or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Audio theory, Setup and Chat › Amplifiers affecting speaker frequency response
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Amplifiers affecting speaker frequency response - Page 9

post #241 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Very poor analogy. Dio didn't use a pejorative term. He simply asked if by 'library' you meant your electronics dealer website. He made no qualitative comment. So if you want to use this analogy, the question you should ask me is "do I still have [my] M&K S150 speakers?". And the answer is a simple "yes". No need to link to a M&K website etc.

The reason I have not changed the Audyssey FAQ is that I attach less than zero importance to the views of anyone with an obvious agenda, especially if that agenda involves the selling of overpriced audio equipment.
Thanks Keith. So it is pretty clear you do attach negative connotation to someone's explanation of science if they are a dealer of equipment. Now you see why I was not blind to that shot that Dio took. He is used your tactic just the same to attempt to lower the value of science presented. To use your analogy of M&K he should have said, "Amir, will it be in the library section of Madrona Digital?" Or simply saying nothing as he knows that is where I put them. Those would have been factual like "do you still have the M&K speakers." A factual statement without trying to prejudice the reader.

Now let's address your bias angle. The paper I linked to talks about the misconception in your FAQ that all reflections are bad and that they must be cured by building a padded cell in your listening room. And that the measurements we take that we think shows improvements there are reflection of what we hear. Both are demonstrated in the article to be wrong. Not as a matter of opinion, but with real data and authoritative references:

References
"Sound Reproduction: The Acoustics and Psychoacoustics of Loudspeakers and Rooms," Dr. Floyd Toole, 2008 [book]
“The Detection of Reflections in Typical Rooms,” Olive, Sean E.; Toole, Floyd E., AES Convention: 85 (November 1988)
“A Computer Model of Binaural Localization for Stereo-Imaging Measurement,” Macpherson, Ewan A., AES Convention: 87 (October 1989)
“Measuring Audible Effects of Time Delays in Listening Rooms,” Clark, David, AES Convention: 74 (October 1983)


So an easy solution would be to ignore the entire article and read the references provided. Of course you didn't bother. You don't have access to those articles and don't believe it is worth spending the price one dinner to buy them.

The whole notion that audiophiles are wrong because they don't look at research and science is practice by you. No good example is shown to actually be interested in the real science.

Finally, the article talks about how you do NOT need to buy all of these absorbers. In that sense, it works 100% against the motivation of anyone selling products such as acoustics. My company can make money selling these as we are dealers for a number of brands. But in the article I talk you out of them. In contrast, you sing the praises of GIK even though they are in the business of selling more of this stuff. Therefore one having a commercial interest is not an issue for in one area, but it is in the other. The difference? I show your audio knowledge to not be right. They don't!
Edited by amirm - 11/16/13 at 2:11pm
post #242 of 362
I should know better than to step into a pissing contest by now, it just gets everyone wet and smelly...
post #243 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

I did that once in another forum and then folks kept asking the question
Probably because you didn't give a straight answer.
Quote:
I mean this:
It shows an address at the upper right corner. I looked at that address on Google Map and it shows a store. Is that the store that you posted the display pictures of on this forum?
post #244 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun B View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post

Then your best bet is to do some tests of your own.

I would, if I knew how. I don't know how.

Here are some how-to-do-it videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jt7GyFW4hOI


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTk9VxV6kjg
post #245 of 362
Thread Starter 

Thank you for the links. I watched half of the first video but I have a question : how would this help me if I'm trying to test two amplifiers?

 

I have a Denon X1000 in the bedroom. And a Krell stereo amp in the main listening room. How would this software help me? What steps must I take?

post #246 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun B View Post

Thank you for the links. I watched half of the first video but I have a question : how would this help me if I'm trying to test two amplifiers?

I have a Denon X1000 in the bedroom. And a Krell stereo amp in the main listening room. How would this software help me? What steps must I take?

IME, the sad truth is that doing direct ABX tests on power amps is probably beyond the capabilities of 99% of all audiophiles, not to mention the vast majority of audio journalists.

The answer to your question is that tests of the kind you desire requires equipment like this:







Of which about 60 sets were built in the late 1980s

This is a picture of one being used:



or this product of which about 300 were built by QSC in the late 1990s.



Or roll your own.
post #247 of 362
Thread Starter 

So you are saying that unless I have an ABX comparator of which limited quantities were sold then I have no way of doing the test. Then why do people on the forum insist I should do my own testing if the situation is as dire as you make it out to be?

 

Then to make matters worse, I need to find rare hardware in order to do the test. If only 60 units were sold, several decades ago, the chances of me finding a unit, one that is working, is probably nil. It makes me wonder how many other members on this forum have actually done their own testing without an ABX comparator.


So what am I to do? Find an ABX comparator at a pawn shop? Assuming I find one .. somewhere, is it straight forward to use? You don't seem to be giving me much confidence in doing these tests.


Edited by Shaun B - 11/17/13 at 3:20am
post #248 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

Very poor analogy. Dio didn't use a pejorative term. He simply asked if by 'library' you meant your electronics dealer website. He made no qualitative comment. So if you want to use this analogy, the question you should ask me is "do I still have [my] M&K S150 speakers?". And the answer is a simple "yes". No need to link to a M&K website etc.

The reason I have not changed the Audyssey FAQ is that I attach less than zero importance to the views of anyone with an obvious agenda, especially if that agenda involves the selling of overpriced audio equipment.
Thanks Keith. So it is pretty clear you do attach negative connotation to someone's explanation of science if they are a dealer of equipment. Now you see why I was not blind to that shot that Dio took. He is used your tactic just the same to attempt to lower the value of science presented. To use your analogy of M&K he should have said, "Amir, will it be in the library section of Madrona Digital?" Or simply saying nothing as he knows that is where I put them. Those would have been factual like "do you still have the M&K speakers." A factual statement without trying to prejudice the reader.

Now let's address your bias angle. The paper I linked to talks about the misconception in your FAQ that all reflections are bad and that they must be cured by building a padded cell in your listening room. And that the measurements we take that we think shows improvements there are reflection of what we hear. Both are demonstrated in the article to be wrong. Not as a matter of opinion, but with real data and authoritative references:

References
"Sound Reproduction: The Acoustics and Psychoacoustics of Loudspeakers and Rooms," Dr. Floyd Toole, 2008 [book]
“The Detection of Reflections in Typical Rooms,” Olive, Sean E.; Toole, Floyd E., AES Convention: 85 (November 1988)
“A Computer Model of Binaural Localization for Stereo-Imaging Measurement,” Macpherson, Ewan A., AES Convention: 87 (October 1989)
“Measuring Audible Effects of Time Delays in Listening Rooms,” Clark, David, AES Convention: 74 (October 1983)


So an easy solution would be to ignore the entire article and read the references provided. Of course you didn't bother. You don't have access to those articles and don't believe it is worth spending the price one dinner to buy them.

The whole notion that audiophiles are wrong because they don't look at research and science is practice by you. No good example is shown to actually be interested in the real science.

Finally, the article talks about how you do NOT need to buy all of these absorbers. In that sense, it works 100% against the motivation of anyone selling products such as acoustics. My company can make money selling these as we are dealers for a number of brands. But in the article I talk you out of them. In contrast, you sing the praises of GIK even though they are in the business of selling more of this stuff. Therefore one having a commercial interest is not an issue for in one area, but it is in the other. The difference? I show your audio knowledge to not be right. They don't!

 

I'm not interested in your essays, Amir. I will just say one thing: if you had read the Audyssey FAQ instead of cherry-picking bits that suit your agenda, you would see that  "the misconception in your FAQ that all reflections are bad and that they must be cured by building a padded cell in your listening room" is a figment of your imagination.  The FAQ has been online for a long time, in the busiest and longest thread on AVS, where many industry professionals sometimes hang out so I am sure that if any of its content was incorrect, I would have been advised by now. Also, if you bothered to read the FAQ you will see many amendments made by me, based on information from those with more knowledge than I have, fully credited to source, so your earlier assertion that I will not amend the FAQ if needed is also wrong. It is a futile and, frankly, pathetic attempt by you to try to discredit me and you have tried it, unsuccessfully, before. As usual in your posts, you duck and dive and change the context and conflate this with that - for what reasons only you know - and your arguments in connection with reflections and which are good and which are not is another attempt. You have shown that you do not understand what movie Reference Level is and had to be picked up on that, and you have shown that you do not understand the difference between a recording space and a listening space, and yet you attempt to present yourself here as an expert in all matters audio. Do not deny the claims in the previous sentence because I have the quotes. 

 

I will admit to one very big mistake on my part for which I am grateful to you for bringing to my attention: that it was a serious error to start seeing your posts again after so many months of not seeing them, This is an error that I will rectify forthwith.

post #249 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonH50 View Post

I should know better than to step into a pissing contest by now, it just gets everyone wet and smelly...

 

:)

 

Yes, and as usual when certain people appear, the thread is derailed.  I can assure you, however, that I have said my last word on the subject.

post #250 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun B View Post
 

So you are saying that unless I have an ABX comparator of which limited quantities were sold then I have no way of doing the test. Then why do people on the forum insist I should do my own testing if the situation is as dire as you make it out to be?

 

 

I meant you should attend some ABX tests. Your area probably has some relevant hobby (or pro) groups who conduct these things from time to time. Get in touch and ask them if they have any scheduled. It will be a huge eye-opener for you and it has the potential to save you thousands of $$$ as well as giving you better results.

post #251 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun B View Post

So you are saying that unless I have an ABX comparator of which limited quantities were sold then I have no way of doing the test. Then why do people on the forum insist I should do my own testing if the situation is as dire as you make it out to be?

Then to make matters worse, I need to find rare hardware in order to do the test. If only 60 units were sold, several decades ago, the chances of me finding a unit, one that is working, is probably nil. It makes me wonder how many other members on this forum have actually done their own testing without an ABX comparator.


So what am I to do? Find an ABX comparator at a pawn shop? Assuming I find one .. somewhere, is it straight forward to use? You don't seem to be giving me much confidence in doing these tests.

There are other ways to do it. Arny's way is the best but you can get exactly the same results with a single blind test and manual switching if you have some other people to help you. We set up a room with a curtain with everything except the speakers behind the curtain. We had the computer generate a random list of A's and b's. Then we set up two identical preamps and level matched the two amps. Switching was done manually by one person behind the curtain following the random list and another person scored the answers. The switching took about two seconds. In order to prevent tipping off the listener the person switching had to go through all the same motions even if the random list called for iterations in a row with the same amp. The results we got with this inferior method were exactly the same as you would get with an ABX test. All of the solid state amps were indistinguishable from one another. Most of the tube amps did have characteristic sonics. One of our test amps was a Krell, by the way. I said it was fussy and time consuming. I wasn't kidding. This method is subject to criticism but it will convince you just as it did me and 9 other members of an audiophile club.
post #252 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun B View Post

So you are saying that unless I have an ABX comparator of which limited quantities were sold then I have no way of doing the test.

You said you wanted to do a certain flavor of "the test", and I told you that you may not have the skills and tools to do flavor of test easily.

There are other forms of "the test" which are a slam dunk, but I'm getting the feeling that they don't rock your cradle.

Its the classic situation that you've probably dealt with more effectively many times before. You can't do the thing you want to do most, but you can do something that is representative and helpful. So you do something that is representative and helpful, but not your fondest dream.
Quote:
Then why do people on the forum insist I should do my own testing if the situation is as dire as you make it out to be?

It is not dire, its just more than what you can easily do on your first date. You have options, but you already seem to be well into denying the reality of the one you can easily do.
Quote:
Then to make matters worse, I need to find rare hardware in order to do the test. If only 60 units were sold, several decades ago, the chances of me finding a unit, one that is working, is probably nil. It makes me wonder how many other members on this forum have actually done their own testing without an ABX comparator.

See, you can't even get the story straight! My post said that there are about 360 of these devices, specifically 60 of one flavor and 300 of another. Why can't you bring yourself to admit the true facts?
Quote:
So what am I to do?

Do what you can do easily and step off from there. Just like the rest of life in the real world.
Edited by arnyk - 11/17/13 at 5:19am
post #253 of 362
Thread Starter 
Quote:

There are other forms of "the test" which are a slam dunk, but I'm getting the feeling that they don't rock your cradle.

Its the classic situation that you've probably dealt with more effectively many times before. You can't do the thing you want to do most, but you can do something that is representative and helpful. So you do something that is representative and helpful, but not your fondest dream.

What other forms of "the test" are a slam dunk?

 

Quote:
It is not dire, its just more than what you can easily do on your first date. You have options, but you already seem to be well into denying the reality of the one you can easily do.


Well then please tell me what other options do I have, instead of just giving me vague answers. What have I denied???

Quote:
See, you can't even get the story straight! My post said that there are about 360 of these devices, specifically 60 of one flavor and 300 of another. Why can't you bring yourself to admit the true facts?

 

Yes, decades ago! The facts are : it's going to be difficult to impossible to find a unit in this age.

 

Quote:
Do what you can do easily and step off from there. Just like the rest of life in the real world.

 

More cryptic replies. If I want to learn more about this you don't seem willing or able to explain it to me properly.

post #254 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by amirm View Post

So it is pretty clear you do attach negative connotation to someone's explanation of science if they are a dealer of equipment.

You know Amir, if it wasn't for your posts' constant self-serving bending and mangling of the truth, more people might like them.

What Keith really said was:

"The reason I have not changed the Audyssey FAQ is that I attach less than zero importance to the views of anyone with an obvious agenda, especially if that agenda involves the selling of overpriced audio equipment."

So if we try to perpetuate the falsehood that ",,, I attach less than zero importance to the views of anyone with an obvious agenda, especially if that agenda involves the selling of overpriced audio equipment." is the same as "...someone's explanation of science if they are a dealer of equipment." then we can agree with you, Amir.

I like to agree with people, but I'm not so strong about me executing that obvious misrepresentation thing..
post #255 of 362
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post
 

 

I meant you should attend some ABX tests. Your area probably has some relevant hobby (or pro) groups who conduct these things from time to time. Get in touch and ask them if they have any scheduled. It will be a huge eye-opener for you and it has the potential to save you thousands of $$$ as well as giving you better results.


There is no "ABX club" near me. I've never even heard of such a thing.

post #256 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun B View Post

Quote:
There are other forms of "the test" which are a slam dunk, but I'm getting the feeling that they don't rock your cradle.
Its the classic situation that you've probably dealt with more effectively many times before. You can't do the thing you want to do most, but you can do something that is representative and helpful. So you do something that is representative and helpful, but not your fondest dream.
What other forms of "the test" are a slam dunk?

http://www.avsforum.com/t/1498174/amplifiers-affecting-speaker-frequency-response/210#post_23954801

and the demonstration in the video that you were watching, and somehow couldn't finish. The next logical steps are to finish the video and re-enact it for yourself.

The main lesson of ABX is not that all good amps and DACs are difficult or impossible to tell apart in a well-run (merely fair and unbiased) listening test. This is true, but it is just a side show to the main event.

The main lesson of ABX is that the sighed casual listening tests that so many people's perception of audio are based on to this day, are totally misleading. As soon as audio developers got over that in the 1980s, the real progress began.
post #257 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun B View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbarnes701 View Post

 

I meant you should attend some ABX tests. Your area probably has some relevant hobby (or pro) groups who conduct these things from time to time. Get in touch and ask them if they have any scheduled. It will be a huge eye-opener for you and it has the potential to save you thousands of $$$ as well as giving you better results.


There is no "ABX club" near me. I've never even heard of such a thing.

I think you are right. Besides SMWTMS here in SE Michigan, the only fraternal organizations who have done much with ABX that I know of are the Boston Audio Society and the Audio Engineering Society. DBTs are heavily used by developers doing SOTA development, but those aren't clubs and what they do is proprietary for the most part.

I would love to do ABX demos at audio shows, but for the organizers of audio shows to invite someone to do ABX (they would have to give me space and time but I would consider paying my own expenses) would be like inviting Greenpeace to the opening of a new nuclear reactor. ;-)

Most ABX demos have been done at universities and AES section meetings.
post #258 of 362
Thread Starter 

Edit

post #259 of 362
Thread Starter 
Quote:
and the demonstration in the video that you were watching, and somehow couldn't finish. The next logical steps are to finish the video and re-enact it for yourself.

 

  But you said :

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnyk View Post


IME, the sad truth is that doing direct ABX tests on power amps is probably beyond the capabilities of 99% of all audiophiles, not to mention the vast majority of audio journalists.

 

Using sound files on a PC isn't going to help me, is it? I want to compare amplifiers.

post #260 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun B View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

IME, the sad truth is that doing direct ABX tests on power amps is probably beyond the capabilities of 99% of all audiophiles, not to mention the vast majority of audio journalists.

Using sound files on a PC isn't going to help me, is it? I want to compare amplifiers.

Your problem is that in the face of numerous helpful alternatives, you want the one that is effectively solid gold and crusted with diamonds. When you said Krell amp, the message came through loud and clear.

I hope you never become seriously ill because the meds and treatments that they give you are going to be far less than what you can dream of. ;-)
post #261 of 362
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post


Your problem is that in the face of numerous helpful alternatives, you want the one that is effectively solid gold and crusted with diamonds. When you said Krell amp, the message came through loud and clear.

I hope you never become seriously ill because the meds and treatments that they give you are going to be far less than what you can dream of. ;-)


And how am I supposed to use software to compare power amplifiers? Are you against Krell amps, does it put you off? These helpful replies you mention seem awfully cryptic to me for the most part. You also made it very clear that I need an ABX comparator to compare amplifiers.

 

Did you not say that?

 

So what am I to do without an ABX box? How does the video you linked me to help me compare AMPLIFIERS? That's all I want to know.

post #262 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnarus View Post



The makers of high-end (read: high-priced) amps would like you to believe that there's something the spec sheets aren't telling you, and that their 50 watts is somehow more powerful than some Japanese receiver's 50 watts. That's hooey.

Actually, in a lot of case their 50 watt is more powerful...because it's not really 50 watts. More than likely a sandbagged rating.
post #263 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun B View Post

What other forms of "the test" are a slam dunk?


Post #251 describes the one we used. Did you read it?
post #264 of 362
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Post #251 describes the one we used. Did you read it?

I did read it, but I can't rely on other people to help switch. I'm a single guy in a rented apartment at the moment. The idea was to be able to do the testing myself. It appears I can't do what I want done without the necessarily hardware.

post #265 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun B View Post

I did read it, but I can't rely on other people to help switch. I'm a single guy in a rented apartment at the moment. The idea was to be able to do the testing myself. It appears I can't do what I want done without the necessarily hardware.

Then simply ignore what we say and go on about your business. I told you I didn't recommend you get involved in bias controlled testing. It is a serious hassle. Crank up the Krell and enjoy some music.
post #266 of 362
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMW View Post


Then simply ignore what we say and go on about your business. I told you I didn't recommend you get involved in bias controlled testing. It is a serious hassle. Crank up the Krell and enjoy some music.


The thing is, I really want to learn. If I can save money in future don't you think I would want to? It just appears that the method and the conditions for testing amplifiers against each other makes it very inaccessible for many people to do properly.

 

If I could get my hands on an ABX comparator box then I would certainly be one big step closer. I just need to scour the internet and see if I can find someone who can sell one. Or get someone to make one for me. I don't mind paying someone to build me a comparator.

post #267 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaun B View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

Your problem is that in the face of numerous helpful alternatives, you want the one that is effectively solid gold and crusted with diamonds. When you said Krell amp, the message came through loud and clear.


I hope you never become seriously ill because the meds and treatments that they give you are going to be far less than what you can dream of. ;-)


And how am I supposed to use software to compare power amplifiers? Are you against Krell amps, does it put you off? These helpful replies you mention seem awfully cryptic to me for the most part. You also made it very clear that I need an ABX comparator to compare amplifiers.

Did you not say that?

What I said was is that if you wanted to compare power amps in real time, this is the equipment you need to do it and that the equipment is rare and hard to use.

I keep pointing you at file-based ABX, but you keep running the exact other way.

I'm hoping that you have gathered that I think that doing power amp tests in real time is not a good starting place for exactly the reasons that you have given.

I see nobody who told you that you have to compare those two power amps or forget ABX.
post #268 of 362
Thread Starter 
Quote:
I keep pointing you at file-based ABX, but you keep running the exact other way.

You gave me the impression that the only way to ABX properly is to use an ABX comparator box. You gave me no indication that using file based ABX for comparing amplifiers would be effective or even relevant.

 

I'll watch that video you linked in full.

post #269 of 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

The easiest way to do ABX testing is to use prefabricated files that are made using equipment of the kind you wish to test. The freeware music player FOOBAR2000 has an ABX plug in to handle the mechanics of the testing. Some files that you may be interested in comparing can be found http://ethanwiner.com/aes/ . Try some of the files named "Soundblaster Generations" It is essentally DAC tests.
What does any of this have to do with testing amplifiers? I have watched Ethan/JJ's video in the past. It is worth watching but it is off-topic as far as teaching someone how to do tests on their own. And further, to test amplifiers you need to have controls that bring out differences. There are no files there that provide this.

And why would a software player with ABX have any usefulness in testing two pieces of hardware? He is not trying to find the difference between two source files or DACs as you mention. He wants to test the effect of bi-amping/amplifier differences.

There has been all these cries about him doing this test. Which one of you has done a bi-amping test and can provide your script and results? Please be specific so that a) we can follow and b) see if you did it correctly.

I think where we are is this:

1. People are told to go and read AES papers. But the very same people don't read AES papers. instead, they rely on second hand summaries put forward by others.

2. People are told to go and run ABX tests on hardware. I am glad you now admitted how challenging it is. Why were those challenges not explained day one so that we would not waste so many posts hammering the poor guy to go and do it? It is clear that folks have not done the such formal tests to have made the suggestions that the poster can go and run it. Any such test has to have millisecond switchover time. You can't do that with a person moving wires between amplifier configurations. Hardware based comparators need to be tested and verified to have more transparency than the amps being switched and that the don't give away clues that can be used by the listener such as relay sounds, switching noise, etc.

If anyone disputes these things, I like to ask them to post an actual ABX test protocol and test that they have participated in. Please be specific so that we can see if you knew how to do it right and if so, for others to learn how to do it. If I am right and no such test description is forthcoming, then let's assume we are done lecturing others on going and running these tests and reading research papers neither one of which seems to be practiced by vocal members on this point.
post #270 of 362
Quote:
"2. People are told to go and run ABX tests on hardware. I am glad you now admitted how challenging it is. Why were those challenges not explained day one so that we would not waste so many posts hammering the poor guy to go and do it? It is clear that folks have not done the such formal tests to have made the suggestions that the poster can go and run it. Any such test has to have millisecond switchover time. You can't do that with a person moving wires between amplifier configurations. Hardware based comparators need to be tested and verified to have more transparency than the amps being switched and that the don't give away clues that can be used by the listener such as relay sounds, switching noise, etc."

That's a matter of opinion and I'll bet your opinion is not based on personal experience. It is perfectly possible to do a test with a 2 second delay and get the same results as you get with a millisecond delay. Exactly the same. I have never read an AES paper and have never suggested that someone else read one. But I have done the tests so it is not possible for you to move me from my position. I know better. My knowledge was gained the hard way. Period. The same is true of Arny. Please go write another article about jitter or some other inaudible phenomenon. You will get a more tractable audience there.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Audio theory, Setup and Chat
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Audio theory, Setup and Chat › Amplifiers affecting speaker frequency response