What vintage speaker might you use today

I have a good num of vintage loudspeakers about and a few that are modernized. Mostly I use my Community Extended Leviathans with 4x 15in altec 515b- TAD 4001 midranges- Fostex t500amk2 tweeters. I also enjoy my RCA MI Shearer horns they have a real type of sound quality and even jaded industry professionals have fawned over them.

Jensen Imperials with the 15" Triaxial loudspeakers.

Tannoy Gold 15" with GRF Rectangular

Just can't seem to stop listening to my Quad ESL57 rebuilt by Wayne.

I have much more current speakers in my closet that just don't give me the pleasure of this vintage design.  They are just wonderful!

One of these days should probably sell the rest.

Bozak B4000A Symphony - 

I'll admit this is an older design and has rolled off highs compared to many modern speakers. However, the double bass units and aluminum midrange drivers are still among the best I've ever heard. I've been told that the crossovers can be modified to make the tweeters "spit" a little, but I've never heard a pair like this. 

But, boy would I like to try it. 

Dahlquist DQ-10s are still the price per dollar king IMHO. They may take some work due to their age, and a decent size tube amp, but then they really shine.

Hey Schubert- 
The Allison Threes were the ones made for corner placement.  I'm using Allison Ones, which are essentially two Threes together and these are meant to go against the wall but away from corners. 

I'm eager to join the modern world but i still love how these sound. 

I had my KLH 17s recapped and was shocked at how good they sounded. 

I have a pair of Advent Legacies from the 80s Jensen era. Definitely midfi, but non-fatiguing and very good bass. Somewhat veiled and polite, but ideal for used $1 classic rock Lps. Surprisingly, I put on some vintage "smoker" sax jazz and they sounded nice. Vocals are a bit flat. I'm going to refoam my orig Advents over Xmas.

None. I've owned and heard so many vintage speakers that I would not seek one to build an extreme system. 

The LS 3/5a from Falcon is making a very big splash. Stereophile finalist for speaker of the year and Recommended components Class B. Not bad for a 50+ year old design.

.
I still use Infinity IRS Betas, made in 1987.  Excellent speakers.  However, I'm currently looking for speakers made in the 21st century.  

Parts and repair for the Betas are impossible to find, let alone getting them to and from a repair facility if one existed.
.

Grew up with a pair of KLH 1's, the ones with the "bass computer", hooked up to a cool looking Phase Linear amp.  They're still at my mom's house, powered by an ancient Hafler amp.  And, they still sound rediculously good.

These are them...http://www.classicspeakerpages.net/library/klh/klh-1_series_klh-1_klh-2_kl/klh-1_series_photos/klh-1...

She offered them to me several times, and honestly, if I ever wanted to give up the chase of "you are there"ness with current audio gear, and simply wanted good sound to enter my room, I'd take them in a heartbeat.  I also think she'd miss them more than she would know till they were gone.

Honestly, I don't know that many speaker brands back then cared about imaging and soundstaging as much as sounding frequency coherent, and I don't view that as a bad thing.  I can't say those speakers ever made musicians appear in a room before me, but they still make music sound better than alot of speakers I've heard or owned.  Top to bottom, they are very solid.  I've owned speakers that cut razor sharp images, and aren't half as musical sounding as these.

I think if I ever decided to give up chasing the dragon, and just wanted good sound to fill a room, I'd pick up and refoam a used pair, and be very happy using them daily.

Quad ESL. I had a pair of bronze in the 80s and sold them. I was never happy with what I'd lost - that spotless window to the music My current black pair are outstanding.

My bedroom system uses a pair of (modded) hafler 300 speakers (http://www.hafler.com/pdf/archive/Model_300_speaker_man.pdf) and in my living room I have a pair of Ryan Acoustics MCL-3. Both circa 1980's I believe.
I'm very happy with both.
in my music room on the other hand I have 2015 speakers :-)

I'm using a pair of circa 1989 Klipsch Chorus II's as my everyday main speakers.  I found a mint pair in oiled oak on craigslist a few years ago, and refurbished them with new crossovers and horn diaphragms.

They might not be the most "accurate" speakers ever made, but they do some things amazingly well.  Great speaker for classic rock, and big band music on vinyl sounds amazing.

Vintage gear is good for nostalgia trips and the audiophile on a lower budget (in fact, very good for them), but not great for building superior audio systems. 

But are they appropriate for people who aren't building extreme or superior audio systems, but instead want to listen to music?  Ancient loudspeaker theorists would argue YES!!!

I have tannoy hpd 315 drivers from i think 1976 in new custom made cheviot cabinets. These are outstanding speakers. Very much the opposite of modern hi fi and for that reason many may not like them. The sound is sweet, musical, with great presence, soundstage and texture. I was surprised that nelson pass uses these in his personal system. They seem to have a cult following but arent mentioned much on this site or in magazines. 

My Irs Betas which I currently use and will never part with. Also have a set of Irs Gammas which also have a permanent home.

The midrange of the Fulton Model J was the FMI 80, mentioned on it's own above by salectric.

I loved the ADS L-710s and 810s, the IMF speakers from that era were also very good as were the Spendors. And let's not forget the  KEF 105 Series, truly great sounding speakers that imaged better than ything else I heard.  Oh yeah for a small standmount, it was hard to beat the KEF 103.2

-RW-

onhwy61, I did indicate vintage gear good for those audiophiles on a lower budget. So, why do you seem to create a dichotomy with the insertion of the word "instead," as though those pursuing higher end systems are not music lovers? Perhaps I misinterpreted your post, so clarification would be good. 

However, if you are trying to suggest that there is some advantage in seeking lower cost gear as if this means a person is a "music lover," as opposed to those who seek upper end systems, here is my thought. Allow me to pose a question; If people who love the gear and build fancy systems are not music lovers, then why are not also the people who amass huge media collections and don't even play half of it not considered collectors and not music lovers? I see a definite bias and negative attitude in regard to the phrase "music lover" in this hobby which skews one way.   :( 

Douglas, you put words in my mouth.  I never said anything about "music lovers".  I simply stated that vintage loudspeakers are good for people listening to music.  In two separate posts you mentioned how vintage loudspeakers would not be suitable for extreme or superior systems.  Whether that is true or not, I don't know, but that is not the question the OP asked.  I detect a

onhyw61, not intending to put words in your mouth; likely a misread. I posted twice because my first post was so delayed it seemed that it was not going to be posted. I'm not trying to bash lower end system users, just share my experiences. 

Doug Schroeder needs to hear an "extreme" (his word) vintage speaker system.  If he does, I predict he will change his opinion that vintage is only suited for "lower end systems" (his words).  To be clear I am not talking about speakers you will find at yard sales.  For example, I am thinking of the pair of Western Electric 757 speakers at the 2011 RMAF.  That system had an engaging musical realism unlike any modern speaker in my experience.

Douglas completely misunderstood the original question. Extreme system is not the point of this thread. Onhwy61 simply stated that instead of building an extreme system some folks may want to instead just listen to music. I among many others happen to agree. Doug your an elitist snob.

JBL L300- with original MC275. Not bad.

Jbl L-7 ,  4 way speaker's,  titanium laminated tweeter,  cross over at 900 htz, 30htz to 27khz, bi-amp  speaker's that hugely improve with high quality speaker  post jumper cable's from bottom post to top post,  very musical, with a unsuspected excellent sound stage, naturalness, transit speed is off the charts for a 1992 speaker. 

Salectric,

I agree with you about extreme vintage systems.  I heard a monster set up in a huge dedicated room that sounded magnificent.  It was based around a Western Electric 555 midrange driver and a 15A horn and twin 18" woofers (looked tiny in this system).  Nothing cheap here, the system was originally triamped using three pairs of Audio Note Gaku-On amps ($250,000 per pair list price), but, when it turned out that the tweeter sounded as good with a "cheap" Kageki, one of the pairs of Gaku-On was relegated to the role of back up amp.  This type of large horn system is pretty unmatchable for the ability to deliver proper scale, sense of ease and natural flow and excellent dynamics at low volume level.

My much more modest horn-based system is no slouch either, provided I don't play it super loud (I never do that anyway).  It is built around the Western Electric 713b compression driver, twin 12" woofers in an Onken bass reflex cabinet and a not that great Fostex bullet tweeter.  Not "extreme" by some standards, but not bad either.  

There are a few vintage speaker components that I would take over anything made these days, except, perhaps, for some really good Japanese replicas of the same drivers.  I heard a fantastic, and reasonably compact, system built around the Jensen M-10 field-coil driver; I haven't heard too many systems sound better.  It is unfortunate that some of these drivers, in good shape, go for around $20,000 per driver (and you may need to buy several to come up with a matched pair).

On the not-too-crazy front, a 302 b compression driver, some RCA compression drivers, BTH compression drivers can be used to make systems that, for some people's taste, will sound better than almost any conventional system out there.  Vintage can be both "extreme" in terms of performance, and budget-friendly.

Excellent comments by Larry, as always.  It's worth noting that many of the Western Electric and Jensen drivers he refers to were introduced in the 1930s!

Regards,
-- Al

Great thread - a couple comments from members stand out to me. Have me intrigued...

Almarg

I’ll say therefore that the only speakers from prior to ca. 1980 that come to mind as some that I might want to use would be the Quad ESL-57 (of course)

@Almarg - as an EE why would you consider this speaker ?

I mean check it out

http://www.quadesl.com/graphics/quadGraphics/quad_impedance_graph.jpg

Just curious ..

Douglas_Schroeder

None. I’ve owned and heard so many vintage speakers that I would not seek one to build an extreme system.

Vintage gear is good for nostalgia trips and the audiophile on a lower budget (in fact, very good for them), but not great for building superior audio systems.

@Douglas_Schroeder

When someone jumps into a community pool and makes big splashes; it smacks of an agenda and or a big mistake - like oh oh , wrong pool ! Why is no one wearing a bathing suit here !

So - I am interested to know the 2 best vintage system that you have personally set up; the room dimensions, how they were driven, and the source that was used with them.

Cheers  

Ct0517, I would consider the Quad ESL-57 because of the legendary reputation it has achieved and maintained over the years, particularly with respect to its mid-range transparency. I am familiar with its impedance curve that you linked to. The wide variation from high impedances at low frequencies to low impedances at high frequencies, which is characteristic of many electrostatics, will of course result in its sonics being amplifier-dependent to a greater degree than would otherwise be the case. But as might be expected given that its design pre-dates the introduction of solid state amps, it is considered to be a tube friendly speaker, and tubes are my preference when it comes to power amplification.

Perhaps surprisingly, though, in some cases solid state amplification can also produce good results with that speaker. For example the vintage Mark Levinson ML-2 from the 1970s, which is rated at only around 25 or 30 watts into 8 ohms but can double its maximum power capability into halved load impedances down to 1 ohm, has always been considered to be a synergistic match.

Best regards,
--Al

LarryI, your speaker is hardly modest.  I am sure it sounds very nice by any standard.  My own vintage speakers are further down the scale.  As you may recall, I use a 15" Jensen P15LL woofer in a sealed cabinet similar to the Western Electric 753 with an Altec 802 driver in a 32A horn.  While I am sure it would sound better with a 713 driver, the 802 still sounds good to my ears.

Almarg
But as might be expected given that its design pre-dates the introduction of solid state amps, it is considered to be a tube friendly speaker, and tubes are my preference when it comes to power amplification.

yeah, the design predates moi, by a few years as well.
My actual pair of 57's are only about 6 years old. Fresh Wayne Picquet rebuilds. I am using an amp that was specifically designed for them. Music Reference RM10. Its been my personal experience that one needs to be very careful with their choice of music with them. My wife for example, seems to get suspicious, and keeps visiting me down in my space whenever female vocals are playing.

I'm going to have to agree with Al here, I have optimized a 1975 pair of Tannoy HPD's (12" Dual Concentric) with new surrounds, custom crossovers, and cabinets, and they perform equally well with 9 Wpc of SET power, or 500 Watts of Class D driving them.

They are better in every way than my previous speakers, Dynaudio Contour 5.4's, which weren't too bad either.

Douglas_Schroeder (BP), "Vintage gear is good for nostalgia trips and the audiophile on a lower budget (in fact, very good for them), but not great for building superior audio systems."

As I have often found arrogance the companion of ignorance, I could not disagree any more strongly with someone who doesn't believe the Quad ESL57 could hold position in the finest sounding audio systems.

The kicker here is that the jbl  L-7 speaker's are not horn speaker's, one of the last fully dynamic speaker's at this level of performance,  and they were only $2,000.000 new in 1992, sound way more expensive compared to alot of speaker's today, my opinion. 

Are eXemplar Horns vintage speakers?

They were first made in the 90s, but the drivers are from the Altec Lansing VotT, which first came out in the 40s.

Still the best speakers I've ever heard.

Several old school speakers in my two main systems.  A pair of stock Altec 846A Valencia's that have great synergy with my Shindo amp and preamp.  However the Valencia's also sound great when my Audio Research tube gear and McCormack SS amp are pulled out of storage.  I also have a pair of Quad ESL 57's that I plan to run in the early part of 2016 with my Shindo preamp and a pair of Quad II monoblocks to give the Valencia's a little break.

Rounding out the "stable" is a pair of Quad ESL 63's that need refurbishment, but when that project is completed after the Big Move out of SoCal next year, I intend to run them with my ARC gear and a pair of Gradient SW-63 subwoofers.  And a pair of Snell Type J II sound great with both the Shindo and Audio Research gear.

My aching back notwithstanding, it's fun to occasionally swap and move speakers in and out.  Provides for different perspectives, a chance to reassess, and to listen to my musical faves anew.    

Salectric,

I am sure that your 753-type system sounds terrific.  I really like the drivers you are using.  I recently heard a system that is still in the tuning stage of build that utilizes the 32A horn and a 302 compression driver, a 15" field-coil woofer and some kind of EV horn tweeter on top.  I was wondering if you have ever thought that a tweeter might be useful way out on top (I know the 302 can go quite high on its own).  I spoke with a Western Electric expert who told me that the 753 used the 713A or 713C driver, which is more extended on top than the 713B, but is not as smooth sounding, an issue which is somewhat ameliorated by the attenuation of highs from the 90 degree bend in the horn.  

Almarg, Trelja, ct0517,

I totally agree that the Quad 57 remains a top competitor, provided that attaining extremely high volume and deep bass is not a major priority.  That speaker really delivers something magical that is hard to explain.  It is too bad someone does not try to make either a replica or a modernized version (one that does not have a tendency to arc).  I recently heard, at the Capital Audiofest, a reconditioned 57 that had been put into a new frame and actively biamped (electronic crossover, two built-in EL34 amps per channel).  Most of the demonstrations of that speaker were designed to show that it could play deep bass and at high volume.  I could not really say if it still had that incredible midrange magic of the original, but, it certainly was very promising (this is a commercially-available speaker, not a one-of thing).  Another room had a 57 with a super-tweeter on top.  That system, too, sounded quite good, although the large conference room it was being shown in did not help for bass response.

In some respects, it seems that, for my taste, a lot of speaker designers, and buyers, have pursued a certain kind of sound that tends toward a lean, harmonically thin and "bloodless" sound.  There are still makers who deliver an old school sound, but, they are in the minority (e.g., Audio Note, JM Reynaud, G.I.P. Laboratory, ESP).  There are some extremely high end modern builders that deliver old school sound using modern updates of old drivers (Goto, Cogent). Also, while I prefer the old sound, that does not mean I don't appreciate what some very modern and completely different sounding speakers can deliver (e.g., MBL, Raidho, and YG, Soundlab). 

LarryI, as a matter of fact I have tried a Jensen RP-302 tweeter to fill in on the extreme treble; however, I was never satisfied with the blend with the 802/32A.  My crossover includes a small HF boost circuit that helps make the 802-8G closer to full-range in the bent horn.  The very top end is still down slightly but for my tastes that is a price I am willing to pay for the excellent coherency of the 2-way.

ct0517, I have built so many dozens of audio systems over the years I don't even remember them all. I have used the Eminent technology LFT VI magnetic planners, which are about twenty years old now. They don't hold a candle to the newer panels. I have used older Chapman audio speakers, older Vandersteens, Mission, Apogee, Magnepans, Von Schweikert etc. None of the older models hold up to current standards of performance. I have heard dozens of vintage speakers, Quad, JBL, etc. at shows and dealers. None of them have impressed me terribly. Same with amps and preamps I have owned, Threshold, Audio Research, Adcom, PS Audio, receivers from Sansui, Denon, etc. My friend bought a beautiful pair of vintage McIntosh amps I heard on his big rig; they're going into this basement system, the correct decision. Wh�y? Because they can't compare to the Border Patrol SET amp he owns. 

So, if you wish to judge my conclusion based on the gear I have owned, feel free. 

Now, if someone is enamored of a very syrupy, "warm" sound, then I can certainly see how a vintage speaker would fit the bill. I remember one reviewer who said he actually tries not to get too much definition in an audio system. To me, this is the antithesis of the High End. One does not need current standards of precision and clarity to obtain a satisfactory sound when timbre and the nebulous "musicality" are of higher importance and precision is of tertiary importance. Is it accurate to real life sound. Not to me, which is why I answered the way I did. 

Trelja, considering Quads, you couldn't get me to own a Quad. They� WERE a good speaker - that was LONG ago. The older models have severely compromised performance in terms of bass extension and power handling. And it sounds like it's coming from an orchestra pit, the speaker is so lowered. We're supposed to accept that in 2015? I will not. I don't give a speaker a pass simply because it has lovely mids. Nostalgia has carried them way too far. I have heard the older quads both he 57's and 63's and I wouldn't dream of owning them, not for great listening. The Kingsound King III tramples them. It has "all of that" in regards to the superb midrange, and much more, that is, an actual lower bass response, as well as a sound field that is above knee level. As far as new Quads, I wouldn't touch one.

Oh, I forgot to mention the Nakamichi cassette deck I owned, what a beautiful machine. A Nak was a great component in its day. 

Douglas_Schroeder

And it sounds like it's coming from an orchestra pit, the speaker is so lowered.

If you do not like the balcony presentation all you have to do is put a 2 x 4 piece of wood under the rear leg. It will raise the presentation - as high as you want. Anyone that has "actually" owned the 57 speaker knows this.

So, if you wish to judge my conclusion based on the gear I have owned, feel free.

I didn't ask you for a list of gear. It tells me nothing. When I ask questions its because I want to learn. The only way for me to learn with Audio is to be able to picture the room the guy is talking about.
I asked you for;

Room dimensions, Speakers, how driven, and what the SOURCE was.

For the two best vintage systems you have put together. If no pictures, and this is too difficult a request forget-about-it.

 

Hi Larryi
re: Quad 57
If I can comment on some of your observations as one of my audio "projects" from the last few years, and specifically the last few months have focused on addressing a number of the constraints you pointed out with the 57. I have uploaded to my system link a current pic of my Quad 57 setup in Room B for reference. Excuse the mess and paraphernalia.

Larryi - I totally agree that the Quad 57 remains a top competitor, provided that attaining extremely high volume and deep bass is not a major priority.

oops this post went long - sorry

The room/space is irregular 20 ' wide by 24 '. It is adjacent to my Music Room A. There is a staircase going up. That plus if I leave the door to Music Room A open creates much more volume. The space I use is the top of the backwards 7 and it is sectioned off by the heavy curtain. Its an in progress build out that unfortunately due to being away and listening in it; finishing touches have been delayed. I say this from a cosmetic point of view, not a sound waves one. The Quad 57 needs a live room. The mid-panel of the 57 speakers are 42 inches high. They are 7 feet in from the front wall. This placement does a few things. It eliminates the head in the vice constraint. You can actually stand up. It places the performers on a 2 foot platform stage which I like.

Now not sure what you mean by extremely high volume. I care about my ears. I am about to turn 54 in a few months, I can still hear to 17k on good days. I am using sub/s - more on this in a bit - and I play at 80-90db averages with 100 db + peaks . One can go much louder. I listen around 80-85 db average.

I went through external tweeters until I realized it was my amp (in my own language) what seemed like choking on the high ohms bass requirement to the point they had nothing left to produce the highs properly. Maybe Almarg can provide a technical description. Saturated or oscillating transformers? Anyway I did research. I owned a modded Music Reference RM9 for many years; This research led me to Roger Modjeski, his 57's, and his Music Reference Rm10 designed for the 57's. I acquired an Rm10, No more external tweeters and no fear of arching.

Fully functional 57 speakers are rated 45k - 18khz. Rate of attenuation outside of the band asymtotic to 18 db/8ve. So properly functioning Quads are good for me on their HF when positioned properly in the room. Now the bass... and it helps to reference the pic loaded on my system page which shows sub locations tried.

Not much I have heard can compete to my ears with the quick start stop of an ESL's bass. But the problem with ESL bass for me, has always been trying to match the visceral in your chest impact of cones. Pressurization of the room is needed for me with full scale Classical, Double bass Jazz, and being the age I am; the Classic Rock I grew up with. Room pressurization at say 85db levels, gets the endorphins flowing for me. But even more so human voice harmonies is still my biggest personal endorphins trigger, and this is why I have been stubborn and enduring with the 57's. The 57's bass is the quickest of the ESL's I have owned. 63's do not have the same magic for me. And double stacked quads are not a linear upgrade.

Re: Stacked Quads - Peter Walker said in the interview that the stacked setup gives 6db more in the bass - and 3 db more everywhere else.
So...They don't play any lower, and it is not a straight linear upgrade to the original single 57 output. The one double setup I heard had too many variables, maybe a bad panel. The magic was not there. So how does one integrate subs for the lowest octave ?

I experimented in my room and I came up with an option that worked for me. The arrows on the system pic point to the locations tried. I discovered that any good sub thats goes down to 20 hz, with crossover and phase control will work. The key is to sync up bass waves and the one way to do this IMO with the 57 is nearfield. What ends up happening is the sub is not asked to perform very hard. On a typical Sub the db dial of 1- 10, I am using "1" with the crossover set up at 50hz. I have had folks over and no one can tell me where the sub is located. They can only say when I ask, that the 57 speakers in front of them are producing it. When I show them the camouflaged nearfield sub - they are in disbelief. Currently looking at selling off some audio items to bring two new subs in - nearfield. I have had two subs on loan in the past, but this was before I acquired the RM10 amplifier. Anyway that's how this project is shaping up. I am really excited about it and if anyone is in the GTA - Greater Toronto Area, and would like to hear the setup let me know - my email is on my systems page.
Cheers

I currently use a pair of Infinity IRS epsilons, I thought of selling them a while back only because they are 20 years old and Infinity no longer has any parts available for them but after listening to many new OVER PRICED speakers I gave up as I didn't want to have to spend upwards of $40,000 to best the sound of the epsilons.