# Upgrade Your Speakers



## Operandi (Dec 9, 2021)

I've been out of audio for awhile but have been getting back into it and though YouTube found GR Research is selling DIY upgrade kits for many commercially available speakers. Klipsch, B&W, Polk, ect.

A bit of an introduction to the concept...

Speaker upgrades are not a new concept for anyone into the DIY aspect of audio.  All speakers are built to a price point so unless you are spending 5 figures there is always going to be room for improvement with better components, cabinet modifications and crossover network changes, the opportunity has always been there.  The issue is most people with the means to analyze a speakers shortcomings and address them would just be better off building something better from scratch, which is what most of what the DIY market is.  Publishing these videos and making the kits available opens up this concept to tons of people that want to upgrade what they have, get into a new level of sound quality that would normally otherwise be financially out of reach, and learn something in the process.

About GR Research...

GR Research is one of the companies out there thats been selling kits, raw drivers for quite while, and (in the past at least) did design work for larger speaker manufactures. I'm not sure who builds the drivers but I believe they are their own design.  They also sold their speaker designs in partnership with AV123 which got good reviews and praise for their value but many may be more familiar with due to their dramatic impulsion. Their kits and designs have always been well regarded from what I remember (the AV122 thing happened right when I was getting into audio) and it looks like they are still selling some of those same designs from then as kits.

It looks like there is a pretty huge library of upgrade videos on YouTube for various speaker upgrades from budget to high-end, and some vintage stuff as well.  They sell a lot of the more popular redesigns (popular speakers that make good candidates) as kits but you can follow his work from the videos or it looks like if you reach out he's willing to work on something if you want it upgraded.  Seems like a pretty good way for someone make a pretty significant upgrade to their sound and learn something in the process.  All you need is a soldering iron, the ability to read and electrical diagram, and the time.

Fixing a popular commercial design...

This is a long form video of the entire process of upgrading the Klipsch RP-600M (the others are more concise, and look at just the redesign) which is a solidly reviewed mid-range speaker.  Its a decent speaker but its pretty clear looking at the crossover components and the measured response that concessions were made to hit that price point and corners were cut during the cabinet construction.









Before and after measurement results...  Stock frequency responses are on the left. notice the bump at around 800Hz and the huge dip after 1Khz.  This is not a intentional design decision but cost concession for mass produced product and/or done for product segmentation to protect the high-end line.  Horizontal and vertical greatly extends the dip in response at the crossover point as the phase issues are exaggerated.

Measurements with new the crossover design on the right, all the response issues resolved, off axis response greatly improved.  Impedance is also smoothed as well as improvements to the spectral decay of the speaker.











About $300 for a new redesigned crossover topology with vastly improved components, cabinet dampening, cable and connectors.  It will sound similar in sense that its using the same drivers but correcting the crossover flaws and upgrading components and you will end up with essentially a new speaker that would be several price tiers up.

****EDIT TO ADD BEFORE AND AFTER RESPONSE PICS BACK IN****


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Sep 11, 2022)

Ultimately, the most important of all is software. Both the audio stack of your operating system has a strong impact, as well as its settings, as well as the exact audio app and the settings of this app.

While most Klipsch speakers are better than the F&D F550X from a purely technical point of view, my F&D F550X sounds much better in reality because I use FreeBSD + bit-perfect mode + vchans disabled + Audacious + 24-bit tracks. 
This sounds of a completely different level than what can come out of windows wasapi. 

Here is my sound demo of these speakers: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jRYGgpwM24xgAZFJhyaqw_NgRFBYMMo5/view

The brands popular with my acquaintances are mainly B&W and Infinity, but none of their speakers sound more clinical than my cheap F&D. I'm sure it has to do with the quality of the source signal going to the speakers.


----------



## jallenlabs (Sep 19, 2022)

I considered GR mods, but then I go against what Klipsch intended in their product and well, I can just EQ the dip out, which I have done and I still prefer it off, with the dip.  I up/side graded from Kef Q 150s because I wanted more dynamic sound and Klipsch delivers.  That said, I don't deny upgrades can help, but you want some balance between what the equipment says and your brain/ears are listening to.

As for Windows tweaks, wow, you have quite a few.  I do think some of those will surely help the quality.  I use Foobar>fibre optic to Schiit Dac>unbalanced cables>Yamaha 2 Channel Amp/Plate sub amp>custom 10ga speaker cables to Klipsch RP500Ms and a Kef subwoofer.  Id like to do some more tweaking...

If Im going to serious listen to music, I go into my home theater and listen to Mission Argonauts and 4 twelve in subwoofers, lol.  Thats my reference.


----------



## Ferather (Sep 20, 2022)

I have researched a design that eliminates as much analogue as possible, in short, working with and pushing digital all the way up to the speaker driver, and then a PowerDAC.
It's a little bit complicated, but if you would like to know more about the idea and some of the specifications, I could post more about it if you like.

A short version, the idea is called 'Smart Speakers', which uses optical from the main digital amp to each speaker, plus power out (separate).
The main unit also accepts optical in at the current 15 channel standard, any amplification will be done in PCM form.

It's possible for OEM's to build a 15 channel main unit, and the consumer purchases the number of speakers required, adding more later is also an option.


----------



## Operandi (Sep 20, 2022)

jallenlabs said:


> I considered GR mods, but then I go against what Klipsch intended in their product and well, I can just EQ the dip out, which I have done and I still prefer it off, with the dip.


The stock crossover has flaws in it, nobody intentionally puts design flaws in a product.  Also you can't EQ most of this because the problems lie in the crossover region between the two drivers, not even room correcting DSP can do anything about this.  Only breakup modes of the drivers and to a certain extent cabinet resonances can be compensated for with EQ or room correction processing.

I'm not sure what happened to the pics but I'll see if I can get them back in.


jallenlabs said:


> As for Windows tweaks, wow, you have quite a few. I do think some of those will surely help the quality. I use Foobar>fibre optic to Schiit Dac>unbalanced cables>Yamaha 2 Channel Amp/Plate sub amp>custom 10ga speaker cables to Klipsch RP500Ms and a Kef subwoofer. Id like to do some more tweaking...


I have no idea what the above post is about but assuming you are starting with good source material (a high bit rate or lossless file) sound reproduction is an electromechanical thing.  That means your speakers / headphones, amplifier, and source (DAC, turntable) are responsible for what you are hearing, not software tweaks and they certainly are not overcoming physical and electronic limitations of cheap multimedia speakers.



Ferather said:


> I have researched a design that eliminates as much analogue as possible, in short, working with and pushing digital all the way up to the speaker driver, and then a PowerDAC.
> It's a little bit complicated, but if you would like to know more about the idea and some of the specifications, I could post more about it if you like.


Analog is not the limiting factor so being all digital is not the answer to any of these problems aside from the fact that flaws like whats present in the Klipsch could be corrected via software.


----------



## Ferather (Sep 20, 2022)

I pretty much thought the thread was more genetic than a specific model, I missed that, I apologize.


----------



## Operandi (Sep 20, 2022)

Ferather said:


> I pretty much thought the thread was more genetic than a specific model, I missed that, I apologize.


Oh, it is meant to be a more of a generic topic, that Klipsch is just particularly bad offender.

To the general topic at hand going 100% digital is not the answer because whatever you do in the digital domain is binary approximation of something that is inherently analog.  Its (digital) is perfect for storing and transmitting data (digital music files, and streams) but as soon as you start transforming it backing into something analog (DAC) everything you do is best effort compromise to get as close as you can to the OG analog signal, and despite what some people think class D does not stand for digital (there is no such thing as digital amp).  DSP based crossover networks can be very good and it allows you to iterate different designs as often (and at no cost) as you want but passive (capacitor, inductor, and resistor) crossover networks are not going to be made obsolete anytime soon.


----------



## Moose Wayne (Sep 20, 2022)

The last thing someone interested in good audio would want is tons of post processing.



A good goal is to get your audio as flat and colorless as possible. Then the recording can do its thing as intended.


----------



## Voodoo Rufus (Sep 20, 2022)

This is a pretty cool area for GR to expand into. I built a pair of their AV1's years ago, and still enjoy them.

Prebuilt speaker manufacturers using value crossover components is no surprise and nothing new. Upgrading select drivers isn't a bad thing either. I do wonder at the value aspect, though. Why not just buy better speakers to start with, or build your own kits? With prebuilt or flat pack boxes, building speakers is easier than ever.

My father is currently upgrading his 1980s era Klipschorns. After several iterations, it has all new crossovers, new midrange and tweeter drivers and horns. The original spec components were very modest by today's standards. Horns and speakers have come a long way since the 1940s. And yes, they do sound better. More efficient, flatter response and less distortion.


----------



## Operandi (Sep 21, 2022)

Moose Wayne said:


> The last thing someone interested in good audio would want is tons of post processing.
> 
> 
> 
> A good goal is to get your audio as flat and colorless as possible. Then the recording can do its thing as intended.


I know less about that but I think something like Dirac Live via Roon would be fine, its just fancy room correction based EQ, its not doing any processing to the content of whats being played back.  Either way its something I'd like to mess with down the road when all the easy hardware upgrades are done.


Voodoo Rufus said:


> This is a pretty cool area for GR to expand into. I built a pair of their AV1's years ago, and still enjoy them.
> 
> Prebuilt speaker manufacturers using value crossover components is no surprise and nothing new. Upgrading select drivers isn't a bad thing either. I do wonder at the value aspect, though. Why not just buy better speakers to start with, or build your own kits? With prebuilt or flat pack boxes, building speakers is easier than ever.
> 
> My father is currently upgrading his 1980s era Klipschorns. After several iterations, it has all new crossovers, new midrange and tweeter drivers and horns. The original spec components were very modest by today's standards. Horns and speakers have come a long way since the 1940s. And yes, they do sound better. More efficient, flatter response and less distortion.


It seems like Danny likes the challenge of fixing some of the commercial designs short comings whether that be cost concessions or design flaws.

All the speakers I own aside from the active monitors on my desk (and I plan on getting rid of those too) are speakers I've built from kits or published designs.  I don't think I'd be as interested in audio if it was just stuff was buying off the shelf.  Any speaker really is subject to cost compromise but when it comes to mid-level stuff from a huge company like Klipsch in the RP-600 they are going to cut cost wherever they can while still keeping the quality reasonable, and that means the cheapest crossover components you can get and cabinets that require as little effort to manufacture as possible.  You just have to hope the underlying design is good (and in this case it isn't).  But even if the crossover didn't have flaws compare the quality of crossover components with even an entry level kit like the C-Note I'm building which uses all poly caps, air core inductors, and large sand cast resistors to the Klipsch's iron core inductors, and electrolytic caps, and tiny resistors. The C-Note is a $150 per pair for reference... DIY from the start is clearly the way to go but if you already have something like these this is still probably well worth the effort.

The Klipschorns sound like a fun project. Yeah driver technology has moved on a ton since then, even with old school paper cone drivers like that, and I'm sure any electrolytic caps that were in there have drifted way off their original values.   Is he taking measurements before and after?


----------



## Voodoo Rufus (Sep 21, 2022)

We have a calibrated mic setup to get the crossovers right. He's doing the crossover design himself, and has the modeling software to get the filters correct.

Here's where he's getting the guts from. Super nice stuff.





						Klipschorn - Klipsch Upgrades by Volti Audio
					

Volti Audio specializes in Klipsch speaker upgrades for the Klipschorn Khorn  loudspeaker, and the Klipsch Belle speaker, offering component upgrade packages that include the V-Trac midrange Tractrix horn



					www.klipschupgrades.com


----------



## Operandi (Sep 21, 2022)

Voodoo Rufus said:


> We have a calibrated mic setup to get the crossovers right. He's doing the crossover design himself, and has the modeling software to get the filters correct.
> 
> Here's where he's getting the guts from. Super nice stuff.
> 
> ...


Man, those are some high roller components, thats gona be sick.  Pretty much a completely new speaker just in the spirit of the original.

At some point I'd like to get a calibrated mic and get more involved but for now I'm sticking to kits and proven designs.  The highest-end design I've built is the Singularity, which is full range 8" (modern) driver in 90L transmission line cabinet, high-end parts but relatively cheap because there are so few of them. Pretty sure my limiting factor is my electronics (Pioneer A9 Elite integrated) so I'm working on that while making plans for new builds, currently have parts for 6.5" Peerless two way with a NE180W and XT25.


----------



## Voodoo Rufus (Sep 21, 2022)

Yeah....my dad is having fun, lol. Calibrated mics are stupid cheap now. I was surprised. Such a useful tool for dialing in speakers and figuring out the room response.









						Home
					

Dayton Audio iMM-6S Calibrated Measurement Microphone for Tablets iPhone iPad and AndroidThe Dayton Audio iMM-6S is a professional-quality measurement and recording microphone that is designed to work with the entire suite of Apple "iDevices" – iPad, iPhone, and iPod. The rugged construction and...



					www.parts-express.com
				




Nice designs on Curt's page there. I'm a fan of the MTMWW ones.


----------



## Ferather (Sep 23, 2022)

I guess I have a different opinion, since digital form is lossless, id prefer to keep it as lossless as possible, that means the only analogue is right in front of the driver.
A digital amp (using lossless) will always be better than an analogue one (not handling lossless, added THD THD-N to amplify).

1. PC > DAC > Analogue out > Conductive cable (EMI other) > Receiver > Amp (also amps any THD THD-N) > Conductive cable (EMI other) > Speakers.
2. PC > Digital out > Optical cable (no EMI) > Receiver > Amp (digital) > Optical (no EMI) > [PowerDAC > Speaker].




2. will produce better audio, and it should also be cheaper than 1, less parts (grounding other).

A £300 sound card will invest all of that into analogue parts, for better audio........

----


----------



## Operandi (Sep 23, 2022)

Ferather said:


> I guess I have a different opinion, since digital form is lossless, id prefer to keep it as lossless as possible, that means the only analogue is right in front of the driver.
> A digital amp (using lossless) will always be better than an analogue one (not handling lossless, added THD THD-N to amplify).
> 
> 1. PC > DAC > Analogue out > Conductive cable (EMI other) > Receiver > Amp (also amps any THD THD-N) > Conductive cable (EMI other) > Speakers.
> ...


You are operating under misconceptions. How can converting to analog degrade the quality when ultimately its all analog anyway?  I mean from from Intel's perspective who isn't in the business of making anything audio related, sure if you run analog out of your $150 motherboard to your high-end amp / speaker setup thats going to degrade quality vs. even the relatively loosely SPDIF output of dekstop boards and using an AVR with a built in DAC.

You can process the signal and simulate everything a passive crossover does actively with a DSP but how cleanly it can do that is still a limiting factor and ultimately not as good as passive corssovers.  You can look at the reviews of the KEF LS50 and Wireless version (which I believe is using active crossovers) has a built in DAC, class D on the woofer and A/B on the tweeter, most people seem to prefer the regular LS50.

I'm not sure what the image / article is talking about but it sounds like some kind of proprietary design that closely couples the DAC and amplifier which sounds like its class D = "Power DAC"?  Any kind of amplification is analog this is just coupling the amplifier that much closer to the DAC and eliminating analog stages with proprietary digital ones  There may be some merit to it but digital still has limitations in how accurately it can simulate an analog signal which is essentially what this is doing.  You also still have the distortion of the amplification stage; that dosen't change and is ultimately only as good as the amplifier.  Making it all digital up to that final stage is a cool achievement I guess but how much does that really benefit things vs really well designed conventional DACs and amplifiers?


----------



## Ferather (Sep 23, 2022)

From reading it produces crystal clear sound, and won awards, but the original company that designed a full PowerDAC system went bust (interestingly), however the design is slightly different from the idea I have.
Personally, I would prefer a digital amp that works directly with PCM, If it makes audio better in general, even by a small 2%, but costs 1/2 the price, we would be better off.

There are a few PowerDAC's going around that drive speakers directly, using SPDIF-TOSLink, 2.12 Ohm, with minimal distortion.
Speakers with high SPL (>= 90dB) are recommended with the PowerDAC-S, they sell 102 dB SPL, 2 Ohm speakers for it.

I think PowerDAC's are new enough to not know about them, and also not many exist (at this time).

====

A side note about technology, sometimes it comes too early (Game Gear - colour, TV adapter, console adapter), or they go bust but it becomes mainstream later (Ageia) < I owned the original one xD.


----------



## cvaldes (Sep 23, 2022)

Operandi said:


> I'm not sure what the image / article is talking about but it sounds like some kind of proprietary design that closely couples the DAC and amplifier which sounds like its class D = "Power DAC"?  Any kind of amplification is analog this is just coupling the amplifier that much closer to the DAC and eliminating analog stages with proprietary digital ones  There may be some merit to it but digital still has limitations in how accurately it can simulate an analog signal which is essentially what this is doing.  You also still have the distortion of the amplification stage; that dosen't change and is ultimately only as good as the amplifier.  Making it all digital up to that final stage is a cool achievement I guess but how much does that really benefit things vs really well designed conventional DACs and amplifiers?



While this might be interesting in terms of proof of concept, I don't see the appeal to Joe Consumer. Whether one can do something and whether it is commercially viable are two separate things.

Let's face it: today's contemporary popular music is written, performed, recorded, mastered, distributed, and converted back into analog sound waves with the expectation that Joe Consumer will likely be using a cheap pair of wireless earbuds via Bluetooth Audio from their smartphone or their car's entertainment system while they are doing something else.

TPU's Audio, Video & Home Theater subforum is littered with various discussions about ways to send multi-channel high-resolution audio signals down whatever physical interface but Joe Consumer doesn't really care. 256K AACs from the iTunes Store (as it was formerly known) was good enough and today whatever standard the streaming services use seems to keep Joe Consumer happy.

Even if you can hear the difference between uncompressed and 320K audio, 99.99% of the music listened to today won't be in conditions that really allow the listener to discern the nuances.


----------



## Operandi (Sep 23, 2022)

Ferather said:


> From reading it produces crystal clear sound, and won awards, but the original company that designed a full PowerDAC system went bust (interestingly), however the design is slightly different from the idea I have.
> Personally, I would prefer a digital amp that works directly with PCM, If it makes audio better in general, even by a small 2%, but costs 1/2 the price, we would be better off.
> 
> There are a few PowerDAC's going around that drive speakers directly, using SPDIF-TOSLink, 2.12 Ohm, with minimal distortion.
> ...


What is a "PowerDAC" though?  It sounds like just a closely coupled DAC to some sort of amplifier topology, almost certainly class D.  At some point it has to be make the transition to analog and I get them calling it a "Power DAC" but its still an analog amplifier at its output stage no matter what.  Its a interesting concept but beyond that if it was the way forward others would have adopted it.  The audiophile market has no limits when comes to spending money on that last .1% of perceived quality.

Ultimately its kinda pointless to try to keep everything digital down the path as long as possible when there are gains to be made literally everywhere else. Here are two of the latest Class D amp designs so there is plenty of progress to made before we try to tie everything into a single unified topology.


cvaldes said:


> TPU's Audio, Video & Home Theater subforum is littered with various discussions about ways to send multi-channel high-resolution audio signals down whatever physical interface but Joe Consumer doesn't really care. 256K AACs from the iTunes Store (as it was formerly known) was good enough and today whatever standard the streaming services use seems to keep Joe Consumer happy.


I think thats why I post here and not on audio forums or Reddit.  Everyone there is already in their associated camps of _"high-end audiophile gatekeeping"_, or the _"only thing that matters are measurements of the AP 5000_".  For someone that wants to get into something higher-end or back into (I grew up with a pretty mid/high-end system in the 90s) making sense of the cluster fuck of a landscape of subjective opinion and technical measurements is impossible if you try to get started from either one of those entrenched perspectives.


----------



## cvaldes (Sep 23, 2022)

Operandi said:


> Ultimately its kinda pointless to try to keep everything digital down the path as long as possible when there are gains to be made literally everywhere else.



Again, this comes down to commercial viability.

Yes, of course it's possible to put the DAC in the speaker housing so it is as close as possible to the speaker elements (tweeter, woofer, mid-range, whatever) but that A.) increases the speaker cost and B.) reduces compatibility with existing A/V equipment that have standard analog speaker outputs.

And can Joe Consumer hear the difference whether the DAC is in the speaker a foot away from the tweeter or if the DAC is in the A/V receiver (or TV set) a few feet farther away?

Then take for example a 7.1 speaker array. That's 8 discrete DACs requiring separate physical connections (digital audio signal transport and some sort of power line for the built-in amplifier). Sure it's possible but not likely going to appeal to Joe and Jane Consumer.

In a similar way, it's fairly easy/inexpensive to send lossy digital audio wirelessly via Bluetooth Audio to consumer earbuds. Is it possible to send 192kHz/24-bit lossless audio wirelessly? Sure, there are probably prototypes sitting in labs somewhere but it's not going to be at a price point appealing to Joe Consumer. The DACs will probably be too expensive and battery life might be a problem. And are those little tiny earbud drivers going to reflect the benefit of pure lossless audio in the typical listening conditions that Joe Consumer will be using them? Probably not.

There are lots of things that are theoretically possible with existing technologies but most simply don't have the practicality or wide appeal necessary to make it in the consumer marketplace. It's clear that not everyone gets that whether it be here at TPU or elsewhere.


----------



## Ferather (Sep 24, 2022)

PowerDAC-S - ECdesigns - A power DAC example (NO AMP), as I said its new, and there are not yet many of them. Its still backwards to promote full analogue over minimal analogue.
If in anyway analogue was better, then why are we using DSP's to process audio, and not an analogue equivalent (ASP)?

Original: Wadia Digital – Power DAC / Digital Amplifier | HFA - The Independent Source for Audio Equipment Reviews (hifi-advice.com)

----

Reiteration of the image I posted from Texas Instruments, in relation to Class D, where we can see the above is an improvement, and my idea another (P-DAC in the speaker).



Notice the 'Digital Domain' reference in both (Wadia). As you said speakers need analogue, but the above is as close as you will get to lossless digital speakers.

----

Attenuator (electronics) - Wikipedia "An *attenuator* is an electronic device that reduces the power of a signal without appreciably distorting its waveform."

====

Forgot to mention, the digital amp I am suggesting will work with PCM signals, more of a DSP, in the same way your media player can turn up-down PCM.
If I turn up PCM from my media player before its sent out, the volume and amount of watts consumed go up, same as an amp.

Also, it's possible to essentially double the volume without any amp, if you cloned 2 channels into 4 and then merged them back together.

2 x 8 dB into 4 x 8 dB, back into 2 x 16 dB, no amp at all.


----------



## Ferather (Sep 25, 2022)

Another way to describe my 'Smart Speaker' design:

PCM @ 20 dB >> Digital amp [PCM DSP] >> 20 db (no user change) >> PowerDAC >> 40w Analogue signal (analogue is power) >> Speaker driver (about 2cm away from the P-DAC, internal circuit)
PCM @ 20 dB >> Digital amp [PCM DSP] >> 40 db (user change) >> PowerDAC >> 80w Analogue signal (analogue is power) >> Speaker driver (about 2cm away from the P-DAC, internal circuit)

Pure signal into the speaker, the watts is an example.

----

Now lets say the speaker can only do 50 watts.

PCM @ 20 dB >> Digital amp [PCM DSP] >> 40 db (user change) >> PowerDAC [Reduce digital signal to match max power output] >> 50w Analogue signal.

----

Note, that the cost and requirements to produce good PowerDAC's in this design is reduced, as its mono (per speaker).



The ultimate edition would be, 0 Ohms.

====

E1DA PowerDAC V2.1 – Linsoul Audio (Headphones)


----------



## Ferather (Sep 26, 2022)

Last note, it would be a good idea that each speaker has a light indicator, which lights up (or changes colour) when then unit reaches maximum stated power.
Going above this, wont strictly cause an issue, however the input signal will be ducked to match to output stats (no volume increase).

Green: Maximum power output is now active, Amber: In ducking/compensate mode.


----------



## Operandi (Sep 26, 2022)

You seem to be getting hung up on this lossless digital domain thing that doesn't really exist and that this proprietary technology not being an amp when in fact it still is.

There is no such thing as lossless digital once you start reconstructing the audio in the digital to analog process, the very beginning of the process of the DAC is lossy not just the analog output.  You can preserve the converted binary data forever as long as the bits are intact but thats not audio, you need a reconstruction filter and while thats digital its just a mathmatical approximation and best effort to create the original audio signal.  Thats why DACs have different topologies and some DACs let you alter their filter, there is no perfect / lossless way to do this.

The PowerDAC or any similar approach is still an amplifier working with an analog signal.  It doesn't matter how closely you couple the digital to analog conversion and preamplifer to whatever amplifier topology and circuit you are using, its still all the same thing.  Their approach is unique and the name makes sense but ultimately its all the same processes just packaged differently.



Ferather said:


> If in anyway analogue was better, then why are we using DSP's to process audio, and not an analogue equivalent (ASP)?


You mean like an EQ?  

DSP audio processing makes sense in form of room correction like Dirac because you are leveraging the advantages of the digital aspects of digital audio.  DSP in this case is just a active EQ that is changing the amplitude of certain frequencies to compensate for room modes and reflections.  The binary representation of audio you are working with is known and you only changing that binary representation based the software you are running.  How the digital audio is reconstructed into analog sound is not changed just the tonality.


Ferather said:


> The ultimate edition would be, 0 Ohms.


If its 0 ohms its not making sound.  The ohm rating is just the numerical representation of (work) of load the transducer represents to whatever its providing it with the power it needs to do work (make sound).


----------



## emanresu (Sep 27, 2022)

I think ole' Ferry is on to something.
And why would you care about Average Sleepy Joe Consumer when there's Early Adopters in a High-End Market (where ASJC is not invited) - with trickle-down effects *eventually*?
I'd say that the idea of pure digital is mesmerizing. There is an intentional distorting algorithm on EVERYTHING digital. Our audio formats or on kernel-level, I dare not say - but it's there. Making us stupid(er).

And those that say "over-processing" hurts the audio.. then you don't remember what audio should sound like. I have broken every rule in the book (including the "standard model"). There's not much you can tell me that isn't possible. You guys always re-iterate and recycle the same old "knowledge" without testing shit yourselves. How can you ever make something new? What if "the Master of Masterers" would be intentionally simplificating his own theorem so that you can never make as much money or cred as he is? Then you pass on this pseudo-max-knowledge to the next generation, and a perfect circlejerk of a lie is created and adamanted. Beware of that this is how it is.
// My 2 psychosises & the Copyright Adaptive Samplerate-Mafia


----------



## Ferather (Sep 27, 2022)

I don't think you follow at all, you keep reverting back to how it needs to be analogue, if all analogue was better than minimal why do PowerDAC do a better job without an amp as such?

You should read more about the efficiency of Class D and PWM.

Analogue is so 1940's, and also resistance effects the ability to pass power at a set rating, if you don't believe me make 100 Ohm speakers or coil up some cable.

If I remember correctly car stereo setups have low resistance, due to the fact they run from a battery with limited charge, power loss is bad.


Analogue is a power signal in a circuit, power + resistance = ?

The Complete Guide To Speaker Impedance (2Ω, 4Ω, 8Ω & More)
Speaker_impedance.pdf (kevinchant.com)

You also can't measure optical in ohms, not conductive.


Imagine a digital PCM amp increasing a signal to say 100 db as an example, and it costs £10, and uses 5v (1-2w for the amp), without loss.
Now the same but an A/B amp increasing a signal to say 100 db, but costs £500, and uses 150w, lossy.


TDI Smart speakers (Turbo digital injected), lol.

====

Given a PCM amp is essentially a DSP and not really an amp, there can be decoders (DTS, Dolby, other), and enhancers (DTS, Dolby, other).
You only worry about the speaker itself with the Smart Speaker design, add more or buy different ones.

The PCM amp should also carry one internal PowerDAC for headphones.

----

Current consumer level SPDIF is 15 channels @ 192k-24b max, on HDA that would be 15 x 96k-24b.
The PCM amp is also a digital optical channel router, since each speaker is mono.


----------



## Operandi (Sep 28, 2022)

Ferather said:


> I don't think you follow at all, you keep reverting back to how it needs to be analogue, if all analogue was better than minimal why do PowerDAC do a better job without an amp as such?


Yeah, I follow but understand that "_PowerDAC" _is marketing term.  I don't care that they call it that cause it helps differentiate how its different but its an analog amplifier circuit somewhere doing the work to move the transducers.  Thats the physics of it how this stuff works, whatever unique design elements the "_PowerDAC" _is employing its not changing anything in principle about how any of this works.

As to it doing a better job, it clearly didn't because thats not the avenue designers are perusing.


Ferather said:


> You should read more about the efficiency of Class D and PWM.


I'm familiar with class D. Class D but just to be clear the "D" does not stand for "digital" its just an amplifier topology designed around the principles of PWM and built with ICs instead of discrete components.  Class D also usually uses a digital switch mode powersupply because of the low current damands but not always.  The efficiencies attributed to class D amps is combination of those two design elements together but you can have a class D amp driven with linear power supply and and you and drive a class A or AB amp with a switching mode power supply.

Right now I'm working on building a class D amp based on ICEpower modules as well as class A amp, the ACA (amp camp amp) designed by Nelson Pass.  Both of these amps happen to use switch mode power supplies but the ICEpower will be 90%+ efficient but the ACA will be more like 10%.


Ferather said:


> Analogue is so 1940's,


The world is analog.  Digital is good for storing and preserving a binary representation of something analog because its now quantifiable, can be protected and reproduced forever without loss but its never going to be inherently better than whatever was analog to begin with.  The Nyquist theory says that CD quality audio needs to be sampled at over twice the maximum audible frequency to avoid aliasing artifacts, and some say thats not even enough, it also dosen't get into oversampling.

Think of it as the difference between looking the view finder in a DSLR that is looking directly through the lens vs the electronic view finder in mirrorless camera.  


Ferather said:


> also resistance effects the ability to pass power at a set rating, if you don't believe me make 100 Ohm speakers or coil up some cable.


Its all volts, amps, and watts; the ohm rating is just the numerical representation of the load of the voice coil to amplifier.  While lower impedance drivers tend to be more efficient its not really a useful measurement of more resistance to work being done in the sense that one is wasting more energy its just a different kind of work load.


Ferather said:


> If I remember correctly car stereo setups have low resistance, due to the fact they run from a battery with limited charge, power loss is bad.


Car audio tends to use drivers that are all 4 ohm or lower because they are working with a system that has a relatively low input voltage of 12 volts.  Its easier to get a amplifier to produce decent power with a lower ohm load on the output when are starting with a low input voltage.


Ferather said:


> You also can't measure optical in ohms, not conductive.


What does this have to do anything?  You also can't hear optical.


Ferather said:


> Imagine a digital PCM amp increasing a signal to say 100 db as an example, and it costs £10, and uses 5v (1-2w for the amp), without loss.
> Now the same but an A/B amp increasing a signal to say 100 db, but costs £500, and uses 150w, lossy.


What is a "digital PCM amp"?  PCM is method of encoding sound in a digital format, its not sound, DSD is another format, its not sound either.  

You need to decode whatever format you store the audio in, run it through some kind of reconstruction filter (the DAC) get a analog signal, which goes into a pre-amp (as a discrete component or as part of integrated amp) to attenuate or add gain in db and then as a fixed voltage ultimately into a power amp (class A, AB, or D).

"db" is measurement of dynamic range, as in how much signal do you have relative to your noise floor.  You are using these terms incorrectly as "db" is not a measurement of power, or efficiency or anything at all related to driving a transducer to pressurize air which is what you need to _"hear"_ sound. What you are looking for is "watts"; and its the unit used on both in the input and output of an amplifier.  And none of this is done without loss (I assume you mean in terms of wasted heat and not lossy vs. lossless audio quality?), class D is roughly 90% efficient, class AB 60%, and class A roughly 10% but none of that matters or has anything to do with an amplifiers sound quality.


Ferather said:


> You only worry about the speaker itself with the Smart Speaker design, add more or buy different ones.


Ok.... now whats a _"Smart Speaker"?  _Speakers with built in DACs and amplifiers are not new, and its all the same (DAC, pre-amp, amp) steps I mentioned above just all done in the speaker. They are also not inherently better than passive speakers, just more convenient for people that don't want dedicated audio components.


----------



## Ferather (Sep 28, 2022)

There are several factors the setup addresses, this includes THD, power induced THD + N, and amplification of power noise, and getting the purest input to speaker.

The PowerDAC in the design outputs the digital input signal (not power based), which has been amped or reduced in PCM form (not power), there is no traditional amp, just an analogue power stage.
The power stage is right at the end, 2cm in front, or a part of the speakers driver, this means there isn't even a Class D, per say. Turning up your music (PCM) increases output signal.

_Here_ is a cheap and easy to produce traditional DAC, the PowerDAC is similar but directly feeding power as part of conversion.

In the analogue domain, there will be loss all the way long the circuit, and much more power consumed.
The Smart Speaker design also stops things blowing up, due to regulation of signal.

You generally need more parts, more money, and higher running costs to get slightly closer to the digital domain, when everything is analogue, and conductive.

----

If you have ever worked with SPDIF-TOSlink, you should already be aware you can increase signal to amp-speakers.
Optical does not conduct power or magnetism, its either plastic or glass, both insulators.

Also note, my PC and my Z906 are electronically isolated from each other.

----




Notice the minimal circuiting with a HDA device.


----------



## emanresu (Sep 28, 2022)

No more silver cables and hysteria. 
No milkin', only honey


----------



## cvaldes (Sep 28, 2022)

And your point is? Widely adopted commercially viable wireless charging has been around for years. The popular Qi standard started in 2008.

And this is one LED. How about an electric toothbrush, smartphone, or smartwatch? (These are all commonplace consumer items.)

This is not a groundbreaking concept in 2022. 

Worse, this cute shiny LED doesn't address practical matters and consumer usage for today's marketplace. 

These two coils are maybe 1.5 cm apart. For home audio, you'd need something like 4-5 meters of wireless power transmission for a satellite speaker in a multi-channel system.

You have a habit of creating theoretical scenarios without any regard to practical real world applications or commercial viability in a consumer marketplace that is overwhelmingly driven by convenience and low entry price. My guess is that most of your proposed "designs" have been prototyped in labs for years if not decades.

And worse, you have a marked propensity to hijack other discussions and turn them into your digital audio dreamland bubble world. The world needs dreamers. But not at the expense of someone else's original discussion topic.

This is a discussion about a speaker mod.


----------



## Operandi (Sep 29, 2022)

I'm not trying to be rude but there are so many misconceptions about how this fundamentally works here its hard to understand the point you are trying to make let alone form a response.  If you don't understand how any of this works in a traditional sense you are at pretty horrible position to try to be talking about reinventing the whole process which you seem to think this concept of "PowerDAC" is (its not, its just repackaging the same concepts in novel form factor).

Just a few points that you can research elsewhere and then if you want start a different thread over take it to PMs or whatever... but which has already been pointed out this thread is about modifying the (analog) components of a speaker.  And no replacing the (analog) crossover with a DSP is not the answer to a better speaker which I guess is why you brought it up?

PCM (or any other kind of format) is not something you can send to speaker, its a digital format for sound, thats it (it would be like trying to listen to piece of sheet music).  It (PCM) has a dynamic range represented in db (the bit depth) and you can attenuate it digitally but that has nothing to do what is driving your speakers or headphones.  This is what you are talking about when you say "increase signal to amp-speakers" in reference to optical.  You have whatever your bit depth is and thats the dynamic range of your "signal" but it 100% always has to be converted to a analog signal and then amplified by a class A, AB, or D amplifier (thats all the topologies that I know of).  You posted a link to some generic low-end DAC board and are proposing you somehow can directly "power it", and that would be better than a analog amp?  You certainly could put enough voltage and current behind that signal drive speakers with it and get output but it would just be noise.

Watts is what moves a transducer and pressurizes the air, so watts is the unit of measurement used here not db.  For a speaker 1 watt at 1 meter is often given in db to represent a speakers efficiency and an n amplifier will have SNR (signal to noise ratio) represented in db.  Your integrated amplifier or pre-amp will also work in db (in similar way you can attenuate the signal digitally in software), for example with my Pioneer A9 and relatively efficient Singularities rarely do I go beyond -14 db on the dial.   Thats really about it for "db" being a useful metric for anything an end user would look at or care about.

This concept of the analog domain being lossy and somehow digital being the answer to this problem make zero sense is stems from your lack of understanding key concepts about how sound goes from binary PCM to pressurized air.  All sound in the psychoacoustic sense is analog, and the nano second the bits hit the DAC its all lossy, thats how it works and why none of what you are talking about is a solution to anything.  This came up in my other thread about MP3 vs lossless audio where you asked about lossless DAC which can't and never will exist.  

The same goes with this notion of analog consuming power and somehow "digital" is the answer for that too...  The efficiency of the amp is what it is, watts consumed on the input side and watts measured via its out, thats all there is to it.  Class A is the worst in that regard and class D is the best in terms of efficiency but good class D is hard; look at Hypex, Purifi, Icepower, Orchard Audio for the cutting edge in class D.  You can't "power PCM" or whatever you talking about because it would just be noise but if you did it would still be measured the same way in watts.

That picture of the flow chart of the HD audio codec doesn't mean what you seem to think it does.  The optical output its simple because its just passing the bits, its not doing anything audio related, it dosn't make it a better form of audio because its not audio.  And being galvanically isolated is nice but who cares when optical is arguably the worst form of connecting a DAC and what you are connecting it to is low end multimedia speakers?  Galvanic isolation is a nice feature but if we are talking about driving towards better sound there are better interfaces than optical and order of magnitude improvements to be made literally everywhere else that make the benefits of 100% galvanic isolation trivial.  If it solves a problem of your source being particularly noisy and/or your DAC rejecting that noise then fine but there are better ways for a source to interface with a DAC.

I'd suggest reading on the ASR or DIY Audio forums, more opinionated like any specialized forum but lots of smart people there. Paul McGowan from PS Audio has a YouTube channel where he answers tons of technical questions on all topics of audio in short a pretty concise format so thats a good resources to get insight pretty much every aspect of this.


----------



## Ferather (Oct 5, 2022)

@Operandi

Thanks for the PM on PowerDAC's.

Thought I'd say something here too, the tech is new enough that very few of you even know of its existence at all. For example, how many of you know the current SPDIF standard is 15 channels total?
My design is intended to implement the base design of a full digital system, but bring it to the consumer level at a reduced cost. With the idea the only thing to change is the speakers.

I essentially took the base design of the PowerDAC, removed the amp, and built the P-DAC as a more simple digital in to analogue out (for speaker drivers).
The normal PowerDAC version works with PWM, whereas my design continues its path as PCM, not changed (other than volume).

The DSP is much more like a normal soundcard, working with PCM (or decoding to PCM), and PCM volume.

====

Imagine, even for headphones, a DSP you can plug them into, that also has all the DTS-Dolby effects you see on PC (PCM), and can be updated via USB.

Digital stage amplifier (optical does not conduct) > [Input signal to power > analogue] Speaker

----

The JIS F05 allows support for any older SPDIF devices, which do stereo or DTS Surround, Dolby Digital Live. And the in-between devices supporting up to 8 channels on the older SPDIF.
Given the current 15 channel (@192k) standard and JIS F05 allowing up to 125mbps NRZ, full format support can be added to the DSP amp (with power supply).

The single outputs, per speaker, are mono (PCM), therefore each speaker has its own P-DAC, and specs (cheap, expensive).


----------



## Operandi (Oct 5, 2022)

Did you read anything I wrote?  You can't amplify PCM, that would just be digital noise.  


Ferather said:


> simple digital in to analogue out (for speaker drivers)


Thats a meaningless combination of words.  You 100%, all of the time need the DAC and amp to do their respective jobs for any of this (sound) to work.  Thats not my opinion thats just the facts of processes and its not simple to get good results.

Every competent EE working in the audio field probably has some dreamy notion of a nearly perfect all digital circuit design but being all digital dosen't aromatically make it cheap or even better.  Look at the Technics R1000 and G700 I PM'd you about, those are $10,000 and $2500 respectively and from Panasonic which is a behemoth of electrical expertise and resources.  Those are the only examples being made and sold that I know of (and I only found the Technics 3 days ago) aside from that crazy boutique failed PowerDAC which I'm sure was even more expensive.

If you are going to talk about this stuff you need to grasp the basics.  You also need to start a new thread for this topic.


----------



## Ferather (Oct 5, 2022)

A media player, lets saying playing an MP3, will decode to PCM, if you adjust the volume on the media player, the output (we go with optical, no power, digital) reduces-gains as you change it.
Currently I am playing audio via my media player connected via optical, I am able to change the volume into the receiver, which changes the output volume.

I can also turn up the knob, and use the amp to increase the signal, for example turning down the media player, turning up the amp.
There is still a DAC, but its not just a converter to analogue, it also adds the power.

The idea is not to amplify power signals as much as possible, and instead convert with the necessary power output (analogue is power in a circuit).

You can most certainly amplify-reduce PCM signals without loss (as far as I can tell), also note the media player sends the PCM to your sound device, in my case optical out.
The volume for the media player and my sound output device are separate, I can also gain-reduce the volume via Windows, all in PCM.

As far as how far you can amplify PCM, I believe 32 bit is the answer. A _true 24 bit equals_ to 144 dB.




Software APO (on sound device), with gain (PCM).



The DAC is in my receiver, after the sound device.


----------



## Operandi (Oct 5, 2022)

Your conceptual understand of this is 100% wrong.  All your points of argument are based on fantasy that only make sense in your head but in no shape or form reflect reality. There can be no intelligent conversion until you get a basic grasp of the concepts you are constantly incorrectly referencing.  Forget everything you know and start over, go follow up on some of the resources I linked to above and then start a new thread cause right now your just spreading misinformation and nonesense.  The following are irrefutable facts....

PCM is a digital format to digitally encode audio but PCM is not sound.

The bit depth is the amount of dynamic range in db.  You absolutely 100% can not amplify PCM, its 1s and 0s, thats it.  If you change the volume with software (but only down, so attenuation) you are compressing the dynamic range of the PCM but you are not changing the bit depth and its loss if you do this.

A DAC is a converter thats it, nothing more.  Its a low power (in simple form a watt or two) line level device; its output voltage ("power" in your head I guess?) does not change.  If a DAC has volume control then its also a pre-amp but a pre-amp is also line level device so thats not adding "power" either.

An amplifier is the only thing that adds power and its in "watts".  Not db, or whatever amount of dynamic range the bit depth of PCM you are talking about.


----------



## trickson (Nov 14, 2022)

LOL.
GR-Research I have watch a ton of his videos and all he can do is give you a crossover and some padding for your box.
Fact is without fundamentally changing the box or the driver it's self-there is little to nothing other than a crossover that can help. 
HE gets a lot of Klipsch speakers in and say's for close to half the price of the speaker you can get the crossover needed to "Fix" the speakers. LMFAO!
Klipsch has been designing their speakers for 50+ years and he has the "FIX"? LMFAO! And it will cost you.
I paid $1,800 bucks for the RP-8000F II's and they are AMAZING Infact all my Klipsch speakers STOCK are AMAZING! all that techno babble them audio experts push out is just to make some extra scratch IMHO.
My Denon 105w Atmos system can push my Klipsch speakers without fail.
This system is an audiophiles dream and a GR research nightmare!  





PCM is Pulse-code modulation and is only stereo Left and right Channel. 
Nothing more. IF you get a PCM signal your AVR is going to have to do all the heavy lifting, It takes the PCM and can turn it into surround sound but it is more a simulation at best. True Atmos and surround sound is NOT PCM ever!


----------



## Operandi (Nov 14, 2022)

trickson said:


> GR-Research I have watch a ton of his videos and all he can do is give you a crossover and some padding for your box.
> Fact is without fundamentally changing the box or the driver it's self-there is little to nothing other than a crossover that can help.


The crossover is half of the design.  Box size determines the tuning frequency, baffle size and shape determines defraction pattern.  Everything else is the performance characteristics of drivers and the crossover, those are the facts.


trickson said:


> HE gets a lot of Klipsch speakers in and say's for close to half the price of the speaker you can get the crossover needed to "Fix" the speakers. LMFAO!
> Klipsch has been designing their speakers for 50+ years and he has the "FIX"? LMFAO!


Do you understand the concepts at work here? The measurements are the measurements, and you can see the same thing here and here.  Not being ruler flat is not a big deal in my opinion as part of that is the _Klipsch sound _and some people prefer it but I'd guess they'd like the speaker more with a more neutral response and sorry that huge dip and that phase issue is a flaw.  Cheap crossover parts are cheap crossover parts, and all mass produced speakers are built to a price but I'd expect better quality for the MSRP.  50+ years of legacy and heritage have little to do with the vast majority of what they are making today, that would be their heritage line like the Heresy and Forte.


trickson said:


> And it will cost you.


Yeah, cause the crossover is using orders of magnitude better quality components.  Look at the price difference between a electrolytic capacitor and polypropylene cap, its the same for air vs. iron core inductors.


trickson said:


> I paid $1,800 bucks for the RP-8000F II's and they are AMAZING Infact all my Klipsch speakers STOCK are AMAZING!


These speakers can still sound good with crossover issues and cheap parts but they'd sound better without the problems and better quality components. In fact the MkII version of this line is basically the same speaker with slightly improved woofer but largely fixes all the crossover issues.


trickson said:


> all that techno babble them audio experts push out is just to make some extra scratch IMHO.


You mean measurements and a technical explanation of the speakers response?  Explain what is wrong GR Research's crossover or what is better about the stock form.


----------



## P4-630 (Nov 14, 2022)

Operandi said:


> I've been out of audio for awhile but have been getting back into it and though YouTube found GR Research is selling DIY upgrade kits for many commercially available speakers. Klipsch, B&W, Polk, ect.
> 
> A bit of an introduction to the concept...
> 
> ...




@Operandi  your pictures are gone in the OP.

It's best to upload the pictures directly in your post so they stay there...


----------



## trickson (Nov 14, 2022)

Operandi said:


> The crossover is half of the design.  Box size determines the tuning frequency, baffle size and shape determines defraction pattern.  Everything else is the performance characteristics of drivers and the crossover, those are the facts.
> 
> Do you understand the concepts at work here? The measurements are the measurements, and you can see the same thing here and here.  Not being ruler flat is not a big deal in my opinion as part of that is the _Klipsch sound _and some people prefer it but I'd guess they'd like the speaker more with a more neutral response and sorry that huge dip and that phase issue is a flaw.  Cheap crossover parts are cheap crossover parts, and all mass produced speakers are built to a price but I'd expect better quality for the MSRP.  50+ years of legacy and heritage have little to do with the vast majority of what they are making today, that would be their heritage line like the Heresy and Forte.
> 
> ...


I understand the concept and that is to make money even if it is a placebo effect. Cough** Cables **Cough **Cough...
Can you tell me what is wrong with the crossover I have first then maybe I can tell you how I feel about spending extra cash on parts.
Klipsch has been designing and building speakers for over 50 years and all the sudden you come along with a fix?
Okay how about I try the "fix" then if I feel like it is worth the 800 + Bucks I will pay it?
I do not mean to sound like a dick, but wouldn't Klipsch a premier Audiophile loudspeaker manufacture already have great parts in their products? If not, why are they the top selling speakers of all time?
Measurements are meaningless if they are not taken in the room, they will be used in. You are trying to convince me that my speakers need some help when I can assure you, they are Factory perfect.
Sound drivers are more than just a measurement they are an instrument. 
I bet you do not even know Klipsch speakers are designed to be as close to the wall as you want? The closer to the wall you put them the more bass you get from them. 
This is why lots are stunned when they get them home set them up and think they did not sound this tinny at the store. they put them 1-2" from a WALL (even a fake wall) this gives them the big bass sound you hear at the store then get all upsad because some smart azz audiophile told them they need to be 18"-36" from the wall. 

Klipsch broke the mold when they came out with, there Tractrix design.
At any rate if you think you can improve on perfection by all means go for it. But I do not need to. not at all.
The Denon and Klipsch are a perfect match. No others can even come close to the sweet sound I get from my system.
I take great pride in all my builds my HT is no exception.
To hear my system in full action would be comparable to watching in an Imax theater.



Operandi said:


> The crossover is half of the design. Box size determines the tuning frequency, baffle size and shape determines defraction pattern. Everything else is the performance characteristics of drivers and the crossover, those are the facts.


Again, without changing the Box size and the baffle or port there is nothing left that can be done other than a crossover and that is FACT!
You can put more foam padding in a box for less resonance and all that jazz but honestly you are asking people to buy a "KIT" and install this themselves that is a huge thing IMHO to take on just for a tad bit if any improvement in sound.
How are you going to change the pitch of the speaker without changing the box and port and crossover and at best you may get some improvement in sound delivery but not in sound quality.
So again, I am still left asking just how is a GR research kit going to improve my speakers? You are still trying to put a hat on a hat.
Oh and "better" parts? How "Bad" are the parts they sell with their NAME on them?!
All my Klipsch crossovers have Prats all marked with Klipsch's NAME! Seems a bit of a reach you saying that I can upgrade my speakers with some 500 bucks' worth of parts.
LOL anything to make a buck.
Audiophiles might buy this BS but not me!


----------



## Voodoo Rufus (Nov 15, 2022)

Wow this thread has gone off the rails.....

Klipsch of today is not the Klipsch of yesteryear. Their higher end speakers will still be quality, but their middle and lower end offerings are retail grade. Their claim to fame has been high efficiency afforded through horn loading, which lowers IMD (intermodulation distortion). It's known that they like to run their speakers a little on the bright side as you can see from the measurements linked above. Looks like the in room response levels it out from the bass bump given by room harmonics.

Quality speakers start with quality drivers. After that, crossover design and component quality. Then, design your box correctly (and there's a lot that goes into box tuning, also). Cheap crossovers are cheap. Can you hear the difference? It depends on a lot. Does Klipsch know how to design crossovers? Hell yeah they do. I'm sure their modern crossovers are better designed and modeled than in the old days of slide rules and hand math. How good are their parts? Only one way to find out. 

So go ahead, open up your speakers and check out the crossovers and their specs. Cheap crossover parts CAN sound just fine, but it's about selecting the right components for the job you're asking them to do.

That said, when I build speakers, I do not skimp on the crossover parts. I might have $400 in drivers for one speaker, and $200 in the crossover.


----------



## trickson (Nov 15, 2022)

Voodoo Rufus said:


> Wow this thread has gone off the rails.....
> 
> Klipsch of today is not the Klipsch of yesteryear. Their higher end speakers will still be quality, but their middle and lower end offerings are retail grade. Their claim to fame has been high efficiency afforded through horn loading, which lowers IMD (intermodulation distortion). It's known that they like to run their speakers a little on the bright side as you can see from the measurements linked above. Looks like the in room response levels it out from the bass bump given by room harmonics.
> 
> ...


I have a lot of Klipsch speakers I got tired of B&W and even SVS, Klipsch are a very bright speaker because people do not know the right placement of the speakers.
Klipsch are designed to be at a minimum of 6" from the wall. closer ='s more bass like I mentioned the new RP'II line doesn't need as much toe-in as the older lines needed.
I have opened one of my Klipsch speakers and seen this sweet crossover MB with parts on it stamped with the Klipsch name.
I also want to point out that Klipsch are not just midgrade speakers I take umbrage to that. I feel that My Klipsch speakers are just as good if not as good as any B&W or SVS excreta. 
When I have to pop out 5K for speakers I do NOT consider them some low-level midgrade crap. or retail offerings. They are just as good if not better even better looking than most speakers out there. No other speaker looks as cool as Klipsch sorry! 





I mean just look at all that sexy! All that AUDIOPHILE SEXY! You can NOT deny it they are in a category all by themselves!


----------



## jallenlabs (Nov 15, 2022)

Insert popcorn eating gif here*


----------



## trickson (Nov 15, 2022)

jallenlabs said:


> Insert popcorn eating gif here*





Operandi said:


> I've been out of audio for awhile but have been getting back into it and though YouTube found GR Research is selling DIY upgrade kits for many commercially available speakers. Klipsch, B&W, Polk, ect.


This guy is a snake oil salesman.
Much like all of them selling Upgrade kits. LOL. 
I cannot see how a MAJOR audiophile loudspeaker company needs GR Research to fix them. OMG!
Why wouldn't Klipsch and the others just come to him for the FIX to their Loudspeakers? And to see the prices for crossovers and some sound batting material?
Now how is it Klipsch are making "Bad" crossovers and speakers again?
The measurements are off? LMFAO! Why Oh LORD why?

The Audiophiles are going to hate me now.


----------



## jallenlabs (Nov 15, 2022)

If a set of speakers needs 400 bucks more added to their 400$ msrp, then just spend double on your speakers... or will those need an $800 upgrade???
I own klipsch rp500m/sub at my gaming rig, Presonus monitors/sub at my workstation.  They sound great for their purpose.


----------



## trickson (Nov 15, 2022)

jallenlabs said:


> If a set of speakers needs 400 bucks more added to their 400$ msrp, then just spend double on your speakers... or will those need an $800 upgrade???
> I own klipsch rp500m/sub at my gaming ri, Presonus monitors/sub at my workstation.  They sound great for their purpose.


Right? I think he wanted like $300.00 bucks for the fix for my RP-6000F I think I seen a kit for the RP-8000F II going for like $800.00 bucks! I mean WOW for a crossover and some no-rez (I think he calls it) for the speaker box. 
My question is after spending more on them does this bring them to Audiophile quality? Can I get a Certificate of Audiophile quality?
I just don't get it, if they are that "Bad" Why not just hire GR research for all your speaker needs? Is Klipsch really missing this guy?
LOL I just bust a gut listening to audiophiles they are so gullible and eager to spend that expendable cash for that placebo sound effect. LMFAO!

** Cables ** Cough *** cables ** Cough**

He even makes cables out of regular speaker wire and a mix of other stuff that makes no sense whatso ever!


----------



## trickson (Nov 16, 2022)

The only true way to upgrade speakers is to get new ones. IMHO if you have to spend just as much on a crossover as for drivers and a box would it not just be better to buy new than try to make do with the old ones that are NOT worth the extra scratch? 
This way you get new speakers as well as parts.
I tell you what if Danny can take a $60 dollar Sony speaker and make it sound as good as my Klipsch (ANYONE OF THEM) I will have him and pay him to "FIX" my Klipsch. Till Then I am not convinced no not at all.


----------



## Operandi (Nov 16, 2022)

trickson said:


> I understand the concept and that is to make money even if it is a placebo effect. Cough** Cables **Cough **Cough...


You clearly don't understand, and don't seem to care to.  Crossover design and crossover components are not placebo.  The design and topology of the crossover is going to affect the tonality of the speaker and its response and phase on and off axis.  Inductors, capacitors, resistors all have electromechanical values that influence the sound, because sound reproduction is all electromechanical.


trickson said:


> Can you tell me what is wrong with the crossover I have first then maybe I can tell you how I feel about spending extra cash on parts.


Whats wrong with the stock version is evident in the measurements (I'll see if I can get pictures back in the OP, or repost them).  The basics of frequency response, and the phase relationship of the drivers are not really that hard to understand if take 30 mins to learn.  Then the measurements will make sense, or don't and continue to call it techno babble.


trickson said:


> I do not mean to sound like a dick, but wouldn't Klipsch a premier Audiophile loudspeaker manufacture already have great parts in their products? If not, why are they the top selling speakers of all time?


You sound like a rabid fanboy that is using classic flawed internet logic, aka conjecture and supposition.

The point of this thread wasn't to shit on Klipsch but to show how all large volume commercial speakers like this are built to price point and can be flawed either through bad design or extreme cost cutting measures.  Its meant to be a learning opportunity and a chance for people to upgrade their speakers if they like them.  The fact that someone is designing better a better crossover means its good enough to be upgraded in the first place.

Klipsch is part of a much larger conglomerate, Voxx International.  Like all the big brands they are competing on price and at scale, it just has to be good enough.  If they can use a $1 capacitor that offers 50% of a $5 capacitor they are going to do that all top to bottom in the design process.  Thats how you get speakers like the KEF Q150 and LS50, using the same basic driver (exactly the same?) but everything around it is completely different, one is a designed to hit a price point and other is a none constrained price design.  

That dosn't make Klipsch bad or a shit brand, thats just the way it works, all the big companies do this. The response issues (for the OG 600M) though are different story.


trickson said:


> Measurements are meaningless if they are not taken in the room, they will be used in. You are trying to convince me that my speakers need some help when I can assure you, they are Factory perfect.


Measurements are not meaningless, thats tonality of the speaker and how its going to sound in room.  The speaker is measured anechoiclly, typical in room response is built into the design.  Room issues are addressed with speaker placement, room treatments, and EQ but they don't make the speakers measurements irrelevant.


trickson said:


> Sound drivers are more than just a measurement they are an instrument.


I agree but measurements tell you an awful lot and the response is pretty much the tonality of the speaker.


trickson said:


> I bet you do not even know Klipsch speakers are designed to be as close to the wall as you want? The closer to the wall you put them the more bass you get from them.
> This is why lots are stunned when they get them home set them up and think they did not sound this tinny at the store. they put them 1-2" from a WALL (even a fake wall) this gives them the big bass sound you hear at the store then get all upsad because some smart azz audiophile told them they need to be 18"-36" from the wall.


How close or far you need to be away from the wall is all down to diffraction patter of the drivers and crossover design.  Klipsch isn't using magic, its just physics and everyone is playing by the same rules.



trickson said:


> Klipsch broke the mold when they came out with, there Tractrix design.


Tractrix = marketing speak for the tweeter which is kinda in between a wave guide and horn.



trickson said:


> Again, without changing the Box size and the baffle or port there is nothing left that can be done other than a crossover and that is FACT!


Again you don't know what a crossover does and adding "!!s" and ALL CAPS dosen't lend your arguments any more credibility.  Box size is the tuning frequency of the bass response, baffle size and shape affects diffraction, everything else is the drivers and crossover.  You can play with this stuff and see how it works if you want, Passive Crossover Designer is free if you have Excel.


trickson said:


> I have opened one of my Klipsch speakers and seen this sweet crossover MB with parts on it stamped with the Klipsch name.


Sourced from the same far east manufactures everyone else in this category is using.


----------



## trickson (Nov 16, 2022)

Again, if you really think that you can improve or have improved on the Klipsch speakers how come they haven't just switched over to your stuff? Or got Danny to work for them?
I just think it is a bit of disingenuous to Klipsch speakers.
I Made crossovers in the 80's in high school electronics class. I may not be a audio expert but I do know a bit about electronics. Oh, I also MADE my own speakers in that class as well they were sweet 150W HAND wound by my own hands the coil and even made a new cone for them. Yeah, I do know a bit of what I am talking about. even if you want to use that Audiophile lingo to try and convince me I am wrong.
So, I present to you this challenge, make a $60 dollar Sony speaker sound as good as my KD-51M And I will be SOLD I will trash all my crossovers and buy up all Danny can make for my speakers I have 6 pair of Klipsch speakers. Till then I am going to remain a sceptic.
I will be glad to concede and say I was so totally wrong as well.
But till I can hear it for myself I just do not buy into it.
***Cough***Cables***Cough*** Cables *** cough...

And PS I am a fanboy I always have been I have a very long history here as a fanboy. AMD's #1 FANBOY HERE and Klipsch as well as DENON!
Do not hate me because I have great equipment, Hate the Equipment you have that is not that great..


----------



## claes (Nov 16, 2022)

Now I have a headache


----------



## trickson (Nov 16, 2022)

LMFAO You had me all the way up till I seen that Climate scientist.


----------



## P4-630 (Nov 16, 2022)

And I'm happy with my Panasonic....


----------



## trickson (Nov 16, 2022)

P4-630 said:


> And I'm happy with my Panasonic....


Panasonic? What is that? DO they even make Speakers?


----------



## P4-630 (Nov 16, 2022)

trickson said:


> Panasonic? What is that? DO they even make Speakers?


----------



## trickson (Nov 16, 2022)

P4-630 said:


> View attachment 270262


WOW Hey Danny needs to see this crap!
I wonder how much better he can get them speakers sounding, I wonder if he can "Fix" that Receiver too that thing looks like it could use some crossover help.
I think I seen that at goodwill the day. LOL....

JK if it works the way you think it should then what is there to "FIX"?

Audiophiles are like the Borg...


----------



## P4-630 (Nov 16, 2022)

trickson said:


> if it works the way you think it should then what is there to "FIX"?


Nothing to fix here, I'm good...

I'm not the OP though...


----------



## 95Viper (Nov 16, 2022)

Stay on topic.
Stop trolling the thread.
Stop the arguing/bickering.
Stop the "mine is better than yours" BS.


----------



## Voodoo Rufus (Nov 17, 2022)

Here's a link to Klipsch crossover designs by speaker model. There's even some documentation Klipsch has provided for modifying the crossovers of their own speakers:






						Klipsch crossovers
					

I've always had a problem to find crossover schema here. So maybe .... One Ring to rule them all (or one thread ... no matter) Index Page 1: Klipschorn/Belle/LaScala Type A Type AA Klipschorn K-500/5000 K-500/5000 W2/W5 AK AK-2 AK-3 AK-4 Heresy Type C Type D Type E Type E2 HIE Heresy II/Tangent 4...



					community.klipsch.com
				




It's not all that uncommon. My Legacy Focus towers come with switches on the back to bump the bass or treble sections by 2dB to help owners tweak the speakers to taste and the room.

I watched a few of GR Danny's vids. It all looks legit to me. Frequency response, waterfall plots, parts discussions, cabinet evaluations. If I had retail grade speakers, wanted to tinker, and had some money to burn, I'd try the upgrade kits. Might be better off selling the speakers and buying better ones, or building kits from scratch (or flat packs) if one has the time and skills. It's quite rewarding.


Looks like the OP may have moved on from this thread, though. Anyway.....


----------



## trickson (Nov 17, 2022)

Voodoo Rufus said:


> Here's a link to Klipsch crossover designs by speaker model. There's even some documentation Klipsch has provided for modifying the crossovers of their own speakers:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, Danny is really good at his work a perfectionist and I would never take that away from him. I just can't see dropping 2K on a speaker and then having to put another 500 into it to make it better. maybe take some old ones and give them new life but just buy new better ones? 
I am just like you, if it takes half as much to fix something new with better parts then just buy a better or new product.
It's like taking a v6 and putting all new parts and aftermarket gear, you still have the core product under it all.


----------



## claes (Nov 17, 2022)

trickson said:


> It's like taking a v6 and putting all new parts and aftermarket gear, you still have the core product under it all.


Think you just answered your own question. Why not add a turbo to your V6 and improve performance at some cost? Or don’t, and enjoy your engine as it came from the manufacturer.


----------



## Operandi (Nov 17, 2022)

trickson said:


> Again, if you really think that you can improve or have improved on the Klipsch speakers how come they haven't just switched over to your stuff? Or got Danny to work for them?


Its clear as day its improved, the measurements show that unless you like the sound that colored but even if you did, everything else the crossover is doing in relation to phase and timing is objectively poor.

By _"your stuff" _you mean better crossover components in general I guess?  That should be obvious, but the reason is because they are expensive and Klipsch like any other manufacture owned by a large parent company is motivated by profits and the crossover is easiest place to cut costs.


trickson said:


> I Made crossovers in the 80's in high school electronics class. I may not be a audio expert but I do know a bit about electronics. Oh, I also MADE my own speakers in that class as well they were sweet 150W HAND wound by my own hands the coil and even made a new cone for them. Yeah, I do know a bit of what I am talking about. even if you want to use that Audiophile lingo to try and convince me I am wrong.


You can do all kinds of things with your own hands but without proper tools and fundamental understanding of key principals it dosn't make much sense.  Building a crude transducer by hand is a science experiment, its interesting but has no practical application, sort of like like trying to build your own toaster from scratch.  And everything being discussed here is basic fundamentals of speaker design not "audiophile lingo", you would only call it that if you didn't understand it and the whole point of this thread was to be a learning experience.

Its not the 80s anymore either.  Anyone can learn this, play the simulation software and pickup a calibrated mic and trail and error and get to decent performing / sound speaker.


trickson said:


> So, I present to you this challenge, make a $60 dollar Sony speaker sound as good as my KD-51M And I will be SOLD I will trash all my crossovers and buy up all Danny can make for my speakers I have 6 pair of Klipsch speakers. Till then I am going to remain a sceptic.


Ummm... no.  The information is (or was) there for anyone to do with what they want.  There isn't anything to prove, the measurements of the original crossover and the new one speak for themselves, if you are happy with what you have leave them be.


trickson said:


> And PS I am a fanboy I always have been I have a very long history here as a fanboy. AMD's #1 FANBOY HERE and Klipsch as well as DENON!
> Do not hate me because I have great equipment, Hate the Equipment you have that is not that great..


Most people fanboy to some extent but you are getting defensive about to the point you where can't have a rational conversation.

Its not about who's shit is better.  All the speakers I have are DIY and built by myself sometimes with the help of others so you wouldn't even know what they are.  I've seen the measurements and I've listened to enough stuff to know how great they are or aren't in respect to commercial stuff.


trickson said:


> Yes, Danny is really good at his work a perfectionist and I would never take that away from him. I just can't see dropping 2K on a speaker and then having to put another 500 into it to make it better. maybe take some old ones and give them new life but just buy new better ones?
> I am just like you, if it takes half as much to fix something new with better parts then just buy a better or new product.
> It's like taking a v6 and putting all new parts and aftermarket gear, you still have the core product under it all.


Danny goes for neutrality.  Not everyone but most people prefer that type of response after the _excitement_ of a boost top end or bottom wares off.  Most of what he is doing with this particular speaker though is fixing the phase and timing relationship which is broken with the original 600M, nobody we prefer that aspect the way it is stock vs the "fixed" version.

The parts are higher-end because if you are hand building your own crossover your time is worth something too.  The parts are not extreme by any means and are exactly the same thing you see the big brands use in their higher-end lines.  Klipsch could probably get the same quality parts GR uses for 10-20% less but the MSRP of the speaker would be double.



dirtyferret said:


> yes and Panasonic/Matsushita sold h-fi audio equipment & speakers under a name that bespeaks power, wealth, and sexiness...Technics


Panasonic / Technics was and is legit, SU-G700, C600.


----------



## P4-630 (Nov 17, 2022)

My parents still have a complete Marantz set with record player, CD player, dual cassette and radio. (90s I think)
An uncle of mine still has a Technics set from the 90s.

@trickson Marantz is what you want....


----------



## Operandi (Nov 18, 2022)

Pics of the response of the 600M before and after have been added back to the first post.


----------

