What to choose for rear fill?

 

Bronze Member
Username: Scab12886

Post Number: 29
Registered: Oct-04
i have a 99 grand cherokee. im lookin at either the adire koda or the dynaudio 240gt components up front. i wasnt sure what to get as the rear fill. i know some people say not to worry about rear speakers, but i do have people riding in the back seat a lot, so i dont want them to miss out completely on the music. should i get 3-way or 2-way? any suggestions of what speakers to get would be great. i was looking at rainbow and focal coaxials...those any good? thanks for any input!
 

Silver Member
Username: Carguy

Post Number: 896
Registered: Nov-04
There are quite a number of people that ignore the rear speakers. I'm not one of them. If you balance them right, it'll sound much better than just having front speakers.
As for the brand, try Infinity. I have them for my front and rear. For a moderately priced item, they sound great.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Scab12886

Post Number: 30
Registered: Oct-04
thanks isaac. do you think i should go for a 2-way or 3-way?
 

Silver Member
Username: Carguy

Post Number: 908
Registered: Nov-04
For the rears, 2 way is good enough. Don't spend too much money on it. The front is more important cause that's where most of the mid to highs will come from.
 

Gold Member
Username: Jonathan_f

GA USA

Post Number: 2836
Registered: May-04
"If you balance them right, it'll sound much better than just having front speakers."

That again is very subjective. From a sound quality standpoint, and for pinpoint imaging and sonic accuracy, just front speakers wins the day. Rears screw up acoustic phase, and pull the soundstage rearward. But, like you, there are people that would rather have rear speakers, and there's nothing wrong with that. Just doesn't make having rear speakers better, that's my point, I've had both and prefer just having fronts, all the time correction and signal processing in the world still can't provide what I like for SQ when running rears.
 

Silver Member
Username: Carguy

Post Number: 914
Registered: Nov-04
Guy, you need to hear a good demo of surround sound. It's like black and white to colour tv comparison. I used to think like you, but not after I heard dts/dolby digital surround sound. Don't settle for 2 channel stereo. You're missing out so much sound, it's not even funny.
To me 2 channel is good for rap and hip hop stuff. But if you're into quality music, then digital surround is the way to go.
This is why I tell everyone not to lose the rear speakers.
Soon I'll make a new thread on installing surround sound system in cars without breaking your budget. The Clarion/Pioneer/Alpine are all crooks. They charge you hundreds of dollars for cheap decoders. I've compared the specs, they don't even come close to the home stereos.
I'm ordering the parts right now and hopefully in a month or 2, I'll have the best car surround system without spending thousands of dollars.
 

tbiddy
Unregistered guest
Wait.. I don't mean to sound like a noob(but i am).. you actually have no rear speakers.. or.. you have just stocks?

Do you balance like 100% up front?

This intrigues me!
 

Gold Member
Username: Jonathan_f

GA USA

Post Number: 2839
Registered: May-04
"Guy, you need to hear a good demo of surround sound. It's like black and white to colour tv comparison. I used to think like you, but not after I heard dts/dolby digital surround sound. Don't settle for 2 channel stereo. You're missing out so much sound, it's not even funny.
To me 2 channel is good for rap and hip hop stuff. But if you're into quality music, then digital surround is the way to go."

Music is recorded in stereo 2.1, not 5.1 surround sound. No decoder can take 2 channels and turn it into 5 channels accurately because there was no rear speaker recorded on the CD to begin with. 5.1 was created for movies, a decoder can not provide accurate sound quality with music production because 5.1 isn't recorded on the media you're given. You're not missing anything by not having more speakers since the speakers are producing the exact same signal. You're detracting from the original signal by putting critical frequencies behind you where they shouldn't be, and acoustic phase issues due to pathlength differences will cause cancellation at specific frequencies, resulting in a frequency response that has peaks and dips. Go to a concert and look at the stage. Now, turn around. Are there any vocalists or instruments behind you? Didn't think so. I'm well aware of many system setups, I've been in audio for many years and have had numerous setups. Better yet, go to IASCA finals and listen to the audio setups. Guarantee you they won't be running rear speakers, and it'll be more accurate than having a bunch of speakers crammed in a car. If you aren't happy with 2 channel stereo, then you didn't install them correctly. tbiddy, I have no rear speaker at all, haven't had them in my last 3 systems.
 

tbiddy
Unregistered guest
Thanks Jonathan.. i'm going to look into this idea.. because i'd rather spend more money on a nice set of components than to have to flop out like.. eh.. 100 bucks on 6x9's which.. sound awful regardless.

Thanks
 

Silver Member
Username: Carguy

Post Number: 917
Registered: Nov-04
Whoa guy, when's the last time you visited Walmart/HMV? Did you go to a section called DVD Music? They not only record in 5.1 surround on DVDs, they also have high quality CDs recorded in surround.
Yes they used to be only 2 channels, but now lot of the artists are also recording in 5.1 channel.
Haven't you also heard of ProLogic II? It will convert 2 channel stereo into 5.1.
Satellite radio and some FM stations support ProLogic II.
I think people should try out 5.1 surround sound. A while back, people used to think black and white TVs were the greatest till colour came out.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Help_2

Post Number: 52
Registered: Dec-04
Personally, I wouldnt buy 5.1 channel audio
Its un-natural.
Plus they dont really record in 5.1,
its just a cheezy re-master most of the time.
5.1 is designed for home use anyhow...
regardless...Isaac, I urge you to enter yourself
into a SQ competition with full-range speakers
in the rears...
youll get laughed at.

If it makes you happy having rear speakers, fine..

But tbiddy...youd be a fool to not listen to
Jonathan on this one.
 

Gold Member
Username: Glasswolf

NorthWest, Michigan USA

Post Number: 6693
Registered: Dec-03
in a JGC, I'd go with 6.5" 2-way coaxials, and use your fader to adjust them so that they are barely audible from the front of the car..
then the back folks can hear them, but you won't.
if you get a set like Infinity that uses an angled, aimable tweeter, you can aim them toward the listeners to help reduce imaging issues.
that's what I did with mine anyway

I don't use rear fill in my car at all either for my competition car.
I have a front stage, and two subs. that's it.
ideal sound stage and imaging that way.
as Jon said, music is recorded in 2.0 and meant to be heard as such.
the only 6 channel audio is for movies if you use a DVD player (I don't count those DVD-A abominations for home audio) I've heard music in matrixed and recorded discrete 6.1 and both sound lousy compared to a *good* 2.0 stereo system.
This is why for music when I want it to sound it's best, I sit at home and use Martin Logan ELS panels with no sub, on a Krell STA-250 amplifier.
Using this setup I can close my eyes and with a good source, can't tell the CD from a live performance in a club in both volume and realism.
I can even tell ya where each musician is sitting and which way he or she is facing.
Any first or second order reflections that a surround system would mimmick are produced properly by the room acoustincs anyway so no need for the rear speakers.

If you want to learn more about the pros and cons of rear fill speakers I wrote this on the topic:
http://www.wickedcases.com/caraudio/rearfill.html

hope it helps
 

Silver Member
Username: Jeremyc

Kunsan AfbSouth Korea

Post Number: 276
Registered: Jun-04
I must agree with glass and jonathon here. I haven't ran rear speakers in my last two cars, and the stereo I am about to put in will be the same way. Now keep in mind I listen to all kinds of music, however my favorite to drive to is trance and techno. Even digitaly recorded music sounds better with a soundstage that has proper imaging and depth. There is no way you could hear the sound as the DJ wanted with rear speakers pulling the soundstage toward the rear of the car, and mesing up the over all imaging. Now if I would have went with a dvd player in my car then I would have ran speakers in the back. Howver I would not have used them for every day music. I would only turn them on for watching DVDs and so on.
 

Silver Member
Username: Carguy

Post Number: 918
Registered: Nov-04
Now why would I enter a competition? Unless you can win millions of dollars, I'd only do it as a hobby. I don't know if you guys have listened to surround sound system in a car, but I have. You can take a classical orchestra done in 2 channel, and same thing done in 5.1 surround sound, and compare it. I am telling you, there is a huge difference in depth, imaging, sound quality. Am I the only one with dvd player in their car? Come on guys, surely you could tell a difference. I can't go back to 2 channel stereo after listenging to surround sound. Yes there's tons of movies on dvd, but do pick up a dvd music and listen. Unlike cd recordings, dvds contain higher audio quality and sampling rate.
Forget about competition, visit your audio store and give dts/digital surround sound a try, then tell me what you think.
 

Gold Member
Username: Jonathan_f

GA USA

Post Number: 2841
Registered: May-04
"Haven't you also heard of ProLogic II? It will convert 2 channel stereo into 5.1."
I'm very aware of Prologic II, and understand how it works as well. It converts via algorithms and encoding, it's considered "Matrix surround decoding". It takes sounds with equal volumes and plays them through the center channel, and it basically evalutes lesser level volumes and chooses which speaker it can best be played on. Not an optimal way of producing stereo when it can be done better by a proper installation of 2 channels. It's worse than Dolby 5.1.

"I think people should try out 5.1 surround sound. A while back, people used to think black and white TVs were the greatest till colour came out."
Dolby 5.1 isn't exactly something new and exciting. The technology has been out since the 80s. Most of us have heard it. Glass has competed in IASCA and won events, I myself have had audio as a hobby for over 15 years, 7 of which I owned a shop. So yes, I've heard pretty much an audio system you could throw at me, including surround sound and DVD, in home and in cars. That's what we're telling you, we've heard it. That's why I'm encouraging you to listen to a QUALITY 2 channel setup in a car, such as Dynaudios, Focals, etc. Also with good amps and signal processing such as that from Zapco, Arc Audio, Brax, Audison, etc. Since these speakers and amps are super high end, your average audio shop won't carry them, competition events are sure to have them, though. You definately won't find high end home audio in Walmart, nowhere close. Sony, Bose, Pioneer, while they get the job done, are some of the lowest end home audio speakers you can lay your hands on. In a live concert, the only sound that comes from the rear are reflections off the walls of the auditorium, and even a surround sound system won't simulate this accurately because reflections would require a time delay, and are frequency specific. That's the reason I said you can't convert 2.1 to 5.1 ACCURATELY, because you have no specific rear information to begin with, and every live environement will be different for the concerts people play in. I didn't say it couldn't sling music to the rear channels. Center channels aren't needed either because when 2 channels are set with proper pathlengths, they will project a perfect center image.

"You can take a classical orchestra done in 2 channel, and same thing done in 5.1 surround sound, and compare it. I am telling you, there is a huge difference in depth, imaging, sound quality"
Don't let your ears fool you. More speakers=louder. It gives the effect of more power. That's the only benefit you're getting. Rear speakers will add ambience because it gives an unnatural 3D effect that shouldn't be there. Some people like this ambience, but it is unnatural and purists prefer to go without because of this. Pop in any CD. Close your eyes. Where is the singer at? Where are the instrumentalists at? If you can't precisely point out the location, you r system needs evaluation. If ANY music comes from behind you, then it isn't true to the signal.
 

Gold Member
Username: Glasswolf

NorthWest, Michigan USA

Post Number: 6711
Registered: Dec-03
"Now why would I enter a competition? Unless you can win millions of dollars, I'd only do it as a hobby."

I've won thousands. close enough? I compete in SQ events, not SPL, so my imaging, sound curve, and soundstage have to be ideal. I've also been doing this professionally for about a decade and a half now, so I have a pretty good feel for it by now. I've heard just about anything you can put into a car from digital delay circuits to full blown DTS/DD systems.
I've heard the same in home systems as well and music is still recorded, and meant for 2.0

"Am I the only one with dvd player in their car?"

may be. I'm an audio purist. I see no desire for a DVD player in a car. I'm too busy driving and enjoying the car itself to worry about watching movies, and car players at present to not support SACD or DVD-A, so 6 channel audio still isn't really widely available in a format that was initially *recorded* in 5 channels. This matrixed, remastered crap they sell in 6 channel that is a revamped version of original 2 channel master recordings never sounds very good. Not just my opinion either. Read any audiophile magazine review on DVD-A titles.

My home system is all KEF Reference for DVD/Video
104/2 mains
C200 center
TD34DS dipole surrounds and rears
12" sub

my audio system is a pair of martin logan odesseys on a krell sta-250 amplifier.

you should audition both and tell me if you still think music belongs on a multichannel system.
most people who feel the way you do have never auditioned a really high end car system, or a good pair of electrostatic panels with proper source, preamp, and amplification path at home.

People are never the same after listening to a good pair of ESLs. I had a friend doubt me on that till she went to hear a set at a shop.. she came back and told me that they were not only amazing, but she umm.. had a rather interesting climactic experience during her listening.

anyway you're welcome to stick to what ya like.
everyone is in the end.
otherwise we'd all have the same systems lol


 

Gold Member
Username: Jonathan_f

GA USA

Post Number: 2843
Registered: May-04
"she came back and told me that they were not only amazing, but she umm.. had a rather interesting climactic experience during her listening."

Gives a whole new meaning to a system that gives a creamy midrange. :-)
 

Silver Member
Username: Carguy

Post Number: 919
Registered: Nov-04
I too enjoy driving my car and listening to music. I didn't get the dvd to watch movies in the car. It was for audio. As I mentioned before, dvds can record audio at higher sampling rate. Glass, you may have had the money and opportunity to go the extremes, but I'm talking about in general. Sure if you had the very high end audio equipments, you'll be able to support your claims, but however, on most normal systems, surround sound will sound better and give better quality. You can take any artist and get one in CD and one in DVD. As long as you have a decent system, you will notice a difference in sound quality on DVDs.
As for "matrixed, remastered crap they sell in 6 channel that is a revamped version of original 2 channel master recordings", that is partly correct. I've seen those too. Not what I consider "quality". Like all new technology, it gets improved constantly. If you spend some time and look around, there are actual DVDs that's not a remastered 2 channel, but an actual recording done specifically for surround sound.
I haven't listend to the system you mentioned above, but since audio is my hobby, I have tried others. Some of the high ends (thousands in dollars) do sound great. I've also listened to high end surround sound systems. They too sound great also. The point I'm trying to make here is to let users know that, 2 channel isn't the only answer to sound quality. Surround sound, when done properly, will sound just as good, if not better.
I strongly urge you people to do a little research on how true surround sound recording is made. You'd be surprised how advanced it is.
 

Gold Member
Username: Jonathan_f

GA USA

Post Number: 2844
Registered: May-04
"As I mentioned before, dvds can record audio at higher sampling rate."
DVD-A is sampled at 96khz at 24 bits, BUT there's a lot more to process because it's spread out over 6 channels as opposed to two. You HAVE to pass more information. If you were comparing apples to apples, it doesn't matter. CDs, DVDs, SACDs, are all beyond the range of human hearing if you're using quality electronics. You have to understand how sampling works. Sampling rate determines the sound frequency range which can be represented in the digital waveform. CD standard is 44.1khz, which is 44,100 samples per second. The sampling has to be 2 times the frequency to be produced, so to produce 20khz (highest frequency in human hearing) the sampling would have to be 40khz, and under the CD standard that is set, it's more than capable of producing the audible range accurately, and it isn't wasting space on useless information. If CDs were inferior, aliasing would occur during music reproduction. That's the reason golden eared critics can't tell a difference or make any proof of superiority of DVD-A. Don't let marketing fool you. The only thing a higher sampling rate is capable of is higher frequencies, ones that we can't hear anyway. The accuracy of the waveform is determined by the bitrate. CD audio is recorded in 16 bit, most car audio CD players use a couple of 1 bit DACs, so they're inferior to begin with. Quality electronics make a difference. If you want the most accurate analog signal you can get, start collecting vinyls.
 

Gold Member
Username: Jonathan_f

GA USA

Post Number: 2845
Registered: May-04
I will say this though, I'd easily acknowledge DVD-A superiority IF they'd start focusing on encoding it in 2 channel information for music, instead of wasting information on the other channels. If audio were to get a true 24 bit (or higher) resolution and it were to become a standard, it would be an improvement, although most likely not audible.
 

Silver Member
Username: Carguy

Post Number: 920
Registered: Nov-04
Jonathan, higher sample rate was just one of the advantages of dvd audio. You can't use that alone and say it doesn't make any difference. If you comebine that feature along with 6 full frequency channels (right, left, center, overhead, rear left and right) you will see an improvement.
If you're strickly comparing sound frequency, then sure, human ear can only handle so much before it becomes inaudible. However, if the comparison is done on the overall sound between CD and DVD-A/SACD, CDs will come 2nd best.
I won't go in detail how DVD-A/SACD are manufactured, but feel free to read up on them.
The bottom line is, YES there is a difference.
 

Bronze Member
Username: Scab12886

Post Number: 32
Registered: Oct-04
so with all this stuff going back and forth...would i be messing stuff up if i got rear speakers? or can i just get them and fade them out a little so they dont mess up my sound, but people in the back still have speakers close to them.
 

Silver Member
Username: Carguy

Post Number: 923
Registered: Nov-04
Scab, for most normal music listening, having a rear won't hurt anything. In fact it'll help the back seaters.
 

Big D
Unregistered guest
"This matrixed, remastered crap they sell in 6 channel that is a revamped version of original 2 channel master recordings never sounds very good."

Woa Woa Woa....I have listed to Pink Floyd DSOTM on record in the triagle shape. Thats how it was inteded. I also have listed to the SACD. No comparrision the SACD blows it away. Same system different media. This 2 ch recording may not be the way it was intened but it is more appealing to my ears. Glasswolf, consider this an exception?
 

Bronze Member
Username: An_eagalach

Annandale, VA US

Post Number: 31
Registered: Aug-04
"Go to a concert and look at the stage. Now, turn around. Are there any vocalists or instruments behind you? Didn't think so." "In a live concert, the only sound that comes from the rear are reflections off the walls of the auditorium."

Vocalists and instruments behind me? Well, no, but I've been to concerts where well-placed speakers have made for a real 360-degree experience. Particular case in point (although there have been others): Pink Floyd on their Dark Side of the Moon Tour -- yeah, I'm old -- at the old Pittsburgh Civic Arena, they had speakers everywhere, and their sound techies had the music going up, down, sideways, circling around... Not the norm, certainly, and not something that could ever be duplicated as a recording. I have to say that I would never ever have anything but a two-speaker stereo in my house, all this x.1 surround sound simulation for STEREO music is an abomination, IMO. That's home stereo, though, in my car, I don't mind having a pair of lesser speakers in the rear deck for the folks who ride in the back -- sort of compensation for having to sit with the subwoofers just inches from their backs.
 

Silver Member
Username: Carguy

Post Number: 924
Registered: Nov-04
I think we're slowly drifting off topic and into something technical. Most "average" car listeners do not have high end equipments, that is why I said having a well balanced rear will help. Nothing like sitting in the back beside a sub and getting nothing but lows.
Neil, at a concert, there are no vocalists behind the audience, but you're comparing apples to oranges.
There are some good articles on how multi channel recordings are made. You'd be surprised with the results. There are those that come from the "old school" who would argue that 2 channel is the only way to accurately reproduce concert environment. As I say often, that may have been true in the past, but not anymore.
I'll post a link for you and Jonathan to read, since you 2 seem to think DVD-A/SACD has no advantages over CD.
http://www.tweeter.com/info/index.jsp?categoryId=1161406

Feel free to search some more on the topic cause there's plenty more info/test results.
 

Gold Member
Username: Glasswolf

NorthWest, Michigan USA

Post Number: 6729
Registered: Dec-03
as for the sound quality difference, SACD has proven to be a much better medium for hi res audio compared to DVD-A, but even then I still stick by audio sounding better in 2.0 stereo.
the only music that even remotely sounds good to me in multichannel playback is either classical/baroque where you have hundreds of instruments already so positioning isn't as vital, or soundscape/mood/new age type stuff which is background music anyway so hearing it all around you really isn't any loss of soundstage etc.. it's more like listening to a forest or a waterfall or something.. its just non-vocal string and synth stuff you listen to when you're trying to get laid or something lol

" If you spend some time and look around, there are actual DVDs that's not a remastered 2 channel, but an actual recording done specifically for surround sound."

oh I know. steeley dan's last CD came out in SACD and DVD-A and was mastered from the studio with multi-channel in mind from the start. plenty of others now as well. the problem still remains mostly in the mastering. the LFE track tends to be too heavy or boomy, too much or not enough information is given on the surround or rear effects channels, etc. btw, just for the record, don't confuse surround sound with DD/DTS. surround is a matrixed mono rear channel dolby came up with, and DD/DTS are discrete 6 channel mediums. (for anyone who wondered the difference)

Isaac, go to www.martinlogan.com and use their dealer locator.
find a local shop who carries their stuff.
go audition one of the better pair of ESL mains they have set up with some good source material. just let me know how ya liked them.. see if ya understand why I adore them so much :-)
I'd like to ehar your opinions upon your return.

Big D, actually DSotM was originally recorded and mastered for qquadraphonic sound, in a 4 channel track. That's one reason it sounded good in SACD. The other is the remastering work done on the SACD before it was laid down on plastic. the remastering process is probably the biggest part of making a CD in regards to how it sounds in the end. The MFSL gold CD of the same album sounds far superior to the original CD release. The main reason for this is the mastering work of the engineer who did the work for MFSL. A lot of time was spent remastering the original tapes for that CD release, and the improved audio is the result.
In that case it wasn't so uch a matter of the medium, but the mastering.
 

Gold Member
Username: Glasswolf

NorthWest, Michigan USA

Post Number: 6730
Registered: Dec-03
btw, regarding high end systems in cars and the average listener/owner, if you're talking about DVD in a car, you're talking $1200+ for a decent head unit to begin with, so you're already talking high end.
the average person balks at spending $350 for a good CD player, and with that in mind, to get back to the basics here, means we're talking about radio and compact disc, which means we're talking about 2 channel media.
nothing in that is recorded in more than 2 discrete channels, so all of this talk of multi-channel, for the average person, is moot.
and, in this case, I even more strongly stick to my guns about the lack of need for rear speakers in a 2.0 media environment unless you need to entertain people in the back seats.
If you're going to bring up DSPs and such that matrix a surround set of channels from 2.0 media, again you're talking a few hundred bucks for the processor, more for discrete channel amplification and speaker placement, etc.. so again you're back to expensive, high end systems which are all too confusing, expensive, and undesired by the average person looking to add a decent SQ system with some boom to their ride.

to answer the more important question, which was that of the original poster's most recent query:
yes you can put in rear speakers and fade to front as desired.
that's a wonderful solution, and I think it'd do the job just fine.
 

Silver Member
Username: Carguy

Post Number: 926
Registered: Nov-04
We've drifted of topic somewhere down the line, but nevertheless, it's a good reference for people to read.
Glass, if they have a dealer near me I'd be glad to hear out your "baby".
 

Gold Member
Username: Jonathan_f

GA USA

Post Number: 2846
Registered: May-04
The surround sound argument reminds me a lot of the "more ways is better" arguments of the 80s. People were dead sure that if you were to make speakers that focused on a specific range, then sound production would be more accurate, similar to the phrase "Jack of all trades, master of none". As you can imagine, it was a convincing argument, but didn't hold true in the real world when put to testing. That's why I encourage people to rely on their ears instead of tech papers and some editors opinion, as they are often swayed due to financial motivation. If you were to test a 5 or 6 way system, it would look better on paper, but the end result isn't as great. It's very similar to if you were to say if you put a speaker in place to simulate an environment, it would be more accurate. It's also a convincing argument, but one that doesn't always hold it's own in independant testing and evaluation. Everything in life has pros and cons, you just have to choose what you want. As long as you've weighed out your options and chosen on what suits your needs, then you've done the right thing and there is nothing to be ashamed of. You've chosen your path and I've chosen mine, we have determined what we like and I believe we are both intelligent enough to not have to argue with each other on what we want our systems to sound like, and what is better than what, because in the end it boils down to subjective opinion and personal preference. Remember that in the end we are doing the exact same thing, but with different methods. You chose to simulate a concert environment by using dedicated drivers to produce the media. I'm doing the exact same thing, but I prefer to CREATE an environment suitable for audio reproduction and lifelike sound reproduction rather than using drivers to replicate it, that's the only difference. We're both doing the same thing though, our opinions only differ on how to do it. Both require work and money to accomplish, but either can be done accurately. I agree that higher resolution media is better than CD media, but I disagree that surround sound will produce a more accurate reproduction than 2.1 done accurately. Just my opinion.
 

Bronze Member
Username: An_eagalach

Annandale, VA US

Post Number: 32
Registered: Aug-04
Isaac, I'm not quite sure what your apples and oranges comment refers to, I didn't think I was comparing anything. The point I was attempting to make was in reference to Jonathan's observation, or implication, that no _significant_ (as opposed to reflected) musical source info at a live concert comes from other than the front stage -- generally true, but not always.

GW's and Jonathan's thoughts (and mine, to a great extent), I believe, are that although we live in a 3-D environment, a superbly engineered two-speaker stereo system can provide a soundstage remarkably close to a real live or studio performance. For now, that likely is sufficient for most people's ears and wallets. And after all, it's all in what makes for a happy listener. For example, I have a bunch of Mobile Fidelity master vinyl recordings in my music collection, the quality of which may never be matched in digital format -- I have done A-B comparisons of master vinyl vs. remastered CD versions of the same album, and for me MV wins hands down. But maybe that's just me.

Glass Wolf, thanks for the recommendation of Martin Logan, I'll hunt them up and give them a listen. I am an old Canton fan as far as home speakers, but I'm always up for expanding my horizons.

Wow, we have gotten a bit off the topic of car stereo, but it's been an interesting thread.
 

Gold Member
Username: Glasswolf

NorthWest, Michigan USA

Post Number: 6781
Registered: Dec-03
I'm just enamored with the electrostatic design. they're great because the entire panel produces the audio, so there's no point sourcing like you tend to get with conventional speakers where you can pinpoint their location. the imaging is just astounding. aside from that though, they're gorgeous speakers too.. they look amazing in almost any room. real eye candy :-) hehe
well worth an audition if just for the experience if you happen to be within an hour or two of a dealer and have a free afternoon.
I actually had to go half way across the state I'm in just to find a dealer though.. but I was passing by anyway so I made the side trip to talk to them when I was shopping for a pair of teh speakers.
small jazz bands sound great on them for auditions, just for the clear separation of vocals and each instrument. gives a very live feel to the music, like being in a small club.
don't be afraid to turn em up to a realistic volume level.. they sound best when you get them opened up a bit
 

Silver Member
Username: Carguy

Post Number: 927
Registered: Nov-04
Okay, we've gotten way off topic, but my point was, if you're going to compare a "superbly" made 2 channel cd to a half a$$ dvd-a/sacd, then sure it'll sound better. But why not compare a superbly made cd against a superbly made sacd/dvd-a? The whole point of anything was to recreate the "live" feeling in your car/living room.
 

Bronze Member
Username: An_eagalach

Annandale, VA US

Post Number: 33
Registered: Aug-04
As I recall, electrostats early on were criticized for lousy bass handling, but from the reviews I've read on M-L's, this shortcoming has been conquered.

Turns out, the nearest dealer is 4 miles from my house :-) Maybe this weekend then. However, um, I'll think I'll forego the Statement E2's at $70,000 a pair... My wife would kill me. Actually, she'd have to kill me, to use the insurance money to pay for the speakers. But the subwoofer array on the Statements consists of 16, 12" drivers??? Gulp! Luckily for me, the highest line the store near me carries is the ClarityB at $2700 a pair.
 

Bronze Member
Username: An_eagalach

Annandale, VA US

Post Number: 34
Registered: Aug-04
Actually, I would dearly love to compare a superbly-made SACD against a superbly-made vinyl master recording.
 

Big D
Unregistered guest
Yo Glass,
I also though DSoTM was intended for quadrphonic but the original was only a 2 track. The quad version was remastered.

Is quadraphic 4 discrete channels? I don't know off hand.

What a great disc


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Side_of_the_Moon
 

Gold Member
Username: Glasswolf

NorthWest, Michigan USA

Post Number: 6791
Registered: Dec-03
the statement E2 are insane.
listen to the odessey or ascent instead.
they're about $6500 and $4300 respectively. much more reasonable.

ESLs go down to about 250Hz flat. below that, the ML towers use conventional woofers in chambered enclosures to give a very hard hitting but flat response down to 20Hz. the Odessey uses an 8" and 10" in each tower. the Ascent uses a single 10" in each tower.
that's one reason you don't really need 'subs' with those puppies either. you feel them through the floor very well with about 250 watts per channel. no need for more than that if you're after realism.
 

Bronze Member
Username: An_eagalach

Annandale, VA US

Post Number: 35
Registered: Aug-04
You have gotten me entirely too fired up with these Martin Logans, there is a store 2.5 miles from where I live that will sell me floor models of the Odyssey (read, pre-broken in) for $5,400. So, I'll go take a listen, and if they're in good shape, then who knows?
 

Gold Member
Username: Glasswolf

NorthWest, Michigan USA

Post Number: 6808
Registered: Dec-03
wow. hell I'd consider buying them for that price if they aren't banged up. they retail for $6,500/pair last I checked. Another nice thing is you can order the trim kits for them from ML in various dyed colors or woodgrains to match your room. anything from light maples to darker oaks and such.. they have some beautiful finishes available.
 

Gold Member
Username: Jonathan_f

GA USA

Post Number: 2853
Registered: May-04
"Okay, we've gotten way off topic, but my point was, if you're going to compare a "superbly" made 2 channel cd to a half a$$ dvd-a/sacd, then sure it'll sound better. But why not compare a superbly made cd against a superbly made sacd/dvd-a? The whole point of anything was to recreate the "live" feeling in your car/living room."

That's for you to compare, not us. We've heard the best of both, I personally prefer 2 channels, I've stated that many times.
 

Gold Member
Username: Jonathan_f

GA USA

Post Number: 2854
Registered: May-04
http://www.betteraudio.com/geolemon/phasing/phasing.htm
http://www.betteraudio.com/Geolemon/multiple/multiple.htm
These sites will give you more info on how rear speakers hurt. But for those that feel they need ambience from the rear, they don't have to have surround sound to accomplish it. It is a simple matter actually, it is well known that only midbass and lower midrange are what will reflect off walls of an environment (concert hall), higher frequencies have too short of a wavelength to reflect and arrive back to you. So, if you bandpass the rear fill, limiting rear fill only to frequencies that would naturally be reflected, put them in mono, and then you attenuate the speakers to a realistic level, then you will accomplish an ambient effect, and it is just as accurate as any processing of surround sound could be because they're the same reflections that a mic would measure if it were at the back of an auditorium. The only thing you wouldn't get is crowd noise, but I could care less about hearing that in the first place. This is the way that competitors run rear fill, and it requires no processors, gives great results, and doesn't hurt the front soundstage by a lot, it also doesn't require DVD-A discs or other forms of expensive media. Some competitors even go as far as adding a delay circuit (such as time correction) to simulate it even further.
 

Gold Member
Username: Glasswolf

NorthWest, Michigan USA

Post Number: 6833
Registered: Dec-03
now Jon we're just pro circuit competitors.. what do we know about how to set up a good system?
hehehe

just kidding
 

Silver Member
Username: Carguy

Post Number: 930
Registered: Nov-04
"That's for you to compare, not us". Do you think I don't test things out for myself? The statement I made above was for people to compare technologies fairly. Lot of people take $10,000 2 channel system and compare it with $5000 surround sound system. That's not how you test nor get a valid result. Whenever I do my testing, I make sure the environment is identical, if not the equipment is comparable.
As you know, depending on your bias opinion, you can make anything sound terrible.
Jonathan, you keep talking about crowd noice for surround sound. Are you really sure you've fully tested sacd/dvd-A? I sure didn't buy my surround system to listen to background crowd cheers.

Anyhow, the discussion has gone off topic.
 

Silver Member
Username: Jeremyc

Kunsan AfbSouth Korea

Post Number: 291
Registered: Jun-04
Well since it went off topic, let me help. Glass I had a chance to listen to some MLs before I moved out here. Way above my price range for now, but wow. I was very impressed. Your analogy of being unable to point them out compared to a normal speaker was dead on. As for the built in subs. I think my neighbors would get tired of putting there pics back on the walls after I ratled them off every day. Neil go take a listen. Even if you can't aford them it will give you something to drool over for a while.
 

Silver Member
Username: Carguy

Post Number: 931
Registered: Nov-04
I didn't mean to sound insulting Jonathan. I thought it over and maybe it did. So I'll explain further why I was a bit ticked off. Lot of people that say "they've listened and tested" seem to only think you get "crowd noise" from surround speakers. If that's what you hear, then you're using wrong dvd-a/sacd or environment.
I take great lengths to ensure that testing is done fairly. I select 2 identical songs from the SAME artist in 2 channel and multi channel discs. Then using the same quality speakers/amps AND environment, I listen to both over few times, to ensure that I haven't missed any detail.
And believe me, there is no "crowd noise" in the songs I use to test. That wouldn't be a fair test anyways.
I was able to get a better 3d image from a professionaly made surround dvd-a than a cd.
So speaking from my experience, I posted the results. I however, never said surround is ALWAYS better cause it'll depend on the recording/media/evnironment etc. Plus I can't say that cause I haven't listend to Glass's equipment setup. From what I hear, it sounds impressive.
I hope this clears up any misunderstandings and this off topic.
 

Gold Member
Username: Glasswolf

NorthWest, Michigan USA

Post Number: 6862
Registered: Dec-03
I don't think anyone is getting upset. at least I hope not.
this did go off topic, but I think we answered the original question before it did, so no real harm done there.

anyway, happy holidays.
hope things go grat for everybody tomorrow.
 

Gold Member
Username: Jonathan_f

GA USA

Post Number: 2856
Registered: May-04
I wasn't insulted. I didn't use the crowd noise analogy as a bad thing, I meant that using a bandpass filter for rear fill won't get you the certain effects that surround sound has (if it does), for example live concerts that record info from the back walls, I meant that I don't really care if I miss that. There are even 2 channel CDs where I've heard beer bottles being thrown toward a stage. Same here, happy holidays, I've gotta be Santa Claus tonight :-).
 

Silver Member
Username: Carguy

Post Number: 932
Registered: Nov-04
Cool, cheers to all and Merry Christmas.
 

New member
Username: Littleguy

Post Number: 9
Registered: Dec-04
WHAT!!!!!! After all that, you guys are leaving, lol.
 

New member
Username: Littleguy

Post Number: 10
Registered: Dec-04
So, if i have subs, would i still need mid bass speaker in the rear?
 

Gold Member
Username: Glasswolf

NorthWest, Michigan USA

Post Number: 6924
Registered: Dec-03
that's personal preference raelly
depends entirely on the whole system, the vehicle, your budget, and your tastes
 

Bronze Member
Username: Littleguy

Post Number: 11
Registered: Dec-04
It's a 90 subaru legacy wagon. Just a work car. But enjoy qs. Have several amps to play with. Nothing great, just want to get the best sound out of what i have :} I have a sub enclosure in the back so that's why i was wondering about mid bass in the rear. There's not much room to work with in this little car but the bass sure sounds good, lol. How do i fill the front, lol:} What kind of speakers? Any suggestions? Thanks for your help. Happy Holidays !
 

Bronze Member
Username: Littleguy

Post Number: 12
Registered: Dec-04
Do you know if Canton Pullman component speakers are any good?
 

Bronze Member
Username: An_eagalach

Annandale, VA US

Post Number: 36
Registered: Aug-04
Happy New Year to all, after all this time, don't know if anybody is still following this thread -- have been on vacation since before Xmas.

Glass and JeremyC, I did go listen to the ML Odysseys. Glass, the store is not going to carry the Odysseys any more, that's why the low price, and no, they're not banged up, looked to me to be in perfect condition. Come on down to Northern Virginia and I'll take you out there :-). As far as the listening test, well... I'm not going to plunk down $5,400 at this point. Here's the situation: went into the listening room, the salesman puts on a nice CD, and at first, it sounds pretty good. Then the music builds some volume and it sounds like crap, the soundstage is confused and mushy sounding. I'm thinking that the speakers are being severely underpowered. Sure enough, I ask and the saleman tells me they're being driven by a candy-assed Denon 125 w/channel receiver. Morons. Great pair of speakers and they don't have the good sense to make them (and potential buyers) happy with enough good clean power. That Krell would do just fine, but I'm thinking -- if I would spring for the MLs -- Sunfire separates. I'm a big Bob Carver fan, love the whole Sonic Holography thing, even though with the ML's imaging it might be overkill.

Maybe we've strayed sufficiently far from car audio, but I wanted to close the loop.
 

Gold Member
Username: Glasswolf

NorthWest, Michigan USA

Post Number: 7171
Registered: Dec-03
yeah electrostatics need very good amps due to their demanding reactive nature. Odesseys need about 250 watts per channel so they were underpowered.
where'd you fo? Audio Associates?
I went to HS in northern Va.
lived in west springfield and fairfax.
I used to work for greg sound & communication there in south springfield on backlick years ago.

 

Bronze Member
Username: An_eagalach

Annandale, VA US

Post Number: 37
Registered: Aug-04
Hey man, small world! I live in Annandale, and actually had Greg Sound put a stereo in my AMC Renault back in the 80's. I wonder if it was you... That was back in the days when I was 100% Alpine electronics, Boston Acoustics for speakers. Ah, were we ever that young and innocent... BTW, Greg's is no longer there. New company, new name, went there a few months ago to get a quote for my new car stereo installation, and their price was one-third above everybody else's.

Audio Associates was a great place, made many purchases there over the years -- they had a great outlet store in Fairfax, near the intersection of Route and Main Street -- but they also went out of business years ago. Tweeters took over that particular location, and in fact, that is where I auditioned the Martin Logans. Don't think much of their product line selections (Denon, Yamaha -- OK, but not top of the line), but they do have occasional flashes of insight, like Martin Logans, for example.
 

Bronze Member
Username: An_eagalach

Annandale, VA US

Post Number: 38
Registered: Aug-04
Route 50 and Main Street, that is
 

Gold Member
Username: Glasswolf

NorthWest, Michigan USA

Post Number: 7190
Registered: Dec-03
yup. I knew the guys who worked at the audio assoc in springfield mall.
I used to drop in there and play with the home stuff and they'd take my keys and run out to play in my car.. haha
Figures Greg's closed. Greg Tsopanis, the owner of the company, wasn't really a car audio guy anyway. more a business man.
I'm sure he got tired of running the business and sold it off. I haven't been back to the area since 1996, but I still talk to one or two guys from the old audio associates. ran into them again when one was selling a set of his KEF Reference 104/2s on ebay and I noticed his description of where they came from.. figured out who he was. haha
Same guys that got me interested in my own 104/2s, too.

sad to think all of my old haunts are disappearing now though. We used to play annandale all the time in sports back in my highschool days in the 80s. lacrosse, crew, wrestling.. took some classes at NVCC in annandale too. used to drive the festiva back then, with the iasca system in it when I was competing.
 

Bronze Member
Username: An_eagalach

Annandale, VA US

Post Number: 39
Registered: Aug-04
I bought a Carver home receiver from Audio Associates at Springfield Mall, still using it. I know the guys you're talking about. Bought a pair of dbx floor speakers (Baltimore company, they went out of business too, don't really know why, great product line) at the AA in Fairfax. There was also an AA on Washington Blvd in North Arlington, shopped heavily there as well.

Trying to remember how long Greg's has been closed. Probably 6 or 7 years. My wife reminded me that Greg's put a stereo in my '91 Honda Civic, not the previous AMC Renault, so the installation would have been spring or summer 1991. Were you working there then? Just recently, the new business there quoted me $850 for an installation when other places were saying $500 to $600. Sometimes you really do get what you pay for, but still...

NVCC Annandale is very near my house, I'm between Little River Turnpike and Braddock Road, just inside the Beltway. MarketPro has its computer show at NVCC every few months (hundreds of vendors of hardware and software at booths and tables, fantastic prices), I'm often there for that.

Yeah, time marches on. Especially in this area. When I moved here in the late '70s there was nothing, but nothing, between Centerville and Manassas, and Manassas was a sleepy little southern town. Now it's solid housing developments and shopping centers, and Manassas is going cosmopolitan. Who woulda thought? Well, one thing hasn't changed -- traffic still sucks, especially during rush hour, a.m. and p.m.

Just checked out your homepage link. I'm curious, the cat pics, is that a Bengal with his nose in the showerhead, and is he yours? I have a Bengal and Maine Coon at home.
 

Gold Member
Username: Glasswolf

NorthWest, Michigan USA

Post Number: 7209
Registered: Dec-03
yeah I was at Greg's in springfield in 91.
the cat is a tiger, ut its not mine.
I do have a tiger kitten though (poydactyl) and the black asian bombay in the pics.

yeah I remember how sleepy springfield was in the 70s and even the 80s too.. and manassas was nowheresville.
 

Bronze Member
Username: An_eagalach

Annandale, VA US

Post Number: 40
Registered: Aug-04
Heh, that's funny, maybe you installed my car stereo. If you did, thanks, great job :-) Real basic system: Eclipse head unit, Boston Acoustics 6.5" in the doors, Boston tweeters on the kick panels, Boston 5.5" in the rear, Alpine amps in the trunk, off-brand EQ under the dash. Light on bass, but with those tweets the imaging was great.

Even though you were back here in '96, you would have trouble recognizing Springfield now, especially by the Mall, new interchange built right at that intersection, a lot more stores and businesses too. That little old shopping center at Commerce Street and Backlick is still there, Fischer's Hardware is still in business, nice Irish pub in there as well. Just about everything else in that general area there has changed though.

If you should make it back here again for a visit, e-mail me, I'll take you to Kate's Irish pub and buy you a Guinness.
 

Gold Member
Username: Glasswolf

NorthWest, Michigan USA

Post Number: 7224
Registered: Dec-03
sounds good. I'm planning to visit one of these days to see things.. maybe in the next year or two.
One of my best friends is an ATC at Dullas, and he's moving from Burke to Manassas soon.. wanted to get out to see his new daughter some time..

 

Bronze Member
Username: An_eagalach

Annandale, VA US

Post Number: 41
Registered: Aug-04
Great. Let me know when you're planning to come to see the "new" Northern VA. You can e-mail me from here.
 

Bronze Member
Username: An_eagalach

Annandale, VA US

Post Number: 44
Registered: Aug-04
btw, if my dreams become reality with the ML speakers, this what will drive them:

http://www.sunfire.com/ClassicVacuumTubePreAmp.htm
http://www.sunfire.com/300TwoFrontPR.htm

maybe a bit of overkill on power, but I just won't turn it up too loud. at least I'll try not to.
 

Gold Member
Username: Glasswolf

NorthWest, Michigan USA

Post Number: 7314
Registered: Dec-03
nice.
stick to puire class A or at least class AB amps for ESL speakers.
Tube amps won't cut it for ESLs. They're extremely demanding and reactive for load.
« Previous Thread Next Thread »



Main Forums

Today's Posts

Forum Help

Follow Us