Yamaha NS1000M
- Thread starter cooky1257
- Start date
They increase or decrease the bass depending on which way round they are.
Rug Doc
pfm Member
Yeah right. lol
Its true :-D
The angle of the centre section effects how the bass is reflected into the room . Think of the angled centre section as a mirror and it makes sense.
dan m
pfm Member
First time I have seen a front ported version. Don't particularly like the looks. Was this a legit version?
http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/710-5...0001&campid=5338728743&icep_item=382566356003
http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/710-5...0001&campid=5338728743&icep_item=382566356003
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
Paddy
pfm Member
No, if you read the description you'll see that they are modified
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
James
Lord of the Erg\o/s
Probably what he gained with bass extension, he's lost an equal measure of bass tightness and snap. NS-1000Ms don't lack bass, and I'd choose quality over quantity every time.
torstoi
pfm Member
That's probably true..
I found some beautiful wooden maple veneered stands s/h , consisting from 2 big horizontal wooden boards
connected by a slide-like diagonal board.
They had the perfect height..but the diagonal 'slide' facing towards the listener
would throw additional bass reflections from the bottom of the speaker
towards the listener..
There seemed to be more bass..but at a cost.
The reflections destroyed the timing of the speaker entirely
and separated bass and mid/tweeter performance in two seemingly different events.
It sounded really strange, as if the bass wasn't able keeping up with the rest of the speaker properly.
Destroyed the timing entirely, probably only miliseconds, but I think the human ear is extremely sensible for such.
As a test I lay two damping towels onto the forward facing slides &
the speaker was acting as one organic unit perfectly again straight away..
The previous owner of the stands sold not only his stands, but also his NS1000 before that
as he thought they weren't any good..
I asked him if he had ever heard the NS on any other stands then the ones he sold me.. : No.
'Okaaay...' was all I thought..
..to close the loop..I imagine making them bass-reflex could result in similarily strange behaviour.
It's true there are speakers that go deeper, but the inegrity of the range they offer
is unchallenged by any speaker I know, even if they do go deeper.
I found some beautiful wooden maple veneered stands s/h , consisting from 2 big horizontal wooden boards
connected by a slide-like diagonal board.
They had the perfect height..but the diagonal 'slide' facing towards the listener
would throw additional bass reflections from the bottom of the speaker
towards the listener..
There seemed to be more bass..but at a cost.
The reflections destroyed the timing of the speaker entirely
and separated bass and mid/tweeter performance in two seemingly different events.
It sounded really strange, as if the bass wasn't able keeping up with the rest of the speaker properly.
Destroyed the timing entirely, probably only miliseconds, but I think the human ear is extremely sensible for such.
As a test I lay two damping towels onto the forward facing slides &
the speaker was acting as one organic unit perfectly again straight away..
The previous owner of the stands sold not only his stands, but also his NS1000 before that
as he thought they weren't any good..
I asked him if he had ever heard the NS on any other stands then the ones he sold me.. : No.
'Okaaay...' was all I thought..
..to close the loop..I imagine making them bass-reflex could result in similarily strange behaviour.
It's true there are speakers that go deeper, but the inegrity of the range they offer
is unchallenged by any speaker I know, even if they do go deeper.
tomek
pfm Member
I have nearly mint NS-1000M since few days. Absolutely gorgeous sound. After nearly 40 years in hifi i got nearly 40 years old speakers. Thinking about recapping, but it is a delicate matter, i don't wont to make it worse ...
Caps for the bass are elcos, here recapping is obvious, but all other caps are pio and i don't know if any Jantzen or Mundorf will be good enough, i don't want to get some kind of bright sound, wan to stay on the warm side.
Original SPS500 where around 170mm high. I think it is to low.
What are Your experience with the height of the stands for NS-1000 ?
Caps for the bass are elcos, here recapping is obvious, but all other caps are pio and i don't know if any Jantzen or Mundorf will be good enough, i don't want to get some kind of bright sound, wan to stay on the warm side.
Original SPS500 where around 170mm high. I think it is to low.
What are Your experience with the height of the stands for NS-1000 ?
I have nearly mint NS-1000M since few days. Absolutely gorgeous sound. After nearly 40 years in hifi i got nearly 40 years old speakers. Thinking about recapping, but it is a delicate matter, i don't wont to make it worse ...
Caps for the bass are elcos, here recapping is obvious, but all other caps are pio and i don't know if any Jantzen or Mundorf will be good enough, i don't want to get some kind of bright sound, wan to stay on the warm side.
Original SPS500 where around 170mm high. I think it is to low.
What are Your experience with the height of the stands for NS-1000 ?
I messed around with different stand heights , I found getting the mid range driver at ear height led to the best balance. I settled on 300mm and had some open frame stands made.
I would have thought the L pad would compensate for any difference in esr.
torstoi
pfm Member
I also have the often mentioned 30-45cm as a stand...seems to work quite well.
The stand heigth reflecting the ~width of the speaker front is also pleasant to the eye.
I have mine toed in a bit, which sounds better to me.but I have sidewalls close, so this may reduce reflections,
less of an issue if you have sidewalls further away.
Have mine tilted up by ~1 cm so the front is a bit higher than the backside.
Thus the tweeter is shooting just over my head and I get more midrange by tendency.
It's also said to help reduce bass refections from the floor & seems the more problematic the lower your stands are and what surface you have on the floor in front of your speakers.
It depends on how sensible you are to high frequencys..or also if you are starting to lack hearing high frequencys well a bit.
So you can compensate for that by aiming the tweeter more ore less at your ear to your taste.
I had mine measured in in my room & found out I have a pretty room-mode @ 40Hz, where the bass became 20dB louder than
the rest of the spectrum.
As the NS has the opportunity to tune in and out tweeter and mid, we used this to turn both in to 100% and the
room-mode got reduced by 3dB.
On paper +20dB @ 40Hz looks terrible, but the main human focus is in the midrange, so it's not very obvious and I think also brain / ear is compensating
most of that anyway.
Out of interest we flattened out the spectrum entirely, using a dsp to let the 40Hz bump disappear nearly entirely,
and while this was quite interesting, it started to change the meaning of songs I've known for a long time
in muting down the main actor in songs and giving statists in the background a more prominent role than before..
As said, this was interesting as such, but I doubted it had been meant this way @ the recording
& I did prefer the original interpretation of the songs by far.
Aso by the additional converting to digital and then back to analogue, the whole thing sounded a tiny bit tired.
Back to 'uncorrect' pure analogue, it sounded fresh and alive again..as I had ever liked it.
Generally the NS isn't very difficult to position in comparison to other speakers I've had.
My room has a size and shape I've seen many times when I visited GB, so I suppose many of you could have a mode @40 Hz.
It's really no big issue, I was absolutely happy before..and so am I now,
but I can recomment trying to dial in mid and tweeter to 100%, give it a week, and turn it out again then then to compare.
To me, 'full in' was a bit better.
The stand heigth reflecting the ~width of the speaker front is also pleasant to the eye.
I have mine toed in a bit, which sounds better to me.but I have sidewalls close, so this may reduce reflections,
less of an issue if you have sidewalls further away.
Have mine tilted up by ~1 cm so the front is a bit higher than the backside.
Thus the tweeter is shooting just over my head and I get more midrange by tendency.
It's also said to help reduce bass refections from the floor & seems the more problematic the lower your stands are and what surface you have on the floor in front of your speakers.
It depends on how sensible you are to high frequencys..or also if you are starting to lack hearing high frequencys well a bit.
So you can compensate for that by aiming the tweeter more ore less at your ear to your taste.
I had mine measured in in my room & found out I have a pretty room-mode @ 40Hz, where the bass became 20dB louder than
the rest of the spectrum.
As the NS has the opportunity to tune in and out tweeter and mid, we used this to turn both in to 100% and the
room-mode got reduced by 3dB.
On paper +20dB @ 40Hz looks terrible, but the main human focus is in the midrange, so it's not very obvious and I think also brain / ear is compensating
most of that anyway.
Out of interest we flattened out the spectrum entirely, using a dsp to let the 40Hz bump disappear nearly entirely,
and while this was quite interesting, it started to change the meaning of songs I've known for a long time
in muting down the main actor in songs and giving statists in the background a more prominent role than before..
As said, this was interesting as such, but I doubted it had been meant this way @ the recording
& I did prefer the original interpretation of the songs by far.
Aso by the additional converting to digital and then back to analogue, the whole thing sounded a tiny bit tired.
Back to 'uncorrect' pure analogue, it sounded fresh and alive again..as I had ever liked it.
Generally the NS isn't very difficult to position in comparison to other speakers I've had.
My room has a size and shape I've seen many times when I visited GB, so I suppose many of you could have a mode @40 Hz.
It's really no big issue, I was absolutely happy before..and so am I now,
but I can recomment trying to dial in mid and tweeter to 100%, give it a week, and turn it out again then then to compare.
To me, 'full in' was a bit better.
Last edited:
torstoi
pfm Member
no, both maximal to the right, which is ~5 o'clock.
We measured both in my room, the neutral 12o'clock position gave a
+20 dB in the 40Hz mode.
Then we set mid and tweeter full in to the right (5 o'clock)
and thus have 'only' +17 dB in the 40Hz mode (by 3dB better)
Thus reducing the bass mode in my room by roughly 15%,
and it also sounded a bit better to me.
We measured both in my room, the neutral 12o'clock position gave a
+20 dB in the 40Hz mode.
Then we set mid and tweeter full in to the right (5 o'clock)
and thus have 'only' +17 dB in the 40Hz mode (by 3dB better)
Thus reducing the bass mode in my room by roughly 15%,
and it also sounded a bit better to me.
Last edited:
