school of hi-fi
- how to PROPERLY integrate a subwoofer into an audio system and ... more
- don’t look for perfect sound where there's no technical chance of achieving it
- uneven placement and décor cause the left and right speakers to sound different
- how to find the real differences between "humane" and "hi-end" CD players
- balanced or unbalanced interconnections?
- USB audio DACs
- hi-fi magazines?
Please, scroll down to find the articles related to the headlines above.
how to PROPERLY integrate a subwoofer into an audio system and ... more
I want to start this “brief” dissertation on systems with subwoofers by quoting word-for-word what audio pro stated on the first page of an old brochure: “everyone needs a subwoofer”.
I think this strong statement is even more relevant nowadays than ever and should appear in a possible “hi-fi bible”, but enriched with an adjective and a specification: "everyone needs a SERIOUS subwoofer and PROPERLY SET UP"!
Beyond merely extending the frequency response, a top-tier subwoofer, professionally integrated into the system, significantly enhances the quality of the entire bass and infrabass range, addressing distortion, speed, damping, ringing, control and also "booming" in the main speakers!
Many audiophiles won’t believe it, and I feel sorry for them, but the truth is that no passive full-range speaker, regardless of its price, can truly deliver an accurate low-frequency response. Unlike the mid-high range, the bass-infrabass range is a "nasty beast", so achieving precise reproduction of these frequencies is a formidable challenge even for dedicated active machines like top-quality subwoofers. As for passive full-range speakers, well... it's a pious wish!
The bass and infrabass reproduction of floorstanders and large passive hi-end speakers usually differs from what is contained in the sound source, especially if they feature woofers larger than 10" and are not placed far from corners and walls!
Therefore, if you own these speakers, it's vital to verify the accuracy of their entire bass range, and while you're at it, also check the rest of the spectrum. But how? You certainly don’t have a spectrum analyser, which would make everything straightforward and accurate, so you’ll need to use an empirical method: get hold of a high-range STAX electrostatic headphones set (or a similar "toy" of other brands) and compare its sound in real-time with that of your speakers while seated in your listening position. I don’t want to sound defeatist, but I'm fairly certain you won't encounter any pleasant surprises: best wishes!
These headphones serve as a reference, and their sound is remarkably close to the original sound contained in the source. They cost "a few dollars", but, in my opinion, any true audiophile could avoid squandering money on useless accessories and instead invest in a pair that can also last a lifetime.
My venerable STAX SR-Lambda Pro is approaching its 40th birthday and still moves me! I use it during the editing process of my recordings, and ... it's pure bliss!
Indeed, bass and infrabass frequencies form the foundation of any musical composition or sonic event. Therefore, they must be reproduced as accurately as possible and should never be treated as mere "ugly ducklings". An emphasised bass-infrabass range also impacts the quality and clarity of the mid-highs range! In the following paragraphs, I will demonstrate why a top-tier active subwoofer, when perfectly set up into a system, is essential for preventing unwanted speakers' "booming" and for reproducing a bass drum or an organ with the same precision and fidelity as a violin or a trumpet.
Well, this topic seems challenging because many esoteric audiophiles have a completely different perspective. They believe, or have been misled to believe, that the addition of a subwoofer will "pollute" the sound of a hi-end system!
It's not typically like me, but I must honestly admit that these audiophiles are generally correct! However, what they don’t imagine is that the blame rarely lies with the "poor" subwoofer itself. Indeed, this occurs due to these two key reasons:
1) the first, and most important one, is the incorrect setup and integration of the subwoofer into the system. The result is that the "booming" bass from the main speakers, which is very common, is further exacerbated by the partial overlap of the subwoofer’s additional output.
This happens because when you buy a subwoofer, it's more than likely (pure euphemism) that you won't be properly instructed by the vendor on how to correctly integrate the new "baby" into the system, assuming he even knows how to do it, which I highly doubt!
Additionally, subwoofer instruction manuals are usually very brief and lack detailed, serious technical directions.
As a result, everyone connects the subwoofer(s) in parallel to the main speakers and, in doing so, unwittingly commits a perfect “setup crime"!
2) the second reason concerns the intrinsic quality of the subwoofers! The vast majority of active subwoofers (the passive ones don’t even deserve to be considered) on the market, regardless of their price, are composed of an amplifier and a driver(s). Just a few adopt advanced electronic technologies to control the driver(s), which is what truly distinguishes top-tier subwoofers. That said, although basic subwoofers cannot match the performance of electronically controlled models, I can say that even basic subs, when perfectly integrated into a system, usually provide a more accurate and realistic bass-infrabass range than the passive woofers found in large speakers, even when massive amplifiers power them.
However, these plain subwoofers often (and rather tragically) employ drivers larger than 10". This is likely intended to please most audiophiles, who believe that the lowest frequencies can only be reproduced using large woofers, but that’s a misconception. Applying basic physics, we can consider the following simple illustrative example: hypothetically, to generate 100 dB of sound pressure at 20 Hz in a room of a given volume, you would have to move, let's say, 1 litre of air 20 times per second. So the practical problem is how to move that much air with a mechanical device.
There are different ways to do it, and here there are two examples: the first is to use a 15" short‑throw woofer with a 9 mm excursion, and the other is to use a 10" long‑throw woofer with a 20 mm excursion. Both move the required 1 litre of air, so in theory, they should deliver the same result, but they don’t.
In hi‑fi audio, where sound quality is paramount, the smaller long-throw woofer proves to be the best choice for the following intuitive techno-physical reasons:
- the cone, having a smaller diameter, flexes less, resulting in lower distortion.- the cone-coil assembly is lighter in mass, making it faster, more responsive and controlled.- the magnet of smaller woofers, in proportion, is normally bigger than the ones used in larger drivers, sometimes nearly as wide as the cone itself, boosting magnetic flux, with all the intuitive benefits that follow.
So, let’s leave oversized woofers to the PA world, where they naturally belong. They’re inherently slow and struggle to stop quickly enough when the signal sharply ends, resulting in a lingering, flabby sound (technically known as ringing). That’s precisely why I believe woofers larger than 10" have no place in a hi-end context.
If limiting woofer size to 10" is an obligation for top-tier active subwoofers, then it becomes an absolute imperative (a hyper-must) for the woofers in large full-range passive speakers, or passive subwoofer, even though the latter really shouldn’t exist.
Given all the points above, I hope it’s now clearer why hi‑end systems with subwoofers normally end up with bloated, unrefined bass. The real problem lies not in adding a subwoofer, but in how it’s integrated and in the quality of its design, driven by technology, not by price, which is just a smoke-and-mirrors trick!
So, if you want to transform (this is the appropriate verb) your system by adding a sub, first of all, you must buy a great one, and my advice is to look for a 10" sub with electronic control.
And now, brace yourself, because what I’m about to say might sound very odd, but it truly isn't. If I were you, I'd seriously consider some old 10" audio pro subwoofers. Thanks to their patented ACE-bass technology, I believe these subs still have no real competitors in bass-infrabass quality! You could snag one at a ridiculously low price from someone eager to sell it, most likely because they haven't read this article and, therefore, didn’t integrate it into the system correctly, ha, ha!
You may be interested to know that in 1978, audio pro launched the world's very first active (ACE-bass patented) subwoofer on the market, the legendary B2-50.
Remarkably, it stands as the only case in hi-fi history to remain unmatched in electronic performance and sound perfection after 48 years! It still delights thousands of audiophiles worldwide, and I’m thrilled and proud to be one of them!
Now that you have a top-tier subwoofer, I'd like to share how to set up a system with a subwoofer for optimal results. A perfect and proper setup is paramount, as the sound of your entire system (not just the bass and infrabass range) depends on it.
Please note that the following instructions apply to ANY subwoofer on Earth, not just audio pro subs.
1) Whenever possible, position the speakers and subwoofer(s) to face the long side of the room. If the speakers are "boomy" floorstanders, move them as far as you can from the corners and walls. In the presence of smaller, stand-mounted speakers, these distances can be significantly reduced.
As a general rule, avoid placing speakers or subwoofer(s) inside furniture, such as cabinets, or in semi-enclosed spaces like niches.
Unlike speakers, a subwoofer(s) should ideally be positioned in a corner or close to one. If that’s not possible, place it at least against a wall. Corners and walls act as natural mechanical amplifiers, enhancing the subwoofer’s efficiency. This enables the achievement of the desired sound pressure at a lower volume, thereby reducing the subwoofer's distortion and increasing its dynamic range.
2) Introducing a subwoofer into a hi-fi system is exactly like adding another “way” to the speakers. Therefore, just as a precise crossover alignment between adjacent drivers is crucial in any speaker, a dedicated crossover is equally indispensable for integrating a subwoofer properly. A crossover consists of a low-pass filter and a high-pass filter. The low-pass filter is not the issue because every active subwoofer has a built-in adjustable low-pass filter. Instead, the situation differs for your speakers, which lack a high-pass filter. Therefore, this filter must be created (possibly by a skilled technician) by rolling off the bass range in the amplifier, or directly in the speakers if it's impossible to do so via the amp.
Unfortunately, this is unfamiliar and challenging territory for any audiophile who is not a technician. As a result, NO ONE does it, and this is the REAL and MAIN REASON why audiophiles (quite rightly) dislike the sound of a hi-end system with subwoofer(s)!
So, to achieve exceptional bass performance when adding a subwoofer, it's MANDATORY to roll off the bass range in the main speakers: NO EXCEPTIONS. EVER! This applies to ALL the speakers of the planet, whether they are huge floorstanders or mini-monitors. In both cases, doing so creates a perfect crossover point between the main speakers and the subwoofer(s).
Furthermore, since the majority of speakers (especially the large ones) tend to have a “hilly” frequency response in the bass range, which causes “booming” bass, applying a 6dB/oct roll-off in this range subdues this issue. This is the ONLY effective way to eliminate, or at least significantly reduce, the "booming". Additionally, rolling off the lowest frequencies in the main speakers increases their dynamic range and speed, while reducing their total distortion.
This occurs because the speakers no longer struggle (in vain) to reproduce the lowest frequencies, which are instead routed to the subwoofer and handled there properly.
As a result, the speaker's woofers produce less distortion, reducing the generation of distortion's higher-order harmonics that affect the entire audio range. This leads to improved clarity in the mid and high ranges.
Moreover, if the low-frequency cutoff in speakers is achieved by rolling off the low end in the amplifier, this provides notable benefits to the amplifier as well: specifically, increased dynamic range, faster transient response (speed), and lower total harmonic distortion (THD). In the case of tube amplifiers, this "alleviation" of bass and infrabass content is so effective that it might be considered for them a real galactic gift. To offer a practical analogy, rolling off the low frequencies in speakers and amplifiers is like removing a 10 kg backpack from a sprinter's shoulders: no more, no less!
To conclude, thanks to a proper and idyllic "marriage” (call it "crossover") between the main speakers and the subwoofer(s), the low frequencies stop “booming”, and the infralow ones are deep, fast, clean and undistorted as if they are carved out of the air! To help you understand what I mean, I'm going to quote the words Scott Bartley, in an old review on FFWD magazine, used to masterfully describe the “bass department” of an audio pro system with a subwoofer (B1-36), perfectly set up by me: ”bass response is wonderfully tight, incredibly fast and, above all, really deep … to create a distortion-free sub-bass effect that feels as though it’s rising up out of the very floor. Call it low-end imaging, if you will”.
Returning to the setup, I must sadly note that hi-fi electronics manufacturers, including the hi-end ones, overlook the importance of integrating high-pass filters into their gear. For a manufacturer, adding a passive high-pass filter with a 6dB/octave slope at three selectable frequencies on a preamp or an amp is straightforward and cost-effective (just a few dollars). Therefore, this oversight should be considered as both a technical and cultural negligence, as it significantly impacts customers who take sound seriously and want to connect a subwoofer to their system correctly! Is it conceivable and forgivable that even these top‑level technicians are unaware of the proper guidelines for integrating a subwoofer into an audio system? To my knowledge, the only amps that can do this are the home-theatre receivers and all the sachem electronics. Anyway, let's now consider what you (or better, a professional) can practically do, to roll off the bass in different types of amplifiers and consequently in the connected speakers: 1) If you are a proud owner of sachem electronics ... no problems! These machines are designed for any roll-off combination, making it a pleasure for a professional to set up the new sub into the system perfectly. 2) If you’re using an integrated amplifier that lacks a bass roll-off feature, a practical solution is to intervene at the speaker level by inserting a high-quality, non-polarised capacitor (see values below) in series to the positive lead of each speaker. To do this, disconnect the positive wire of the speaker cable from the amplifier’s positive binding post (usually marked red or +). Connect one lead of the capacitor (either one, if non-polarised) to the amplifier’s red binding post, and the other lead to the speaker cable’s positive wire, ideally by soldering them together. Repeat the process for the other speaker. However, if the speaker’s crossover is easily accessible, a technician can solder the capacitor directly onto the crossover's PCB, which is a much cleaner and professional solution. The value of these bipolar electrolytic capacitors can be 150μF (100V) if your speakers have a nominal impedance of 4Ω, and 300μF (100V) if their impedance is 8Ω. In NZ and Australia, you can find these capacitors in Jaycar stores, with (in NZ) part numbers RY-6924 and RY-6932, respectively. I know this isn't the most “technical” solution to the problem, but in these cases, it's more than acceptable, and the most practical one! 3) A more elegant solution is available for owners of a preamp and a power amp or monoblocks, which do not account for the possibility of rolling off bass frequencies (unfortunately, the norm). In this case, the signal can be rolled off before it reaches the power amp(s) by inserting a small polypropylene capacitor (possibly a WIMA MKP10) in series with the core of the left and right shielded cables connecting the preamp to the amp(s). A cleaner approach is also possible: a technician can solder the small capacitor directly to the core of the output socket inside the preamplifier or the core of the input socket of the amplifier. Regarding the capacitance value of these two capacitors (one per channel), once a professional finds in the specifications of the power amp(s) the input impedance value, he can easily calculate it to achieve a 6dB/oct roll-off at the desired frequency. For example, if the input impedance of your amp or monoblock is 13kΩ, using a 100nF capacitor will roll off your frequency response in the bass range at 6dB/oct, with the -3dB point at 122Hz. This method should be adopted by every owner of a preamp and power amp(s), as it benefits not just the speakers but also the amp(s), as explained before! However, if you send me an email with the data, I can calculate the value of the capacitors for you. NOTE: It is understood that the method mentioned in point 2) is also valid for this configuration, albeit more "primitive". 4) If you have a home theatre receiver, the solution is straightforward. Regardless of the type and dimensions of the main speakers you use, even though they are as large as a wardrobe (the current tragic trend in hi-end speakers), go to the SPEAKER SETUP menu, and select the SMALL SPEAKERS option for ALL the speakers (front, centre and rear). Now connect the subwoofer to the “Sub-Out” RCA socket(s) of the receiver using a shielded cable (the quality of the cable is not crucial for sound quality). Many home theatre receivers also offer the option to select the roll-off frequency and the slope for the main speakers. If these features are available, it's very easy to flatten the frequency response of "booming" main speakers (to join the sub perfectly) by following these simple steps: select the 6dB/oct slope on the receiver, and play, only on the main speakers (sub OFF), a well-recorded CD with good bass and infrabass content. Now, starting from 80Hz, increase the high-pass frequency point until you hear clean bass. In the presence of terrible floorstanders, sometimes positioned in corners or similar spots, achieving clean bass may require setting higher frequencies (180/200Hz). No worries, the essential thing is to achieve a clean and flat bass! Next, you need to set up the frequency of the low-pass filter in the sub. Normally, if you have cut the speakers at around 120Hz with a 6dB/oct slope, this knob should be set at 50Hz (12dB/oct, if you can choose the slope). However, if you have chosen a higher frequency for the roll-off point of your main speakers (see the previous paragraph), you could go higher than 50Hz, but never more than 80Hz. You might think that cutting the speakers at 120Hz while setting the sub’s low-pass filter to 50Hz would create a "hole", but in reality, it forms a perfect -3dB crossover point at around 80Hz, which is the necessary and sufficient condition to obtain a flat frequency response at the crossover point. It’s too long to explain why right now, but just trust me! However, a small "dip" at the crossover point (completely inaudible at these frequencies) is far preferable to a small "hill", which is veeeery audible. Additionally, increasing a subwoofer’s low-pass frequency raises distortion and reduces dynamic range: this holds true for every subwoofer worldwide. It's now time to power up the sub and adjust its level perfectly. With a spectrum analyser, this is an easy operation of a minute. Still, it's unlikely that you have one, so you'll find below an empirical method to adjust the infrabass pressure. First, with any amplifier, you must set up the tone controls (if any) to flat and ensure that no filter is active. As for tone controls, which are a thing of the past, if your preamp, amp, or receiver has them, never use them and, if possible, bypass them! In the presence of home-theatre receivers, pre-set the system to “stereo mode".Now, select a few well-recorded CDs that feature genuine infrabass content, such as bass drums or pipe organs. Avoid older recordings that lack deep low-frequency material. With these, inexperienced listeners often compensate by cranking the subwoofer level, chasing infrabass that simply isn’t present in the source! For optimal results, select a Telarc CD, as this label is renowned for its high-quality recordings, especially in classical music. If you don’t already own one featuring a well-defined bass drum or organ, consider acquiring one. A Telarc CD I feel confident recommending for this purpose is Pictures at an Exhibition (CD-80042): wonderful music and a flawless recording. Then, while playing it, adjust your subwoofer’s volume until the infrabass pressure feels balanced and satisfying at your listening position. If you find yourself needing to turn the knob past "eleven o’clock" to achieve satisfaction, there might still be an issue with your system setup (I’d recommend checking the sub-out level on your home-theatre receiver if you use one of them). Alternatively, it’s very possible that your musical taste and listening habits could need some "adjustment", ha, ha! In this regard, I strongly advise against setting your subwoofer at an excessively high level. Unnatural and overly emphasised bass leads to listening fatigue and headaches, while obscuring the clarity of the upper audio frequencies. Finding the right balance is crucial for enjoyable listening experiences! Now that your subwoofer is perfectly connected and tuned, you're about to face a rather unsettling truth: recording quality is wildly inconsistent! Sometimes, you'll be rewarded with glorious bass and infrabass, but more often, the outcome will be underwhelming, lacking that visceral thrill. This is one of the hi-fi original sins, and there’s no remedy for it. Please resist the urge to tweak the subwoofer volume to adjust the sound of CDs, as it’ll only drive you mad. If the system is properly calibrated, leave it alone. Accept the reality: you get what the recording gives you! Anyway, if you have set everything up correctly, but playing a well-recorded CD, you still have a bass with “some problems", check the sound of your main speakers again. Here are a few suggestions: 1) as mentioned above, if you have the option in the amplifier's setup menu, try to increase (even up to 180Hz - 6dB/oct, if needed) the crossover point for the main speakers (high-pass filter) and set up the low-pass knob of the subwoofer around halfway. This is usually an exhaustive solution.2) if that is not an option, try moving the main speakers further away from the corners and the back wall. Also, shorten the length of the speaker cables to a minimum, which must always be as short as possible (this is a general rule). 3) as a last resort, try to move the subwoofer from the corner along the back wall. If the issue persists, you almost certainly must blame the acoustics of your room. Unfortunately, poor bass quality and sometimes even mid-high frequencies aren’t always solely dependent on the audio system itself. Good acoustics in your listening room, along with the opportunity to position the speakers correctly, are essential for achieving optimal sound quality. If you happen to be "unlucky", all your efforts might be mercilessly nullified. In such cases, I recommend experimenting by relocating your system to a different part of the room or even trying it out in another room. Sometimes, these changes can yield miraculous results! A 20Hz frequency has a wavelength of 17 metres, so in a closed room with a diagonal shorter than 8.5 metres, you physically won’t perceive it, assuming your ears can detect such a low frequency. In practice, this means deep bass requires spacious, elongated, open rooms to develop fully. In small, enclosed spaces, it simply cannot expand or “go deep” as intended. The room's shape is also crucial, so avoid rooms with a cubic shape, as these are generators of “standing waves”. If possible, also avoid rooms where their dimensions are multiples of one another, such as a room measuring 6m × 9m with a height of 3m. In situations like these, there isn’t much that can be done. You can only try to enhance the infrabass potential of your room by opening doors and, if possible, windows too (please don't laugh, I’m very serious about this)! In fact, infrabass (not bass) reproduction depends more on the room’s geometry, size, and openings rather than on its décor and flooring. Also note that pressure, depth, and the quality of bass and infrabass vary significantly throughout the room. These variations are inevitable and normal, so you must adjust your system to attain a flat bass response only at your usual listening point. You’ll likely find that even small adjustments, such as moving your listening point forward or back, or up and down, can make a significant difference. Finally, be sure not to position your listening point around the centre of the room or against the rear wall. Well ... after reading this “treatise” on systems with subwoofers, are there any audiophiles who still believe that a top-tier subwoofer, perfectly set up by a professional, is a detrimental addition to a hi-end system? If so, I’m sadly sorry for them! A poor (often disgusting) bass range is typically the most common issue in most systems (hi-end included) and can only be resolved, or at least mitigated, through technical means. Audiophiles must realise that achieving perfect bass and infrabass response, and addressing major acoustic flaws in the low-frequency spectrum of the system, is simply impossible without the inclusion of subwoofers in the system and the expertise of a prepared technician. Period. So, my final piece of advice to the “esoteric crowd” is this: instead of squandering heaps of money on overpriced, almost useless, but supposedly “miraculous” interconnects and accessories, invest far less in a quality subwoofer, and call in a skilled professional to set it up properly. You won’t believe the sound "metamorphosis" of your entire system. And finally ... welcome to the exclusive realm of true hi-end, not just in name and price! And now, let me end on a positive (perhaps, just semi-positive) note: Recently, I've noticed that hi-end speaker manufacturers have finally begun producing subwoofers as well. They've probably realised, considering the "funny" prices, it's yet another lucrative revenue stream, but this is only a detail! This is good news, but most of these "subwoofers" I’ve seen on Facebook and in brochures generally look more like carnival props than true hi-end gear, with most being just passive or active, oversized (yet aesthetically beautiful) boxes, featuring tragically large drivers. Sadly, this suggests they’ve jumped on the same no-tech bandwagon as much of today’s hi-end audio: the bigger, the pricier, the better! Instead, for that kind of money, an audiophile might reasonably expect an active subwoofer with electronic control over its long-throw and not larger than 10" driver(s). Alongside the standard low-pass filter, such a subwoofer must also include an adjustable high-pass filter to address the previously discussed issue of bass roll-off in the main speakers, essential for properly integrating the subwoofer into the system. This high-pass filter could also be external (but sold with the sub), which is actually better, as this configuration allows its placement between the preamp and power amp (shortening the cables). I'm well aware that designing a machine capable of reproducing the infrabass embedded in the source with near-perfection (perfection being, of course, unattainable) is the most demanding challenge in the entire hi-fi chain. So vast is the gulf between a subwoofer worthy of the name and those vulgar “boom-boxes” that the two scarcely belong to the same category. But still ... these designers must at least keep trying! Who knows, maybe one day they'll manage! Oops, perhaps I'm just the usual perennial dreamer, slow to accept that in a world where sonic culture is generally low, substance has given way to surface. Nowadays, marketing and striking aesthetics manage to overshadow the real essence of a product, turning medium-quality gear into mythical objects for the well-heeled audiophile. The show goes on, and I’m still watching this little circus unfold! However, what’s great is that subwoofers are no longer taboo and are finally entering the "conversations" in the hi-end scene. Let’s see where it leads, and ... who knows if they'll at least connect and set them up properly! I've aimed to keep the technical language as simple as possible, and I hope these instructions assist you in setting up your enhanced system to perfection, or at least to the best of your ability. However, if you encounter any issues you cannot resolve, please visit the hi-end doctor page and feel free to contact us.
Returning to the setup, I must sadly note that hi-fi electronics manufacturers, including the hi-end ones, overlook the importance of integrating high-pass filters into their gear. For a manufacturer, adding a passive high-pass filter with a 6dB/octave slope at three selectable frequencies on a preamp or an amp is straightforward and cost-effective (just a few dollars). Therefore, this oversight should be considered as both a technical and cultural negligence, as it significantly impacts customers who take sound seriously and want to connect a subwoofer to their system correctly! Is it conceivable and forgivable that even these top‑level technicians are unaware of the proper guidelines for integrating a subwoofer into an audio system? To my knowledge, the only amps that can do this are the home-theatre receivers and all the sachem electronics. Anyway, let's now consider what you (or better, a professional) can practically do, to roll off the bass in different types of amplifiers and consequently in the connected speakers: 1) If you are a proud owner of sachem electronics ... no problems! These machines are designed for any roll-off combination, making it a pleasure for a professional to set up the new sub into the system perfectly. 2) If you’re using an integrated amplifier that lacks a bass roll-off feature, a practical solution is to intervene at the speaker level by inserting a high-quality, non-polarised capacitor (see values below) in series to the positive lead of each speaker. To do this, disconnect the positive wire of the speaker cable from the amplifier’s positive binding post (usually marked red or +). Connect one lead of the capacitor (either one, if non-polarised) to the amplifier’s red binding post, and the other lead to the speaker cable’s positive wire, ideally by soldering them together. Repeat the process for the other speaker. However, if the speaker’s crossover is easily accessible, a technician can solder the capacitor directly onto the crossover's PCB, which is a much cleaner and professional solution. The value of these bipolar electrolytic capacitors can be 150μF (100V) if your speakers have a nominal impedance of 4Ω, and 300μF (100V) if their impedance is 8Ω. In NZ and Australia, you can find these capacitors in Jaycar stores, with (in NZ) part numbers RY-6924 and RY-6932, respectively. I know this isn't the most “technical” solution to the problem, but in these cases, it's more than acceptable, and the most practical one! 3) A more elegant solution is available for owners of a preamp and a power amp or monoblocks, which do not account for the possibility of rolling off bass frequencies (unfortunately, the norm). In this case, the signal can be rolled off before it reaches the power amp(s) by inserting a small polypropylene capacitor (possibly a WIMA MKP10) in series with the core of the left and right shielded cables connecting the preamp to the amp(s). A cleaner approach is also possible: a technician can solder the small capacitor directly to the core of the output socket inside the preamplifier or the core of the input socket of the amplifier. Regarding the capacitance value of these two capacitors (one per channel), once a professional finds in the specifications of the power amp(s) the input impedance value, he can easily calculate it to achieve a 6dB/oct roll-off at the desired frequency. For example, if the input impedance of your amp or monoblock is 13kΩ, using a 100nF capacitor will roll off your frequency response in the bass range at 6dB/oct, with the -3dB point at 122Hz. This method should be adopted by every owner of a preamp and power amp(s), as it benefits not just the speakers but also the amp(s), as explained before! However, if you send me an email with the data, I can calculate the value of the capacitors for you. NOTE: It is understood that the method mentioned in point 2) is also valid for this configuration, albeit more "primitive". 4) If you have a home theatre receiver, the solution is straightforward. Regardless of the type and dimensions of the main speakers you use, even though they are as large as a wardrobe (the current tragic trend in hi-end speakers), go to the SPEAKER SETUP menu, and select the SMALL SPEAKERS option for ALL the speakers (front, centre and rear). Now connect the subwoofer to the “Sub-Out” RCA socket(s) of the receiver using a shielded cable (the quality of the cable is not crucial for sound quality). Many home theatre receivers also offer the option to select the roll-off frequency and the slope for the main speakers. If these features are available, it's very easy to flatten the frequency response of "booming" main speakers (to join the sub perfectly) by following these simple steps: select the 6dB/oct slope on the receiver, and play, only on the main speakers (sub OFF), a well-recorded CD with good bass and infrabass content. Now, starting from 80Hz, increase the high-pass frequency point until you hear clean bass. In the presence of terrible floorstanders, sometimes positioned in corners or similar spots, achieving clean bass may require setting higher frequencies (180/200Hz). No worries, the essential thing is to achieve a clean and flat bass! Next, you need to set up the frequency of the low-pass filter in the sub. Normally, if you have cut the speakers at around 120Hz with a 6dB/oct slope, this knob should be set at 50Hz (12dB/oct, if you can choose the slope). However, if you have chosen a higher frequency for the roll-off point of your main speakers (see the previous paragraph), you could go higher than 50Hz, but never more than 80Hz. You might think that cutting the speakers at 120Hz while setting the sub’s low-pass filter to 50Hz would create a "hole", but in reality, it forms a perfect -3dB crossover point at around 80Hz, which is the necessary and sufficient condition to obtain a flat frequency response at the crossover point. It’s too long to explain why right now, but just trust me! However, a small "dip" at the crossover point (completely inaudible at these frequencies) is far preferable to a small "hill", which is veeeery audible. Additionally, increasing a subwoofer’s low-pass frequency raises distortion and reduces dynamic range: this holds true for every subwoofer worldwide. It's now time to power up the sub and adjust its level perfectly. With a spectrum analyser, this is an easy operation of a minute. Still, it's unlikely that you have one, so you'll find below an empirical method to adjust the infrabass pressure. First, with any amplifier, you must set up the tone controls (if any) to flat and ensure that no filter is active. As for tone controls, which are a thing of the past, if your preamp, amp, or receiver has them, never use them and, if possible, bypass them! In the presence of home-theatre receivers, pre-set the system to “stereo mode".Now, select a few well-recorded CDs that feature genuine infrabass content, such as bass drums or pipe organs. Avoid older recordings that lack deep low-frequency material. With these, inexperienced listeners often compensate by cranking the subwoofer level, chasing infrabass that simply isn’t present in the source! For optimal results, select a Telarc CD, as this label is renowned for its high-quality recordings, especially in classical music. If you don’t already own one featuring a well-defined bass drum or organ, consider acquiring one. A Telarc CD I feel confident recommending for this purpose is Pictures at an Exhibition (CD-80042): wonderful music and a flawless recording. Then, while playing it, adjust your subwoofer’s volume until the infrabass pressure feels balanced and satisfying at your listening position. If you find yourself needing to turn the knob past "eleven o’clock" to achieve satisfaction, there might still be an issue with your system setup (I’d recommend checking the sub-out level on your home-theatre receiver if you use one of them). Alternatively, it’s very possible that your musical taste and listening habits could need some "adjustment", ha, ha! In this regard, I strongly advise against setting your subwoofer at an excessively high level. Unnatural and overly emphasised bass leads to listening fatigue and headaches, while obscuring the clarity of the upper audio frequencies. Finding the right balance is crucial for enjoyable listening experiences! Now that your subwoofer is perfectly connected and tuned, you're about to face a rather unsettling truth: recording quality is wildly inconsistent! Sometimes, you'll be rewarded with glorious bass and infrabass, but more often, the outcome will be underwhelming, lacking that visceral thrill. This is one of the hi-fi original sins, and there’s no remedy for it. Please resist the urge to tweak the subwoofer volume to adjust the sound of CDs, as it’ll only drive you mad. If the system is properly calibrated, leave it alone. Accept the reality: you get what the recording gives you! Anyway, if you have set everything up correctly, but playing a well-recorded CD, you still have a bass with “some problems", check the sound of your main speakers again. Here are a few suggestions: 1) as mentioned above, if you have the option in the amplifier's setup menu, try to increase (even up to 180Hz - 6dB/oct, if needed) the crossover point for the main speakers (high-pass filter) and set up the low-pass knob of the subwoofer around halfway. This is usually an exhaustive solution.2) if that is not an option, try moving the main speakers further away from the corners and the back wall. Also, shorten the length of the speaker cables to a minimum, which must always be as short as possible (this is a general rule). 3) as a last resort, try to move the subwoofer from the corner along the back wall. If the issue persists, you almost certainly must blame the acoustics of your room. Unfortunately, poor bass quality and sometimes even mid-high frequencies aren’t always solely dependent on the audio system itself. Good acoustics in your listening room, along with the opportunity to position the speakers correctly, are essential for achieving optimal sound quality. If you happen to be "unlucky", all your efforts might be mercilessly nullified. In such cases, I recommend experimenting by relocating your system to a different part of the room or even trying it out in another room. Sometimes, these changes can yield miraculous results! A 20Hz frequency has a wavelength of 17 metres, so in a closed room with a diagonal shorter than 8.5 metres, you physically won’t perceive it, assuming your ears can detect such a low frequency. In practice, this means deep bass requires spacious, elongated, open rooms to develop fully. In small, enclosed spaces, it simply cannot expand or “go deep” as intended. The room's shape is also crucial, so avoid rooms with a cubic shape, as these are generators of “standing waves”. If possible, also avoid rooms where their dimensions are multiples of one another, such as a room measuring 6m × 9m with a height of 3m. In situations like these, there isn’t much that can be done. You can only try to enhance the infrabass potential of your room by opening doors and, if possible, windows too (please don't laugh, I’m very serious about this)! In fact, infrabass (not bass) reproduction depends more on the room’s geometry, size, and openings rather than on its décor and flooring. Also note that pressure, depth, and the quality of bass and infrabass vary significantly throughout the room. These variations are inevitable and normal, so you must adjust your system to attain a flat bass response only at your usual listening point. You’ll likely find that even small adjustments, such as moving your listening point forward or back, or up and down, can make a significant difference. Finally, be sure not to position your listening point around the centre of the room or against the rear wall. Well ... after reading this “treatise” on systems with subwoofers, are there any audiophiles who still believe that a top-tier subwoofer, perfectly set up by a professional, is a detrimental addition to a hi-end system? If so, I’m sadly sorry for them! A poor (often disgusting) bass range is typically the most common issue in most systems (hi-end included) and can only be resolved, or at least mitigated, through technical means. Audiophiles must realise that achieving perfect bass and infrabass response, and addressing major acoustic flaws in the low-frequency spectrum of the system, is simply impossible without the inclusion of subwoofers in the system and the expertise of a prepared technician. Period. So, my final piece of advice to the “esoteric crowd” is this: instead of squandering heaps of money on overpriced, almost useless, but supposedly “miraculous” interconnects and accessories, invest far less in a quality subwoofer, and call in a skilled professional to set it up properly. You won’t believe the sound "metamorphosis" of your entire system. And finally ... welcome to the exclusive realm of true hi-end, not just in name and price! And now, let me end on a positive (perhaps, just semi-positive) note: Recently, I've noticed that hi-end speaker manufacturers have finally begun producing subwoofers as well. They've probably realised, considering the "funny" prices, it's yet another lucrative revenue stream, but this is only a detail! This is good news, but most of these "subwoofers" I’ve seen on Facebook and in brochures generally look more like carnival props than true hi-end gear, with most being just passive or active, oversized (yet aesthetically beautiful) boxes, featuring tragically large drivers. Sadly, this suggests they’ve jumped on the same no-tech bandwagon as much of today’s hi-end audio: the bigger, the pricier, the better! Instead, for that kind of money, an audiophile might reasonably expect an active subwoofer with electronic control over its long-throw and not larger than 10" driver(s). Alongside the standard low-pass filter, such a subwoofer must also include an adjustable high-pass filter to address the previously discussed issue of bass roll-off in the main speakers, essential for properly integrating the subwoofer into the system. This high-pass filter could also be external (but sold with the sub), which is actually better, as this configuration allows its placement between the preamp and power amp (shortening the cables). I'm well aware that designing a machine capable of reproducing the infrabass embedded in the source with near-perfection (perfection being, of course, unattainable) is the most demanding challenge in the entire hi-fi chain. So vast is the gulf between a subwoofer worthy of the name and those vulgar “boom-boxes” that the two scarcely belong to the same category. But still ... these designers must at least keep trying! Who knows, maybe one day they'll manage! Oops, perhaps I'm just the usual perennial dreamer, slow to accept that in a world where sonic culture is generally low, substance has given way to surface. Nowadays, marketing and striking aesthetics manage to overshadow the real essence of a product, turning medium-quality gear into mythical objects for the well-heeled audiophile. The show goes on, and I’m still watching this little circus unfold! However, what’s great is that subwoofers are no longer taboo and are finally entering the "conversations" in the hi-end scene. Let’s see where it leads, and ... who knows if they'll at least connect and set them up properly! I've aimed to keep the technical language as simple as possible, and I hope these instructions assist you in setting up your enhanced system to perfection, or at least to the best of your ability. However, if you encounter any issues you cannot resolve, please visit the hi-end doctor page and feel free to contact us.
don't look for perfect sound where there's no technical chance of achieving it
The purpose of this page is to help prevent audiophiles from squandering fortunes in the futile pursuit of top-tier sound from technically hopeless hi-end speakers.
Well, I'm perfectly aware that I’m wasting my time, but I consider it a duty, or almost a "humanitarian" rescue mission, so I must at least try!
To begin with, I believe the term “hi-end” is widely misused and abused today! Indeed, when modern speakers are designed with outdated 70s-style technology and labelled “hi-end” solely because they feature a beautiful, oversized, mirror-polished solid wood cabinet crammed with drivers and marketed with an outrageously inflated price tag, the adjective feels decidedly misplaced.
Regarding the prices of today's hi-end, it seems many audiophiles have forsaken the real value of money, common sense and any link to the real world.
Whether $50,000 (or muuuuuch more) for a pair of speakers sounds reasonable, then proportionally, what should a car cost? Upwards of $50 million, at least!
Many audiophiles may not be aware that the most expensive part of a speaker is the cabinet, as the industrial costs of woofers, midranges, tweeters, and crossovers are relatively low. While the designer’s research time should be considered, it’s worth noting that research time in car design is exponentially higher.
Therefore, considering these factors, a pair of passive loudspeakers priced, let’s say, at over $20,000 should be seen as a mockery, unless the cabinet is crafted from exotic, fragrant wood and embellished with solid gold inlays!
Lately, hi-end design and production have been undergoing a baffling and notable process of technical involution rather than evolution. In the same way, analogue and vinyl have been sadly exhumed, and in speaker design, we're witnessing a return to the not-too-advanced "technology" of fifty years ago. In fact, manufacturers are once again producing massive passive speakers (the bigger, the better), effectively disregarding the technological progress made over the past five decades, markedly in the reproduction of the bass and infrabass range.
Regarding these "bigger is better" speakers, I am reminded of a striking, but very true, statement from an old (1980) audio pro brochure: we call "phone booths" those speakers that wage a losing battle with the dimensions of domestic rooms and have been designed this way due to a lack of technology.
I wholeheartedly agree with this statement, and in the realm of hi-end home audio, I stand firmly against the recent trend of massive, "dinosaur-like" speakers, which, in this article, I will henceforth amicably refer to as "dino(s)".
I start by saying that the perfect loudspeaker doesn’t exist. Still, it's possible to get close enough if its design adheres to the principles of acoustic physics and strikes the best compromise between technical parameters and sonic priorities. A speaker like that won’t necessarily be expensive, because there is no real reason for it to be (unless the cabinet is the work of a luthier from Cremona). Remember, it’s NOT the price, the beauty of the cabinet, the useless spikes, the bi-wiring, and so on, that guarantee sonic hi-end, but the technical skill of the designer, who must keep things as simple as possible and not defy the basic rules of acoustic physics! Surely you will think that this is the norm in hi-end speaker design, but I assure you it isn’t. To illustrate my point with a practical example, imagine dream cars (Ferrari, Porsche, Aston Martin, McLaren, ...) sporting “beautiful” octagonal wheels!
You might think I’m exaggerating, but it's exactly like that. The only difference is that, when faced with octagonal wheels, anyone will instantly notice the “marginal ” technical flaw. In the realm of speakers, however, aberrations of comparable magnitude go unnoticed by most audiophiles. These are much less intuitive and demand a solid grasp of electronics and acoustic physics to be perceived.
The utopian, theoretically perfect loudspeaker would resemble the tip of a needle, as such a design would be immune to physical phenomena like diffraction, refraction, reflections, phase shifts, time alignment issues, and drivers' interaction. Although creating such a speaker is impossible, a designer’s guiding principle should always be “the smaller, the better", to keep these parameters within acceptable limits.
Instead, the current prevailing trend is to construct increasingly large loudspeakers with wide front panels, necessitated by the dimensions of their oversized woofers. With these broad front surfaces (often tragically mirror-polished!), it's difficult to minimise adverse effects such as diffraction, refraction, reflections and phase anomalies on the drivers dedicated to mid-high frequency reproduction, which deteriorate their emissions.
Furthermore, many designers of these "dinos" often use multiple drivers per way (instead of only one), perhaps to impress and/or justify the ridiculous price. Someone should explain to me why this is necessary for domestic use, when a good sat-sub system can easily achieve live “rock concert” sound pressure. The only advantage I can think of is that, doubling any driver, the sound emission increases by 3dB, consequently reducing distortion at the same required level. However, using multiple identical drivers also significantly increases the adverse effects mentioned before, resulting in a muddy, unfocused sound and "funny" imaging. To make a long story short, and generalising, these “dinos” defy the basic rules of acoustic physics that I studied in Secondary School, not at University! They could be like dream cars with “octagonal” wheels!
However, I must honestly say that some designers of "dinos" have adopted a more serious technical approach, housing the tweeter and midrange (luckily, only one per way) in small pods, placed vertically above the large cabinet of the woofer(s). In other speakers, they create "mega" D'Appolito configurations: two mid-bass drivers with the tweeter in the centre, vertically aligned in the middle of a very tall, impressive box, with large woofers (the more, the merrier), above and below.
Even though these speakers are "dinos", at least try to follow the main rules of acoustic physics, and for this reason, they should sound better than those with a large front panel full of drivers.
It’s nonetheless interesting (and quite amusing) to observe that most of today's "dinos" are essentially made up of a simple two/three-way speaker, similar to a typical bookshelf model, paired with a "compilation" of passive woofers.
So here’s my logical question: why didn’t the designers create beautifully voiced two-way speakers (in D'Appolito configuration) to be paired with separate active subwoofers? Were they afraid to give birth to something truly top-notch? Something compact, easy to position, and perfectly tunable, even if placed in mid/small rooms, and/or sub-optimal locations?
I refuse to believe these designers are just a bunch of hopeless technicians, so there’s got to be another reason!
Yes, there surely is, and in my view, the reason is that they probably know it’s impossible (or at least I hope so) to sell two bookshelf speakers and two subwoofers for $50k or much more! Even the most gullible audiophile might realise someone is making fun of them!
On the contrary, achieving that with "monumental" speakers is entirely possible, and ... for manufacturers and retailers, it’s definitely worth it! The amusing part is that, in this way, audiophiles don’t even realise they’re being conned just as badly, if not more so!
Hence, I do prefer a pair of top-sounding 2-way on stands, along with one (or two) top-tier active subwoofers (perfectly set up). In fact, very simple 2-way slim floorstanders or bookshelf speakers on stands, with a semi-oval cabinet to reduce internal standing waves, a front panel not wider than the largest component on it, and capable of producing high sound pressure with low distortion, are nowadays the best possible speakers for reproducing sound from 80Hz upwards.
Indeed, such a speaker should have only one tweeter and one mid-woofer, or, even better, one tweeter and two mid-woofers in a D’Appolito configuration (two vertical mid-woofers with the tweeter in the centre between them). This configuration offers significant advantages over a traditional two-way bookshelf speaker, delivering outstanding imaging, reducing midbass distortion, and enhancing the speaker’s overall dynamic range.
Please don't faint, but I seriously suggest considering the purchase of two top-tier centre speakers! A centre speaker usually delivers very accurate sound because designers know it is the most important speaker in a home theatre system, so they pay special attention to its design.
By setting them up vertically on 60 cm stands, you automatically create a speaker system in pure D'Appolito configuration. Moreover, because of their "humane" dimensions and since they are not natural "boomers", you can position them optimally in places impossible for “dinos". Now, the only remaining challenge is reproducing the frequencies below 80Hz and ... the deeper, the faster, the cleaner, the better! The obvious solution is to add one (or two) electronically controlled, serious subwoofers, integrated into the system by a professional.
Such sat-sub systems will easily outperform "dinos", not only because they are more respectful of the laws of acoustic physics, but also for many other technical and physical reasons, as outlined below:
>> a sat-sub system is a bi-amplified setup, with all the great benefits that come with it. The main speakers and their amps, properly rolled off in the bass range to integrate with the sub, only need to handle frequencies above 80Hz. This is an immense relief for the speakers and something surely valuable for any solid-state amp, too, but an outright priceless gift for all tube amps! In this regard, I believe that every owner of tube amplifiers should seriously consider incorporating a top active subwoofer, professionally integrated into their system. They will regret not having done it earlier! It’s a fact that a bi-amplified system with active subwoofer(s) produces less distortion and offers significantly greater "speed", dynamics and control (even employing a less powerful amp) compared to traditional "dinos" with slow, oversized passive woofers, driven by massive amplifiers. The “speed,” also known as “transient response,” is one of the most important parameters of a system, being an essential peculiarity of every musical instrument and any sonic event! An organ has a low speed, whereas percussion and plucked string instruments have a high speed. If your system is “slow”, it will "fade" the soul of these instruments, softening their original "sharpness", which shouldn’t be seen as a drawback, but rather as an essential sound feature of these instruments! Audiophiles think that reproducing the sound of a harpsichord is easy stuff for a hi-fi system, but they couldn’t be more mistaken. Slow systems (which I mercilessly call “funeral systems”) may handle an organ, but only pretend to give you back the soul and true essence of a seriously recorded harpsichord. Percussion instruments are even more demanding, and you surely can’t imagine that perfectly reproducing a highly audible triangle in a full orchestral climax is "food" for only a few systems! Just for a change, it's interesting (or rather sad) to note that "gurus" and magazines never mention speed or transient response! >> a two-way passive crossover for a bookshelf, or centre speaker, unlike those for three/four/five-way "dinos", is enormously simpler! If correctly designed, it results in a much faster and time-aligned crossover. >> unlike “dinos”, small speakers are not natural “boomers”. If needed, you can position them (obviously on stands) close to the back wall or even in corners, particularly if rolled off on the bass range to join a sub correctly. >> the bass-infrabass range of a 10" electronically controlled active sub has got nothing in common with that one generated by the large (nowadays, tragically ever-growing) passive woofer(s) of "dinos”: it’s deeper, much faster, fully controlled, damped, and cleaner. To illustrate the point with a real-world example, it's akin to comparing the performance of a Ferrari and a Bentley on a winding, uphill road! >> the distortion and ringing (lingering decay and lack of damping) of an active good sub is always much lower than that of passive big woofers! Consequently, its emission of harmonics and overtones (generated by the distortion in the low spectrum) is inferior, greatly benefiting the mid-high range of the speakers. Why? Simply because these "invented" harmonics, added and distributed with decreasing intensity across the entire audio band, are fewer. In short, large passive woofers that attempt to reach deep frequencies introduce more unwanted effects in the mid-high spectrum than a subwoofer. Some pathetic audiophile calls it "colour", but the correct word is definitely "horror"! >> unlike “dinos”, where the only way to try to "humanise" the bass-midbass response is through placement adjustments (when possible), a sat-sub system can almost always be perfectly tuned for a flat response at the listening point by a professional. This capability alone creates a significant performance gulf between the two systems! >> to accurately recreate the original image contained in the source, the virtual vision of the performers, and the 3D stage, small speakers with a compact front panel are far superior to larger speakers. This contradicts the common beliefs among many audiophiles that bigger speakers produce a larger image. Indeed, it's the opposite, and acoustic physics explains why. Only small, in-phase and time-aligned speakers, possibly in D’Appolito configuration, can deliver an accurate 3D representation of the original image present in the recording and consequently on the CD! Furthermore, the image is linked to the frequency response of a system through the mathematical relation known as the Fourier inversion theorem. Applied to this context, it essentially states that the flatter the frequency response at the listening point, the more precise the image reconstruction will be. Therefore, as previously said, a good sat-sub system can usually achieve a flatter frequency response at the listening position than what is achievable with “dinos”, resulting in a better image as well. >> the total cost of a hi-end system composed of smaller speakers, an active subwoofer, and appropriately scaled-down amplification is significantly lower than that of a system featuring “dinos” and massive amps. This can be an enticing advantage for many audiophiles. However, for those who enjoy flaunting their gear, or for retailers, it may be perceived not as a plus but a minus.
>> a sat-sub system reduces the risk of divorce, but even in this case, whether that counts as a pro or a con is arguable and deeply personal!
>> a sat-sub system is a bi-amplified setup, with all the great benefits that come with it. The main speakers and their amps, properly rolled off in the bass range to integrate with the sub, only need to handle frequencies above 80Hz. This is an immense relief for the speakers and something surely valuable for any solid-state amp, too, but an outright priceless gift for all tube amps! In this regard, I believe that every owner of tube amplifiers should seriously consider incorporating a top active subwoofer, professionally integrated into their system. They will regret not having done it earlier! It’s a fact that a bi-amplified system with active subwoofer(s) produces less distortion and offers significantly greater "speed", dynamics and control (even employing a less powerful amp) compared to traditional "dinos" with slow, oversized passive woofers, driven by massive amplifiers. The “speed,” also known as “transient response,” is one of the most important parameters of a system, being an essential peculiarity of every musical instrument and any sonic event! An organ has a low speed, whereas percussion and plucked string instruments have a high speed. If your system is “slow”, it will "fade" the soul of these instruments, softening their original "sharpness", which shouldn’t be seen as a drawback, but rather as an essential sound feature of these instruments! Audiophiles think that reproducing the sound of a harpsichord is easy stuff for a hi-fi system, but they couldn’t be more mistaken. Slow systems (which I mercilessly call “funeral systems”) may handle an organ, but only pretend to give you back the soul and true essence of a seriously recorded harpsichord. Percussion instruments are even more demanding, and you surely can’t imagine that perfectly reproducing a highly audible triangle in a full orchestral climax is "food" for only a few systems! Just for a change, it's interesting (or rather sad) to note that "gurus" and magazines never mention speed or transient response! >> a two-way passive crossover for a bookshelf, or centre speaker, unlike those for three/four/five-way "dinos", is enormously simpler! If correctly designed, it results in a much faster and time-aligned crossover. >> unlike “dinos”, small speakers are not natural “boomers”. If needed, you can position them (obviously on stands) close to the back wall or even in corners, particularly if rolled off on the bass range to join a sub correctly. >> the bass-infrabass range of a 10" electronically controlled active sub has got nothing in common with that one generated by the large (nowadays, tragically ever-growing) passive woofer(s) of "dinos”: it’s deeper, much faster, fully controlled, damped, and cleaner. To illustrate the point with a real-world example, it's akin to comparing the performance of a Ferrari and a Bentley on a winding, uphill road! >> the distortion and ringing (lingering decay and lack of damping) of an active good sub is always much lower than that of passive big woofers! Consequently, its emission of harmonics and overtones (generated by the distortion in the low spectrum) is inferior, greatly benefiting the mid-high range of the speakers. Why? Simply because these "invented" harmonics, added and distributed with decreasing intensity across the entire audio band, are fewer. In short, large passive woofers that attempt to reach deep frequencies introduce more unwanted effects in the mid-high spectrum than a subwoofer. Some pathetic audiophile calls it "colour", but the correct word is definitely "horror"! >> unlike “dinos”, where the only way to try to "humanise" the bass-midbass response is through placement adjustments (when possible), a sat-sub system can almost always be perfectly tuned for a flat response at the listening point by a professional. This capability alone creates a significant performance gulf between the two systems! >> to accurately recreate the original image contained in the source, the virtual vision of the performers, and the 3D stage, small speakers with a compact front panel are far superior to larger speakers. This contradicts the common beliefs among many audiophiles that bigger speakers produce a larger image. Indeed, it's the opposite, and acoustic physics explains why. Only small, in-phase and time-aligned speakers, possibly in D’Appolito configuration, can deliver an accurate 3D representation of the original image present in the recording and consequently on the CD! Furthermore, the image is linked to the frequency response of a system through the mathematical relation known as the Fourier inversion theorem. Applied to this context, it essentially states that the flatter the frequency response at the listening point, the more precise the image reconstruction will be. Therefore, as previously said, a good sat-sub system can usually achieve a flatter frequency response at the listening position than what is achievable with “dinos”, resulting in a better image as well. >> the total cost of a hi-end system composed of smaller speakers, an active subwoofer, and appropriately scaled-down amplification is significantly lower than that of a system featuring “dinos” and massive amps. This can be an enticing advantage for many audiophiles. However, for those who enjoy flaunting their gear, or for retailers, it may be perceived not as a plus but a minus.
>> a sat-sub system reduces the risk of divorce, but even in this case, whether that counts as a pro or a con is arguable and deeply personal!
Anyway, all the above mentioned "pros" of a sat-sub hi-end system, are summarised and made visible in this screenshot:
This is the screenshot of my portable spectrum analyser, an NTI Minilyzer ML1 (1/3 octave), showing the fantastic frequency response of my system playing pink noise, with the microphone (a Schoeps CMC3-MK2) positioned in my listening point. This result is the outcome of a hyper-meticulous setup of a pair of very serious centre speakers (set up in D'Appolito configuration) on 60 cm stands, driven by sachem electronics, and completed with my lifelong, glorious and still unbeaten subwoofer (an upgraded, 48-year-old, audio pro B2-50).
As you can note, the 20Hz is flat, with 8kHz at -3dB and 16kHz at -6dB, completely adhering to the dictates of "its majesty" Brüel & Kjær!
Such a pink noise response at the listening position borders on the utopian and in my lounge, is unlikely for any "dinos" system, regardless of price! Not to mention the lightning-fast transient response, the endless dynamic range and total control over the sound.
What makes it even more interesting, or rather amusing, is that the combined cost of the speakers and subwoofer could be well below 5,000 NZD. If you're curious, a detailed list of my system's components is available on the live recording page.
Given all this, the "big question" remains: why do most audiophiles buy floorstanders and "dinos"? Excluding showmanship, visual appeal, magazine influence, and the self-serving advice of retailers, the only plausible explanation is that they were either unaware of the facts detailed in this article or simply had no idea this website even existed.
One thing is indisputable: hi-fi magazines and so-called “esoteric gurus” have always been more than diligent in keeping audiophiles in the dark about these matters, assuming, without ever guaranteeing, that they even know them themselves!
Indeed, they have no interest at all in recommending or promoting hi-end sat-sub systems.
Now, a few considerations about different typologies of large speakers, with their pros and cons:
1) Large, dynamic, full-range, multi-way floorstanding speakers (typically equipped with multiple drivers) -- They come with several drawbacks, as previously mentioned. As for their advantages, I struggle to identify any, beyond their imposing size and visual appeal. They are the archetypes of today's "dinos". 2) Big, dipole speakers (electrostatic, isodynamic, ribbon, etc.) -- The pros are that, generally, these speakers have quite an accurate timbre and detail, with good "speed" in the mid-high. Considering the cons, there is the problem of their limited dynamic range and sound pressure, as well as an inconsistent infrabass range. In my opinion, to address these issues, a top-tier and fast 10” active subwoofer, perfectly tuned into the system by a professional, is essential and makes a terrific difference (even in the mid-high range). However, there are other cons: the biggest one is that they are dipole speakers, meaning they emit sound equally from both the front and back. So, to put it simply, the sound emitted from the front reaches your ears at the initial instant (T1). Meanwhile, the sound emitted from the back, born in opposition-of-phase, and reflected by walls, corners, the ceiling, and the floor, arrives at your ears delayed, at various instants (T2, T3, T4, etc.). This results in an out-of-phase sound that doesn’t accurately represent the true size of the instruments (e.g., a violin might sound as big as a piano). Another issue is that, despite the front stage being enjoyably wide, it doesn’t allow a focused localisation of the performers. When listening to commercial CDs, these problems are less noticeable due to their multi-microphone recording techniques and lower quality. You might even appreciate the larger sound. But with perfect recordings (in phase), the problems and the true nature of the dipole speakers are delivered on a silver tray! 3) Big, full-range, dynamic, multi-way floorstander speakers, with an omnidirectional (also called poly-directional) multi-driver head, for the reproduction of the mid-high range -- These speakers have the same (actually, even more) cons as the dipole speakers mentioned in the previous paragraph, except for sound pressure. As for the pros, I cannot see any.
4) Large, full-range, loudspeakers with dynamic woofer(s) and dynamic horn drivers for the mid and high range -- A particular, quite long speech has to be addressed to them, but I cannot do that in full here, so I’ll try to be concise, explaining the essentials. Horn drivers can be classified into three generations: first, second and third. Their only purpose is to increase the sound pressure of a normal driver by a mechanical amplifier, which is the horn. These horn drivers enable the creation of highly efficient loudspeakers (around 100dB 1W/1m), reducing the need for powerful amplifiers, and this is surely a great pro. The most commonly used horns in loudspeakers belong to the first generation, similar to those from 70 years ago. Even using the best possible modern drivers, mounted on modern profiles (Onken, Iwata, etc.), they produce a sound affected by heavy colouration and sometimes a nasal timbre too. This happens for the following physical-acoustical reasons: 1 - Alteration of the frequency response, caused by the deformation of the membrane, which is exposed to the high pressures generated in the compression chamber. 2 - Internal resonances, at different frequencies and their multiples, generated inside the compression chamber and the throat. 3 - Resonances generated by the reflections inside the horn, plus diffraction of high frequencies created by the mouth of the horn, along its perimeter.
The second and third generation of these drivers is another story. In recent years, thanks to the use of complex computing programs in the hands of skilled technicians, a couple of big companies have managed to solve, or at least minimise, the problems exposed above. These companies now produce full-range, high-efficiency speakers (with dynamic woofers and horn drivers for the mid-high frequencies), which, in my opinion, are the best option for music reproduction in huge rooms and venues. However, audiophiles must not consider employing these speakers in domestic, normal rooms because they are very large and also designed to achieve a perfect balance at a distance. Regarding the very expensive “hi-end” speakers, constructed with horn drivers and dynamic woofer(s), as far as I know, almost all of them are made by small manufacturers who use horns similar (even if modern) to those of the first and second generation. Any comment is superfluous. The only “hi-end” aspect is the appearance and price! Anyway, considering that these speakers represent a very minimal part of the market, a couple of simple questions emerge spontaneously: are these very few manufacturers the only “custodians of the truth”? Could it be possible that all the others (the vast majority), who use normal mid-ranges and tweeters, are wrong? I don’t think so. However, these speakers are aesthetically impressive and surely the best possible speakers to show off! 5) Not too big floorstander speakers incorporating an active subwoofer -- If these speakers are seriously designed, they should be considered the only real full-range speakers on the market! Practically, they are similar to sat-sub systems and a good alternative to them. Typically, their mid-high range utilises one tweeter and one mid-woofer (or, even better, a D’Appolito configuration), and the front panel of the cabinet is as narrow as the largest component on it. The active subwoofer is in the lowest part of the cabinet and can be side-firing or down-firing. A professional can flatten their frequency response at the listening point without big problems! These are great speakers, and I love them. However, I honestly believe that, even in this case, top-tier sub-sat systems could still be a better choice, if only for their superior adaptability to any environment, and the ability to select the subwoofer that best suits the setup. There are many other different types of speakers, but not being representative and often "ridiculous" too, I will ignore them. In conclusion, the bitter reality of today's hi-fi and hi-end world is that marketing has overshadowed engineering. As a consequence, all the previous categories of speakers, except for the last one, are outrageously expensive, managing to pass off the price as a guarantee of "celestial" sound! So, despite my pointless disappointment, technically inexperienced audiophiles are irresistibly drawn to the imposing size of these "the bigger, the better" dinosaurs. If they are wealthy enough, they buy them without a second thought. But later, as they start to uncover the true "soul" of these speakers, they attempt to fix the flaws by swapping in more monstrous amplifiers, "blessed" cables and absurd accessories, only to squander yet another fortune, much to the delight of the "gurus" rather than for their own satisfaction. The problem is that, at best, all their expensive efforts only manage to smooth the edges of the “octagonal” wheels barely! Now you should be able to understand the exact meaning of this article's headline, or at least I hope so.
I have intentionally used clear, accessible, not-too-technical language to ensure that every reader can grasp the key concepts. After all, this topic is the most complex and important in hi-fi and hi-end audio. That said, if anyone has questions, curiosities, concerns, or specific inquiries, I’d be more than happy to help and avoid costly mistakes.
1) Large, dynamic, full-range, multi-way floorstanding speakers (typically equipped with multiple drivers) -- They come with several drawbacks, as previously mentioned. As for their advantages, I struggle to identify any, beyond their imposing size and visual appeal. They are the archetypes of today's "dinos". 2) Big, dipole speakers (electrostatic, isodynamic, ribbon, etc.) -- The pros are that, generally, these speakers have quite an accurate timbre and detail, with good "speed" in the mid-high. Considering the cons, there is the problem of their limited dynamic range and sound pressure, as well as an inconsistent infrabass range. In my opinion, to address these issues, a top-tier and fast 10” active subwoofer, perfectly tuned into the system by a professional, is essential and makes a terrific difference (even in the mid-high range). However, there are other cons: the biggest one is that they are dipole speakers, meaning they emit sound equally from both the front and back. So, to put it simply, the sound emitted from the front reaches your ears at the initial instant (T1). Meanwhile, the sound emitted from the back, born in opposition-of-phase, and reflected by walls, corners, the ceiling, and the floor, arrives at your ears delayed, at various instants (T2, T3, T4, etc.). This results in an out-of-phase sound that doesn’t accurately represent the true size of the instruments (e.g., a violin might sound as big as a piano). Another issue is that, despite the front stage being enjoyably wide, it doesn’t allow a focused localisation of the performers. When listening to commercial CDs, these problems are less noticeable due to their multi-microphone recording techniques and lower quality. You might even appreciate the larger sound. But with perfect recordings (in phase), the problems and the true nature of the dipole speakers are delivered on a silver tray! 3) Big, full-range, dynamic, multi-way floorstander speakers, with an omnidirectional (also called poly-directional) multi-driver head, for the reproduction of the mid-high range -- These speakers have the same (actually, even more) cons as the dipole speakers mentioned in the previous paragraph, except for sound pressure. As for the pros, I cannot see any.
4) Large, full-range, loudspeakers with dynamic woofer(s) and dynamic horn drivers for the mid and high range -- A particular, quite long speech has to be addressed to them, but I cannot do that in full here, so I’ll try to be concise, explaining the essentials. Horn drivers can be classified into three generations: first, second and third. Their only purpose is to increase the sound pressure of a normal driver by a mechanical amplifier, which is the horn. These horn drivers enable the creation of highly efficient loudspeakers (around 100dB 1W/1m), reducing the need for powerful amplifiers, and this is surely a great pro. The most commonly used horns in loudspeakers belong to the first generation, similar to those from 70 years ago. Even using the best possible modern drivers, mounted on modern profiles (Onken, Iwata, etc.), they produce a sound affected by heavy colouration and sometimes a nasal timbre too. This happens for the following physical-acoustical reasons: 1 - Alteration of the frequency response, caused by the deformation of the membrane, which is exposed to the high pressures generated in the compression chamber. 2 - Internal resonances, at different frequencies and their multiples, generated inside the compression chamber and the throat. 3 - Resonances generated by the reflections inside the horn, plus diffraction of high frequencies created by the mouth of the horn, along its perimeter.
The second and third generation of these drivers is another story. In recent years, thanks to the use of complex computing programs in the hands of skilled technicians, a couple of big companies have managed to solve, or at least minimise, the problems exposed above. These companies now produce full-range, high-efficiency speakers (with dynamic woofers and horn drivers for the mid-high frequencies), which, in my opinion, are the best option for music reproduction in huge rooms and venues. However, audiophiles must not consider employing these speakers in domestic, normal rooms because they are very large and also designed to achieve a perfect balance at a distance. Regarding the very expensive “hi-end” speakers, constructed with horn drivers and dynamic woofer(s), as far as I know, almost all of them are made by small manufacturers who use horns similar (even if modern) to those of the first and second generation. Any comment is superfluous. The only “hi-end” aspect is the appearance and price! Anyway, considering that these speakers represent a very minimal part of the market, a couple of simple questions emerge spontaneously: are these very few manufacturers the only “custodians of the truth”? Could it be possible that all the others (the vast majority), who use normal mid-ranges and tweeters, are wrong? I don’t think so. However, these speakers are aesthetically impressive and surely the best possible speakers to show off! 5) Not too big floorstander speakers incorporating an active subwoofer -- If these speakers are seriously designed, they should be considered the only real full-range speakers on the market! Practically, they are similar to sat-sub systems and a good alternative to them. Typically, their mid-high range utilises one tweeter and one mid-woofer (or, even better, a D’Appolito configuration), and the front panel of the cabinet is as narrow as the largest component on it. The active subwoofer is in the lowest part of the cabinet and can be side-firing or down-firing. A professional can flatten their frequency response at the listening point without big problems! These are great speakers, and I love them. However, I honestly believe that, even in this case, top-tier sub-sat systems could still be a better choice, if only for their superior adaptability to any environment, and the ability to select the subwoofer that best suits the setup. There are many other different types of speakers, but not being representative and often "ridiculous" too, I will ignore them. In conclusion, the bitter reality of today's hi-fi and hi-end world is that marketing has overshadowed engineering. As a consequence, all the previous categories of speakers, except for the last one, are outrageously expensive, managing to pass off the price as a guarantee of "celestial" sound! So, despite my pointless disappointment, technically inexperienced audiophiles are irresistibly drawn to the imposing size of these "the bigger, the better" dinosaurs. If they are wealthy enough, they buy them without a second thought. But later, as they start to uncover the true "soul" of these speakers, they attempt to fix the flaws by swapping in more monstrous amplifiers, "blessed" cables and absurd accessories, only to squander yet another fortune, much to the delight of the "gurus" rather than for their own satisfaction. The problem is that, at best, all their expensive efforts only manage to smooth the edges of the “octagonal” wheels barely! Now you should be able to understand the exact meaning of this article's headline, or at least I hope so.
I have intentionally used clear, accessible, not-too-technical language to ensure that every reader can grasp the key concepts. After all, this topic is the most complex and important in hi-fi and hi-end audio. That said, if anyone has questions, curiosities, concerns, or specific inquiries, I’d be more than happy to help and avoid costly mistakes.
uneven placement and décor cause the left and right speakers to sound different
Only a small percentage of lucky audiophiles have the opportunity to set up the sound system in a room with an optimal rectangular shape and measurements. In this ideal case, I strongly recommend placing the speakers (and the electronics) symmetrically along one of the short walls, facing the long side of the room.
Unfortunately, most of us aren't that lucky and have to cope with the reality of the available room, which often is anything but regular in shape and unevenly decorated as well. As a result, the surroundings of the left and the right speakers are different!
Well, you should know that the midbass-bass-infrabass range of any speaker is highly influenced and modified by the walls and furnishings around it. Suppose you need to place the two speakers in locations with different background arrangements and decor, as one speaker in a corner and the other with just a flat wall behind it, or an open space, or between two pieces of furniture, and so on. In these cases, the unavoidable result is that, in the listening position, the emission of the two identical speakers, playing the same audio signal, will be affected, showing different frequency responses across the entire low spectrum. To help you grasp the severity of this common issue, I'll put it in simple terms: it's exactly like using different speakers for the left and right channels! A spectrum analyser will mercilessly reveal the shocking truth!
If you don't have it, but only a CD with a track of "pink noise", play it and start switching (or balancing) between the left and the right speaker. Even this way, you will clearly and immediately hear the quite unbelievable difference in sound between the two speakers, and my best wishes for ... a good night's sleep!
Regarding the CD with "pink noise", in my view, it should be part of the accessories of any audiophile, but just using a normal good CD and an amplifier with mono and balance (you could dig out an old one from the cellar and temporarily reconnect it), is more than enough to evaluate the extent of the issue.
The amusing thing is that audiophiles seriously concern themselves with solving problems as important as the "sex of angels" while totally ignoring an anomaly of this magnitude! This is a grave negligence, given that resolving it should be one of their top priorities! To my knowledge, neither the so-called "gurus" nor the magazines have ever discussed this common reality. Could it be, just perhaps, that they have no idea how to fix it?
However, if you find yourself in this situation and want to unlock your system’s full potential, you must have this resolved. However, this complex issue cannot be fixed by throwing money at cables or indulging in esoteric paraphernalia, despite what some “hyper-skilled” vendor might claim. So, just this once, get serious and consult a qualified professional. With a spectrum analyser, two high-quality subwoofers (essential for this task), and the possibility to roll off the bass response in each main speaker as needed, this person can achieve a uniformly flat frequency response across the entire bass range at your listening position for both your speakers.
In conclusion, the audiophile must come to understand that this is the ONLY WAY to proceed to fully address this issue and ensure almost identical sound from each channel. It's by no means a simple task, and, as already said, it's food for only highly skilled professionals.
Unfortunately, the number of these "gentlemen" available on the market is more than very limited, and perhaps this is the main reason why insiders and magazines are so cautious about publicising this "thing"!
If the job is done properly, it's like having the entire system "blessed by a miracle". You’ll be delighted to discover that your system now delivers vastly improved sound: coherent, cleaner in the mid-highs, free from boominess, and crowned with glorious infrabass. It’s like killing not just two, but a whole flock of birds with one stone!
Note: Dipole and omnidirectional speakers, when placed in parts of the room with varying backgrounds, due to their rearward full-spectrum radiation, experience uneven rear reflections that alter the entire audio spectrum, not just the mid-bass. Unfortunately, in this case, there's no way to pair their mid-high range emissions either.
In my opinion, an audiophile whose room lacks a wall (ideally the shortest one) with two identical, symmetrical ends for speaker placement should think twice before investing in this type of speaker.
If you have any doubts, queries, or need professional help, please don't hesitate to contact us.
how to find the real differences between "humane" and "hi-end" CD players
Even though the CDs and CD players are on the "edge of the grave", replaced by computers and high-quality DACs, for online streaming at original CD quality (for complete information about this topic, read ”USB audio DACs” on this page), there are still audiophiles who “invest” substantial sums in esoteric CD players. So, the simple question is: is it really worth spending $50,000, instead of $500, on a CD player?
You can probably already guess what I think about it, but I don’t want to influence you. Instead, I’d like to offer an unbiased and empirical method for determining, with certainty, whether it’s worth it or not.
Given that the sonic differences between CD players are always minimal, the only truly effective and serious way to evaluate them is through real-time switching, which, in these cases, is the only way to avoid any mental conditioning.
Despite the probable hostility of your retailer to this procedure (potentially toxic to his business), you would ask him to connect a "humane" CD player to one input of the preamp (or amp) of the system you want to use for this trial, and the expensive one to an adjoining input of the same machine, to allow rapid switching between them in real-time.
Now you have to feed the two CD players with two identical, preferably well-recorded and complex CDs, and start playing them, pressing the play buttons at the same instant, for perfect synchronisation. From now on, you can switch between the two CD players at any time, but the first thing you have to do is to check the levels of the two machines, which must be identical. If not, the one that’s a bit louder (even minimally) always appears to be the best: it seems clearer, more selective, etc. If you are lucky, the two machines will already be playing at the same levels. If not, and if both the CD players have fixed outputs, to even the levels, you have to reduce the volume of the loudest one by an external passive volume control (a potentiometer, practically). If not available, get used to adjusting the volume every time you switch: this is quite imprecise and frustrating, but better than nothing, and you have to deal with the fact.
It can also happen that one of the two machines has a volume control and, if this CD player is the loudest one, just reduce its volume for perfect parity. If both the machines have volume control, no problems at all, obviously.
And if you avoid knowing which CD player is playing (Identifying them just as 1 and 2) until the very end of the trial (blind test), it's even better!
Now, enjoy the challenge! I'm pretty sure you'll encounter some interesting surprises, and you'll also come to understand your retailer's possible initial hesitation.
Now, a few personal considerations: 1) being CD players truly hi-fi machines (not just in name), the difference in sound (if any) is minimal and, if so, mostly depends on their analogue sections.
2) there’s the possibility that the two CD players sound the same.
3) as usual in the hi-fi world, galactic and outrageous prices are no guarantee of "celestial" sound at all! 4) before spending a substantial amount on these machines, which, at best, can only make minimal changes to a system's sound, a wise audiophile must first be certain about the sound of the more critical components, particularly the speaker system, which accounts for over 80% of the final sound.
The amusing truth is that many audiophiles own hi-end speakers that aren't able to reveal sonic differences as subtle as those between CD players! In this case, I suggest using a high-quality electrostatic headset or... simply buy the cheapest one.
To finish, and generally speaking, if you are spending important money on components or other stuff, where possible, always use real-time switching to compare them!
balanced or unbalanced interconnections?
As per today's trend, many hi-end electronics, in addition to the standard unbalanced inputs and outputs, feature balanced inputs and outputs as well! So, I think that someone has indeed noted that I have not furnished any of our sachem electronics with balanced inputs and outputs! Why? Are there reasons? Yes, there are, and I explain them below.
Let me start by saying that balanced lines are a feature of "professional" equipment. However, be aware that the term "professional" is NOT synonymous with top-tier sound quality. In general, professional gear does not belong to the hi-end category in terms of sound performance (though exceptions may exist, none of which I am aware of). In fact, you might even consider it one of the "original sins" of recorded music!
Indeed, the purpose of balanced lines is only to prevent induced noise in long signal cables, not to enhance sound fidelity! In fact, in recording studios and concert halls, the microphone cables are very long (frequently exceeding 20–30 meters) and may operate in environments saturated with radio frequencies and magnetic fields. In such circumstances, balanced lines are a must to avoid external interference. On the other hand, in the domestic hi-fi world, the interconnections are very short and well shielded, and the line levels are usually higher than in a mic line. For these reasons, it is unlikely (particularly in NZ) that there will be induced noise in your system, so you won’t need balanced lines at all. Anyway, it's more than easy to verify if you are affected by any induced noise: using unbalanced lines, turn on the CD player, and, without playing music, just set the volume of the preamp (or amp) very high and ... listen. Anyway, you might find it interesting that, aside from electronics with "fully balanced" circuits (which are very rare, insanely priced and arguably useful), the best way to achieve a balanced input/output from an unbalanced circuit is by adding an extra electronic circuit to the unbalanced output stage of the "emitting" device and another circuit to the input stage of the "receiving" device, to reconvert it into unbalanced. In the best cases, these circuits consist of an IC amplifier, plus resistors and capacitors. The capacitors are in the signal path and normally have a capacitance of around 10μF, which renders the use of polypropylene caps very problematic, due to their large dimensions. So, everyone uses electrolytic capacitors! But ... electrolytic capacitors are among the worst sounding types available, to the point that serious audio designers accept their use only when alternatives are practically impossible, such as in power supplies or tight spaces where minimal dimensions are the priority! Therefore, if your lines are noise-free, by utilising balanced interconnections, you normally listen to two additional (and not the top possible, sonically speaking) electronic circuits to NO advantage, on the contrary! I've never tried, so I don’t know how much they can affect the final sound, but they probably will. However, many audiophiles claim that there are audible differences between balanced and unbalanced lines. They may have a point, but what they probably cannot imagine is that, in typical conditions, the machine’s genuine voice is that of the unbalanced lines. In my opinion, in a noise-free environment, and excluding the veeeery few systems where all components are truly designed to be "fully balanced", it’s preferable to avoid balanced lines. Where both balanced and unbalanced sockets are available, I recommend using the unbalanced ones if you want to hear the machine’s original sound. Now you can fully understand why I didn’t fit any sachem electronics out with balanced input/output options: I wanted to maintain their signal path capacitor-free, which is the paramount peculiarity of these machines, and the key element of their uncommon performance. They are serious electronics that, to be sold, don't need to rely on "smoke and mirrors" or on useless "large blue eyes" (any reference is purely coincidental). Thinking it over ... maybe I am just the usual pathetic dreamer! To give you a visual idea, the photo below shows the circuits (left and right channels) I use to convert the output signal from unbalanced to balanced in my microphone preamp. I couldn't avoid adding balanced outputs since some professional recorders only feature balanced inputs. That said, my Tascam recorders provide both XLR and RCA inputs, so ... I exclusively use the unbalanced RCA ones!
Indeed, the purpose of balanced lines is only to prevent induced noise in long signal cables, not to enhance sound fidelity! In fact, in recording studios and concert halls, the microphone cables are very long (frequently exceeding 20–30 meters) and may operate in environments saturated with radio frequencies and magnetic fields. In such circumstances, balanced lines are a must to avoid external interference. On the other hand, in the domestic hi-fi world, the interconnections are very short and well shielded, and the line levels are usually higher than in a mic line. For these reasons, it is unlikely (particularly in NZ) that there will be induced noise in your system, so you won’t need balanced lines at all. Anyway, it's more than easy to verify if you are affected by any induced noise: using unbalanced lines, turn on the CD player, and, without playing music, just set the volume of the preamp (or amp) very high and ... listen. Anyway, you might find it interesting that, aside from electronics with "fully balanced" circuits (which are very rare, insanely priced and arguably useful), the best way to achieve a balanced input/output from an unbalanced circuit is by adding an extra electronic circuit to the unbalanced output stage of the "emitting" device and another circuit to the input stage of the "receiving" device, to reconvert it into unbalanced. In the best cases, these circuits consist of an IC amplifier, plus resistors and capacitors. The capacitors are in the signal path and normally have a capacitance of around 10μF, which renders the use of polypropylene caps very problematic, due to their large dimensions. So, everyone uses electrolytic capacitors! But ... electrolytic capacitors are among the worst sounding types available, to the point that serious audio designers accept their use only when alternatives are practically impossible, such as in power supplies or tight spaces where minimal dimensions are the priority! Therefore, if your lines are noise-free, by utilising balanced interconnections, you normally listen to two additional (and not the top possible, sonically speaking) electronic circuits to NO advantage, on the contrary! I've never tried, so I don’t know how much they can affect the final sound, but they probably will. However, many audiophiles claim that there are audible differences between balanced and unbalanced lines. They may have a point, but what they probably cannot imagine is that, in typical conditions, the machine’s genuine voice is that of the unbalanced lines. In my opinion, in a noise-free environment, and excluding the veeeery few systems where all components are truly designed to be "fully balanced", it’s preferable to avoid balanced lines. Where both balanced and unbalanced sockets are available, I recommend using the unbalanced ones if you want to hear the machine’s original sound. Now you can fully understand why I didn’t fit any sachem electronics out with balanced input/output options: I wanted to maintain their signal path capacitor-free, which is the paramount peculiarity of these machines, and the key element of their uncommon performance. They are serious electronics that, to be sold, don't need to rely on "smoke and mirrors" or on useless "large blue eyes" (any reference is purely coincidental). Thinking it over ... maybe I am just the usual pathetic dreamer! To give you a visual idea, the photo below shows the circuits (left and right channels) I use to convert the output signal from unbalanced to balanced in my microphone preamp. I couldn't avoid adding balanced outputs since some professional recorders only feature balanced inputs. That said, my Tascam recorders provide both XLR and RCA inputs, so ... I exclusively use the unbalanced RCA ones!
the two, black, bipolar electrolytic capacitors are compulsory and both are on the signal path
USB audio DACs
As I mentioned in the above topic, "don't look for perfect sound where there's no technical chance of achieving it", some hi-end audiophiles are currently embarking on a somewhat incredible retroactive technological journey, reminiscent of 70s "technologies", embracing vinyl, analogue equipment, large woofers, massive speakers, no active subwoofers, and so on. However, there’s another group, the enlightened ones, pursuing a different path: liberating music from the confines of CDs or vinyl-based sources.
With the increasing number of home automation and electronic integration, the demand for top hi-fi products that can easily interact with computers is rising every day, so a good DAC (Digital Audio Converter) has become an essential part of their systems!
In my case, considering that 90% of the music I usually listen to comes from my live recordings stored on my large hard disk, using a high-quality USB audio DAC is an absolute necessity.
It's also interesting to consider using, as your main CD player, the CD/DVD player inside your computer as a transport, paired with a top-tier DAC as the converter.
However, nowadays you have at your disposal even cleverer ways to listen to music and one of them is called TIDAL. With Tidal, you can stream over 25 million tracks in CD quality and 75.000 music video clips in high definition and immaculate sound, making it an online library of music in original quality for very demanding audiophiles. You just need a computer (any computer) for streaming and a superior DAC for sound perfection. I mentioned Tidal, which was the first, but now there are many other similar sites for original-quality streaming at a very low price.
Nonetheless, for those who choose to align themselves with the vinyl enthusiasts, I offer a modest piece of advice. They should (indeed, they must) be aware that every time an LP is played, some degree of deterioration occurs. This is one of the many issues inherent to this primitive technology, where sound is generated by the mechanical friction of the stylus’s diamond tip against the groove walls. The diamond doesn’t wear out, but the groove does!
So, surely I’m not, but if I were one of these audiophiles, I'd digitally record all my LPs onto a hard drive, to preserve forever the sound they had at the moment of recording. Naturally, the digital sound will be charmingly “humanised” by the perfect cartridge, crackles, pops, and that “lovely” distortion unique to vinyl, but at least it will be safe from further deterioration!
As for sound quality, if you use a good DAC for playback, the sound will be identical to what the turntable originally played, because a digital recorder doesn’t alter the sound in any way. Then, if you monitor the recording through headphones rather than speakers, the result may be even better, since it avoids any feedback effects. Feedback is yet another “delight” of the vinyl universe, and it’s tied to volume (the higher it is, the worse the effect). But even at normal listening levels, you’re never entirely free from its action.
Digitally recording them, you can also eliminate the usual, lengthy, religious "ritual" of placing, cleaning, kissing and blessing an LP on the turntable before playing it, and an additional benefit is that you could create a database and later find the track you want to play with just a click, instead of searching for the desired LP in a chaotic collection!
NOTE: As is often the case in the hi-fi world, the price of an item does not necessarily reflect its sonic quality. Therefore, I present an empirical method for comparing two different DACs in real time, free from any mental conditioning that might influence judgment, especially when the differences (if any) are minimal.
Insert a complex CD into the computer's CD player (or use Tidal), connect the two DACs you want to compare to separate USB ports on the computer, and then connect their outputs to two adjacent inputs on the preamp or amplifier. By switching between the two inputs, you can compare the sound of both DACs in real time.
However, it's essential to ensure that both DACs are playing at the same volume. As often emphasised before, even a minimal difference can skew your perception: the slightly louder one will always seem better.
hi-fi magazines?
For sure, hi-fi magazines can be useful, particularly their first pages, where they present new stuff and talk about how the market evolves, and their last pages, usually dedicated to music.
However, the most important pages should be the ones in the middle, dedicated to the reviews of various pieces of gear, but regarding these reviews, the shrewd audiophile should ask himself a few questions:
Do reviews generally reflect reality?
Are they made by serious professionals, with at least a solid knowledge of sound and live classical music?
Are reviewers truly free to write the unfiltered truth or what they honestly think is the truth?
Well, even if exceptions exist, my answer to all of these questions is NO!
In fact, generally speaking, trade magazines normally rely more on advertising revenue than on sales, making it obvious that every editor's top priority is to keep their advertisers "happy"!
So, between magazines and importers (or manufacturers), there is a tacit agreement: if you advertise with us, we review your products, and ... that says it all!
In your experience, can you recall even one review that has spoken negatively about the item? Certainly not, and that alone confirms that something is off. I can assure you that many products (sometimes very expensive) that have received glowing reviews actually deserved to be panned.
It must still be said that the best reviewers subtly hint at the true essence of a product, but you need to be highly skilled at reading "between the lines".
Furthermore, it's very unlikely (actually almost impossible) to find a review of an item imported or manufactured by a company that doesn't advertise in the magazines. However, reviewers are not always acting in bad faith. Many of them are simply incompetent, yet the result is just as misleading. Moreover, reviews are shaped by the personal sonic taste of the reviewers, which could be veeeeery different from yours!
I think that the following two paragraphs will be very educational for audiophiles who take reviews as gospel truth.
In the Italian hi-fi world, I've been one of the opinion leaders for quite a long time. So in 1986, I was invited to write a two-page article ("Fair Go" style) for each monthly issue of the Italian hi-fi magazine Alta Fedeltà. It was both challenging and amusing. Although I only wrote in general terms, never mentioning brands directly (yet making things clear enough for readers able to read "between the lines"), after twelve issues of politically "incorrect" articles, the editor could no longer withstand the pressure from advertisers. Since the very first issue, they had been obsessing over the content and covertly blackmailing him. So, he had to "kindly" ask me to stop, and, being a good friend of his, ... I did.
Another fascinating case worthy of reflection is that in 1978, when audio pro's B2-50 (the first active subwoofer, and at the time, as astonishing as a green Martian landing on Earth) hit the market, the hi-fi magazine ignored the brand audio pro, its groundbreaking "baby" called "active subwoofer", and its revolutionary ACE-bass patented technology!
Indeed, the B2-50 was the very first and only active subwoofer to enter the global market. So, hi-fi magazines had no interest in promoting such a conceptually new product, one that posed a potential disruption to major speaker manufacturers and risked leading to a monopoly in the just-born subwoofer market. Moreover, the company behind it neither invested in advertising in national or international hi-fi magazines, nor paid to promote its groundbreaking and unrivalled technology.
So, just a few magazines reported the event (without emphasis), and the others (the majority) ignored audio pro and the world's first machine capable of perfectly reproducing the infrabass range!
The preceding lines are enlightening and interesting for understanding what actually happens offstage in the magazines, so, dear audiophile, if you have to buy some stuff (particularly if expensive), you may certainly read reviews of it (if any), but be wise and go further: implement your knowledge about the "object of your dreams", looking for proper scientific measurements of it, and, visiting "Google Images", have a look at its interior (very important to verify if it's a "festival" of messy cables or seriously designed and built), but mostly, use your ears and a perfect CD, of which you possibly know the real content.
If you follow my advice, you will surely be much richer and much more satisfied with the sound of your system! For your information, I happily stopped reading hi-fi magazines in 1987, marking the magical end of bilious attacks, plus a fresh, unbiased approach whenever I have to evaluate new gear!
You will find other interesting considerations about reviews and reviewers on the live music vs. hi-fi and the hi-end doctor pages.