Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

By what criteria do you think the wire inside the box inferior? In the
crossover filter is several meters of wire, is it too not quality wire?
Do you judge the technical design poor for including this wire? Do you
think those who designed the speaker would also include wire that was not
perfectly capable of performing to the specifications of the design?
Unless you have informed answers to the above I would suggest leaving the
wire as it is. If you doubt the technical qualifications or honesty of
the manufacture, then you should perhaps sell this product for being a
failure.

Hello everyone

I'm planning to change all inner wirings of 804, as they are quite
poor compared to general quality of finishing and sound.
Has anyone made these kind of modifications on nautilus ser. or even
better if on 804? Any special instructions, pics or hints are welcome,
like to know where am I heading.

BRGDS
Riku

  #2   Report Post  
Wessel Dirksen
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

wrote in message ...
By what criteria do you think the wire inside the box inferior? In the
crossover filter is several meters of wire, is it too not quality wire?
Do you judge the technical design poor for including this wire? Do you
think those who designed the speaker would also include wire that was not
perfectly capable of performing to the specifications of the design?
Unless you have informed answers to the above I would suggest leaving the
wire as it is. If you doubt the technical qualifications or honesty of
the manufacture, then you should perhaps sell this product for being a
failure.


It doesn't work exactly like that. Designs from even great factories can
usually easily be improved. Only in the last few years have there been
completely tweeked assembly line luidspeakers. It's kinda like asking
yourself could a good Mercedes be improved by AMG, or a good Ford Mustang be
improved by Cobra. (Cooper and Mini also come to mind) There are reasons for
this. Big names with pricing in the regular guy's budget have to play it
safe and often purposely de-tune an otherwise aggressive design voor
economic and sometimes marketing reasons. Also technology moves on. I would
not want the inductors from 10 years ago in my speakers.

Hello everyone

I'm planning to change all inner wirings of 804, as they are quite
poor compared to general quality of finishing and sound.
Has anyone made these kind of modifications on nautilus ser. or even
better if on 804? Any special instructions, pics or hints are welcome,
like to know where am I heading.

BRGDS
Riku


  #3   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

My questions stand as is, if there is no reason to think otherwise, the
wire is as good for it's purpose as it gets, possible exceptions being
such things as the gauge is too small etc. , but this would be revealed in
answering the questions. If one thinks the wire lacks the majic ingredient
known only to exist in wire other then that used in the speaker, well what
can one say; and how exactly does one not know it does not exist in the
existing wire and in spades. The manufacture would have to be very
desperate for cash to skimp on a few inches of wire gauge, in which case
the entire design would be suspect and support for tossing the product
well considered. A more likely diagnosis in this instance is audio
nervosa.


By what criteria do you think the wire inside the box inferior? In the
crossover filter is several meters of wire, is it too not quality wire?
Do you judge the technical design poor for including this wire? Do you
think those who designed the speaker would also include wire that was not
perfectly capable of performing to the specifications of the design?
Unless you have informed answers to the above I would suggest leaving the
wire as it is. If you doubt the technical qualifications or honesty of
the manufacture, then you should perhaps sell this product for being a
failure.


It doesn't work exactly like that. Designs from even great factories can
usually easily be improved. Only in the last few years have there been
completely tweeked assembly line luidspeakers. It's kinda like asking
yourself could a good Mercedes be improved by AMG, or a good Ford Mustang be
improved by Cobra. (Cooper and Mini also come to mind) There are reasons for
this. Big names with pricing in the regular guy's budget have to play it
safe and often purposely de-tune an otherwise aggressive design voor
economic and sometimes marketing reasons. Also technology moves on. I would
not want the inductors from 10 years ago in my speakers.

Hello everyone

I'm planning to change all inner wirings of 804, as they are quite
poor compared to general quality of finishing and sound.
Has anyone made these kind of modifications on nautilus ser. or even
better if on 804? Any special instructions, pics or hints are welcome,
like to know where am I heading.

BRGDS
Riku

  #4   Report Post  
Wessel Dirksen
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

wrote in message ...
My questions stand as is, if there is no reason to think otherwise, the
wire is as good for it's purpose as it gets, possible exceptions being
such things as the gauge is too small etc. , but this would be revealed in
answering the questions. If one thinks the wire lacks the majic ingredient
known only to exist in wire other then that used in the speaker, well what
can one say; and how exactly does one not know it does not exist in the
existing wire and in spades. The manufacture would have to be very
desperate for cash to skimp on a few inches of wire gauge, in which case
the entire design would be suspect and support for tossing the product
well considered. A more likely diagnosis in this instance is audio
nervosa.


All factories for all kinds of products, excepting exotica, scimp all the
time to bring their product into budget which is a must in a competitive
economy. The production cost of a speaker is typically about 15 to 20% of
its MSRP which doesn't leave much room for splurging. Then the designer's
proverbial woody from his proud concept usually gets limp when the bean
counters tell him to make it 25% cheaper. The crossover and connecting wire
is exactly where loudspeakers tend to scimp almost without exception. This
is because unitl recently, the typical consumer knew nothing about this part
of the speaker, and you can scimp there to a certain extent. But in past
years your speaker had to have a "kevlar cone, kapton former, neodynium
magnet, super re-enforced cabinet, ect." to be cool enough to sell so those
expensive quality, but also marketable bits have to be in there, so where
else can you save. Now I wholehartedly agree with you in saying that if a
speaker makes you happy leave it alone. That's what it is there for. But if
one dares to go inside you will almost certainly find something worth
replacing.

Speaker manufacturing is no Walhalla and it is somewhat like sausage. You
don't really want to know what's in there because you may be disappointed.

Wessel


By what criteria do you think the wire inside the box inferior? In the
crossover filter is several meters of wire, is it too not quality wire?
Do you judge the technical design poor for including this wire? Do you
think those who designed the speaker would also include wire that was

not
perfectly capable of performing to the specifications of the design?
Unless you have informed answers to the above I would suggest leaving

the
wire as it is. If you doubt the technical qualifications or honesty of
the manufacture, then you should perhaps sell this product for being a
failure.


It doesn't work exactly like that. Designs from even great factories can
usually easily be improved. Only in the last few years have there been
completely tweeked assembly line luidspeakers. It's kinda like asking
yourself could a good Mercedes be improved by AMG, or a good Ford Mustang

be
improved by Cobra. (Cooper and Mini also come to mind) There are reasons

for
this. Big names with pricing in the regular guy's budget have to play it
safe and often purposely de-tune an otherwise aggressive design voor
economic and sometimes marketing reasons. Also technology moves on. I

would
not want the inductors from 10 years ago in my speakers.

Hello everyone

I'm planning to change all inner wirings of 804, as they are quite
poor compared to general quality of finishing and sound.
Has anyone made these kind of modifications on nautilus ser. or even
better if on 804? Any special instructions, pics or hints are welcome,
like to know where am I heading.

BRGDS
Riku


  #5   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

"Wessel Dirksen" wrote:

wrote in message ...
My questions stand as is, if there is no reason to think otherwise, the
wire is as good for it's purpose as it gets, possible exceptions being
such things as the gauge is too small etc. , but this would be revealed in
answering the questions. If one thinks the wire lacks the majic ingredient
known only to exist in wire other then that used in the speaker, well what
can one say; and how exactly does one not know it does not exist in the
existing wire and in spades. The manufacture would have to be very
desperate for cash to skimp on a few inches of wire gauge, in which case
the entire design would be suspect and support for tossing the product
well considered. A more likely diagnosis in this instance is audio
nervosa.


I agree with this :-)

All factories for all kinds of products, excepting exotica, scimp all the
time to bring their product into budget which is a must in a competitive
economy. The production cost of a speaker is typically about 15 to 20% of
its MSRP which doesn't leave much room for splurging. Then the designer's
proverbial woody from his proud concept usually gets limp when the bean
counters tell him to make it 25% cheaper. The crossover and connecting wire
is exactly where loudspeakers tend to scimp almost without exception.


But you can't save much money on a few inches or feet of internal wire. And
even if you could don't forget that some internal wiring, like apparently too
small wire or inductor with same, may actually contain a "hidden" resistor and
your wire substution may actually be compromising a given crossover function.

Another interesting side of DIY modifications is that while I heartily endorse
such IF they actually improve the product. But you practically never see
engineering verification of improvements.In the latter regard I guessing that
the most common at-home "upgrades" to speakers simply involves replacing parts
(wires, caps, inductors, resisitors) with more expensive parts that weren't
sound qualilty limiting in the first place.


  #6   Report Post  
Guruguru
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

(Nousaine) wrote in message ...
"Wessel Dirksen"
wrote:

wrote in message ...
My questions stand as is, if there is no reason to think otherwise, the
wire is as good for it's purpose as it gets, possible exceptions being
such things as the gauge is too small etc. , but this would be revealed in
answering the questions. If one thinks the wire lacks the majic ingredient
known only to exist in wire other then that used in the speaker, well what
can one say; and how exactly does one not know it does not exist in the
existing wire and in spades. The manufacture would have to be very
desperate for cash to skimp on a few inches of wire gauge, in which case
the entire design would be suspect and support for tossing the product
well considered. A more likely diagnosis in this instance is audio
nervosa.


I agree with this :-)

All factories for all kinds of products, excepting exotica, scimp all the
time to bring their product into budget which is a must in a competitive
economy. The production cost of a speaker is typically about 15 to 20% of
its MSRP which doesn't leave much room for splurging. Then the designer's
proverbial woody from his proud concept usually gets limp when the bean
counters tell him to make it 25% cheaper. The crossover and connecting wire
is exactly where loudspeakers tend to scimp almost without exception.


But you can't save much money on a few inches or feet of internal wire. And
even if you could don't forget that some internal wiring, like apparently too
small wire or inductor with same, may actually contain a "hidden" resistor and
your wire substution may actually be compromising a given crossover function.

Another interesting side of DIY modifications is that while I heartily endorse
such IF they actually improve the product. But you practically never see
engineering verification of improvements.In the latter regard I guessing that
the most common at-home "upgrades" to speakers simply involves replacing parts
(wires, caps, inductors, resisitors) with more expensive parts that weren't
sound qualilty limiting in the first place.



Hello to all

Well well, you all made your points while I was out.
Nervosa, don't think so, this is a hobby.
Last Thursday I opened my 804 and were convinced to go on with this
project,
wires really are poor and there are many unnecessary connections made
with tab terminals. Before I opened 804, I was afraid that this
modification is hard to complete (glueing and stuff), but it's not,
everything is more or less loose and easy to change. I'm not going to
touch on crossover components, because I have no way to measure the
"end result". Tested Goertz MI 1 gables whole weekend and choosed to
use that (flexible, good sound and not too
expensive)
http://www.alphacore.com/mispeaker.html .
Another high class speaker manufacturer uses also Alpha-core cables on
inner wirings, but right now I can't remember which one.
Seals are also poor, there are actually no seal at all under the
connection panel (it actually whistles when played loud) and one seal
which was under bass was heavily wrinkled.
Maybe newer speakers are finished more carefully, maybe not, we will
see when friend of mine does the same modifications as I do. We have
already compared differences between our 804, he has serial number
around 15000 and I have serial around 3500. Bottom plate is made out
of plastic and mine is made from wood. His spikes are very loose, and
there are absolutely nothing that can be done to improve those without
dramatic changes (bottom plate and threads has to be unattached before
anything can be done). Bass cones are different.

This is not the first modification for me, succeed with Marantz
CD17mkII.
Amp and pre-amp are totally home made. It tooked about one year to
finish those.
Amps compete with Classe CA-100, not with power, but sound quality.
Pure A-class, nominal power 20W with lot's of considerable low
distortion overdriving capability, maybe 50W. Anyway, the power is not
the point, overall sound quality is.

Think that we are having a good conversation here and your opinions
are always welcome, but please do not judge people by "but this would
be revealed in answering the questions". I rather listen music than
surf on the internet and that's why I don't have net at home.

BRGDS
Riku
  #8   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

"wires really are poor and there are many unnecessary connections made
with tab terminals. "

By what criteria do you judge the wire poor? I assume the "tab" terminals
are what we in the US call spade. Why do you feel the terminals are not
working as specified and that current flow could be increased/improved by
replacement? Are you considering solder joints instead, if so to what
advantage to the electrical performance of the speaker would it be? Are
you aware some people think the push on friction type of tab/spade
terminal a superior connection method? You mention other speakers having
a "good" wire which might be to your listening advantage. How do you know
that the existing wire doesn't have what ever "quality" of the "good"
wire, but even more so? By your description, how do you know anything by
visual inspection alone? If the wire had been thick with a vibrant
colored cover would you be considering replacement?
  #9   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

(Guruguru) wrote:

.....snips to content....


Well well, you all made your points while I was out.
Nervosa, don't think so, this is a hobby.
Last Thursday I opened my 804 and were convinced to go on with this
project,
wires really are poor and there are many unnecessary connections made
with tab terminals.


"Poor" wires can't, in my opinion, necessarily be evaluated by visual
inspection unless they are defective in some way (insulation scraped or
something.) But don't forget that the wire may be intentionally that way as in
have a certain resistance value. I've tested literally hundreds of finished
loudspeakers and have never seen tab connectors to be an issue physically or
sonically.

Before I opened 804, I was afraid that this
modification is hard to complete (glueing and stuff), but it's not,
everything is more or less loose and easy to change. I'm not going to
touch on crossover components, because I have no way to measure the
"end result". Tested Goertz MI 1 gables whole weekend and choosed to
use that (flexible, good sound and not too
expensive)
http://www.alphacore.com/mispeaker.html .

Have at it :-) Why not modify one of them and then compare it to the un-mod
one. Put a section of acoustically transparent cloth over both; have a friend
position them while you're out of the room and then test. Repeat a few times
and see if you get consistent results. Remember to use a coin or something to
randomize positions because individual positioning will strongly influence
results.

Good listening.
  #10   Report Post  
Guruguru
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

(Nousaine) wrote in message ...
(Guruguru) wrote:

....snips to content....


Well well, you all made your points while I was out.
Nervosa, don't think so, this is a hobby.
Last Thursday I opened my 804 and were convinced to go on with this
project,
wires really are poor and there are many unnecessary connections made
with tab terminals.


"Poor" wires can't, in my opinion, necessarily be evaluated by visual
inspection unless they are defective in some way (insulation scraped or
something.) But don't forget that the wire may be intentionally that way as in
have a certain resistance value. I've tested literally hundreds of finished
loudspeakers and have never seen tab connectors to be an issue physically or
sonically.


About 6,3mm tab terminals, they work as funnel, transfer resistance is
much higher than on spades or solder connections, think that you know
that.
Wire it self is made out of somekind steel mixture (not silver).


Before I opened 804, I was afraid that this
modification is hard to complete (glueing and stuff), but it's not,
everything is more or less loose and easy to change. I'm not going to
touch on crossover components, because I have no way to measure the
"end result". Tested Goertz MI 1 gables whole weekend and choosed to
use that (flexible, good sound and not too
expensive)
http://www.alphacore.com/mispeaker.html .

Have at it :-) Why not modify one of them and then compare it to the un-mod
one. Put a section of acoustically transparent cloth over both; have a friend
position them while you're out of the room and then test. Repeat a few times
and see if you get consistent results. Remember to use a coin or something to
randomize positions because individual positioning will strongly influence
results.

Good listening.


Yeah, that's what I'm gona do, but first have wait until I have new
cables between amp and 804 (now there is MI 1)


  #11   Report Post  
Wessel Dirksen
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

"Nousaine" wrote in message
...
"Wessel Dirksen" wrote:

wrote in message

...
My questions stand as is, if there is no reason to think otherwise, the
wire is as good for it's purpose as it gets, possible exceptions being
such things as the gauge is too small etc. , but this would be revealed

in
answering the questions. If one thinks the wire lacks the majic

ingredient
known only to exist in wire other then that used in the speaker, well

what
can one say; and how exactly does one not know it does not exist in the
existing wire and in spades. The manufacture would have to be very
desperate for cash to skimp on a few inches of wire gauge, in which

case
the entire design would be suspect and support for tossing the product
well considered. A more likely diagnosis in this instance is audio
nervosa.


I agree with this :-)

All factories for all kinds of products, excepting exotica, scimp all the
time to bring their product into budget which is a must in a competitive
economy. The production cost of a speaker is typically about 15 to 20% of
its MSRP which doesn't leave much room for splurging. Then the designer's
proverbial woody from his proud concept usually gets limp when the bean
counters tell him to make it 25% cheaper. The crossover and connecting

wire
is exactly where loudspeakers tend to scimp almost without exception.


But you can't save much money on a few inches or feet of internal wire.

And
even if you could don't forget that some internal wiring, like apparently

too
small wire or inductor with same, may actually contain a "hidden" resistor

and
your wire substution may actually be compromising a given crossover

function.

Another interesting side of DIY modifications is that while I heartily

endorse
such IF they actually improve the product. But you practically never see
engineering verification of improvements.In the latter regard I guessing

that
the most common at-home "upgrades" to speakers simply involves replacing

parts
(wires, caps, inductors, resisitors) with more expensive parts that

weren't
sound qualilty limiting in the first place.


You can never measure the difference at this level. Even with the very best
24bit/192 kHz equipment and the most modern method of analysis, you are
measuring with very, very elementary and crude waveforms which will never
simulate a complex musical waveform. Let's suppose that from the factory the
speakers look really flat, say +/- 1 dB (although this is never the case).
After even a thorough tweeking they will still look just as flat but may
sound much, much better. The improvement in this theoretical scenario is not
in the flatness of the curve but in the preservation of the integrity of the
signal getting to your ears. Many speakers can also be hugely improved by
optimizing the diffractive properties of transmission, inside and outside of
the cabinet.

  #12   Report Post  
Wessel Dirksen
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

"Guruguru" wrote in message
...
(Nousaine) wrote in message

...
"Wessel Dirksen"
wrote:

wrote in message

...
My questions stand as is, if there is no reason to think otherwise,

the
wire is as good for it's purpose as it gets, possible exceptions

being
such things as the gauge is too small etc. , but this would be

revealed in
answering the questions. If one thinks the wire lacks the majic

ingredient
known only to exist in wire other then that used in the speaker, well

what
can one say; and how exactly does one not know it does not exist in

the
existing wire and in spades. The manufacture would have to be very
desperate for cash to skimp on a few inches of wire gauge, in which

case
the entire design would be suspect and support for tossing the

product
well considered. A more likely diagnosis in this instance is audio
nervosa.


I agree with this :-)

All factories for all kinds of products, excepting exotica, scimp all

the
time to bring their product into budget which is a must in a

competitive
economy. The production cost of a speaker is typically about 15 to 20%

of
its MSRP which doesn't leave much room for splurging. Then the

designer's
proverbial woody from his proud concept usually gets limp when the bean
counters tell him to make it 25% cheaper. The crossover and connecting

wire
is exactly where loudspeakers tend to scimp almost without exception.


But you can't save much money on a few inches or feet of internal wire.

And
even if you could don't forget that some internal wiring, like

apparently too
small wire or inductor with same, may actually contain a "hidden"

resistor and
your wire substution may actually be compromising a given crossover

function.

Another interesting side of DIY modifications is that while I heartily

endorse
such IF they actually improve the product. But you practically never see
engineering verification of improvements.In the latter regard I guessing

that
the most common at-home "upgrades" to speakers simply involves replacing

parts
(wires, caps, inductors, resisitors) with more expensive parts that

weren't
sound qualilty limiting in the first place.



Hello to all

Well well, you all made your points while I was out.
Nervosa, don't think so, this is a hobby.
Last Thursday I opened my 804 and were convinced to go on with this
project,
wires really are poor and there are many unnecessary connections made
with tab terminals. Before I opened 804, I was afraid that this
modification is hard to complete (glueing and stuff), but it's not,
everything is more or less loose and easy to change. I'm not going to
touch on crossover components, because I have no way to measure the
"end result". Tested Goertz MI 1 gables whole weekend and choosed to
use that (flexible, good sound and not too
expensive)
http://www.alphacore.com/mispeaker.html .
Another high class speaker manufacturer uses also Alpha-core cables on
inner wirings, but right now I can't remember which one.
Seals are also poor, there are actually no seal at all under the
connection panel (it actually whistles when played loud) and one seal
which was under bass was heavily wrinkled.
Maybe newer speakers are finished more carefully, maybe not, we will
see when friend of mine does the same modifications as I do. We have
already compared differences between our 804, he has serial number
around 15000 and I have serial around 3500. Bottom plate is made out
of plastic and mine is made from wood. His spikes are very loose, and
there are absolutely nothing that can be done to improve those without
dramatic changes (bottom plate and threads has to be unattached before
anything can be done). Bass cones are different.

This is not the first modification for me, succeed with Marantz
CD17mkII.
Amp and pre-amp are totally home made. It tooked about one year to
finish those.
Amps compete with Classe CA-100, not with power, but sound quality.
Pure A-class, nominal power 20W with lot's of considerable low
distortion overdriving capability, maybe 50W. Anyway, the power is not
the point, overall sound quality is.

Think that we are having a good conversation here and your opinions
are always welcome, but please do not judge people by "but this would
be revealed in answering the questions". I rather listen music than
surf on the internet and that's why I don't have net at home.

BRGDS
Riku


Go for it Riku! Let us know how it turns out. Chances are that you and all
of your firends will be amased at how much better they sound.

Wessel

  #13   Report Post  
Wessel Dirksen
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

"Dick Pierce" wrote in message
news:8uQVb.12175$QA2.22118@attbi_s52...
wrote in message

...
I'm planning to change all inner wirings of 804, as they are quite
poor compared to general quality of finishing and sound.
Has anyone made these kind of modifications on nautilus ser. or even
better if on 804? Any special instructions, pics or hints are welcome,
like to know where am I heading.

By what criteria do you think the wire inside the box inferior? In the
crossover filter is several meters of wire, is it too not quality wire?


And what say ye about the fact that the poor wretched woofer itself
is wired wth probably FORTY FEET of VERY small (probably on the order
of 28-31 gauge), VERY ordinary, decidedly non-magic copper wire.
Precisely HOW much effect does on thing that replacing a couple of
feet of 18 gauge wire with a couple o feet of magic 14 gauge wire
will have considering that it's looking through 20 times as much
that's maybe 1/10 the diameter or smaller?

Really?


Hi Dick,

Strangely enough, if the internals have, say 18 gauge alloy wire, replacing
it does often make an audible difference. It's usually subtle but obvious.
Getting rid of series electrolytic caps and replacing them with equal value
film caps, if the value is smaller than about 100 micF or so, is also even
more audible. A weird as it may sound, even beefing up a ground (-)
connection, even to a tweeter circuit can lead to obvious improvement in the
details, depending on the circuit. This has repeatably and reliably been
proven in the almost 20 or so years I've been doing this stuff. And I'm very
sceptical about audiophile pseudo science, but I take every reasonable claim
seriously until I, and other reliable ears, hear otherwise.

Dick, you're a famous guy and as a newcomer to these newsgroups it's really
cool to be able to communicate with you like this. As a respected technicall
y oriented scientist, you must also realize that we don't know what's going
on the micro level because we don't have the observable picture pegged at
the electron level yet. If you look at fluid flow dynamics which is much
more "observable" than electrons, it is obvious that even when micro level
flow turbulence occurs, it can contribute significantly to the output. Also,
I'm curious of something which maybe you can give feedback on. Intuitively I
feel there is a difference between what happens to the signal at the voice
coil and what happens to the signal getting to the voice coil. At the voice
coil level, tranduction is occuring, the large impedance characteristic of
the wire at that point is an inherent part of this process. Also the voice
coil quality, be it in the composition of the metals, how hot it gets while
doing its thing, or even how it is wrapped also contributes to the signal
integrity.

Wessel


  #14   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

"Wessel Dirksen" wrote:

...snips...

"Nousaine" wrote in message


Another interesting side of DIY modifications is that while I heartily

endorse
such IF they actually improve the product. But you practically never see
engineering verification of improvements.In the latter regard I guessing

that
the most common at-home "upgrades" to speakers simply involves replacing

parts
(wires, caps, inductors, resisitors) with more expensive parts that

weren't
sound qualilty limiting in the first place.


You can never measure the difference at this level.


If there's an acoustical cause surely you can.

Even with the very best
24bit/192 kHz equipment and the most modern method of analysis, you are
measuring with very, very elementary and crude waveforms which will never
simulate a complex musical waveform.


Not to argue the point but even the most complex of waveforms can be reduced to
a series of sine waves.

Let's suppose that from the factory the
speakers look really flat, say +/- 1 dB (although this is never the case).
After even a thorough tweeking they will still look just as flat but may
sound much, much better.


Sure but this too, can be verified with bias-controlled listening tests. I've
never seen DIY speaker modification results verified with either measurement or
controlled listening tests.

Of course, there's no problem at all with ensuring all gaskets are intact and
things like that. My point is that casual inspection of internal parts is not
an effective analysis of their sonic effect.

You seem to think that I am unfamiliar with speaker modification and DIY
speaker building and that somehow I haven't investigated these phenomena.
Replacing signall bearing parts may have a detrimental change that is
unanticipated (such as replacing an inductor with larger guage wire where the
series resistance of the inductor is a part of the design.)

Replacing connectors or soldering joints that have tab connectors most likely
carries no risk as long as the project engineer has enough experience to do so
without damaging the speaker.

Anything of the latter nature will invalidate any warranty and may make factory
service unavailable at a later date, as well.

The improvement in this theoretical scenario is not
in the flatness of the curve but in the preservation of the integrity of the
signal getting to your ears.


So as long as the modification doesn't interrupt the built-in errors then it's
OK? If that's your criterion, I say, why bother?

Many speakers can also be hugely improved by
optimizing the diffractive properties of transmission, inside and outside of
the cabinet.


Changing the cabinet shape is one thing. Replacing parts and soldering internal
connections is something else.

  #15   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

"You can never measure the difference at this level. Even with the very
best 24bit/192 kHz equipment and the most modern method of analysis, you
are measuring with very, very elementary and crude waveforms which will
never simulate a complex musical waveform. Let's suppose that from the
factory the speakers look really flat, say +/- 1 dB (although this is
never the case). After even a thorough tweeking they will still look just
as flat but may sound much, much better. The improvement in this
theoretical scenario is not in the flatness of the curve but in the
preservation of the integrity of the signal getting to your ears. Many
speakers can also be hugely improved by optimizing the diffractive
properties of transmission, inside and outside of the cabinet."

There are a few expressed and implied strawman type arguments here, all of
which have been covered well on this ng before and need not be addressed.
If a few inches, 24?, of wire in the box makes such a difference, why
can't the several feet in the crossover and speaker coil simply continue
to overwhelm any very small subtraction to whatever "problem" replacing
the wire affords? If one can't measure any difference in the properties
of the wire, how does one know there is a difference to make it "sound
better"? How does one measure the integrity in a before and after wire
swap? If there is a wave, complex or not, shape change related to
integrity, how does one know it suffers in the absence of gear to measure
same? If in fact such cann't be measured, how does one know that the
existing wire in fact is not far superior to wave integrity then any
possible substitute? On what experience of measurement, at what ever bit
level and depth, can we even know in the first place or confirm anew that
wire does something to wave integrity; such that you can start with that
presumption on which to make deductions? The box shape effect on
difraction are well known, all such for the exact theoretical basis
confirmed by measurement.


  #17   Report Post  
Wessel Dirksen
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

Hi, this is a reply to both replies.

I see that this is a highly debatable subject and that we all seem to agree
on the basic principles but have very different opinions on the "unknown"
factor. My position is based on a wealth of experience where the intangable
"that could never be the case" factor seems to regularly make very obvious
audible differences that can't reliably be measured with test sines, chirps,
noise etc, but can be "measured" with normal music which much more complex.
(usually it is very obvious after you improve multiple intangables) I
believe that we don't accurately know what's going at the level of electron
flow through wire or any conductor. Ask an amp guy. They will tell you that
PCB design is also very weird in this way.

Any amp guys out there?

Wessel

wrote in message ...
"You can never measure the difference at this level. Even with the very
best 24bit/192 kHz equipment and the most modern method of analysis, you
are measuring with very, very elementary and crude waveforms which will
never simulate a complex musical waveform. Let's suppose that from the
factory the speakers look really flat, say +/- 1 dB (although this is
never the case). After even a thorough tweeking they will still look just
as flat but may sound much, much better. The improvement in this
theoretical scenario is not in the flatness of the curve but in the
preservation of the integrity of the signal getting to your ears. Many
speakers can also be hugely improved by optimizing the diffractive
properties of transmission, inside and outside of the cabinet."

There are a few expressed and implied strawman type arguments here, all of
which have been covered well on this ng before and need not be addressed.
If a few inches, 24?, of wire in the box makes such a difference, why
can't the several feet in the crossover and speaker coil simply continue
to overwhelm any very small subtraction to whatever "problem" replacing
the wire affords? If one can't measure any difference in the properties
of the wire, how does one know there is a difference to make it "sound
better"? How does one measure the integrity in a before and after wire
swap? If there is a wave, complex or not, shape change related to
integrity, how does one know it suffers in the absence of gear to measure
same? If in fact such cann't be measured, how does one know that the
existing wire in fact is not far superior to wave integrity then any
possible substitute? On what experience of measurement, at what ever bit
level and depth, can we even know in the first place or confirm anew that
wire does something to wave integrity; such that you can start with that
presumption on which to make deductions? The box shape effect on
difraction are well known, all such for the exact theoretical basis
confirmed by measurement.


  #18   Report Post  
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

Adding music as the signal source doesn't improve matters, use any source
for any reason. The basic question is what properties of a wire requires
it's replacement so as to increase speaker performance. If as you claim
there is an unknown variable but it can't be measured, how does one
determine which wire has or doesn't have it; and is it better to have it
or not? Many people are of the mind that the unknowns are well known,
they are in the perception process of the person and not in the physical
reality of the wire. If we eliminate these perception factors and there
is no difference in electrical measurement, what remains; and still that
nagging question of how do we know of an unknown? Under what situation
does your experience, under which this unknown can be realized, make this
possible? If 24 inches of a wire with this factor makes a difference,
does 48 inches double it? Or is it subtraction, of the many feet of plain
wire in the crossover and speaker coil, does replacing 24 inches of the
total internal box length make the difference? Can we set up a situation
where increasing or decreasing the total amount of the wire with the
unknown factor makes it obvious, as compared to same amount of wire
without the factor of the same electrical properties? Spectulation about
electron flow and confirmation of some unknown is not the same thing.
What does it afford us to speculate and measure and experiment to our
heart's delite if it is all about something which doesn't exist? When all
factors have been excluded, including the perceptual, and still no
difference exists; on what basis can we continue to believe some unknown
might still be found when the straight line answer is to exclude some
unknown?

I see that this is a highly debatable subject and that we all seem to agree
on the basic principles but have very different opinions on the "unknown"
factor. My position is based on a wealth of experience where the intangable
"that could never be the case" factor seems to regularly make very obvious
audible differences that can't reliably be measured with test sines, chirps,
noise etc, but can be "measured" with normal music which much more complex.
(usually it is very obvious after you improve multiple intangables) I
believe that we don't accurately know what's going at the level of electron
flow through wire or any conductor. Ask an amp guy. They will tell you that
PCB design is also very weird in this way.

Any amp guys out there?

Wessel

wrote in message ...
"You can never measure the difference at this level. Even with the very
best 24bit/192 kHz equipment and the most modern method of analysis, you
are measuring with very, very elementary and crude waveforms which will
never simulate a complex musical waveform. Let's suppose that from the
factory the speakers look really flat, say +/- 1 dB (although this is
never the case). After even a thorough tweeking they will still look just
as flat but may sound much, much better. The improvement in this
theoretical scenario is not in the flatness of the curve but in the
preservation of the integrity of the signal getting to your ears. Many
speakers can also be hugely improved by optimizing the diffractive
properties of transmission, inside and outside of the cabinet."

There are a few expressed and implied strawman type arguments here, all of
which have been covered well on this ng before and need not be addressed.
If a few inches, 24?, of wire in the box makes such a difference, why
can't the several feet in the crossover and speaker coil simply continue
to overwhelm any very small subtraction to whatever "problem" replacing
the wire affords? If one can't measure any difference in the properties
of the wire, how does one know there is a difference to make it "sound
better"? How does one measure the integrity in a before and after wire
swap? If there is a wave, complex or not, shape change related to
integrity, how does one know it suffers in the absence of gear to measure
same? If in fact such cann't be measured, how does one know that the
existing wire in fact is not far superior to wave integrity then any
possible substitute? On what experience of measurement, at what ever bit
level and depth, can we even know in the first place or confirm anew that
wire does something to wave integrity; such that you can start with that
presumption on which to make deductions? The box shape effect on
difraction are well known, all such for the exact theoretical basis
confirmed by measurement.


  #19   Report Post  
chung
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

Wessel Dirksen wrote:

Hi, this is a reply to both replies.

I see that this is a highly debatable subject and that we all seem to agree
on the basic principles but have very different opinions on the "unknown"
factor. My position is based on a wealth of experience where the intangable
"that could never be the case" factor seems to regularly make very obvious
audible differences that can't reliably be measured with test sines, chirps,
noise etc, but can be "measured" with normal music which much more complex.


How does one measure with normal music?

You have trouble accepting that what appears complex can be described as
a summation of sine waves?

(usually it is very obvious after you improve multiple intangables) I
believe that we don't accurately know what's going at the level of electron
flow through wire or any conductor. Ask an amp guy. They will tell you that
PCB design is also very weird in this way.


Not at audio frequencies. PCB design is very well understood by
competent electrical engineers.

Any amp guys out there?


Well, yes.


Wessel


  #20   Report Post  
citronzx
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

"chung" wrote in message
...
Wessel Dirksen wrote:

Hi, this is a reply to both replies.

I see that this is a highly debatable subject and that we all seem to

agree
on the basic principles but have very different opinions on the

"unknown"
factor. My position is based on a wealth of experience where the

intangable
"that could never be the case" factor seems to regularly make very

obvious
audible differences that can't reliably be measured with test sines,

chirps,
noise etc, but can be "measured" with normal music which much more

complex.

How does one measure with normal music?

You have trouble accepting that what appears complex can be described as
a summation of sine waves?


I'll second that question. If you do not have the mathematical background
to understand Fourier serise then you have absolutly no business giving
anyone advice on matters of audio or sound.


(usually it is very obvious after you improve multiple intangables) I
believe that we don't accurately know what's going at the level of

electron
flow through wire or any conductor. Ask an amp guy. They will tell you

that
PCB design is also very weird in this way.


Not at audio frequencies. PCB design is very well understood by
competent electrical engineers.

Any amp guys out there?


Well, yes.


Wessel



This is all absurd, sorry to be so blunt but its true. If you have spent
the money to own a pair of Nautilus 804's then for god sake don't go taking
them apart. If you want to goof around then make your own speakers from
scratch. First, you won't be screwing with what is already a well
engineered design and second you might actually learn something. You can
buy drivers from many sources (including B&W on eBay) and you go nuts with
over built crossovers and cables made out of the rarest metals in the
universe. But why oh why mess with a perfectly good pair of speakers that
you WILL NOT improve? Let me repeat that, YOU WILL NOT IMPROVE THEM! These
are not poorly made speakers, these are very well made, high quality
speakers. Any improvement will be psychological (that is if you don't
actually mess them up in the process). I have an idea, why don't you give
the money that you would waste on this project to charity, then, when you
listen to your speakers, you can know that you've actually done some good in
the world.



  #21   Report Post  
Ban
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

Wessel Dirksen wrote:
My position is based on a wealth of experience
where the intangable "that could never be the case" factor seems to
regularly make very obvious audible differences that can't reliably
be measured with test sines, chirps, noise etc, but can be "measured"
with normal music which much more complex. (usually it is very
obvious after you improve multiple intangables) I believe that we
don't accurately know what's going at the level of electron flow
through wire or any conductor. Ask an amp guy. They will tell you
that PCB design is also very weird in this way.

Any amp guys out there?

Wessel,
I have been designing PCBs for a long while and I have to tell you, there is
no black magic involved. To make a good design it is essential to understand
the circuit perfectly and to analyze the current flow from/to the source to
each consumer(sink). This is not easy, and most people forget to observe the
most important thing: the flow back in the ground line to the supply.

It has nothing to do with "levels" in fact no levels exist. And electrons
are *not* comparable to water molecules or whatever you imagine, because
they have no mass and they are *small*. They will not form eddies on corners
or jumps in diameter as hydraulics or gasses, (even if there is an "eddy
current", which is caused by an electromagnetic field like all current
flow). In fact the flowing electrons distribute evenly and smooth in the
conductor, because they repel themselves mutually, unless we have very high
frequencies(skin-effect). Electromagnetic fields will govern the flow
absolutly.

Even if there is no current flow, all electrons are already continuously
moving according to their temperature at a very high speed and not only
that, they are also "jumping" instantanously. All these things can be
measured and calculated.

All properties of a conductor can be measured precisely and put into
numbers, the transmission-line theory covers even very high frequency
behaviour (irrelevant for audio).
--
ciao Ban
Bordighera, Italy
  #22   Report Post  
Wessel Dirksen
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

wrote in message
news:3cwWb.279361$xy6.1423933@attbi_s02...
Adding music as the signal source doesn't improve matters, use any source
for any reason. The basic question is what properties of a wire requires
it's replacement so as to increase speaker performance. If as you claim
there is an unknown variable but it can't be measured, how does one
determine which wire has or doesn't have it; and is it better to have it
or not? Many people are of the mind that the unknowns are well known,
they are in the perception process of the person and not in the physical
reality of the wire. If we eliminate these perception factors and there
is no difference in electrical measurement, what remains; and still that
nagging question of how do we know of an unknown? Under what situation
does your experience, under which this unknown can be realized, make this
possible? If 24 inches of a wire with this factor makes a difference,
does 48 inches double it? Or is it subtraction, of the many feet of plain
wire in the crossover and speaker coil, does replacing 24 inches of the
total internal box length make the difference? Can we set up a situation
where increasing or decreasing the total amount of the wire with the
unknown factor makes it obvious, as compared to same amount of wire
without the factor of the same electrical properties? Spectulation about
electron flow and confirmation of some unknown is not the same thing.
What does it afford us to speculate and measure and experiment to our
heart's delite if it is all about something which doesn't exist? When all
factors have been excluded, including the perceptual, and still no
difference exists; on what basis can we continue to believe some unknown
might still be found when the straight line answer is to exclude some
unknown?


Wow, this is getting good.

OK, you've now all heard the micro science I believe is there. But, one
manipulative factor that measureably stands out are all forms of signal loss
in loudspeaker design, be it electrical, mechanical or
acoustic. If one makes a general attempt to reduce all signal losses in the
complete signal pathway, with, very important, compensating for any effect
on frequency response, there is always repeatedly an improved situation as a
result. Depending on how much loss you recover, this is measureable in very
slight to modest increase in efficiency, but the sonic impact is often
everything but subtle.

Have any of you ever truly studied the inside any hi-fi speaker at all? I
should be preaching to the choir here. Have any of you ever studied what
happens when you take BAF stuffing out of a vented cabinet and line the
walls instead? If you had, than you would know that the increase in bass
definition is huge with only a modest increase in output efficiency. Only
sometimes can you see this improvement in the impulse or step response. Have
any of you ever studied what happens when you reduce the DC resistance in
the series pathway to a woofer, with lower loss wire and better inductors?
(adjusting for frequency response of course). Well, it's also huge. Have any
of you ever hard wired PCB terminals on a speaker with a PCB, or got rid of
the PCB altogether? Well, it is usually not huge but very discernable.
Getting to my point, replacing the wire in this example can be of benefit if
replacing it would improve the overall DC resistance going to the woofer.
Some British designs have up to 1 ohm of series resistance going to the
principle low frequency driver(s). You get this down to 0.1 or 0.2 ohm and
the difference is phenomenal but your test equipment, in its current form,
will never specifically "show" this improvement to you. In the tuning of an
existing speaker which you don't want to re-design, you really only need
test equipment to restore the tonal balance. (i.e. flat, smooth SPL
response)

Once more thing about measuring. Do you really think that measuring
frequency response, impulse response, ETC, or distortion of any kind
actually gives you any comprehensive picture as to what's going on? It's
only scratching the surface.

So to spice it up some, why don't you prove to me why Riku's B&W's could
never be improved.

Wessel

I see that this is a highly debatable subject and that we all seem to

agree
on the basic principles but have very different opinions on the "unknown"
factor. My position is based on a wealth of experience where the

intangable
"that could never be the case" factor seems to regularly make very

obvious
audible differences that can't reliably be measured with test sines,

chirps,
noise etc, but can be "measured" with normal music which much more

complex.
(usually it is very obvious after you improve multiple intangables) I
believe that we don't accurately know what's going at the level of

electron
flow through wire or any conductor. Ask an amp guy. They will tell you

that
PCB design is also very weird in this way.

Any amp guys out there?

Wessel

wrote in message

...
"You can never measure the difference at this level. Even with the very
best 24bit/192 kHz equipment and the most modern method of analysis,

you
are measuring with very, very elementary and crude waveforms which will
never simulate a complex musical waveform. Let's suppose that from the
factory the speakers look really flat, say +/- 1 dB (although this is
never the case). After even a thorough tweeking they will still look

just
as flat but may sound much, much better. The improvement in this
theoretical scenario is not in the flatness of the curve but in the
preservation of the integrity of the signal getting to your ears. Many
speakers can also be hugely improved by optimizing the diffractive
properties of transmission, inside and outside of the cabinet."

There are a few expressed and implied strawman type arguments here, all

of
which have been covered well on this ng before and need not be

addressed.
If a few inches, 24?, of wire in the box makes such a difference, why
can't the several feet in the crossover and speaker coil simply

continue
to overwhelm any very small subtraction to whatever "problem" replacing
the wire affords? If one can't measure any difference in the

properties
of the wire, how does one know there is a difference to make it "sound
better"? How does one measure the integrity in a before and after wire
swap? If there is a wave, complex or not, shape change related to
integrity, how does one know it suffers in the absence of gear to

measure
same? If in fact such cann't be measured, how does one know that the
existing wire in fact is not far superior to wave integrity then any
possible substitute? On what experience of measurement, at what ever

bit
level and depth, can we even know in the first place or confirm anew

that
wire does something to wave integrity; such that you can start with

that
presumption on which to make deductions? The box shape effect on
difraction are well known, all such for the exact theoretical basis
confirmed by measurement.



  #23   Report Post  
Wessel Dirksen
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

"citronzx" wrote in message
news:aLAWb.288604$na.448590@attbi_s04...
"chung" wrote in message
...
Wessel Dirksen wrote:

Hi, this is a reply to both replies.

I see that this is a highly debatable subject and that we all seem to

agree
on the basic principles but have very different opinions on the

"unknown"
factor. My position is based on a wealth of experience where the

intangable
"that could never be the case" factor seems to regularly make very

obvious
audible differences that can't reliably be measured with test sines,

chirps,
noise etc, but can be "measured" with normal music which much more

complex.

How does one measure with normal music?

You have trouble accepting that what appears complex can be described as
a summation of sine waves?


I'll second that question. If you do not have the mathematical background
to understand Fourier serise then you have absolutly no business giving
anyone advice on matters of audio or sound.


Well, what I shall I say to this. I'm just getting used to this forum
discussion thing and I'm amazed at how we seem to need to appear to be
"smarter" than each other and be destructive. Actually we should be helping
each other understand more. I try to understand enough of Fourier summation
to understand the composition of sound and how loudspeakers work. Obviously
so do you. I think we are all intelligent affectionado's of audio so lets
get on with a friendly discussion then. If music can defined as a very
complex Fourier waveform composed of seemingly pretty close to an infinite
number of individual wavelets superimposed on each other than my point over
the state of the art in acoustic measuring stands for itself. We have no
choice but to "measure" with music and our ears because speakers must
reproduce all those superimposed wavelets, it's their job. With rudimentary
test signals which currently have a Fourier breakdown count with ussually no
more than the number of fingers on your hand (noise excepted), you aren't
really looking at what a speaker does in real life. If I really want to know
how to reproduce a cello, do you really think that a simple MLS or a sine
sweep comes close to helping me really truly understanding this? A tip of
the iceberg at best.

In this whole B&W 804 string, there seems to be a collective scientific "we
know about it and have a formula for it or it doesn't exist" mentality going
on. If you want to build a better mousetrap, take apart all the mousetraps
you come accross and do your best to understand how they work. In doing this
you will discover many unknowns about mousetraps.

Wessel



(usually it is very obvious after you improve multiple intangables) I
believe that we don't accurately know what's going at the level of

electron
flow through wire or any conductor. Ask an amp guy. They will tell you

that
PCB design is also very weird in this way.


Not at audio frequencies. PCB design is very well understood by
competent electrical engineers.

Any amp guys out there?


Well, yes.


Wessel



This is all absurd, sorry to be so blunt but its true. If you have spent
the money to own a pair of Nautilus 804's then for god sake don't go

taking
them apart. If you want to goof around then make your own speakers from
scratch. First, you won't be screwing with what is already a well
engineered design and second you might actually learn something. You can
buy drivers from many sources (including B&W on eBay) and you go nuts with
over built crossovers and cables made out of the rarest metals in the
universe. But why oh why mess with a perfectly good pair of speakers that
you WILL NOT improve? Let me repeat that, YOU WILL NOT IMPROVE THEM!

These
are not poorly made speakers, these are very well made, high quality
speakers. Any improvement will be psychological (that is if you don't
actually mess them up in the process). I have an idea, why don't you give
the money that you would waste on this project to charity, then, when you
listen to your speakers, you can know that you've actually done some good

in
the world.


  #24   Report Post  
Keith Hughes
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

Wessel Dirksen wrote:

In this whole B&W 804 string, there seems to be a collective scientific "we
know about it and have a formula for it or it doesn't exist" mentality going
on.


You seem to be espousing the "we don't know everything, so
absolutely everything has to be equally possible/plausible"
mentality. Your statements such as "I see that this is a highly
debatable subject and that we all seem to agree on the basic
principles but have very different opinions on the 'unknown'
factor." exemplifies this, IMO. It presupposes that:

a) The parameter(s)/characteristic(s) *you* purport to exist are,
in fact real (defining them as "unknown" is somewhat telling IMO),
and;

b) What is 'unknown' to you, is universally unknown (there are a
number of folks around here - myself excluded - who have rather
extensive speaker knowledge that may well exceed yours).

Saying, in effect, 'there are things I know about, that no one,
including you, understand' is likely to cause the more
knowledgeable folks to take umbrage. On RAHE or elsewhere.

If you want to build a better mousetrap, take apart all the mousetraps
you come accross and do your best to understand how they work. In doing this
you will discover many unknowns about mousetraps.


Well, let's recap. This thread started with a post stating:

"I'm planning to change all inner wirings of 804, as they are
quite poor compared to general quality of finishing and sound."

This seems, clearly, to imply a desire to replace parts with
"better" parts, irrespective of original design criteria. This in
no way equates to "take apart all the mousetraps you come accross
and do your best to understand how they work", which would be an
engineering/redesign exercise, and seemingly outside the scope of
the original posters' desires.

Most responders seem to be of the opinion, logical IMO, that
random changing of components/wires, without analysis of the
effect on original design parameters, is highly unlikely to
improve anything. You seem to be a minority dissenter in that view.

Personally, I don't claim any expertise in speaker construction or
crossover design, but what strikes me about the whole concept
(relative to this specific thread) is *how* can the wiring be
"quite poor" when compared to the quality of the sound? IOW, there
appears to be no problem with the 'sound quality', and if that's
the case, there *is* no problem with the wiring quality (unless
one is concerned about stability and longevity criteria, but
having owned B&W's for 20 years, that doesn't seem an issue to me).

Keith Hughes

  #25   Report Post  
Wessel Dirksen
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

"Ban" wrote in message
...
Wessel Dirksen wrote:
My position is based on a wealth of experience
where the intangable "that could never be the case" factor seems to
regularly make very obvious audible differences that can't reliably
be measured with test sines, chirps, noise etc, but can be "measured"
with normal music which much more complex. (usually it is very
obvious after you improve multiple intangables) I believe that we
don't accurately know what's going at the level of electron flow
through wire or any conductor. Ask an amp guy. They will tell you
that PCB design is also very weird in this way.

Any amp guys out there?

Wessel,
I have been designing PCBs for a long while and I have to tell you, there

is
no black magic involved. To make a good design it is essential to

understand
the circuit perfectly and to analyze the current flow from/to the source

to
each consumer(sink). This is not easy, and most people forget to observe

the
most important thing: the flow back in the ground line to the supply.


This is what I was referring to with the "ask an amp guy" line. And may
perhaps explain why beefing up the ground connections to a loudspeaker
driver tends to improve overall damping properties.


It has nothing to do with "levels" in fact no levels exist. And electrons
are *not* comparable to water molecules or whatever you imagine, because
they have no mass and they are *small*. They will not form eddies on

corners
or jumps in diameter as hydraulics or gasses, (even if there is an "eddy
current", which is caused by an electromagnetic field like all current
flow). In fact the flowing electrons distribute evenly and smooth in the
conductor, because they repel themselves mutually, unless we have very

high
frequencies(skin-effect). Electromagnetic fields will govern the flow
absolutly.

Even if there is no current flow, all electrons are already continuously
moving according to their temperature at a very high speed and not only
that, they are also "jumping" instantanously. All these things can be
measured and calculated.

All properties of a conductor can be measured precisely and put into
numbers, the transmission-line theory covers even very high frequency
behaviour (irrelevant for audio).
--
ciao Ban
Bordighera, Italy


Thanks for the informative reply.

I now realize that I had given the wrong impression in this thread in that I
never intended to imply that there was any kind of voo-doo involved, only
that electrical conduction is more that just connecting the dots and
measuring the impedance factors between those dots. I was not under the
impression that electrical conduction was actually measureable at this level
yet. Thanks for the input. A few questions if I may about your reply and
your field of study as it pertains to mine.

I have heard that paying attention to the pathway length (or overall mass of
a pathway) of certain areas of an amplifier circuit make audible
differences. In particular, grounding at certain areas and also important
current sensitive areas. An example would be how distributed are the ground
pathways throughout the circuit. This is really what I was implying, that
the "style" of laying out the PCB also lends a hand in things. Do you
believe this is true then or hogwash. I guess what I'm asking is if all the
dots are connected, is this enough, or do you have to pay special attention
to how they are connected to optimize results?

Second, from your perspective, do you believe that reducing significant
electrical transmission loss improves the transduction process in an EMF
setting such as a standard electro magnetic loudspeaker?

Wessel



  #26   Report Post  
Wessel Dirksen
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

"Keith Hughes" wrote in message
news:3fUWb.301294$na.452469@attbi_s04...
Wessel Dirksen wrote:

In this whole B&W 804 string, there seems to be a collective scientific

"we
know about it and have a formula for it or it doesn't exist" mentality

going
on.


You seem to be espousing the "we don't know everything, so
absolutely everything has to be equally possible/plausible"
mentality. Your statements such as "I see that this is a highly
debatable subject and that we all seem to agree on the basic
principles but have very different opinions on the 'unknown'
factor." exemplifies this, IMO. It presupposes that:

a) The parameter(s)/characteristic(s) *you* purport to exist are,
in fact real (defining them as "unknown" is somewhat telling IMO),
and;

b) What is 'unknown' to you, is universally unknown (there are a
number of folks around here - myself excluded - who have rather
extensive speaker knowledge that may well exceed yours).

Saying, in effect, 'there are things I know about, that no one,
including you, understand' is likely to cause the more
knowledgeable folks to take umbrage. On RAHE or elsewhere.

If you want to build a better mousetrap, take apart all the mousetraps
you come accross and do your best to understand how they work. In doing

this
you will discover many unknowns about mousetraps.


Well, let's recap. This thread started with a post stating:

"I'm planning to change all inner wirings of 804, as they are
quite poor compared to general quality of finishing and sound."

This seems, clearly, to imply a desire to replace parts with
"better" parts, irrespective of original design criteria. This in
no way equates to "take apart all the mousetraps you come accross
and do your best to understand how they work", which would be an
engineering/redesign exercise, and seemingly outside the scope of
the original posters' desires.

Most responders seem to be of the opinion, logical IMO, that
random changing of components/wires, without analysis of the
effect on original design parameters, is highly unlikely to
improve anything. You seem to be a minority dissenter in that view.

Personally, I don't claim any expertise in speaker construction or
crossover design, but what strikes me about the whole concept
(relative to this specific thread) is *how* can the wiring be
"quite poor" when compared to the quality of the sound? IOW, there
appears to be no problem with the 'sound quality', and if that's
the case, there *is* no problem with the wiring quality (unless
one is concerned about stability and longevity criteria, but
having owned B&W's for 20 years, that doesn't seem an issue to me).

Keith Hughes


As a newbie to forum discussion but not to loudspeaker design or
manufacturing processes, I've seemed to annoy people during this string and
infer to others that I'm ignorant in these matters both of which don't
normally apply to me. A matter for some self reflection for sure. The fact
is that I have been designing, improving, and repairing loudspeakers for
quite awhile now for a living and I have never advertised, the projects just
keep coming on their own. I've had the priveledge to work on quite a few
B&W's through the years and I've always been impressed at their ability to
in general wonderfully engineer their products doing the budget limbo like
everyone must do. This what hallmarks a good loudspeaker in the real world.
I don't believe I have used the word "poor" at all in this discussion. But
like most all regular guy's budget, real world, mass produced loudspeakers,
with individual TLC you can often improve things. I find it amazing that
this concept is so difficult to believe. It's not about good or bad; its
about performance. Terms like "high end" and "audiophile" usually imply a
search for high performance in sonic reproduction. The analogy to
loudspeaker manufacturing does not differ much in this regard to cars, both
in terms of technology advances in time and economic restraints. You could
want a "good" high performing modified race car so to speak and not a "good"
off the showroom sportscar. In which case some people come to me.

The departure from the original post started as a general indication as to
what the owner could expect to gain from making modifications to his
speakers. I thought I could help. Others seem to be offended to even think
improvement is possible.

Lastly, yeah I like thinking about kooky and philosophical beyond the
envelope stuff because I have dedicated much of my lifetime to mastering the
technical knowledge to be able to do the regular technical loudspeaker stuff
half of my work week. In this endevour, I have discovered that the tools of
the trade are not comprehensive and the picture is far from complete. It
seems to me that if loudspeakers are by far the worst link in the audio
chain that thinking beyond the current paradigm, even philosphically, should
be paramount.

That's it for this thread for me.

Wessel
  #27   Report Post  
Nousaine
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

"Wessel Dirksen" wrote:

...snips to content .....

I don't believe I have used the word "poor" at all in this discussion.


But the original poster did.

But
like most all regular guy's budget, real world, mass produced loudspeakers,
with individual TLC you can often improve things. I find it amazing that
this concept is so difficult to believe.


It's not difficult to believe but I've not seen any concrete evidence that the
usual scheme of replacing parts and internal wiring actually results in
improvement. Indeed it's been fairly well been proven to me that a few feet of
internal wire and capacitor type replacement do not improve performance as is
often claimed. IOW, why fix it if it ain't broke?

OTOH if you have some good evidence that is generally unavailable please share.

It's not about good or bad; its
about performance. Terms like "high end" and "audiophile" usually imply a
search for high performance in sonic reproduction.


IME in audio those terms most often involve a quest for wishful thinking and
better margin :-)

The analogy to
loudspeaker manufacturing does not differ much in this regard to cars, both
in terms of technology advances in time and economic restraints. You could
want a "good" high performing modified race car so to speak and not a "good"
off the showroom sportscar. In which case some people come to me.


I think this is a good analogy. I often see ads for air-flow inlets and filter
devices that claim to add 10 to 20 hp. Yet I've never seen a single
performance test that verifies anything like that. Instead these devices get
co-mingled with big power boosters (superchargers, nitrous, internal engine
modifications) and I've yet to see a single performance verification test.

While I think it is quite possible to 'improve' an OEM loudspeaker system
performance, but with products that have good engineering as a basic this will
not be easily accomplished in a meaningful way by replacing a few feet of
internal wire or bypassing a couple capacitors.

OTOH it is true that there are plenty of not-so-good performing loudspeakers
(even high-end models) but, again, even there some engineering background and
acoustical measurement equipment and bias controlled listening tachniques will
be necessary to figure out if what you get is "improved" over what was already
there.

I'm all FOR D-I-Y; but I think that folks should have a reasonable expectation
that loudspeaker modifications may only give you nothing sonically and may even
degrade performance and will surely invalidate any warranty.


The departure from the original post started as a general indication as to
what the owner could expect to gain from making modifications to his
speakers. I thought I could help. Others seem to be offended to even think
improvement is possible.


In general, with 30 years of speaker DIY and 15 years of professional
experience I've never once seen a speaker that was even moderately 'improved'
with part/wire replacement. Even those that were "rebuilt" with many new
significant (drivers) parts were never verified to better currently available
OEM models that cost less money than the parts cost of the rebuild.

What's the old quip "Any fool can build a loudspeaker; and unfortunately many
do." For we DIY guys - embark on this venture with realistic expectations.


Lastly, yeah I like thinking about kooky and philosophical beyond the
envelope stuff because I have dedicated much of my lifetime to mastering the
technical knowledge to be able to do the regular technical loudspeaker stuff
half of my work week. In this endevour, I have discovered that the tools of
the trade are not comprehensive and the picture is far from complete. It
seems to me that if loudspeakers are by far the worst link in the audio
chain that thinking beyond the current paradigm, even philosphically, should
be paramount.

That's it for this thread for me.


I think we've run this course to a logical end.
Wessel






  #28   Report Post  
Stewart Pinkerton
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

On 17 Feb 2004 06:20:25 GMT, "Wessel Dirksen"
wrote:

It's not about good or bad; its
about performance. Terms like "high end" and "audiophile" usually imply a
search for high performance in sonic reproduction. The analogy to
loudspeaker manufacturing does not differ much in this regard to cars, both
in terms of technology advances in time and economic restraints. You could
want a "good" high performing modified race car so to speak and not a "good"
off the showroom sportscar. In which case some people come to me.


It's a given that a Le Mans winning car of the '60s would be thrashed
by a modern production car such as the Porsche 966 Turbo. To return to
loudspeakers in particular, the final production version from an
engineering-led company such as B&W will have been carefully 'voiced'
for the exact components used. Put a 500 BHP engine in a car designed
to handle 200 BHP, and the result will not be pretty...............

The departure from the original post started as a general indication as to
what the owner could expect to gain from making modifications to his
speakers. I thought I could help. Others seem to be offended to even think
improvement is possible.


As noted above, unauthorised tweaking by the substitution of nominally
'superior' crossover components and wiring, may well destroy the
voicing of the speaker, which has been *designed* to use the standard
components. Of course, some people may prefer the result (especially
if they've paid lots of money for it!), but it's *very* unlikely to be
an improvement in absolute terms - indeed, you'd almost certainly be
better off buying the next standard model up the range, rather than
paying for 'custom' tweaks!

Lastly, yeah I like thinking about kooky and philosophical beyond the
envelope stuff because I have dedicated much of my lifetime to mastering the
technical knowledge to be able to do the regular technical loudspeaker stuff
half of my work week. In this endevour, I have discovered that the tools of
the trade are not comprehensive and the picture is far from complete. It
seems to me that if loudspeakers are by far the worst link in the audio
chain that thinking beyond the current paradigm, even philosphically, should
be paramount.


Can't argue with that - always a good philosophy.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

  #29   Report Post  
Stewart Pinkerton
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 18:18:27 GMT, "Wessel Dirksen"
wrote:

"Ban" wrote in message
...
Wessel Dirksen wrote:
My position is based on a wealth of experience
where the intangable "that could never be the case" factor seems to
regularly make very obvious audible differences that can't reliably
be measured with test sines, chirps, noise etc, but can be "measured"
with normal music which much more complex. (usually it is very
obvious after you improve multiple intangables) I believe that we
don't accurately know what's going at the level of electron flow
through wire or any conductor. Ask an amp guy. They will tell you
that PCB design is also very weird in this way.

Any amp guys out there?

Wessel,
I have been designing PCBs for a long while and I have to tell you, there is
no black magic involved. To make a good design it is essential to understand
the circuit perfectly and to analyze the current flow from/to the source to
each consumer(sink). This is not easy, and most people forget to observe the
most important thing: the flow back in the ground line to the supply.


This is what I was referring to with the "ask an amp guy" line. And may
perhaps explain why beefing up the ground connections to a loudspeaker
driver tends to improve overall damping properties.


This is not true - I'm an amp guy......... :-). Electrical damping is
only of relevance *below* the fundamental resonance of the system,
although excessive source impedance (including cable resistance) may
certainly affect frequency response.

Signal return paths (and ground planes, which may be quite separate)
are certainly of importance in PCB design, particularly at higher
frequencies, but IME most competent engineers have no problem with
this.

It has nothing to do with "levels" in fact no levels exist. And electrons
are *not* comparable to water molecules or whatever you imagine, because
they have no mass and they are *small*. They will not form eddies on corners
or jumps in diameter as hydraulics or gasses, (even if there is an "eddy
current", which is caused by an electromagnetic field like all current
flow). In fact the flowing electrons distribute evenly and smooth in the
conductor, because they repel themselves mutually, unless we have very high
frequencies(skin-effect). Electromagnetic fields will govern the flow
absolutly.


Um, this isn't entirely true at high frequencies and/or high voltages,
but near enough for audio!

Even if there is no current flow, all electrons are already continuously
moving according to their temperature at a very high speed and not only
that, they are also "jumping" instantanously. All these things can be
measured and calculated.

All properties of a conductor can be measured precisely and put into
numbers, the transmission-line theory covers even very high frequency
behaviour (irrelevant for audio).


Quite so.

I now realize that I had given the wrong impression in this thread in that I
never intended to imply that there was any kind of voo-doo involved, only
that electrical conduction is more that just connecting the dots and
measuring the impedance factors between those dots. I was not under the
impression that electrical conduction was actually measureable at this level
yet.


Actually, it's been measurable at this level for more than 30 years.

Thanks for the input. A few questions if I may about your reply and
your field of study as it pertains to mine.

I have heard that paying attention to the pathway length (or overall mass of
a pathway) of certain areas of an amplifier circuit make audible
differences. In particular, grounding at certain areas and also important
current sensitive areas.


Only if you *really* screw it up! :-)

An example would be how distributed are the ground
pathways throughout the circuit. This is really what I was implying, that
the "style" of laying out the PCB also lends a hand in things. Do you
believe this is true then or hogwash. I guess what I'm asking is if all the
dots are connected, is this enough, or do you have to pay special attention
to how they are connected to optimize results?


For highly sensitive circuits such as phono amplifiers, I've found
that 'star' earthing is useful in keeping PSU noise and RFI to a
minimum. These are artifacts which are likely below the level of
audibility, however.

Second, from your perspective, do you believe that reducing significant
electrical transmission loss improves the transduction process in an EMF
setting such as a standard electro magnetic loudspeaker?


Yes of course, but you don't need to go to less than about 10% of the
minimum speaker system impedance in the combined amplifier source
impedance and cable loop resistance. This is easily achieved with most
SS amps and most speakers.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

  #30   Report Post  
Dick Pierce
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message news:WitYb.51895$uV3.103980@attbi_s51...
On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 18:18:27 GMT, "Wessel Dirksen"
wrote:


This is what I was referring to with the "ask an amp guy" line. And may
perhaps explain why beefing up the ground connections to a loudspeaker
driver tends to improve overall damping properties.


This is not true - I'm an amp guy......... :-). Electrical damping is
only of relevance *below* the fundamental resonance of the system,


No, this is most certainly not true. Damping is most significant
AT fundamental resonance. Why? Because this is the point where
the system is storing the most energy, it is the frequency at
which the total system losses are most significant, since it is
those losses (all of them) that determine damping. Above resonance,
the system is mass-controlled. Below resonance, the system is
stiffness-controlled. At resonance, it's resistance controlled.

Now, that being said. the notion that "beefing up the ground
connections tends to improve overall damping properties" simply
does not hold at all under scrutiny, UNLESS the ground connections
are som abysmally bad as to be a significant source of the total
system loop resistance to begin with. And, if that's the case, the
system is broken.

TO explore this requires us, once again, to dispell the myth of
"damping factor." The damping of the system is essentially a
measure of the energy stored to energy dissipated through loss
mechanism. That energy storage is greatest at resonance.
Remember that the energy stored in the moving mass goes as
velocity squared which goes directly as frequency below
resonance, and as the inverse of frequency above resonance,
and in a stiffness, it goes as excursion squared, which is
constant below resonance, and goes as in inverse square above
resonance: combine the two, and we find that energy stored is
maximum AT resonance.

There are three basic means of dissipating this energy, removing
it from the resonant system and thus damping the system: energy
can be removed through the resistive part of the radiation
impedance, i.e., we do work on the air and it makes sound. It can
be removed through mechanical friction in the surround and spider,
or it can be dissipated in the effective total series electrical
resistance. I state these in increasing order of importance: by
far, the LEAST amount of energy is dissipated by producing sound,
typically less than 1% in direct-radiator loudspeakers. The
mechanical damping comes next, and is on the order 5-25% of the
total damping. By far, the largest portion of the energy dissipation,
or damping, in speaker that have any pretentions is electrical.

Now, that may SEEM to be arguing FOR "beefing up the ground
connections" and rewiring the two feet of wire between the
crossover and the driver, BUT, such notions ignore the fact
that BY FAR, the single LARGEST resistance in the ENTIRE loop,
by an order of magnitude and most often much greater, is the
simple DC resistance of all that wire in the voice coil.

Unless those whimpy ground connections and that awful ordinary
wire from the crossover to the drivers has a total loop resistance
that is significant compared to the DC resistance of the voice
coil, beefing them ground connections and replacing that awful
wire, WILL NOT change the system damping in ANY significant fashion.

I now realize that I had given the wrong impression in this thread in that I
never intended to imply that there was any kind of voo-doo involved, only
that electrical conduction is more that just connecting the dots and
measuring the impedance factors between those dots. I was not under the
impression that electrical conduction was actually measureable at this level
yet.


Actually, it's been measurable at this level for more than 30 years.


Try twice that long!


  #31   Report Post  
Stewart Pinkerton
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

On 18 Feb 2004 05:32:36 GMT, (Dick Pierce)
wrote:

Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message news:WitYb.51895$uV3.103980@attbi_s51...
On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 18:18:27 GMT, "Wessel Dirksen"
wrote:


This is what I was referring to with the "ask an amp guy" line. And may
perhaps explain why beefing up the ground connections to a loudspeaker
driver tends to improve overall damping properties.


This is not true - I'm an amp guy......... :-). Electrical damping is
only of relevance *below* the fundamental resonance of the system,


No, this is most certainly not true. Damping is most significant
AT fundamental resonance. Why? Because this is the point where
the system is storing the most energy, it is the frequency at
which the total system losses are most significant, since it is
those losses (all of them) that determine damping. Above resonance,
the system is mass-controlled. Below resonance, the system is
stiffness-controlled. At resonance, it's resistance controlled.


I'm not getting this, since at resonance, the impedance of the speaker
will be at its highest, and therefore least sensitive to source
impedance variations. OTOH, below resonance, it rapidly reduces to a
value close to the DC resistance of the coil, and is directly
responsive to variations in source resistance. Perhaps we are using
the same words with different meanings. I am referring to 'damping
factor', of course I accept your definition regarding energy storage
and system losses.

Actually, it's been measurable at this level for more than 30 years.


Try twice that long!


60 years *is* more than 30 years - I chose my wording carefully, to
avoid rushing off to my references! :-)
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

  #32   Report Post  
Wessel Dirksen
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

Well one last reply now that this has become somewhat interesting. Here's
what I do in modding a speaker:

I usually replace areas of the electrical pathway that I would deem possibly
significant in reducing series resistance. Unless the internal wire is say
18 or 20 guage alloy wire, I don't worry about it too much although when in
doubt my standard 14 guage OFC is always more than good enough. PCB's and
high Rdc inductors I remove/replace as policy. The difference heard in
overall bass tightness at low frequencies is always significant and usually
very pronounced. Customers tend to love this difference especially if the
overall series resistance to the VC is cut by 40% or more. Obviously I don't
do this blindly without response compensation as previously stated. For
example, the Joseph Audio infinite slope filter models (at least from 3
years ago) have close to 2 ohms of series resistance and in one experience
benefited greatly from a complete simpler filter redesign with much less
series resistance. Tweeters, particularly older un-chambered high fs models,
seem to respond to beefing up the ground if it appears to be lacking and if
the corner freq is not on the high side. (you see this often in KEF and
B&W's from the 80's and early 90's) which I believe is the same principle at
work.

Replacing series electrolytic cap's with an appropiate film type,
particularly the older rough foils ones in any HP circuit, is subtle but
usually absolutely worthwhile. This is particularly audible when listening
to high frequency transient signals in mono. (Yup mono, IMO the center image
in mono is a great addition to evaluate overall imaging properties, but
maybe this is general knowledge, I don't know) I also really like MOF
resistors. As a rule I replace the whole crossover and give the complete old
unit back as a back out guarantee but usually ends up as a souvenier. The
new hardwired filter is in general overall improved even if fundamentally
unchanged in total response. Impedance compensation to a near resistive load
has been proven to be interesting to tube amp owners who have low power or
little to no negative feedback.

Then there is the cabinet and low frequency system itself. Often there is
alot which can be improved on the inside and outside and if desired you can
sometimes grant a wish to the owner to change the tuning profile of a vented
system to help aleve a deficiency or problem, often in combination in their
listening environment. I pay attention to many details here which
cumulatively can become extensive. Increasing Qp and Qb in vented systems if
possible is usually worthwhile especially if highly lossy to begin with. A
very over diffractive acoustic field in and around the front baffle
(including a highly diffractive grill) is usually also worth tending to and
if replacing the baffle anyway for this, improves cabinet mechanical
stability. All of which can be done without changing any fundamental tuning
parameters by compensation if the preservation of the personality of the
loudspeaker is an objective. Obviously a bit of the character will always
change somewhat in the process but not to its detriment overall.

"Dick Pierce" wrote in message
...
Stewart Pinkerton wrote in message

news:WitYb.51895$uV3.103980@attbi_s51...
On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 18:18:27 GMT, "Wessel Dirksen"
wrote:


This is what I was referring to with the "ask an amp guy" line. And may
perhaps explain why beefing up the ground connections to a loudspeaker
driver tends to improve overall damping properties.


This is not true - I'm an amp guy......... :-). Electrical damping is
only of relevance *below* the fundamental resonance of the system,


No, this is most certainly not true. Damping is most significant
AT fundamental resonance. Why? Because this is the point where
the system is storing the most energy, it is the frequency at
which the total system losses are most significant, since it is
those losses (all of them) that determine damping. Above resonance,
the system is mass-controlled. Below resonance, the system is
stiffness-controlled. At resonance, it's resistance controlled.

Now, that being said. the notion that "beefing up the ground
connections tends to improve overall damping properties" simply
does not hold at all under scrutiny, UNLESS the ground connections
are som abysmally bad as to be a significant source of the total
system loop resistance to begin with. And, if that's the case, the
system is broken.

TO explore this requires us, once again, to dispell the myth of
"damping factor." The damping of the system is essentially a
measure of the energy stored to energy dissipated through loss
mechanism. That energy storage is greatest at resonance.
Remember that the energy stored in the moving mass goes as
velocity squared which goes directly as frequency below
resonance, and as the inverse of frequency above resonance,
and in a stiffness, it goes as excursion squared, which is
constant below resonance, and goes as in inverse square above
resonance: combine the two, and we find that energy stored is
maximum AT resonance.

There are three basic means of dissipating this energy, removing
it from the resonant system and thus damping the system: energy
can be removed through the resistive part of the radiation
impedance, i.e., we do work on the air and it makes sound. It can
be removed through mechanical friction in the surround and spider,
or it can be dissipated in the effective total series electrical
resistance. I state these in increasing order of importance: by
far, the LEAST amount of energy is dissipated by producing sound,
typically less than 1% in direct-radiator loudspeakers. The
mechanical damping comes next, and is on the order 5-25% of the
total damping. By far, the largest portion of the energy dissipation,
or damping, in speaker that have any pretentions is electrical.

Now, that may SEEM to be arguing FOR "beefing up the ground
connections" and rewiring the two feet of wire between the
crossover and the driver, BUT, such notions ignore the fact
that BY FAR, the single LARGEST resistance in the ENTIRE loop,
by an order of magnitude and most often much greater, is the
simple DC resistance of all that wire in the voice coil.

Unless those whimpy ground connections and that awful ordinary
wire from the crossover to the drivers has a total loop resistance
that is significant compared to the DC resistance of the voice
coil, beefing them ground connections and replacing that awful
wire, WILL NOT change the system damping in ANY significant fashion.

I now realize that I had given the wrong impression in this thread in

that I
never intended to imply that there was any kind of voo-doo involved,

only
that electrical conduction is more that just connecting the dots and
measuring the impedance factors between those dots. I was not under the
impression that electrical conduction was actually measureable at this

level
yet.


Actually, it's been measurable at this level for more than 30 years.


Try twice that long!


  #33   Report Post  
Stewart Pinkerton
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

On 19 Feb 2004 00:25:41 GMT, "Wessel Dirksen"
wrote:

Well one last reply now that this has become somewhat interesting. Here's
what I do in modding a speaker:

I usually replace areas of the electrical pathway that I would deem possibly
significant in reducing series resistance. Unless the internal wire is say
18 or 20 guage alloy wire, I don't worry about it too much although when in
doubt my standard 14 guage OFC is always more than good enough. PCB's and
high Rdc inductors I remove/replace as policy. The difference heard in
overall bass tightness at low frequencies is always significant and usually
very pronounced. Customers tend to love this difference especially if the
overall series resistance to the VC is cut by 40% or more.


Unfortunate that the total internal speaker resistance *including* the
VC is reduced by much less than 1%, making your other claims highly
dubious. Of course, I could easily demonstrate to you that I had
achieved significantly improved bass tightness in your speakers -
without changing anything! It's called salesmanship.............

Obviously I don't
do this blindly without response compensation as previously stated. For
example, the Joseph Audio infinite slope filter models (at least from 3
years ago) have close to 2 ohms of series resistance and in one experience
benefited greatly from a complete simpler filter redesign with much less
series resistance.


Oh, you totally revoiced the speaker and *you* think it was of great
benefit? Perhaps the designer would disagree, since the precise
crossover design is a key element of JA speakers.........

Tweeters, particularly older un-chambered high fs models,
seem to respond to beefing up the ground if it appears to be lacking and if
the corner freq is not on the high side. (you see this often in KEF and
B&W's from the 80's and early 90's) which I believe is the same principle at
work.


Now *that* is absolute balderdash, I have seen no such problems in any
of the many such speakers I have examined.

snip of contentious claims

Basically, you are tweaking perfectly competent designs, no doubt
achieving a *different* sound, which you *claim* to be an improvement
and are able to sell as such to your clients. Personally, I'd back the
multi-million pound research labs at Revel, B&W and KEF against
anything which you are likely to achieve. A loudspeaker is a complex
and carefully designed *system*, and you cannot 'improve' any one
component without upsetting the overall voicing.
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

  #34   Report Post  
Guruguru
 
Posts: n/a
Default B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification

Nips

Hello to all

I have a new question for all of you. If engineers would calculate
wires in crossover parameters, should wires be pair cable or atleast
be installed symmetrically. Resistance value stay the same if cables
are installed one way or another, but mH and µF values vary depending
how poles interfere each other. Think that this overturns the point
that by changing wires, you may or you will end up with worse end
result than orginal wires. Still can't point out the result, because
new cable for amp-speaker is under purchase.

BRGDS
Riku

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help - wiring identity Pioneer OEM CD changer HHamil7780 Car Audio 3 July 4th 04 04:49 PM
VW Factory CD Changer - Wiring Diagram? Kevin Gibbons Car Audio 1 June 18th 04 02:12 AM
Wiring for component "drawers"? Michael Volow General 2 March 13th 04 04:46 AM
B&W Nautilus 804 inner wiring modification Wessel Dirksen High End Audio 1 February 6th 04 07:03 PM
wiring a used DVA-5205 to test? Robert Drake Car Audio 1 August 14th 03 04:09 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:12 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"