System #124 (Prodigy)

MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum

Help Support MartinLogan Audio Owners Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
John,

That sounds good.

Maybe you can drop over here on a Sunday after you finish your Whittier activities, before we get together with the group.

I have only archived a few albums. I am still optimizing the vinyl play back. I want the best sound I can get, before I record them all to hard drive.

However, I belive the answer to you question will be that I will seldom spin a record once they have been trasfered.

Bruce
 
Thank you Bruce for coming by and showing us your DAC system...notice that I wrote "System" :) Where did you get those heat senses, the ones under the DAC that showed "Yellow" for cold and "Blue" for warm operation temp?
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the Anti

Bruce, thank you for inviting me over to see and hear your Martin Logan stereo system. Your anti-cables revealed the music very fast and detailed. I believe its the right way to go with near field listening. As you know I listen on my stereo about 9 feet away and my speaker cables, as you heard on your system, create a smooth sound stage. I wonder what anti-cables will sound like on a far stage set-up? Could it be that a far field set-up needs more of a sound stage? By the way, let me know when you get some new bass speaker cables. What would happen if you went one to two gauges lower (wider) with the copper wire? Another thought: since one of your stereo amps is more modified than the other, what would happen if you set up one amp to the bass out put of each speaker and the other amp for the panels? That way your bass and panels could "equal-out". I hope you enjoyed the music I bought over as I enjoyed some of your music. Thanks again, JD3
 
Last edited:
Bass and room resonance

John,

Sorry it took so long to reply. Between family matters, the office and other businesses I have not been able to give our common hobby the attention it deserves.

I did mention, in our private email, that I would respond to this post in the forum.

So…..

Yes, I did enjoy the music you brought. You certainly have eclectic tastes.

After you left, I used Hagarty and the contact spray on both ends of the 12 gauge romex that I had jury rigged to the woofers. It audibly tightened the bass.

All this extra bass got me thinking. I pulled out my old Radio Shack SPL meter and found correction factors on the web. I ran several tests using the Stereophile CD-2, 1/3 octave test tones.

The results were ear, I mean eye opening. I found that running the system full range with one amp and the autofomers, while taming nastiest in the mids and high frequencies also over damped the woofers. I had been listening to a very bass deficient system, before vertically bi-amping.

Although there are major portions of the audio spectrum that are flat within + or - 3 db, there are some other real problems. There is a huge mountain (not a peak about 14 db) centered at 630 Hz. It is back down to the reference level at 400 and 1,000. There is a big dip of about -12 db at 1,600 Hz.

The bass is flat at 200 to 250, but at 160 it drops about 12 db in output and stays flat down to 50 where it takes another abrupt drop to – 23 db and stays there on out toward 20 Hz. This is with the single amp driving the entire crossover. Biamped that 1st drop to 160 is only is only – 6db and is flat to 50 where it drops again as it did before.

So, I think that the bottom line on all of this is that I need to find a way to tame the resonance peak at 630 and add a real subwoofer or two.

To your question about the amps. One of the major advantages of biamping is having no cross talk in the power supply. Biamping with a stereo amp on the stats and a stereo amp on the woofers does away with that power supply advantage. Additionally, the woofer sections are drawing a lot more power than the stats. So vertically biamping really allows more power supply for each woofer than would be available by "horizontally" biamping.

Although the amps were modified at two different times by the same person, they are more a like than they are different.

I will report back with my next step.

Anyone who wishes to jump in on this thread, please do.

Bruce
 
Last edited:
Bruce, WOW, I would like to see that Radio Shack meter...or maybe I should get one. How much are they? I had Bill, a audio salesman friend, test my 5.1 system with a meter but never tested my stereo.

You saw my bi-aming with mono amps on my system. What would you term "vertically" bi-amping from mono blocks? In a way I am just running off of 2 pairs of outputs: one for the panels and the other for the woofers. You got me thinking about "vertically" versus 'horizontally" terminology, but the terms are mainly used for stereo amps. I was thinking of the modications on your one amp and the 4 ohm coil to the panels and was wondering if "vertically" bi-amping them would cause any unbalance. Then again your right, the bass would lose if powered from one stereo amp. In other words does the 4 ohm coil create any resistance?

I always had "eclectic tastes" and was normally 3 to 4 year ahead of the current "pop" music, but after the 1980's something changed: "pop" music became too commerical for my tastes. As you heard from my music sections I tend towards "world" or "folk" music these days. I need to get back to my jazz.

If we ever do this again, what type of music do you want to hear because you transfer CD's into your hard-drive?

Thanks again for the music evening.
 
Last edited:
Bruce, WOW, I would like to see that Radio Shack meter...or maybe I should get one. How much are they?
The Radio Shack SPL meter has become de facto standard equipment for anyone installing HT/Audio gear. I've had mine for years. I think they run $40 to $50. Highly recommended.

Update: Just checked RadioShack.com on the net, and they're listed at $49.99. Just search for "SPL Meter".
 
Last edited:
Bruce, WOW, I would like to see that Radio Shack meter...or maybe I should get one......

You saw my bi-aming with mono amps on my system. What would you term "vertically" bi-amping from mono blocks? In a way I am just running off of 2 pairs of outputs: ....

If we ever do this again, what type of music do you want to hear

Thanks again for the music evening.


John,

I think, from your comment above, you still have some confusion about bi-amping. Let me take a step back here. (this has turned out to be a long post for those who do not care to read on)

In the golden days of audio some audiophiles would have tri-amped systems. Three way systems were common to optimize the driver size to the frequency response. In order to accomplish this “tri-amped” system one would need an active electronic three way crossover (which was inserted between the preamp and the amps, there were no crossovers at the speaker), three STEREO amps and enough interconnects and speaker wire.

Usually, a rather small (1 to 30 watts) tube amp was used for the tweeters (because tubes were certainly sweeter back then and one does not need much power for the tweeters in a three-way speaker). From the crossover a set of speakers wires would come from the left channel of the “tweeter” stereo amp to the tweeter on the left and a set of speaker wires would come from the right channel of the amp to the right tweeter. These wires would only be carrying the high frequency that the electronic three-way crossover had split off from the full range signal.

In the mid range a somewhat larger stereo tube amp was usually used. For the woofers a much larger solid state (transistors were used because they could be built to produce a lot more “power” and have a greater damping factor for woofer control) amp did the job. Sometimes they would use solid state mono blocks on the woofers. And very occasionally all amps would be mono blocks.

Now to accomplish the above with stereo amps one needs THREE stereo amps. To accomplish the above with all mono blocks one needs SIX amps, one for each driver.

To simplify things, lets now talk about a two-way system (which our ML just happen to be). Most speakers use passive crossovers. And most just have one pair of binding post to connect the speaker wire to. The original Aerius had a single pair of binding post. I believe with the Aerius i (or some such nomenclature) they went to two sets of binding post, so one could bi-wire. Now to bi-wire one much physically separate (electrically disconnect) the crossover section to the tweeter/mid-range (stats in our case) and the woofer section. That is why your Odyssey and my Prodigy come with jumpers for those who do not wish to bi-wire. They need to physically reconnect the two crossover sections.

The fact that there are two sets of binding post on the back of our MLs does not make each speaker into two full range speakers. We still have just one full range speaker on each side. Without the jumper, connecting up to one set of binding post would just give you the stats or the woofers.

“Vertically” bi-amping or “horizontally” bi-amping are terms that would be applied to STEREO amps ONLY. Vertically bi-amping requires two identical amps. Horizontally bi-amping does not. If one had bi-amped a two-way system with mono blocks one would need FOUR mono blocks. Each mono block would of course have its own power supply. To bi-amp vertically one would use a stereo amp. One channel would be used for the tweeter/mid and the other for the woofer. There would be one power supply shared by both channels (unless the stereo amp was dual mono construction with two power supplies, which is not very common in stereo amps so we won’t consider that case). So the term “vertically” bi-amped specifically applies to a stereo amp. This could be accomplished actively, with an external electronic crossover that would be inserted between the preamp and the stereo amp, or it could be accomplish passively, as I do, allowing the full range signal to go through each channel of the amp and having the passive crossover within the speaker to either roll off the highs or filter out the bass.

Now some companies that build stereo amps also build mono blocks in the same chassis. Often times they take the stereo lay out and make a few changes to the circuit, but use the same power supply and output devices. This essentially doubles that power supply for each side(because you now have two chastises), decouples any interaction between the left and right channel power supplies and usually doubles the output devices, resulting in two to four times the power from the mono block that one would have had available from one channel of their stereo amp.

These mono blocks do not have two RCA or balance inputs, for left and right, as a stereo amp would. But sometimes they have two sets of binding posts. Since their stereo model had two sets of binding post they keep the same physical layout. But these binding post are not from TWO separate amps, remember this IS a mono block. The two sets of binding post are connected in parallel. The two sets are there just to make it easy to bi-wire. It is easier to connect two sets of wires to two sets of post than it is to one set of posts.

John, you have MONO blocks with two sets of binding posts. Although you could connect one amp to tweeters on both sides and the other to the woofers on both sided, because each amp has a SINGLE input you would be sending one channel to both sides. In other words, you left channel could be coming out your woofers and your right channel could be coming out your stats.

Your system is optimally wired as it is. I hope this clears this up for you.

Oh, one more thing. Some stereo amps have a switch to switch them into a mono block. This is about the only time there would be more than one set of inputs on a mono block. The amp would be labeled or the instruction manual would indicate which of the two stereo inputs would be used for mono operation.

Looking forward to us getting together again.

Bruce
 
Meter

I forgot to mention that I have had this RS meter for decades. It is slightly different than the currently produced meter.

The response sensitivity rolls off at both frequency ends, but the corrections for this are well estabished and there are several internet sources for the correction tables.
 
Last edited:
Bruce, thank you for the amp - cross over - connection history, but this is what I was getting at; I can't use the term "vertically bi-amping" on the way I set up my mono blocks to the separated panel and bass cross-overs. I lack a term for it. I know that I have one input with 2 outputs per mono block and that I could/would never run one amp to either both bass or both panels. I am not confused at all. :duh: I was just trying to clean up the terms. And yes, my Aragon Palladium's are modified Aragon 8008BB's in the same chassis. Your discription of what most audio companies do is perfect. I wish I could write better, I seem to be misunderstood many times in this forum. :think: I really like the 'Edit" button. If I ever "seem" to not make sense just wait a few days and the "thread" will change for the better
 
Last edited:
Bruce, I guess all the confussion in the word "Bi-wire" is that at our audio club most are running "Bi-wire" from a stereo amp to a Martin Logan speaker, but normal speaker cables on either a 3 channel or 5 channel amp for a 5.1 system (No one has a 7.1). The "bi-wire" starts out as a normal speaker cable from a stereo amp output then spilts into 2 sections before it is connected to the panel and woofer inputs on the Martin Logan speaker. Yet my stereo is running with mono block amps, so if I write 'bi-wire" most people are going to think I am using the spilt type of "bi-wire" and if one looks from the back of my mono block amps the speaker cable set-up looks like a “Vertical bi-amping" set up. Therefore I was using stereo amp langauge for a mono block amp set up which you have givien me a new term: "bi-wired system with mono block amps".

See I wrote before that I would finally make sence :haha1:
 
Last edited:
Bi-wire? Don't forget your subs!

John,

When you mention that you are bi-wired from mono block amps, you forget to add that you also have stereo powered subs. And rather impressive subs at that.

Well, I got around to subs too. My Behringer DSP1024P (12 band parametric equilizer) should be here tomorrow. It is slatted to be used just with the subs.

Monday or Tuesday a PAIR of NOS (new old stock, since the "i" is current production) Depths will be here too!

Boy am I excited!

I think you are in for a treat the next time you show up at my place.

Bruce
 
Bruce, the NHT Sub Two's are mono subs, each has a Sunfire 500 watt amp each but the controller creates the stereo signal.

I re-read your HZ drop offs where the drop off starts at 160 HZ, thats around some Martin Logan cross overs. What is the cross over on a Prodigy?

Are you going to take out certain HZ from the Martin Logan bass and then run the balanace to the subs, or like my system where the Martin Logans and subs are totally separated?
 
Prodigy - Odyssey

John,

The ML lit. indicates that your Odyssey is more like the Prodigy than not. Both are 5' 7" with 46" tall stats. The Prodigy is 3.5" wider 1db more efficient and has two 10" woofers instead of an 8" and a 10". Both speakers are listed as crossing over at 250 Hz.

I realize that each sub "box" that you have is mono. I referred to them as stereo because many people only have one sub in which they sum the output of the L+R channels, while you have a seperate sub for each channel, as I will by Tuesday.

I plan to run the subs seperate, as you do. However, I will probably do some experimenting to see what gives me the best result.

Have a good weekend.

Bruce
 
Bruce, have you compared the Depth with the Descent? Since you have the Prodigy with two 10 inch woofers, the Depth's three 8 inch woofers might give the tightest bass. BTW, where are you going to fit them in that room? ;)

When I get back from vacation in Ukraine, maybe we can bring one pair of subs to the other's stereo and compare.
 
Depths

John,

I have only listened to the Descent i. I spent some time talking with several ML dealers and others. Read a lot of reviews and sub related websites, then jumped on these two new, older Depths and a Behringer DSP1124P.

It was either two Depths or a Single Descent i. Given my smallish room and the other factors I can manipulate, the Depths, in stereo, with additional EQ for a little over 2k compared to the Descent i at just under 3k with a discount, seemed a more cost effective way to go.

If you think I will have trouble getting my subs into my room, just imagine my placing a couple of Descents in there. Current plan is to place them just external to the Prodigy, at the mid walls.

Even though they are close in weight, since the Depths are physically samer than you Sub2s, it will probably be easier to bring my subs to you.

Talk to you after you get back.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top