W 4 3/4", D 4 >> 3/8". Audio fidelity is very good considering the price. >> > > _______________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Post to: [hidden email] > You must be a subscriber to post to the list. > Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm > Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com > Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.12/1595 - Release Date: 8/6/2008 8:23 AM > > > > Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
Don, Did you buy the requisite "monster cable" and gold connectors? If
not try it again. Your Vanderstien speakers will sound better and you won't be wasting those precious audio watts with skinny speaker wire. Note to all: Please don't email me pro or con in re monster cable and gold connectors. I already know the only reason Radio Shack stays in business is by selling the stuff to audiofool's. Don Wilhelm wrote: > Warning - tongue is firmly planted in my cheek! > > If you want really, really good audio from the K3, go to your > audiophile emporium and get a pair of Vanderstien speakers (or other > comparable high fidelity speakers) and an audio amplifier suitable for > driving them. Connect the amplifier input to the K3 output - of > course, there may be some impedance/drive level interfacing to be > done, but the K3 will really sound full range on those speakers. > > Yes, I know those speakers are floor standing, and are pricy and heavy > as well as being low efficiency, but if you really want to hear the > true sound of the K3, that is the way to go. The sound of those > computer speakers will pale in comparison. > > Yes, I tried it once just to see how it would sound, but that is not > my normal hamshack setup - compromises must be made, each to his own. > My Vandesteins are back in the home theater system where they belong - > but do try it if you want to convince yourself how good the K3 (or any > radio) can sound. > > 73, > Don W3FPR > -- R. Kevin Stover, AC0H K2/100 #4684 ARRL SKCC #215 FISTS #11993 _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
Kevin,
Not Monster Cable, but a good large conductor flexible speaker cable just the same. As much as those cables are over-hyped, there is still a need to carry a large current for the power levels that some of the low frequency notes can produce - yes, the Vandersteins will go down to 20 Hz with good response and little coloration. I did listening tests before purchasing and satisfied my ears rather than listening to sales and advertizing hype. Before the listening tests (many years ago), I could not conceive that a turntable base (all were good heavy solid construction) itself could make a great difference, I thought it would be mostly the tone arm and cartridge, but listening tests proved that to be false. I don't buy audio from Radio Shack here - I have a good audio/home theater shop in the area, and have been dealing with them since they started over 20 years ago. 73, Don W3FPR Kevin wrote: > Don, Did you buy the requisite "monster cable" and gold connectors? If > not try it again. Your Vanderstien speakers will sound better and you > won't be wasting those precious audio watts with skinny speaker wire. > _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
I did the same as Don, but with CD players and power amps. I figured
they were "all the same" and the high priced stuff was just over priced. Then I did something dangerous. I actually listened to good gear and compared it head to head with the great gear. I found out in a hurry that I was dead wrong. There really is a difference, a difference you can hear. I don't know if Monster Cable is hype or not, but I'm sure not going to write it off or embrace it without an A/B listening test. I've done the same with ham gear. Many say the TS-830s is a great sounding rig. I had one, tried it, compared it to the K2 and promptly sold the 830s. People talk about how great the TenTec stuff sounds. I've had it (Corsair, Omni C, V, Century 22, 21, Argo), used it, loved it. Then I foolishly compared it (Omni V) to the 830s. Boy was that Omni harsh sounding. Omni went bye-bye, 830 took the main position on the desk. Then came the K2 ... Then the K3. - Keith N1AS - - SKCC K3 711 - -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Don Wilhelm Before the listening tests (many years ago), I could not conceive that a turntable base (all were good heavy solid construction) itself could make a great difference, I thought it would be mostly the tone arm and cartridge, but listening tests proved that to be false. _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Roy Morris-6
Tongue out of cheek... Having been the owner of several fine Vandersteen (note correct spelling for those doing Google searches) speaker systems, I can recommend Don's suggestion. However, depending on your HF radio, be prepared for some strange sounds. High-end audio equipment will reveal a lot of "warts" in your source material (this time your rig). And, the better your home audio system (interconnect and speaker cables included), the more warts you wil l hear. You may find that listening to CW and SSB sounds better on those $5.00 speakers. Now, with my tongue in cheek...better yet, take the rig into your home theater room and plug it into the system. Now, if we could only get Elecraft t o add a video output of the Front Panel Display, you could watch everything in high definition splendor! Better yet, how about the whole front panel as a video display - as you adjust controls, they would move on the TV screen, the appropriate LED would light up as you changed functions... Wow! Time for some kool-aid. 73, Henry - K4TMC K3/100 #98 ************** Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget? Read reviews on AOL Autos. (http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017 ) _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Darwin, Keith
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
|
|
|
On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 16:15, Ron D'Eau Claire wrote:
> But such testing is more subjective than one might think. ... > We see (or hear) what we believe we will see or hear. > > It's what us humans do. And that's why so much effort is put into making > truly objective observations. That's very hard for humans to do, if we are > able to do so at all. > > Ron AC7AC Amen. The whole purpose of the scientific method is to try to eliminate scientists' subjectivity from their observations. The only way to tell for sure if one speaker (for example) actually sounds better than another is to do a double-blind test. Neither the person running the test nor the subject knows which speaker is which until after the test is over. Unfortunately it is often not trivial to design a test that meets those conditions. Al N1AL _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
And don't be suprised that the results show that nobody can agree on a
single speaker which sounds best. Since tastes (and hearing abilities) vary so much, recommendations on a good speaker system must be taken with a grain of salt. Ditto on adjustment of TX audio. You are at the mercy of the subjective individual(s) reporting back to you. I've heard so many on the air sessions where one guy is playing with his "audio". The group agreed upon result would even be rejected by the landline company as bad. 73 de Brian/K3KO Alan Bloom wrote: >On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 16:15, Ron D'Eau Claire wrote: > > > >>But such testing is more subjective than one might think. >> >> >... > > >>We see (or hear) what we believe we will see or hear. >> >>It's what us humans do. And that's why so much effort is put into making >>truly objective observations. That's very hard for humans to do, if we are >>able to do so at all. >> >>Ron AC7AC >> >> > >Amen. The whole purpose of the scientific method is to try to eliminate >scientists' subjectivity from their observations. The only way to tell >for sure if one speaker (for example) actually sounds better than >another is to do a double-blind test. Neither the person running the >test nor the subject knows which speaker is which until after the test >is over. Unfortunately it is often not trivial to design a test that >meets those conditions. > >Al N1AL > > >_______________________________________________ >Elecraft mailing list >Post to: [hidden email] >You must be a subscriber to post to the list. >Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > >Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm >Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com > > > _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Alan Bloom
>> It's what us humans do. And that's why so much effort is
>> put into making >> truly objective observations. That's very hard for humans >> to do, if we are >> able to do so at all. >> >> Ron AC7AC > > Amen. The whole purpose of the scientific method is to > try to eliminate > scientists' subjectivity from their observations. The > only way to tell > for sure if one speaker (for example) actually sounds > better than > another is to do a double-blind test. Neither the person > running the > test nor the subject knows which speaker is which until > after the test > is over. Unfortunately it is often not trivial to design > a test that > meets those conditions. Nearly the worse way to do any comparison is to know what it is and then compare. For example? When I compared a G5RV on 80 meters with a dipole and told people the G5RV was a G5RV, it lost nearly all the time in reports. When I said the dipole was the G5RV and the G5RV was the dipole, the actual dipole almost always lost and the antenna that was really the G5RV almost always was "better". When I did the test blind they were randomly about equal, the same as a field strength reading and a model of the antenna systems showed. 73 Tom _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
|
|
On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 17:18, Tom W8JI wrote:
> Nearly the worse way to do any comparison is to know what it > is and then compare. > > For example? When I compared a G5RV on 80 meters with a > dipole and told people the G5RV was a G5RV, it lost nearly > all the time in reports. When I said the dipole was the G5RV > and the G5RV was the dipole, the actual dipole almost always > lost and the antenna that was really the G5RV almost always > was "better". When I did the test blind they were randomly > about equal, the same as a field strength reading and a > model of the antenna systems showed. > > 73 Tom Many years ago when we installed the new 120-foot tower with stacked 20 meter monobanders at W1AW, we wanted to compare the new antenna with the old rhombic antenna that had been used for years for bulletins and code practice. For several weeks, after each transmission session we would send a series of long dashes on each antenna and ask people to send in reception reports comparing the two antennas. But we called the antennas "A" and "B" with a random assignment each session of which was which. By the way, the results were kind of interesting. The rhombic was as good or better than the stacked monobanders for stations on its boresight to the west - more or less centered on San Francisco as I recall. But the Yagis had a wider beam width so they were significantly better in places like Washington state and San Diego. I suspect if we had announced which antenna was "A" and which was "B" we probably would have got different results. Al N1AL _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: [hidden email] You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |