Luxman SQ-N150 integrated amplifier | Stereophile.com

Now, after a few years of rest, Luxman has restored the NeoClassico series – and the spirit of the SQ-N100 – equipped with the SQ-N150 integrated amplifier ($2795), which integrates the N100 with a dynamic phono amplifier stage. (The SQ-N100 was priced at US$2,999 when it was last launched, with only MM phono amplifier.) N150 also added channel balance control, a larger metal-enclosed multi-function remote control (included in the price), and backlight output Class VU meter, and the newly introduced PK split-phase inverter circuit for Class AB output stage. Four JJ Electronic EL84 pentode power tubes made in Slovakia produce 10Wpc in push-pull mode, and the other two are JJ Electronic 12AX7 / ECC83 dual triode input driver tubes.

I wrote it in my review of Luxman's

"Compared with the electronic products produced by other contemporary manufacturers, Luxman CD players, amplifiers and DACs have their own appearance... placed side by side, it is difficult to distinguish the classic Luxmans of the 1960s and 70s from their uniqueness. Today’s fashionable product.” These statements also apply to the SQ-N150: this is a fashionable machine with a 5 mm thick aluminum alloy shell and a matte white/silver coating; its output transformer and power supply The housing of the transformer uses the same surface treatment. The chassis and rear panel are made of coated steel. The black, close-fitting tube cage adds a dark flavor to the beautiful appearance of the SQ-N150.

SQ-N150 is small in size, 11.69 inches wide, 7.40 inches high, and 9.88 inches deep; it weighs just over 27 pounds. As an audio reviewer in a small apartment, I think this moderate size? Luxman describes it as having an "A4" footprint-a welcome change from the advanced audio components provided by most hi-fi manufacturers.

The user controls of the amplifier are scattered on its top and front panel. The former is a rotary input selector switch, followed by three small potentiometers for bass, treble and balance. On the front panel of SQ-N150 are two output-level VU meters with a Display control button. On the right is a Line Straight button switch, which bypasses the tone control, plus a Phones jack, a Volume knob (with an embedded orange LED indicator for changing the volume, flashing), and a switch button labeled button . Operation (with its own orange LED) and IR receiver for remote earpiece.

The rear panel of SQ-N150 includes an IEC jack (two cores, no ground wire), two pairs of gold-plated speaker binding posts, three pairs of input jacks (RCA), a pair of phono input jacks (RCA), and a turntable grounding Column (except for a single ground point, it has almost no other gaps: if you also need to ground the step-up transformer, it’s bad news). Four aluminum closed rubber feet are fixed on the bottom plate. In response to an e-mail question, John Prawel, Luxman's vice president of US sales, wrote: "Design, engineering, assembly, testing and packaging in Japan." "Direct inspection of SQ-N150 A roster of high-quality Japanese parts is shown. Alps’ electric volume control and'audio grade’ Nichicon UFW/FW capacitors. In addition, Panasonic electrolytic and Murata film capacitors and special relays are used by Japanese supplier Takamisawa, JRC (New Japan Radio Co., Ltd.) Integrated control ICs are provided on demand. High-quality "point-to-point" soldered solid bus bars are used in combination with component-filled FR-C. 4 glass epoxy circuit boards with optimized copper traces. Luxman itself is used. OFC (oxygen-free, non-plated cable) cable. VU meters are also customized for Luxman in Japan.

Prawel pointed out: "The headphone output comes from the main amplifier output." "When the headphone plug is inserted into the front panel headphone jack, the main speaker will be muted. The headphone output is specified as 300mV and the impedance is 16 ohms. Low impedance headphones are not recommended."

When Jack Sigmund, President of Luxman America Inc. asked me about the tube bias via e-mail, he said: "The unit is not an automatic bias. He said: "It has been installed before leaving the factory. Tube, and the bias voltage of each unit has been checked. Each SQ-N150 must be tested for moisture absorption and preheated during the entire power cycle so that the output tube bias can be accurately set at the factory. Unless/until the output tube is replaced, there is no need to check or change the offset. The process is very simple, but since it does require access to the motherboard (by removing the bottom cover), we do not provide this information here. User manual. Instead, we want to establish contact with customers to ensure that they receive the correct instructions, guidance and safety advice. "

As for other settings: Usually, I find that using a step-up transformer (SUT) can improve the sound of the MC cartridge, but Sigmund recommends that I run

The MC cassette ($1200) is directly inserted into the SQ-N150. "For Hana ML cartridges," Sigmund pointed out, "you should omit the step-up transformer and use the SQ-N150's onboard MC input. The input sensitivity of the MC input is 0.33mV / 100 ohm load, which should be actually recommended by Hana The load of the cartridge is 100 ohms; this should be a good choice."

I used

Turntable ($9595) and 11-inch Kuzma 4Point Tone Arm ($6500), and

Turntable with Jelco TS-350S tonearm ($799) and

Cartridge ($299) to evaluate Luxman amplifier, and mine

CD player/

combination.

($8400/pair, 90dB) and

A speaker with Auditorium 23 speaker cable ($3998/pair, 99dB) is also part of the evaluation system.

In order to get a good bass response on Luxman, my DeVore O/93s needs to be placed closer to the rear wall when used with 40Wpc.

Integrated amplifier. Finally, I installed the O/93s rear panel 31" from the front wall of the listening seat, and installed the speaker front panel 74" from the speaker of the speaker. Klipsch Forte III requires similar adjustments to achieve a satisfactory bass frequency response.

Before Sigmund suggested that I use the Hana ML cartridge directly for the MC input of the SQ-N150, I used a step-up transformer from Bob's Devices ($1375) to plug into the MM input of the SQ-N150. In most recordings, this produces excellent tonal richness, higher frequency clarity, midrange warmth and lower end weight. I was surprised to find that the MC input of the SQ-N150 gave me 50% to 60% of the sound of Bob's Devices SUT. If the step-up transformer is not used, the bass weight and clarity will be reduced. On the other hand, without a transformer, speed and clarity have been improved.

My favorite bass range torture test track is Kraftwerk's A side

(2-LP, Astralwerks ASW 91708-1, 2003). This album has experienced a marathon journey of marathon-style melody and drum rhythm through the flickering and harsh sound of the quiet synthesizer. Side A culminates with a vibrating 8-tone synthesizer mode, and the almost subsonic bass flow indicates that some amplifiers may be difficult to reproduce clearly. If the clarity or detail that I heard from the reference device cannot be achieved, I am surprised that SQ-N150 can replicate this sequence with good warmth and weight in a large sound field. SQ-N150 replicates the pulsating, stroboscopic characteristics of the note pattern without sacrificing its fluidity. The stereo image is distributed proportionally in a sound field wider than the depth.

This is a picture close to a human being and can give you some sense of scale.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/tdMcgPoUXb8/hqdefault.jpg

Petite, fits almost anywhere!

Yes, it is small, even small.

If you don’t look closely, I won’t notice.

These Stereophile pictures seem too large and unbelievable. Ok

I bet that this cute little all-in-one is aimed at people with small houses and small speakers. (Little Japanese)

The damn thing is as cute as a bug, but American Schiit may be equally small, and the price is even lower.

I have always admired Luxman and even Tanberg, but have never really committed to ownership, because I never thought about what Luxman could solve.

however...

I bet that if I put it next to the relaxed lazy boy, I might fall in love with it. I will scroll and write all about it. Interesting.

Tony is somewhere in bbbbbrrrrrr.

It's more like'Liddle' Luxman :-) ........

Maybe KM can also review the Rogue Audio Cronus Magnum III tube integrated amplifier 100 WPC, $2,995... Rogue Audio components usually have low headphone output impedance, which is very suitable for low impedance headphones... .. Of course, they are also ideal for high impedance headphones :-) ........

They will be two good test tube options around the $3,000 mark.

Very low power, high distortion, although expensive, but not cheap. If it costs $700, I can see that it is attractive.

If the reviewer thinks this is "one of the most transparent components in my system", then I will be curious about what he has heard before.

Are you running music through a Marshall guitar amplifier?

You can get Benchmark AHB-2 for a few hundred dollars more.

At least the cost of this micro-watt distortion generator does not exceed $20,000.

A more expensive alternative may be to use a clean signal gain chain for the main system backbone and insert the Manley Mastering version of Massive Passive to provide some special tube temperature tuning and optional EQ, such as more powerful tone control. The key is to include special seasonings only when needed, and not include special seasonings on well-documented skilled materials.

https://www.manley.com/pro/msmp#mmmsmp-mastering-header

If ordinary enthusiasts try to use the Manley Massive Passive unit with all these knobs and controls, they will start to get nervous and say: "I am angry for hell, I can't stand it anymore" :-) ........ ...

Not sure if he will still use these, but I remember an interview with Bob Ludwig (Bob Ludwig (Grammy Award Winner, Engineer, Maine Studio in Portland, Maine) Highlights the Massive Passives in his studio and mentions that he sometimes uses those fingerings in his records.” It should not be regarded as a general negative comment on digital, because he also mentioned that he is mainly in the digital field (In DAW) work. The purpose of his use of Massive Passive is to solve specific problems. His use does not necessarily include the use of the EQ function, and sometimes just plugs the device into the sound of the signal chain with neutral settings.

If you transmit audio signals anywhere close to these tubes, it will add "flower-like beauty" to the sound quality........You only need to ask HR :-) .........

"If the average enthusiast tries to use the Manley Massive Passive device with all these knobs and controls, they will feel a nervous breakdown."

Knob violinists need to be aware of the potential Colavita visual advantages that need to be fine-tuned, and pause the knobs to make small noises to get their paws away from the knobs and listen, perhaps closing their eyes while listening. Sight and touch will distract the brain’s hearing, while visual processing will dominate perception.

http://www.google.com/search?q=Colavita+visual+dominance+effect

But like almost all professional equipment, it mostly runs at +4dBu (balance only +4), it looks like you can switch the unbalance to -10dBu, but it may be an internal switch. +4 is the "professional" input/output level, and -10 is the consumer... If your device cannot handle the extra level, it may cause device distortion and the input level is too low. In other words, this is not the best consumer solution.

Similarly, most consumers do not know how to use this or other analog master control devices (or most professional gear tbh) correctly.

In systems containing consumer-grade equipment, +4_dBu balanced I/O devices must be used with caution.

This is my suggestion, without proper warning.

Thank you for waving the warning sign.

Dude, if you only audition objective speakers, you will quickly understand that the concept of "distortion" keeps you in the dark all your life. As I said, it’s time to change the course of a great band.

Reply @I don't understand.

So, in other words, the return to technology since 70 years ago is more serious than the technology I already have? No thanks.

My Benchmark AHB-2 is orders of magnitude better than this expensive electronic brick.

If you like a lot of distortion and noise, try it.

Keep the slide rules, Super 8 movies and noisy hard shell tube amplifiers. I will stick to my laptop, Blu-ray and the best power amplifier on the planet.

The tube amplifier made 70 years ago and the tube amplifier made today share one thing in common, that is, the basic circuit. All other parts, especially the use of current manufacturing technology and material technology have been completely upgraded.

Therefore, distortion is no longer in the past. Far away. You can't believe it if you don't believe your ears. That is pure discrimination produced by pure ignorance. The mediocre mentality simply put it.

A beautifully made amplifier at an attractive price. I hope Luxman can issue another 20 watts of more power. That would be super attractive at $4795.

These can be configured as boost amplifiers, powerful and clean enough. The nonlinearity of the upstream tube amplifier will dominate the final sound characteristics.

https://www.stereophile.com/solidpoweramps/907mf/index.html

Read the JA1 notes in the measurement section.

I suggest that the MF-550K is more suitable for editing with good recording effects that avoid the high pitch factor. For converting high-compression music into low-sensitivity speakers with high continuous output, this is not the right choice, but there is not enough radiator. If implemented in a suitable application, a larger radiator is not needed.

http://www.luxman.com/product/detail.php?id=28

What a cool amp. Like your comments as always.

I also dig XRCD. They sound great.

... $2800 will currently buy the Marantz PM7005 integrated amplifier-plus Technics SL-1500C turntable, Denon DCD-600NE CD player and a pair of JBL Stage A190 speakers.

https://www.musicdirect.com/integrated-amp/marantz-pm7005-integrated-amp

https://www.crutchfield.com/p_133SL1500B/Technics-SL-1500C-Black.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byTAqpXCPB8

https://www.jbl.com/loudspeakers/STAGE+A190.html

...Until the early storage channels of the stereo integrated amplifier. This amplifier is definitely not the tea I drank in 2019, but my earliest audio (I am very old) was spent exclusively with a push-pull EL84 amplifier. I'm talking about the late 1950s and early 1960s. For most people who want a decent "medium power" (at the time 40 watts was considered high power) amplifier, this is the setting to go amplifier. I believe the EL84 designed by Mullard is everywhere. Many of these amplifiers are rated at 12 watts. So many examples......Scott, Fisher, Eco, Heath, Dinaco (higher power), Stromberg Carlson, etc. All the better console speakers of the day used EL84 as output. My Telefunken Opus 7 and SABA 400 German radio also use PP EL84. It is a studio output tube for the masses. This is a very good tube. It is easily available even in the rugged Russian-made 6P14-EV version, which replaces the 7189 (EL84 with higher dissipation rate). You can make a very sweet sound amplifier from this tube. Anyone who has ever heard of Dyna Stereo 35 will know that this is true. This is probably the best sound of all Dynaco tube amplifiers.

If someone wants to use 6P14P-EV output tubes to build several higher power, lower distortion monoblock amplifiers, I suggest to consider Menno van der Veen’s Specialist VDV-2100-CFB-SSCR-PPS output transformer (each €216, (Excluding tax), stereo requires two), and a matched octet 6P14P-EV output tube (each matched octet is $180, stereo requires two octets).

The transformer can handle current and has a primary impedance of 2k Ohm (the parallel push-pull pair in an octet will see 8k per pair). It includes a separate 40% super linear winding instead of a simple tap on the shared winding. Therefore, the screen can work at a lower regulated voltage than the B+ anode plate voltage, which may be 400V , And the voltage on the screen may be 300V. The voltage drop on the screen will greatly reduce non-linearity and extend lamp life. The transformer also includes a 10% cathode strip used in series with the cathode of the output tube, which can further reduce the non-linearity and increase the damping coefficient, so that the amplifier is more resistant to changing load impedance. The frequency range passband of the transformer between -3_dB drop angle is 0.4_Hz to 234_kHz, and the wide frequency band is used to reduce the differential phase distortion through the transformer, so that feedback can be better utilized. The rated music power of this transformer is 100W, and the peak value can far exceed this power.

The transformer is housed in an attractive corrugated finished product tank, so it should be easy to integrate into an exquisite finished product design, and there should be no mechanical noise from the iron core or winding.

If some people may be familiar with these, please note that Menno van der Veen's current output transformer "Speialist" series is closely related to the "Specialist" transformer series designed for Plitron 25 years ago for wide bandwidth, low distortion and highly flexible application. His preferred output tube is push-pull 6550. He referred to the super-linearity with the added cathode band as a "super triode", although the output tube was not bundled into a triode-like operation in the application.

Use the same transformer.

https://mennovanderveen.nl/cms/index.php/nl/producten/specialist/vdv-2100-cfb-sscr-pps-detail

you are right

I own a Stereo 35, I like its sound performance but don't like the appearance of its chassis, so I sold it!

I regret selling that cute little amplifier for 35 years.

If I find one somewhere today, I will buy one today. I did not see

Tony in Venice

If a straight line with gain is a goal worth pursuing, then there is no doubt about where to listen to the "sound" of a particular tube/amplifier.

The clean benefit of constant load is worth it. Although this is something that some people might want (including myself), some people seem to want something else, and their personal subjective opinions and wishes are not wrong.

Aside from unknowing victims, the thoughtful purchaser of this amplifier did not seek pure gain with constant load, and its power output was sufficient to be used in most of the current market with products like Benchmark Media AHB2 speaker.

Rather, it is clear to understand the buyer’s situation that the amplifier will be available in a small part (except for a small part) of high-sensitivity speakers and/or at very close listening distances and/or at unrealistically low listening levels Low output power. ISO226 and other loudness contours illustrate the non-linearity of human auditory perception and illustrate the effect of listening at an unrealistic level. The amplifier also provides audible non-linear distortion products, a mixture of noise and linear distortion, and some visual effects of light-emitting tubes and dancing hands. These visual effects may distract auditory attention (Colavita visual advantage effect). It doesn't seem to be what people want. A small group of audiophiles.

There is nothing wrong with the desires and subjective opinions of audiophiles, no matter how different they are from the desires and subjective opinions of others.

"It's illogical."

Because if I don't like it, it is foolish for others to like it.

A short video of Luxman SQ-N150 integrated amplifier and matching D-N150 DAC-CD player

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RhRwp_ja_s

Just to stir up another wasp nest:

Although it is not yet possible to fully restore musical performance, there are a few obvious rules:

You are welcome.

Science knows that high-fidelity as a kind of "science" is often just a set of assumptions about both.

By the way, enter your list one by one:

-If there is no real ranking of all distortions, then the claim to any one of them is an unscientific profligacy and attractive to rhetoric. There is no such list.

-Re: Distortion, beyond a certain point, any excellent speaker can and will show different distortions throughout the system. This refutes the common assumption among amateurs that meaningful clarity and authenticity are the product of the speaker. They are definitely not. The scale may be, but the real organic sound is not.

Active, multi-power amplifier system without filling in #1 above, if it is said to be passive, then it must not be said to be "better" than the same design. In addition, as pointed out to you before, there is absolutely no 100% 3dB level difference between active and passive, nor can it show the direction of heat flow.

-Referring to #1 and #2 above again, real listeners know that the days of audio tube amplifiers are hardly finished. Not only are they no longer obsolete, but they are now better than ever because they are faster, have lower inherent distortion, and can be implemented through various circuit functions that listeners like. (There is no analogy to the benchmark sound quality.)

-Unless you limit it to rough specifications, in practice or the scientific community will not assert this claim, I suspect it is related to your high-fidelity ability. However, if the DSP improves the time characteristics (step response and group delay) of the loudspeaker "without design considerations", then you will have a more effective proposition, although you still have to filter all results according to the above list and all designs. Here again is an unsupportable claim.

-The pinnacle of driver development was and was the top soft-sound driver half a century ago. In fact, the best drivers produced today are enhanced versions of those format designs, and previous work has been filtered into many new drivers. It is easy to assume that a miniature speaker happens to flatten the wire.

Tools, schmool.

We do this because it is playing with a toy that makes a sound.

I call it performing arts, and the fetish equipment is very good!

I haven't really witnessed "serious" listening.

Jeffening

Considering the tastes and goals of a particular person, your list makes sense. This is the expectation for the lowest possible coloring and the high fidelity of the signal.

However, this is not everyone's goal, nor will it satisfy everyone. Therefore, fortunately, there are many products that can meet the standard in addition to your own products. :-)

The problem with people telling others "better" is that eventually, someone might hear what you are saying and find that they disagree with your enthusiasm.

I listened to some very low chroma speakers and like some of them. But I also like some speakers with better colors. (Because I am discussing flavors, I will not introduce the reasons now). For example, I have listened to three active/DSP Kii speakers, which are a combination of many speakers you just promoted. they are very good. I was almost unmoved. I prefer some other passive speakers, I'm sure you will want to contain them.

Similarly, people have been talking about obsolete tube amplifiers for nearly 50 years. But they are flourishing. why? They satisfy the desires of others, even if not yours. Although there are various SS amplifiers (such as Bryston) in my system, I always end up returning to my Conrad Johnson tube amplifier. For those tube amplifiers that I think are very valuable, my system sounds better than "better". My friend is tired of the hassle of tube amplifiers and now uses solid state amplifiers. Well, I think the tube amplifier is outdated. Except when he was happy, I found his system was not as fun as his tube amplifier.

So, it is certain that you have established some wisdom for certain groups of enthusiasts, but thankfully, there are many other options for those with different standards and goals.

In fact, the premise that bandwidth and power are equal to fidelity is very flawed. This simple metric may tell many tech enthusiasts who make strict demands and judge others, but as Stereophile has shown for decades, fidelity is a complicated matter. The subwoofer and the $1,000 AVR constitute excellent performance, because high-end users are naturally all snake oil, or because high-end users are deceived, deaf people are not only wrong, but also offensive. Sadly, it often appears in these topics-additional free online magazines. This is equivalent to he feet.

Likewise, I don't accept the false premise that "low chroma" exists anywhere in any rough, superficial indicators (such as lines on the screen), and is inherently accompanied by a truly organic, authentic musicality. Absolutely not; I have never heard of a system with technology enthusiasts that can produce natural music with real high-end audio. The best sound I have heard in 40 years is far from the most extreme and the most impossible system, which is very different from ordinary technology hobbyist equipment. Sound is a fascinating technique because it is the complete opposite of traditional midstream audio.

There is no reason to support the use of "color" tags for components, because we think they can please some unsuspecting listeners. This assumption defaults to the opinion of technology enthusiasts, that rough, superficial, mid-fidelity indicators are most meaningful when they are actually counterproductive. There is more.

For technology enthusiasts, subjecting the field to his fallacy is offensive. We should not surrender.

I like it when people with limited knowledge but a large vocabulary go to great lengths to make nihilistic assertions.

We have all noticed that you will have endless fun, allowing those of us to gain more experience, as well as the keenness and perception to connect it with others.

But I admit that when you immediately appeal to the usual fallacies, you will get some worrying verifications, turning over on your back like this.

Colored, colorless... I think this hobby is more like an appreciation of wine: we do this for entertainment and we like what we like.

Objectivists can shut up. Pure subjectivists need to remember that they are only speaking for themselves.

...Which means they don't exist at all. They are still in production, but still there does not mean that they are even a growing industry. The vinyl records sold in the United States last year were about 19 mm. Less than 1% of albums sold digitally via CD and download. I think Beyonce sold so many records for her last album.

No one in the recording industry uses tube amplifiers for mixing or mastering. They are too noisy, distorted and non-linear. And, oh yes, they are unreliable and will change within months of daily use.

When making live engineering music, you need the best tools to produce the best products for your customers. The tube amplifier will not allow you to do this.

It doesn't matter what the music style is.

When you need absolute transparency, the test tube will not provide you with transparency. period. This is a fact.

The choice of speakers is troublesome because you need to consider the sound and size of the room. not sure.

In my home theater/mastering room, I use servo speakers and KEF LS50, and Dirac Live can improve the already good sound and improve the effect of the basement. I'm redoing my home studio, and it will mainly be line source speakers instead of point source speakers like KEF. In the old house I rented, there was no choice in tearing the walls. Neither adds a small amount of acoustic foam. In this case, it will be good to eliminate the reflections of the floor and ceiling by using line source speakers. It is still a very active room, but the speakers will match the room rather than oppose it. From the studio to the theater will only provide greater transparency for my work. It also allows me to hear the sound of the final product in two very different environments.

I know I like a certain sound. However, this does not mean that this is true. I keep messing things up in the studio. Ironically, sometimes you might mistakenly think that by adding band-limiting distortion to the instrument, it sounds cleaner and appears more in the mix. It's ok.

But for my surveillance system, I need truth in all situations. Only in this way can I decide the appropriate result.

Although it is impossible to obtain a straight line with gain, we are now close to it. By adding DSP to the mix, the room and speakers are no longer a problem. When I make music, I want to know that my final product has a chance to be completely heard like in a recording studio. It is possible now.

Both the microphone and the speaker (transducer) require trade-offs and inherent flaws. There should be no electronic equipment between them.

That is high fidelity.

So, in summary:

Vinyl = VHS tape

Distortion = Dyson goes all out

High resolution numbers = the best recordings you have ever seen or heard (as long as the operation is correct)

Burn me all you want. I have no room for discussion left. There are better things to do.

When you habitually come up with any components that do not meet your vague assumptions and assertions; when you habitually and randomly characterize things you don’t use and hear as features; when you never mention the sound of things When you always mention claims about things; when you strongly imply that anyone who is not within your wavelength range cannot reach your undefined professional level; when you deliberately violate the rules; when other people actually use and hear People who have been through these things only know when you are wrong; assuming that it can be called a conversation, how do you think of a conversation?

Arguments that boldly omit the "period" interruption mark to emphasize will often not force anyone to join a new frame of reference. At the same time, the systems and components that did arouse the awe of the real audience did not appear in the strict and unpublished standards that I understood as the mysterious and unpublished technical experts.

Whether it is a random assertion or a real-world result, a technical expert is not the right choice. He always walked towards the door, because he always argued with himself about how others were wrong, conflicting paragraph after paragraph. Moreover, he lacked respect for the other party's discovery and intelligence, so he telegraphed loudly and clearly.

Should everything end?

At the same time, hell subjectivists just experience things, and those things are to be experienced. You must agree that this is a novel concept...

Which "line source speakers" are you considering buying? ........ Just curious:-) .........

Both parties will have:

• 6 BG Neo-8S medium/high

• 24 Dayton Audio RS100-8 4-inch mid-woofer speakers (12 on each side of Neo-8S)

• 2 Rythmik L12 servo submersibles

Unless MiniDSP updates its board amplifier to run FIR filters at 96kHz (currently, they only support 48kHz...ugh), otherwise, the frequency divider is most likely Xilica XD-4080.

I will also get a MiniDSP Dirac processor, but it depends on the final system amplifier.

If the only option is Xilica, I will get an IOM Classic monoblock amp (https://internetofmusic.nl/product/iom-classic/) because nCore is excellent, efficient and I like those huge electric meters!

The quality of the amplifier is directly proportional to the size of the meter!

Most likely, Universal Audio X6 will be used as an audio interface. That will be to bring performance and powerful plugins.

Needless to say, this will be a very strong system with a height of about 7', but the price is not expensive. If all goes well, it will be completed by this time next year.

And, since the total system power is at least 4kW and has 64 drives, you don't want to control the volume carelessly.

If used improperly, it will definitely cause damage to the audio system.

But for me, the two biggest things are to eliminate floor/ceiling reflections and use multiple drivers to make them work with the smallest possible distortion.

Eventually, the LS50 will be replaced by an even better design, but it will take several years.

Cheers!

For those who are not familiar... Infinity IRS is a good example of line source loudspeakers... In the PS Audio listening room, there is a JA1 video posted online to listen to Infinity IRS . ....... Recently, many indoor and outdoor professional PA systems are arranged in a vertical curved array:-) .........

Line sources are fundamentally different from point sources in many important ways. They cannot radiate to the third dimension, that is, height, so their attenuation in distance is only half of the natural rate. This makes them completely deviate from the point source bass system, but only a theoretical distance.

They also have time domain problems, because 2D radiation prevents them from correcting for step pulses correctly. Fortunately, they have transmittable transient characteristics that may make the entire output a net benefit. Nevertheless, they still suffer from self-noise, especially small and medium-sized panels.

In large venues, lines are meaningful. The top of the line is straight and can well maintain the level of the rear of the entrance hall, while the curved lower part can be converted into natural 3D radiation and will not overwhelm the first few lines.​​​​ Whether they are suitable for home reproduction depends on how you deal with their problems.

Yes, the line source needs to be implemented correctly (du!).

However, if done well, they can function well in untreated rooms.

As for your opinion of "J" arrays, they are worse than line arrays. See what Dr. Don Keele has to say about them.

The CBT array is better. If my room allows, I will do it.

Parts Express sells CBT line array speakers at reasonable prices:-) .....

S&V Magazine reviewed the Dayton Audio (Parts Express) CBT line array speaker, the size of which is:-) .......

As this and your other recent posts show, your secret prejudices determine this day. This is obvious, and now it has almost been acknowledged. You show the assertion, and then show the pride that keeps them hanging.

Define a correctly implemented line array. There is no name drop, no empty claims; given the type limitation, what is the right speaker. Then enter the amplifier. Then to the source. Then music. "accuracy". distortion. and many more.

Somewhere, you might find that we are back to the first line of my first article in that thread, it just observes that not only is there no such list, but it won't be too soon at any time. Not only that, but in all the audio sciences we claim, any serious reader already knows that they do conflict.

In other words, we know *some* things, but we advocate many things. We simply don’t know how all these are really connected-well, we don’t know anything, but there must be enlightened minds when it comes to design, they are perceptual, can listen and compare with real music, even if they are talking technologists The dictator of ”did not give them any obvious attention, which is part of the so-called scientific conflict-but as you want to say, some of us are very willing to *speak to others on the carpet.

For things they don’t know, or if they know, they can’t say mysteriously.

...You have no expertise in audio. The speaker or amp design will not work.

Dr. Don Keele is a genius and great man. Have you emailed him? Unless I have a serious problem, I won't bother him. It's awesome to see his resume and his CBT speaker design.

Dr. Sigfried Linkwitz is also a good person. He also answered my question as kindly as Dr. Tang. He does think that if I need more bass than B&O BeoLab 5 can provide, then I am a liar. I'm. He is both an amazing guy and a genius. Although he didn't want to buy them, his dipole design was crazy. However, none of them work in my room.

If you don't know anything about the subject, then you know who Bruno Putzeys is and the pioneering work he is (or has completed) with Hypex, Kii and Purifi.

This is Class D and DSP.

Maybe the Dutch and Dutch? No?

Again, fire at me at any time.

Online anonymous writers are meaningless to me. I do not seek any verification.

My name is Jeff Henning. I live outside of Philly. Both my parents were born in Philly. If you know something about Philly, even our sports team We are not strong, and we will not tolerate anyone's nonsense.

You are a clown.

Po weak BS is meaningless, because everything you do is all over the world, saying that I don't understand the situation, or just an idiot. For a guy who doesn't seem to know anything, it makes me feel very lively.

Would you like to explain in detail how you know that I know nothing? Also, please do this by directly stating and not writing like George Weir on the LSD pipe bender.

Maybe you can elaborate on the latest speaker design and how to arrange the drivers into the room acoustics? Maybe share some CAD renderings?

I personally designed a (somewhat) simple dipole subwoofer.

What's in the handbag, Johnny?

Artie Nudell is a genius. The Internal Revenue Service is great.

"I don't have enough bandwidth to discuss. There is better things to do."

Lol!

You have provided us with too much evidence to the contrary.

...From a music point of view, this amplifier is very suitable for Jeff's hypothetical main speakers, Bench-Race 549 speakers, non-existent speakers and speakers he has never heard before. BR-549 can absorb one kilowatt of power, but its 80Hz+ response, high sensitivity and relatively reactive load will be very suitable for Luxman.

Decades ago, I had actually heard of such a thing, but Jeff said that I was a clown, so it didn’t matter. The terrible, terrible shame we will never know.

Relatively speaking, better.

It can be easily said that it sounds cleaner, but what is better is that 100% is a matter of preference. There is no number or science in the world that can force one person’s preference over another. I don’t know why people continue to work hard.

In the video, the linearity change is small, the noise is minimal and the maximum consistency with the original signal is considered "real".

In audio, distortion and non-linearity with an absurd degree are considered "color". Imagine if there are interesting "colors" on your TV. Probably a lot of noise and leaves are blue.

Again, as someone who understands speaker design and develops it myself, I realize that not every box will work in every situation.

But when it comes to electronics, if you don't want a straight wire with gain, you will get stuck at best, or become ignorant at worst.

No signature is required for everything between the signal and the speaker. If you disagree, I'm fine. Enjoy the distorted sound.

My rig laughed at you.

Learn to do it. By the way, your stereo is substandard. If noise and distortion are your thing, please own it, but please don’t show that everyone else needs to log in to your station wagon.

In addition, my BMW S1000RR sports bike is faster than your car. Overcome it.

Just like Jean Cowboy Storm likes to say: "Sorry, damn luck!"

...Many speakers

For example, when measuring at an output level of 90dB and a distance of 1m, the distortion of the 804D3 is rated to be <0.3% in the frequency range of 120Hz-20kHz.

At 1kHz, the amplifier achieves a 0.3% distortion point at the output of 8W to 8Ω or 4W to 4Ω.

Made in Japan

US retail price-$2795

USD 2795 = GBP 2160.04

UK retail price-£2,999

£2,999 = $ 3884.27

If anyone can explain this to me, I would be very grateful.

We live in a world full of changes. 30-50 years ago, we often lingered on exotic Luxman equipment. They knew that the performance was top-notch and they could last a lifetime, but the price was prohibitively high. Nowadays, Luxman's price is a small part of other similar high-end equipment, compared with that, this is a cheap price!

Just out of everyone’s interest, unless you are one of my favorite speaker or amp designers, I really don’t care what you think of me or what I think.

When I read a decent, well-thought-out review, I don’t post it at all. BS must solve this "sounds good to me" problem.

When I read some reviews about the 8-watt distortion generator, which is one of the cleanest amplifiers the reviewer has ever heard of, I'm sorry, someone had to call this guy on the carpet.

That is the definition of junk audio news. Is this the guy who likes to use Border Patrol DACs and DAC chips for more than 20 years (price is $2, priced at about $2,000)?

Luxman's solids are worthwhile and expensive. The world-class level remains to be seen. They don't seem to have made any new breakthroughs or conducted any research and development. That would mean they were just cruising.

There are absolute things in the audio world and the audio world.

The amplifier is "faulty".

If you don't like my conclusion, I won't care. As Shat said: "Get life!"

Lux is a lovely product with a lovely pedigree. It regained the best of its kind because it has become rare. Its appeal is obvious, and obviously, its sound is great. Actually know what it is and how it works, I hope it will not be less. I also know how to use it. As I said, use it *correctly*.

The review captured this. This is 550 Spyder. It is clearly not a Raptor F-150.

Therefore, you tell Mr. Micallef that he is deaf, which is nonsense, but there is nothing more nonsense than this, you then take the posture of victimized objective reporter.

Do I seem to care what you or other people think you post here?

It has been said that the answer is: "No, I don't care."

Still don’t you understand?

For the reviewer, I hope this should be his last review.

[Edit to delete personal attacks. ]

I can assure you that this is not Ken's latest comment.

For a broader view on this topic, I will say this-I mean it is a former PhD in physics who published original research results in peer-reviewed journals: conveying the emotion of music when judging the effectiveness of audio components, Science has no hegemony. Other views are valid. Your continued attempts to deny the legitimacy of other views are paranoid and antisocial.

In terms of its value, despite your claims, I won’t believe you don’t care what other posters think. I think you care.

Your valuable comments are welcome here. The usual way to provide this input is not.

Jim Austin, editor

Colloid

This is what I care about:

• Your publication is not overwhelmed by the swamp of recognized standard equipment ("Sounds great to me")

•Stereophile calls bricks bricks (you know what I mean)

• As one of the few publications that still require time and effort to actually measure the equipment, I hope it can maintain this state

*About my nature is weird, I am responding to people (especially a person) who are attracting me. Besides saying that others are wrong, did I say anything nasty or the opposite? If I am told that I am incorrect, I want to use facts and research to state my situation.

• Please do, indicate who I am going to follow who did not follow me first

• Honestly, Jim, you are right. I should not waste my bandwidth on people who think that microwatt amplifiers will generate a lot of noise and distortion to understand logic and science.

I will not release it soon. Are you a pseudonym for one of them? It seems suspicious here.

In any case, we must do better. Sorry, critics of your magazine’s news and people who buy it wholeheartedly are a bad thing in your eyes.

The next time one of your reviewers applauds a substandard product, I will sit down and laugh and your credibility will decline.

wish all the best,

Jeff

The person who seems to need to sustain life is called Jeff Henning.

You are presenting a crazy combination of narcissism and virtue signals.

"Get life."

:-D

The Jeff Alberston brought to you is more important than anything else.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=jeff+albertson

I had to think for a moment... "Oh, I wasted my life." At Anton on the spot!

The almighty objectivist is not interested in music and is also interested in meaningless ranking competition. He is characterized by familiar illogical assertions, assumptions, freedom, insults, and the kind of ignorant, waving, bench-like racket seen in this thread.

Whether the input is valued and welcomed depends on the magazine. However, the reason that is also determined by the magazine is the reason why the music can be perfectly reproduced, and this reason should not tolerate the familiar, predictable, and inappropriate dissatisfaction on the music.

I heard that the next "Objectivist" system for technology enthusiasts will be the first to sound like music, just like the next Crusade of Objectivists I meet, he will respect his peers more, and He obviously doesn't respect the music itself. That's very clear.

As you said, if only the civilization, humanity, art and soul in the audio are kept, as you said, anti-social, I really hope Stereophile can bear it.

You don’t even know what kind of sound a will make after touching your head a few feet?

At the end of the show, did you have anyone five years older than you?

Just want.

If someone wants to recreate a Scott 299B with proper input/output buffering to connect to 21st century audio [I can't play a CD without overload, there is no output buffering], but they will sell it for almost the same amount of money. I will not object.

I have a HH Scott LK-72, a member of my audio club is resurrected, it is cheap and cute! ! !

. . . But not that far. Luxman has half the power, and the Scotties do have an "echo" distortion function, with the extraordinary ability to push the surface noise of the music to the back of the music. It seems to address the qualities that make Luxman fascinating, while having a retro look and feel, which seems to be driving the development of Hi-End these days.

And Scott’s 0.45V line input sensitivity. If you want to be able to use most of the volume control range before the amplifier’s output is clipped, there should be an attenuator between the CD player’s output and Scott’s input.

In addition, Scott’s 20W maximum output indicates that if you want to avoid peak clipping of wide dynamic range program material, you should use relatively efficient speakers.

...Exceeding the power limit of the output stage is caused by the fact that the input signal of the high-level jack (auxiliary, tuner, etc.) is controlled by the buffer/sound control system before being sent to the volume. Many manufacturers at that time designed amplifiers in this way. For example, the high output of a CD player will overload the input circuit and cause distortion even at a small volume. The solution is to attenuate the output level of the CD player to no more than about volts. In more modern amplifiers without tone control, there is volume control first, then active circuitry. Usually, the signal goes directly from the volume control to the power amplifier stage. In this case, there is no chance for the input circuit to be overloaded, and only the amplifier line stage with the older output clipping is operating at a higher input impedance, so the voltage amplifier is more noisy. Placing the volume control after the production line stage allows them to lower the noise at that stage when adjusting the volume, but you will worry about the possibility of overload. Higher quality amplifiers use the 4-wire volume control used before and after the line stage, which eliminates overload problems and reduces line volume noise.

The problem is much deeper, and I'm sure there is an impedance problem. The bass and treble of the tape droop. Both front and back may require different (or at least some) cushioning.