Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Technical Questions hk 3480 modification: science or wishful hearing?

I am curious now as to what M80 brand speakers you are referring to. We have seen the floor standing Millenia M80's to computer speakers (cambridge soundworks). Gosh help us if you are comparing two units with computer speakers that only go down to 62 hz, putting only a quarter watt into each channel. How much volume does that actually give you?

RickSean

Back up a step and take a look at the site you're posting that last question on. Is it really that ambiguous? If you were on a BMW fansite and someone said, "I'm amazed at the performance my M3 gives me!" do you think someone would ask him if he was referring to a BMW M3 or this WWII-era vehicle?

Mo, although it's not a big deal, for example the HK 7300 which has amplifier sections similar to if not identical with the 3480, including a 110KHz bandwith spec, measured as 166KHz here . My mention of the bandwidth point wasn't because it was of any audible significance, but rather that the reviewer seemed to be using a misleading term, i.e., "improvement", when the measurement was simply better than a conservative spec number.

Dammtttt… Dropped my popcorn….

I sure do enjoy being indecisive and non-committal when these topics come up. They’re entertaining as hell when I couldn’t care less who the winner is….

I used Axiom M80s.

Let me get this this straight.. you are running the Axiom M80's (which say they need a minimum wattage of 10W) with 2.3 watts of power from the Sony Boombox? I would have to think that dynamics, bass frequencies and overall clarity would be greatly diminished.

Also, about the reference to the HK 7300; it is about a $1000 unit right now (was more expensive earlier when it was produced). I do not believe it is being made at this time and has not been made for about 2 yrs. It hasn't been on my dealer list for 2 yrs, nor is it on the HK website. This is a substantially more expensive receiver than my modified piece and I would likely take a guess does not sound as good even a stock unit of the HK 3485. The electronic components inside the HK units have changed in the last few years. For instance, the HK 3480 that was reviewed (which at the time was current) has been replaced by the HK 3485. The HK 3485 is clearer, is more dynamic, with more precise bass, and better location and "airy" highs. It has the same amount of wattage, but defintely seems to have better electronics.

Rick Sean

Trying to understand both sides of the arguments here.

Exactly which parts of the "better electronics" in these two specific models being compared would create the better sound you mention. I have a fundamental understanding of electronics but not as to how current variations relates to sound depth, soundstage, etc. If you can fill in the gaps to explain your argument, it would be appreciated.

I'll expect the debunking theories too follow but both are required for me to learn and hearing both sides make for a good discussion, if nothing else.

Andrew

That is really very interesting. I did talk this over with an associate of mine, who has been around audio for many years and who worked for my late boss, and his response was rather the same as mine. We both were perplexed at how a speaker that says its minimum wattage is 10W can be powered very well at all at a quarter of a watt. With that amount of wattage, you would only be listening to the tweeter, as the bass driver would not have enough wattage to hardly move, if move at all. The crossover's capacitors also require a certain amount of wattage to power up as well, and may also not be functioning very optimally. I would have to say, that at this low, barely functional wattage level, it would be near impossible to tell the difference between that denon receiver and the Sony, as the woofers would not be functioning hardly at all at a quarter of a watt. Not that I am a fan of Denon equipment, mind you. You would not be able to hear the difference in either harshness or richness or depth when comparing the units at that low wattage level when only the tweeters are functional. A more fair comparison, if you wanted to prove your point that expensive gear is not always the best in fidelity, would have been to compare a cheaper brand receiver (not a very low wattage boombox that can't drive your woofers) with that denon at equal output levels that drove your woofers of your speakers and the subwoofer coming from the receivers. You would then be able to judge at decent wattage how well the units were doing in terms of harshness, midrange, and bass frequency and then be able to make a very fair and interesting comparison between how the individual units sounded throughout the frequency range, not just at the upperend of the frequency range, which tells you nothing about the bass / midrange levels and their quality. I would suggest using a sub in this comparison, you could judge how clean and deep the units you were comparing went and how solid those frequencies were. I am not saying the Denon, would win out either. In fact, I have a suspicion you may find a receiver that was substantially cheaper that could very well beat it. I am not a fan of how Denon equipment sounds, especially the more recent Denon equipment. But I do not think that conducting a test where you are running less than a quarter watt into each speaker from a Sony boombox and a denon is a very fair test, when a person would only be hearing the tweeters. This of course brings us to a discussion about wattage amounts and more wattage vs less, damping factor etc. I personally have noticed a large amount of difference when comparing modified units that had less or a greater amount of wattage. The cone control and precision of movement is just far better. I do not think, though, that the technology was there for high wattage clean sounding units until recently.