Your Side by Side Experience With Best Vintage vs Newer Expensive Hi Tech Speakers
Has anyone here ever done a side by side comparison between Tannoy Autograph, Bozak Concert Hall Grand, EV Patrician, Jensen Imperial Triaxial, Goodmans, Stentorian, Western Electric, Altec A4, Jbl Everest/Hartsfield/Summit/Paragon/4435, Tannoy Westminsters, Klipschorns vs the Hundreds of Thousand even Million Dollar speakers of today like Totems, Sonus Farber, BW, Cabasse, Wilsons, Dmt, Infinity, Polk ...etc
Today I was at our speaker shop, and we were having the new guys learn about tuning the speakers. Our speaker designs are free resonant and tunable. We have there in the shop identical speakers for the guys to do tapping tests on. Identical except for the mid dividing board that is. The one you can take a set of drumsticks and play it going up and down the scale in-tune. The other one you start to play it and you can hear that the pitch is off and out of tune. Same exact speakers with one board 7"x9" making the difference. Folks who visit are always shocked. I don’t build speakers like typical HEA speakers. Mine are made from instrument wood on the front baffle, .3" thick (yes only .3" thick, just over 1/4"). The rest (not including the base) is made from our own soft pulp compressed board 3/8" thick. On the FS (floorstanding) models there is a mass loading chamber on the bottom. And of course there is a Tuning Bar & Bolts so the user can change the tone.
My speakers are specifically designed to work like any acoustical instrument. What makes an acoustical instrument work? They are made to use the room as part of their components. Take any acoustical instrument and tune it in a room. Now take that instrument into another room. What do you notice? The instrument has gone out of tune slightly or major. Rooms and instruments work as one, so do speakers and rooms. You can put the best speaker in the world in a room and if it doesn’t tune to that room it will sound out of tone, timbre, pitch or phase. Audiophiles experience this all the time and can’t figure out what is wrong. I tell them "it’s not the speaker". I go through this every day somewhere in the world. Someone buys this raved about speaker and it sound horrible in their room. Or the other thing I get a lot is, someone moves and when they setup their new room it doesn’t sound as good as their old space.
This is why I’m thinking about starting some threads here about tuning. It will really help folks understand some things that maybe they haven’t done or even heard of before. And so yes, Vinny you are right on the money. It’s all about tuning.
Michael Green
www.michaelgreenaudio.net
PS: here’s how fine tuned you can design a speaker. Do you guys know how many parts I have in my crossover? "1" it’s a ERO cap, and that’s it. Do you know why? Because I have done what Vinny says, I tune my drivers to my cabinet, and to whatever room they get used in.
Even though I had a good bit of loudspeaker building experience with my own / friends’ projects as well as my involvement with Fried, until I began building amplifiers, I didn’t understand the importance resistors play in the sonic presentation.
At one point, I had four amplifiers in front of me, three of which using the same circuitry, differing only only in their passive components, and two of which only in their resistors. The first was a classic Dynaco ST70 using the carbon composition resistors of the day. The second using carbon film resistors and modern capacitors, with the third identical apart from its metal film resistors. I built both of these amplifiers in the same time period. The fourth amplifier was a Dynaco ST80, produced in Japan, built to correct all the supposed flaws in the original; increased power supply capacity, Mullard long-tail pair (used by 99% of today’s push-pull tube amps and most of the Dynaco replacement / upgrade boards) driver stage, LED bias indicators, and (ironically) a triode / ultralinear switch.
The resistors themselves profoundly influenced the sound.
The original Dynaco had that amber colored, overly warm, lush sound normally equated with vintage gear. The same amplifier circuit with metal film resistors not only sounded like a modern amplifier with its clarity, neutrality, and openness, it possessed a level of both speed and liquidity most products with another zero or two in their price tags hope for.
Despite the marketing claims amplifier manufacturers have used over the past few decades about their innovations and ingenuity, when it comes to tube amplifiers, the circuits remain the same as those used in the 1950s. THE single most meaningful difference between a vintage and modern tube amplifier is the metal film resistors, and to a much lesser extent, capacitors.
The guitar industry knows this all too well. The demand for the vintage sound by the customers has led to both the much higher collectibility and pricing of the original amplifiers, the reintroduction of those same products, at a much higher price point to boot, and the tuners in every town folks bring their amps in to up their tone. Number one way to get that vintage tone, carbon composition resistors.
And if anyone cared...the Dynaco with the carbon film resistors sounded less than noteworthy, possessing neither the charm some treasure vintage products for, nor the modern sound that I prefer. The ST80 proved to me how the simplicity of the concertina phase splitter produces a special sound the vast majority of today’s push-pull tube amplifiers simply do not. With few exceptions, high-end audio amplifier designers have rejected this topology over the years using the argument of lacking the gain the long-tail pair produces. However, since many here like to quote Nelson Pass these days in regard to our components producing more gain than we can make use of, I’m now going to begin claiming this an advantage for the concertina. And for what it’s worth, though the sound of the ST80 fell far short of the original as all of these "improved designs" do in my experience, I did appreciate the triode switch even if it conflicts with Dynaco’s actual raison d’etre of ultralinear operation
Thanks @michaelgreenaudio your bang on and doing a great service. You think outside the box and have a wide viewing audio mind. Thanks for instructing us the importance of audio tuning. I had read about rudimentary concept in an old scott 1950s brochure about tuning your speakers or was it out of phase. I forget now lol. Michael Your taking it to a higher level. Kudos.
Thank you @trelja i had read same thing recently on old thread in another audio site. Scott tube integrated owners wondered why their equipment didnt sound warm after servicing or didnt sound great after purchasing it used. Because their tech had changed the original resistors. I did not know this prior to few days ago. Its such an important detail that the normal audio hobbyist probably doesnt know including myself until few days ago. Maybe technicians are unaware.
@trelja So would you suggest keeping the original carbon composition resistors for vintage and changing the modern tube amps resistors? today what are the best sweet sounding resistors and what brands do you suggest if your building an amplifier from scratch or if you would be repairing an old neglected tube integrated.
If by necessity you had to replace a resistor in a vintage tube or transistor resistor due to faulty can you find an ideal modern equivalent to the vintage original resistor?
What about if your repairing an old Luxman Marantz or Sansui ss amplifier or solid state receiver?
What do you recommend i tell the technician: I need to get my Scott tube integrated 299D overhauled and Sansui P2020 tube integrated amp checked and wiring work done.
My friend is getting The massive Ampzilla amplifier refurbished
@michaelgreenaudio I too am curious about this tuning method that you reference. I am always open minded to any possibilities, and look forward to reading your posts, once posted. As a guitarist, I disagree somewhat on your comment on tuning being accurate in one room, and moving to another room makes the instrument sound out of tune (if I am understanding you correctly) I agree that an acoustic guitar will "sound" different, room to room, but not out of tune. I'm also curious about your drivers being tuned to the cabinet, AND the room. So, if a potential customer were to purchase your speakers, how do you determine the correct tuning methodology for that individuals room?
As for the original question from the OP, I have a little story about my vintage/modern comparison. Back in the mid seventies, as a budding young (but poor) audio enthusiast my first "decent" pair of speakers where the Altec Lansing Model 3's (don't laugh, I was just a kid). Now at that point in time the shop I was dealing with also had a pair of the Model 15's. For me at the time, they were my unattainable Holy Grail. Time marches on, and now decades later, and many different speakers, I am running a pair of Wilson Maxx 2's, and also have a set of Wilson Watt Puppies in reserve.. Recently I had an opportunity to purchase a pair of decent Altec Model 3's. I did so purely out of a sense of nostalgia. The same weekend I also found a pristine set of the Altec Model 15's. I just HAD to have them. Brought them home and built a pair of custom "pig-tails" for spade connecting, so as not to modify the stock binding posts on the 15's. Well, after listening for a while, my thoughts were; WOW !! These really sound awful !! LOL
I don’t think your long winded at all. I don’t know why some of these posts are so short lol.
In my studio, and up in the tunable studio I designed at SUNY, I use to give a demo to my classes that went like this. I would take one of the rooms and tune it up. The musician (we did this with a lot of different instruments) would then go into the room and tune his or her instrument in that room. In another room a few feet away I had it out of tune. I would have the musician then walk into the out of tune room and their instrument would go out of tune. I even did this in the bigger studio/hall. I would go through and tune up one half of the room, leaving the other half out of tune. Then I would have a student tap on his drum (tuned of course) they would walk from one side of the room to the other and you would hear the drum go out of pitch as soon as they got into the out of tune space and then back in tune when they walked and played back into the tuned area. This particular demo was pretty wild cause in this big room it was only a matter of maybe a foot from tuned to out of tune.
Here’s another cool one.
When I was doing some work with Slum Village in the Sound Lounge, folks would come by and we would do some interviews. One day Bubby Webb and a few others did a cool demo, I think it was for VH1. They had Mel (great singer) sing on the regular floor just off the main stage area. While she was singing she stood up on one of my vocal platforms, and you could hear her voice instantly jump into her chest. She would get on and off that platform while singing. Needless to say the TV guy freaked out. He called it a trick, then we had him do the same thing.
What type of guitars do you have?
yep the Tunable Speakers are pretty cool
I did a show in Frankfurt years ago. Dave’s speakers were in the room next to me, it was when I first came out with the Chameleon. About half way through the show I decided to do something interesting. I got the same recording Wilson was playing, and I told a bunch of guys I could tune my speaker to sound like the Wilson’s. Of course that got folks going. So I went over and listened in their room for a while, and then came over to my room and tuned them up as close as I could. I sold 15 pair that day. It was so fun that I did the same thing in Denmark. Only this time had B&W in the room next to me. B&W didn’t like it I don’t think. The Wilson gang is always cool. Dave’s got style.
Very interesting Michael. It would be cool to experience this first hand, and you're absolutely right about Dave (and Daryl, and all the others at Wilson I've had the pleasure of speaking with) They are classy folks, and always "there" for the customer. Just like all the good people at Bryston up here in Canada. As for the guitars, just way too many to list, although my only acoustic is a Martin D-45
"I’m also curious about your drivers being tuned to the cabinet, AND the room. So, if a potential customer were to purchase your speakers, how do you determine the correct tuning methodology for that individuals room?"
mg
Well, it depends how deep into tuning that guy or gal wants to go. Some folks get some of my stuff and use it to tune with, and some will even go as far as have me build or design a Tunable Room for them. I’m doing two rooms right now. My method comes with all the tools a person needs to make their sound how ever they want (within reason). There are some incredibly different ears out there. I have a forum where I help them get to that place. For some it’s pretty easy and for others it’s tough going, until they get the hang of things. I also do a lot of systems where the listener has their favorite components and I try to help them get the system to work well together. It takes a lot of getting to know the person cause it’s not my sound we’re going after it’s theirs. There are reviews about this when I use to go around and do the reviewers. One cool one you can look up is one I did with Bob Hodas for Widescreen review. That was kind of fun because he was tuning with his computer and I was there with my toys.
If you go to my website you will see a lot more obviously. There are a lot of variables in recording and through the playback stage as you know. What I’ve tried to do is make a tunable product (products) that gives the listener enough flexibility as it takes, if not I will design something custom for them. It’s a cool gig. Deciding what is correct is a big question in this hobby because the typical system setup only plays about 10% of the recorded code. That leaves a lot of recording to open up. One of the first things folks will mention as they start tuning is how big the soundstage gets. I mean we’re talking in some cases of the stage tripling over night. Once I get that stage open I start working with the listener to help them focus things in to a comfortable place for them. Then after they’ve been tuning for a while I show them how to make adjustments from recording to recording. It’s really up to how far they want to go, and how much adjusting they want to do.
I ask about the guitars cause I love to visit with luthiers. I spend a lot of time with instrument builders.
@vinny55 you bring up an excellent point on the Scott amplifiers.
We’ve seen example after example over the years of well-meaning techs going through a vintage component, and replacing the carbon composition resistors with modern, stable, reliable, tighter tolerance parts leaving the owner feeling utterly disappointed with what they wind up with. Fortunately, so many have come to the realization that despite all their shortcomings, for the owner of a vintage piece, in order to maintain its original character it’s best to use the same sort of parts they were built with.
As for modern audiophile components, unlike the guitar world, unless someone truly aims for that sort of vintage sound and feel, I don’t see any reason one would consider carbon composition resistors.
I’m less dogmatic in terms of brands of each type of resistor, as they obviously vary to a far smaller degree than moving from type to type. There’s a truly excellent thread in the "Tech Talk" section on this topic, though it focuses on folks experience with the nth degree in chasing the best of the best, and until one reaches that high a plane, they don’t need to look beyond the mainstream products offered by the major sellers. However, you may find it curious that excellent film resistors from the likes of Vishay, Dale, CTC, etc. can cost a few cents where carbon composition resistors could cost a buck or three.
There are a few notable people attached to each product or manufacturer of vintage gear. If I were you or your friend needing my vintage component gone over, I would seek out the forums dedicated to that particular product, as those individuals will surely show up there or get talked up by the devotees. As an aside, if you feel at all comfortable working around these things, I encourage you to become your own tech. That's the way you really maximize what you have, as you will become intimately knowledgeable about it by the combination of finding a group of people who also are on the journey with the component and eager to share their experiences and perspectives and lessons learned, and actually putting your head down and working through the piece yourself, not to mention also being the cheapest way
I have kef 107/2, revel salon1's and Salon2's all we're sota in their day. I think tweeters have come the farthest and if you listen to the speakers I have you will pick the newest one every time. If you throw in cost tho vintage gear can still compete dollar for dollar.
You have me there since I'm not familiar with horns I can't speak on the progress. Does the first LaScala sound the same as one bought today? if so I really should have stocked up as prices have gone up x10.
@steve59 The couple of main differences between the early Lascala and the series II, are : ( 1 ) went from 3/4 inch birch ply to 1 inch birch ply and MDF, in the cabinet design. The dog houses ( woofer sections ) were resonant in the originals. The series II are now two boxes, dog houses is one, and mid horn / tweeter horn in upper. The combined weight of the speaker is now 175 lbs, versus 123 lbs for the original. ( 2 ) The crossovers have changed a little, with the woofer crossing over at a lower frequency to the mid horn. The crossovers are now using newer, higher grade, closer tolerance components, giving them the ability of passive biamping / biwiring, and to extract an extra db of effieciency, from 104, to 105 ( according to the specs Klipsch publishes. The crossover in the series II is based on the " AL3 " crossover, as there were a few various crossovers during the original productions. Also need to mention, that at some point Klipsch changed from metal mid horns to a ( and I hate to use the term, a plastic type horn ), to reduce ringing, in the originals. The series II, can be gotten in several different finishes, and although sometimes special ordered, some retailers stock a few finishes. The originals were available in, I believe, 3 ( Walnut Oak, Oak Oak, and raw birch ). Klipsch also had the " pro " version, with handles built into the upper portion of the cabinets, sealed the back of the mid / tweeter / crossover section, fused the tweeter, as well as the entire speaker, used a higher power handling woofer and added 5 way binding posts, with the original non pro versions having screw terminal barrier strips for hook up. I am sure I am leaving some things out. The original Lascala, was produced actually as a PA speaker for a well known politician for his campaigning. They were also produced with a specific price point. The original Lascala had some inherent weaknesses, which became noticeable as people were buying them for their homes, and using early,higher power solid state amps ( as the tube amp users did not hear these issues, ime ). So is there still a family resemblance between the old and the new ?. I think so. Is the series II worth the extra price difference ? Well, that depends. I could purchase a pair of originals, and do so much to them, that they might be indistinguishable from the new ones, or, even better. So sorry for my long rant, but I guess you can see I am a " Klipsch guy " ( specifically the Heritage Line ). I do feel the new Lascala is price competitive with other speakers, as, imo, they do more of what " I want ". They could use some additional bass augmentation, by adding a pair of extremely fast subwoofers. The Lascala is my favorite Heritage, as it is the most versatile. Enjoy ! MrD.
I agree, and if I were able to build a special room specifically to accommodate the Khorns ( room corners become part of the doghouse ), and then get rid of some of the other room corner " problems ", I would own a pair. Some of the best systems I have heard were with this exact situation. Enjoy ! MrD
I think there are at least two different topics here and both are interesting:
1. Tuning systems and rooms: The two sides never seem to converge on this one, and I suggest it's due to the fact that audiophiles do not all have the same objective. I'm not sure why we have such a hard time admitting this as a basic assumption. Some audiophiles love this pursuit in order to enjoy the technological pursuit of "accurate" reproduction of what is on a recording... hearing every detail both additive and subtractive from the musical experience, because that's what the engineer laid down. To them, tweaking and tuning to make mediocre recordings sound musical is antithetical to why they are in this hobby in the first place. The second type -- and yes there are undoubtedly more than two, but to oversimplify -- are those who want to fool their brains into thinking a live musical event is playing out in their listening room, so they can experience at least a part of the emotional experience of what the musician played/intended. When a Type 2 like Michael (or me) starts talking about making adjustments to make a higher percentage of recordings fool our brains, it necessarily will never make sense to Type 1, unless/until that Type 1 person might experience it for themselves, and maybe if they are at heart a music lover, they might just shift their overall objective.
In the meantime, we should could avoid a lot of argument by being clear about our objective going in, and only if the objectives align is it worth the ink to argue about the means to achieve it. But even if we are ships passing in the night, there is some entertainment value trying to convince one another our objective is the more worthy! It's been fueling audio forums for decades.
2. Vintage equipment vs modern: I would respectfully suggest we restage this question along the lines of my #1 above. I don't think it's so much about old vs new, and it is about designers who design for Type 1's vs those that design for Type 2's. My short response to the original question is in line with Michael Green's, in that speakers of old seemed to be more about musicality, as driven by the ears of the designers, whereas today's speakers, while some are indeed designed around musicality and a designer's great ears like the old days, are the result of several forces I've noticed: a) Reviewers, somewhere along the line ... and maybe it coincided with the digital revolution ... started assigning badges of honor to attributes like "neutrality" and "accuracy" which, in an epic twist of fate, have no objective meaning whatsoever. I observe these terms have come to connote sparkling, airy highs and a thin midrange, uncolored by any chestiness, richness or humanity. IMHO the whole neutrality juggernaut has fueled a generation of products and listeners who unfortunately are missing out on the miracle of our hobby... that a system can truly trip the wires in our brains that create the illusion of real music. "Neutral" systems are amazing technological reproducers of sound and cause one to instantly say "Wow that's a great system." Musical systems cause one to instantly tap their foot and say "Wow Miles Davis is great." So audio companies face a customer base in which 80% of them want neutral hifi. What is a business that wants to stay in business to do? Many (not all) lean toward hifi.
As was pointed out earlier in this thread, there is no need to create false, judgmental distinctions between tuning a room, tuning with an equalizer, tuning with a cable, and tuning by choosing a component like a DAC or power amplifier. Every choice we make tunes our systems. Our entire hobby is about tuning!
I don't understand what Michael Green is getting at with his "codes" references, but I do wholeheartedly agree that anything that can be done to a room or stereo system to improve the probability that our little reptile brains will be fooled into thinking they are listening to live music is a very, very good thing. But then again I am a Type 2!
@kosst_amojan Saul Marantz, Sidney, Fisher hhscott and M Buongiorno, Carver, S Hegeman, David Hafler all used tonecontrols so i guess they were all idiots and didnt have a clue about Audio. No tone controls is a total useless restriction imposed in audio. Whoever decided to implement this no tone controls concept has shortchanged the audio world and brainwashed many
I am a collector of full range speakers. A good pair of vintage speakers with modern dsp can absolutely make newer speaker seem silly to buy. I’ve yet to hear anything that will touch the larger dunlavys.p, For 10000 or less. Or the big old tannoys. I don’t think anyone is hand tuning speakers these days like dunlavy did. The fact that 25-30 years later I can afford much more expensive yet have only purchased 2 newer speakers R5 5 symphonic line and a pair of evolution mm3. The later being the most expensive pair by far. I e spent some time with the mini dsp and more recently with the legacy wavelet, The wavelet and a good pair of vintage full range speakers can be pretty impressive. Those k horns no matter how many mods have tried them 3 times with upgrades no matter what yuck. Those are good for college parties and for home theater definitely not at the core of an audiophile system.
I've had a lot of speakers on your list and still do,along with many higher end modern speakers..and still do..For me I prefer the presentation of newer speakers but will say the resale value seems to be greater with the classic icons.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
