[David]

I have a pair of old (early 70's vintage) Sansui real walnut wood case
speakers, 18"x16"x29". They still sound good to my ear, but my ear is
getting a bit old also g. However, I have put some relatively newer used
Bose speakers up next to them, and frankly I prefer the old ones.

My dilemma is this: I will be moving internationally soon, and I am
wondering if I should take them; or just buy some new ones upon arrival.
I am no longer at all up-to-date on current audio technology, so I really
don't have any idea what is smart.

Can any of you up-to-date folks give me your suggestions? How do today's
speaker systems compare with these old ones? Would it make any sense to
install newer technology speakers into the heavy wooden cabinets, or would
the acoustics be completely unmatched? What would you folks do under my
circumstances?

Thank you most kindly for any suggestions,
~~DJ

[Eeyore]

David wrote:

I have a pair of old (early 70's vintage) Sansui real walnut wood case
speakers, 18"x16"x29". They still sound good to my ear, but my ear is
getting a bit old also g. However, I have put some relatively newer used
Bose speakers up next to them, and frankly I prefer the old ones.

No great surprise there !


My dilemma is this: I will be moving internationally soon, and I am
wondering if I should take them; or just buy some new ones upon arrival.
I am no longer at all up-to-date on current audio technology, so I really
don't have any idea what is smart.

Can any of you up-to-date folks give me your suggestions? How do today's
speaker systems compare with these old ones?

Good ones are vastly better. Sansui certainly weren't known for quality speakers
either so I'd get some decent new ones.

Would it make any sense to
install newer technology speakers into the heavy wooden cabinets,

No.

or would
the acoustics be completely unmatched?

Yes.

What would you folks do under my circumstances?

What would your budget be fro new speakers and is their size a factor for you ?

Graham

[Ro_ro]

If you upgraded / rebuilt the crossovers you could give your speakers a new
lease of life. Capacitors deteriorate which makes the sound degrade. Replace
the caps with polypropylene ones of the exact specs of the old ones. And you
could replace the inductor with an air cored one. I'm sure your drivers are
fine.

The sound of those bose speakers will tell you a lot about what is wrong
with many of the speakers built today.

Yes you can buy new, very nice, smooth, musical speakers, but it will cost
you a LOT. Most new reasonably priced speakers will have the specs and the
dynamics and all the boxes ticked. They'll go loud, sound detailed and
impress your geeky friends but don't sound very musical.

Many of the speakers built in the 60's and 70's have not been surpassed by
modern speakers below $10,000. Examples would be the old Quad ESL's and some
of the old Kef stuff.

Sansui didn't make great speakers but they weren't too bad! There's quite a
lot of effort and design and passion and quality electronics in some of
their 70's models. You only get that today in the very top priced models.
For normal money today you will get a computer/geek designed speaker where
all the graphs look right... like those bose speakers...

There may be exceptions within your budget. I don't know of them though...
you will have to hunt them down.

If you were to put new drivers into your old cabinets you would have a major
design project on your hands to design a crossover which matched drivers and
cabinet, diffraction effects, and a million other variables unique to your
particular driver and cabinet combination. Maaybe sansui have an upgrade
path that they've designed and tested for your speakers, but I doubt it...


"David" wrote in message
...
I have a pair of old (early 70's vintage) Sansui real walnut wood case
speakers, 18"x16"x29". They still sound good to my ear, but my ear is
getting a bit old also g. However, I have put some relatively newer
used
Bose speakers up next to them, and frankly I prefer the old ones.

My dilemma is this: I will be moving internationally soon, and I am
wondering if I should take them; or just buy some new ones upon arrival.
I am no longer at all up-to-date on current audio technology, so I really
don't have any idea what is smart.

Can any of you up-to-date folks give me your suggestions? How do today's
speaker systems compare with these old ones? Would it make any sense to
install newer technology speakers into the heavy wooden cabinets, or would
the acoustics be completely unmatched? What would you folks do under my
circumstances?

Thank you most kindly for any suggestions,
~~DJ

[GregS]

In article , "Ro_ro" wrote:
If you upgraded / rebuilt the crossovers you could give your speakers a new
lease of life. Capacitors deteriorate which makes the sound degrade. Replace
the caps with polypropylene ones of the exact specs of the old ones. And you
could replace the inductor with an air cored one. I'm sure your drivers are
fine.

Capacitors are placed upon final listening judgement, and changing
capacitor types can change the value selected, or at least in quality
speakers.

The sound of those bose speakers will tell you a lot about what is wrong
with many of the speakers built today.

Yes you can buy new, very nice, smooth, musical speakers, but it will cost
you a LOT. Most new reasonably priced speakers will have the specs and the
dynamics and all the boxes ticked. They'll go loud, sound detailed and
impress your geeky friends but don't sound very musical.

I would agree. To get bass, you need something other than small speakers in most
cases.

greg

[TimPerry]

David wrote:
I have a pair of old (early 70's vintage) Sansui real walnut wood case
speakers, 18"x16"x29". They still sound good to my ear, but my ear is
getting a bit old also g. However, I have put some relatively
newer used Bose speakers up next to them, and frankly I prefer the
old ones.

My dilemma is this: I will be moving internationally soon, and I am
wondering if I should take them; or just buy some new ones upon
arrival.
I am no longer at all up-to-date on current audio technology, so I
really don't have any idea what is smart.

Can any of you up-to-date folks give me your suggestions? How do
today's speaker systems compare with these old ones? Would it make
any sense to install newer technology speakers into the heavy wooden
cabinets, or would the acoustics be completely unmatched? What would
you folks do under my circumstances?

Thank you most kindly for any suggestions,
~~DJ

i'd get a nice set of headphones and take them with me on the plane.

[GregS]

In article , wrote:
I have a pair of old (early 70's vintage) Sansui real walnut wood case
speakers, 18"x16"x29". They still sound good to my ear, but my ear is
getting a bit old also g. However, I have put some relatively newer used
Bose speakers up next to them, and frankly I prefer the old ones.

My dilemma is this: I will be moving internationally soon, and I am
wondering if I should take them; or just buy some new ones upon arrival.
I am no longer at all up-to-date on current audio technology, so I really
don't have any idea what is smart.

Can any of you up-to-date folks give me your suggestions? How do today's
speaker systems compare with these old ones? Would it make any sense to
install newer technology speakers into the heavy wooden cabinets, or would
the acoustics be completely unmatched? What would you folks do under my
circumstances?

Thank you most kindly for any suggestions,

Newer speakers can be better. Those types of speakers are not
made like that now, or at least in any large
amount. The New AR3 design by Ken Kantor is or was the closest thing I can think of in the same
size category. Tower type speakers are much more common now. They
have a small footprint, but can putput the full audio range. If you get two small
units and a subwoofer system, otherwise the minimonitors usually
are limited on bass extension.

Take a look at these hiighly rated speakers, and see if size and price are good.

http://www.axiomaudio.com/

Also take a look through Goodsound.

http://www.goodsound.com/equipment/
http://www.goodsound.com/home.shtml

greg

[Eeyore]

Ro_ro wrote:

If you upgraded / rebuilt the crossovers you could give your speakers a new
lease of life. Capacitors deteriorate which makes the sound degrade. Replace
the caps with polypropylene ones of the exact specs of the old ones. And you
could replace the inductor with an air cored one. I'm sure your drivers are
fine.

For that kind of money you can buy complete new speakers with modern high
performing drive units !


The sound of those bose speakers will tell you a lot about what is wrong
with many of the speakers built today.

No - it tells you whats's wrong with Bose ( lots) and nothing else.


Yes you can buy new, very nice, smooth, musical speakers, but it will cost
you a LOT. Most new reasonably priced speakers will have the specs and the
dynamics and all the boxes ticked. They'll go loud, sound detailed and
impress your geeky friends but don't sound very musical.

Many of the speakers built in the 60's and 70's have not been surpassed by
modern speakers below $10,000.

Totally wrong !


Examples would be the old Quad ESL's and some
of the old Kef stuff.

The ESLs are fine and still exist today albeit a newer and bettter model. KEF
were 'ok' in their day but have long been surpassed.


Sansui didn't make great speakers but they weren't too bad! There's quite a
lot of effort and design and passion and quality electronics in some of
their 70's models. You only get that today in the very top priced models.
For normal money today you will get a computer/geek designed speaker where
all the graphs look right... like those bose speakers...

No. Bose are uniquely bad.

You want some *really* good speakers ?
http://www.pmcloudspeaker.com/index2.html

Graham

[Eeyore]

GregS wrote:

changing
capacitor types can change the value selected, or at least in quality
speakers.

Utter drivel.

Graham

[JohnR66]

"Eeyore" wrote in
message ...


Ro_ro wrote:

If you upgraded / rebuilt the crossovers you could give your speakers a
new
lease of life. Capacitors deteriorate which makes the sound degrade.
Replace
the caps with polypropylene ones of the exact specs of the old ones. And
you
could replace the inductor with an air cored one. I'm sure your drivers
are
fine.

For that kind of money you can buy complete new speakers with modern high
performing drive units !


The sound of those bose speakers will tell you a lot about what is wrong
with many of the speakers built today.

No - it tells you whats's wrong with Bose ( lots) and nothing else.

snip
What is wrong with Bose? I have not heard them yet to make a call. I'm
looking for a small (no more than 18" tall) set of bookself speakers for my
old stereo that are fairly sensitive and sound decent.
John

[Eeyore]

JohnR66 wrote:

"Eeyore" wrote
Ro_ro wrote:

If you upgraded / rebuilt the crossovers you could give your speakers a
new lease of life. Capacitors deteriorate which makes the sound degrade.
Replace the caps with polypropylene ones of the exact specs of the old
ones. And
you could replace the inductor with an air cored one. I'm sure your drivers

are fine.

For that kind of money you can buy complete new speakers with modern high
performing drive units !


The sound of those bose speakers will tell you a lot about what is wrong
with many of the speakers built today.

No - it tells you whats's wrong with Bose ( lots) and nothing else.

snip
What is wrong with Bose? I have not heard them yet to make a call. I'm
looking for a small (no more than 18" tall) set of bookself speakers for my
old stereo that are fairly sensitive and sound decent.

Bose speakers are certainly not efficient for one thing and rarely sound decent
either.

Their marketing is first class though.

It would be easier to ask what's right with Bose and the answer would be 'not
much'. Inferior materials and components cleverly sold for a very high price. Go
listen but don't allow them to sweet talk you into anything.

Graham

GS [Wed, 20 Sep 2006 18:43:04 GMT]:
...
Take a look at these hiighly rated speakers,
and see if size and price are good.
http://www.axiomaudio.com/

Odd that the specs for the m80 claims:

Freq Resp +/-3dB (Hz): 34 - 22kHz [Graph]

yet looking at that graph (M80 SPL)

http://www.axiomaudio.com/gallery_m80ti_diagram.html

shows it to be about 20 dB down at 19 kHz (let
alone 22 kHz) and about 10 dB down at 34 Hz.
The 3 dB end points on the graph are about 60
and 17000 Hz. That's according to their graph.
Maybe they'll change one or the other, or add
a footnote to clear things up, some day.

--
40th Floor - Software @ http://40th.com/
iPlay : the ultimate audio player for mobiles
mp3,mp4,m4a,aac,ogg,wma,flac,wav, play+record
parametric eq, xfeed, reverb; all on a mobile

[Eeyore]

wrote:

GS [Wed, 20 Sep 2006 18:43:04 GMT]:
...
Take a look at these hiighly rated speakers,
and see if size and price are good.
http://www.axiomaudio.com/

Odd that the specs for the m80 claims:

Freq Resp +/-3dB (Hz): 34 - 22kHz [Graph]

Relatively few speakers have a response that good.


yet looking at that graph (M80 SPL)

http://www.axiomaudio.com/gallery_m80ti_diagram.html

shows it to be about 20 dB down at 19 kHz (let
alone 22 kHz) and about 10 dB down at 34 Hz.
The 3 dB end points on the graph are about 60
and 17000 Hz. That's according to their graph.
Maybe they'll change one or the other, or add
a footnote to clear things up, some day.

Well..... I make it +/- 3dB from 60Hz to ~ 17kHz too. Which is pretty fair
actually. Not many spoeakers wil ever be vastly better.

The flatness in the mid-range is excellent and you'll indoubtedly notice that if
you have good ears.

The 'frequency response' figure in the marketing blurb is often taken at -10dB
btw ( industry 'rule of thumb ). That dip at 19k could easily be from a
measurement issue. It looks to be about -10dB @35 Hz.

Don't knock it.

Graham

[Ro_ro]

You want some *really* good speakers ?
http://www.pmcloudspeaker.com/index2.html

Graham

Yep. Great company. Their FB1 design is particularly well regarded. This
design is based extremely closely on the BBC 60's / 70's design LS3/5A,
combined with the 70's designed AB1 complementary subwoofer. And those old
70's builds sound just as good as today's new builds... there was a test
done somewhere recently I recall.

What I am saying is that FB1 design uses 60's/70's technology with a couple
of slight tweaks... sounds great

Anyway, that speaker costs around $3,000... would be money well spent, but
still a lot of dough... for less than a couple of hundred you can either
give your Sansui's a new lease of life or get a pair of new 'glass in a
blender' speakers like the bose

[Eeyore]

Ro_ro wrote:

You want some *really* good speakers ?
http://www.pmcloudspeaker.com/index2.html

Graham

Yep. Great company. Their FB1 design is particularly well regarded. This
design is based extremely closely on the BBC 60's / 70's design LS3/5A,
combined with the 70's designed AB1 complementary subwoofer. And those old
70's builds sound just as good as today's new builds... there was a test
done somewhere recently I recall.

What I am saying is that FB1 design uses 60's/70's technology with a couple
of slight tweaks... sounds great

New drivers as well AIUI.


Anyway, that speaker costs around $3,000... would be money well spent, but
still a lot of dough... for less than a couple of hundred you can either
give your Sansui's a new lease of life or get a pair of new 'glass in a
blender' speakers like the bose

I was quite keen on Mission's efforts in the 80s. Back then they used Seas units
( great choice ) and were a good economy buy.

I'm not really familiar with that territory any more but I reckon there must be
some pretty decent stuff out there for a modest price..

Graham

[Ro_ro]

What I am saying is that FB1 design uses 60's/70's technology with a
couple
of slight tweaks... sounds great

New drivers as well AIUI.

Of course. Those old 60's/70's drivers (T27 and B110) aren't made anymore
unfortunately. But they're still right up there with the best of today's
drivers bar the very high end. The major re-design required was to pick new
drivers as close as possible to those old drivers, and then tweak the
speaker to behave as near as possible to the original design ..

[Laurence Payne]

On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 01:17:30 GMT, "JohnR66" wrote:

What is wrong with Bose?

The 802 was OK :-) The domestic stuff is "lifestyle" crap. And
vastly over-priced.

[Eeyore]

Laurence Payne wrote:

On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 01:17:30 GMT, "JohnR66" wrote:

What is wrong with Bose?

The 802 was OK :-)

Don't even get me started on that POS. The equaliser box had 16dB of boost at LF
and 14dB at HF IIRC !


The domestic stuff is "lifestyle" crap. And vastly over-priced.

Very true. They're selling an image not a sound.

Graham

[Adrian Tuddenham]

wrote:

GS [Wed, 20 Sep 2006 18:43:04 GMT]:
...
Take a look at these hiighly rated speakers,
and see if size and price are good.
http://www.axiomaudio.com/

Odd that the specs for the m80 claims:

Freq Resp +/-3dB (Hz): 34 - 22kHz [Graph]

yet looking at that graph (M80 SPL)

http://www.axiomaudio.com/gallery_m80ti_diagram.html

shows it to be about 20 dB down at 19 kHz (let
alone 22 kHz) and about 10 dB down at 34 Hz.
The 3 dB end points on the graph are about 60
and 17000 Hz. That's according to their graph.
Maybe they'll change one or the other, or add
a footnote to clear things up, some day.

It's not the first time I've come across stupid specifications that a
simple graph showed to be false. I don't know why they do it; because
they actually have a very good flat response there, which doesn't need
to be lied about in order to sell it.

My only worry would be the notch just above 200 c/s. It isn't deep
enough to give serious concern, but I would worry that the rapid phase
shift from something so sharp might be audible. I wonder what is
causing it - at that frequency it has to be something physically large
or rather heavy (mass of speaker unit resonating on stiff front panel?).


--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

[GregS]

In article . invalid, lid (Adrian Tuddenham) wrote:
wrote:

GS [Wed, 20 Sep 2006 18:43:04 GMT]:
...
Take a look at these hiighly rated speakers,
and see if size and price are good.
http://www.axiomaudio.com/

Odd that the specs for the m80 claims:

Freq Resp +/-3dB (Hz): 34 - 22kHz [Graph]

yet looking at that graph (M80 SPL)

http://www.axiomaudio.com/gallery_m80ti_diagram.html

shows it to be about 20 dB down at 19 kHz (let
alone 22 kHz) and about 10 dB down at 34 Hz.
The 3 dB end points on the graph are about 60
and 17000 Hz. That's according to their graph.
Maybe they'll change one or the other, or add
a footnote to clear things up, some day.

It's not the first time I've come across stupid specifications that a
simple graph showed to be false. I don't know why they do it; because
they actually have a very good flat response there, which doesn't need
to be lied about in order to sell it.

My only worry would be the notch just above 200 c/s. It isn't deep
enough to give serious concern, but I would worry that the rapid phase
shift from something so sharp might be audible. I wonder what is
causing it - at that frequency it has to be something physically large
or rather heavy (mass of speaker unit resonating on stiff front panel?).

Graphs tell it like it is as measured, but have little bearing
on room response. The response at two meters would be different also.

greg

[David]

On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 00:14:46 -0600, David wrote:

I have a pair of old (early 70's vintage) Sansui real walnut wood case
speakers, 18"x16"x29". They still sound good to my ear, but my ear is
getting a bit old also g. However, I have put some relatively newer used
Bose speakers up next to them, and frankly I prefer the old ones.

My dilemma is this: I will be moving internationally soon, and I am
wondering if I should take them; or just buy some new ones upon arrival.
I am no longer at all up-to-date on current audio technology, so I really
don't have any idea what is smart.

Can any of you up-to-date folks give me your suggestions? How do today's
speaker systems compare with these old ones? Would it make any sense to
install newer technology speakers into the heavy wooden cabinets, or would
the acoustics be completely unmatched? What would you folks do under my
circumstances?

Thank you most kindly for any suggestions,
~~DJ

Thank you for all the discussion folks! This has been a useful exercise
for me.

I have a pretty clear idea now about what I need to do with those Bose
speakers! g

I appreciate the websites. I have gone through them, but still need to
spend some more time.

I can relate well to the points made about bass response vs. speaker size,
as that has been my experience as well. I am sure that all of your ears
are more keen and discerning than my own; however, in that light, what
would you think of this idea: Suppose I keep the big-box speakers mainly
for their bass response, and look to some of the newer designs for
everything else? I realize that that could get into compatibilty/matching
issues, but again I really doubt that my ears are that sophisticated.

I could further have the big-box speakers inspected/tested, and if there
are problems I could have the woofers replaced/upgraded. I do agree that
there would be issues with the baffles, etc.; but at these low freqs, I'm
not sure that my ears could tell the difference anyway. What would you
think of this idea?

Thank you again,
~~DJ

[Walt]

Eeyore wrote:
Laurence Payne wrote:
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 01:17:30 GMT, "JohnR66" wrote:

What is wrong with Bose?

The 802 was OK :-)

Don't even get me started on that POS. The equaliser box had 16dB of boost at LF
and 14dB at HF IIRC !

Gotta side with Laurence here. It was OK. Compared to some of the
other POS boxen that were in vogue for small PA speakers at the time, it
was a good choice. Lesser of several evils if you will.

Yeah, it moved the problem around rather than solving it; the aggressive
electronic EQ necessary to compensate for the vast shortcomings of an
inferior design caused as many anomalies as it cured. But for some
applications it was OK.

The domestic stuff is "lifestyle" crap. And vastly over-priced.

Very true. They're selling an image not a sound.

Thirded.

//Walt

[Eeyore]

David wrote:

I can relate well to the points made about bass response vs. speaker size,
as that has been my experience as well.

Listen to a PMC and you'll instantly forget that idea !

Graham

[GregS]

In article , wrote:
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 00:14:46 -0600, David wrote:

I have a pair of old (early 70's vintage) Sansui real walnut wood case
speakers, 18"x16"x29". They still sound good to my ear, but my ear is
getting a bit old also g. However, I have put some relatively newer used
Bose speakers up next to them, and frankly I prefer the old ones.

My dilemma is this: I will be moving internationally soon, and I am
wondering if I should take them; or just buy some new ones upon arrival.
I am no longer at all up-to-date on current audio technology, so I really
don't have any idea what is smart.

Can any of you up-to-date folks give me your suggestions? How do today's
speaker systems compare with these old ones? Would it make any sense to
install newer technology speakers into the heavy wooden cabinets, or would
the acoustics be completely unmatched? What would you folks do under my
circumstances?

Thank you most kindly for any suggestions,
~~DJ

Thank you for all the discussion folks! This has been a useful exercise
for me.

I have a pretty clear idea now about what I need to do with those Bose
speakers! g

I appreciate the websites. I have gone through them, but still need to
spend some more time.

I can relate well to the points made about bass response vs. speaker size,
as that has been my experience as well. I am sure that all of your ears
are more keen and discerning than my own; however, in that light, what
would you think of this idea: Suppose I keep the big-box speakers mainly
for their bass response, and look to some of the newer designs for
everything else? I realize that that could get into compatibilty/matching
issues, but again I really doubt that my ears are that sophisticated.

I could further have the big-box speakers inspected/tested, and if there
are problems I could have the woofers replaced/upgraded. I do agree that
there would be issues with the baffles, etc.; but at these low freqs, I'm
not sure that my ears could tell the difference anyway. What would you
think of this idea?

Thank you again,

Inspection YES. Check to see if the driver surrounds are intact, and will remain intact.
Check the speakers for equal sounds. or that when playing mono pink noise, that the
response is flat, and everything is in the exact center image.

greg

[GregS]

In article , wrote:
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 00:14:46 -0600, David wrote:

I have a pair of old (early 70's vintage) Sansui real walnut wood case
speakers, 18"x16"x29". They still sound good to my ear, but my ear is
getting a bit old also g. However, I have put some relatively newer used
Bose speakers up next to them, and frankly I prefer the old ones.

My dilemma is this: I will be moving internationally soon, and I am
wondering if I should take them; or just buy some new ones upon arrival.
I am no longer at all up-to-date on current audio technology, so I really
don't have any idea what is smart.

Can any of you up-to-date folks give me your suggestions? How do today's
speaker systems compare with these old ones? Would it make any sense to
install newer technology speakers into the heavy wooden cabinets, or would
the acoustics be completely unmatched? What would you folks do under my
circumstances?

Thank you most kindly for any suggestions,
~~DJ

Thank you for all the discussion folks! This has been a useful exercise
for me.

I have a pretty clear idea now about what I need to do with those Bose
speakers! g

I appreciate the websites. I have gone through them, but still need to
spend some more time.

I can relate well to the points made about bass response vs. speaker size,
as that has been my experience as well. I am sure that all of your ears
are more keen and discerning than my own; however, in that light, what
would you think of this idea: Suppose I keep the big-box speakers mainly
for their bass response, and look to some of the newer designs for
everything else? I realize that that could get into compatibilty/matching
issues, but again I really doubt that my ears are that sophisticated.


If you got an extra amp and active crossovers you could go to a modern
minimonitor for the upper end. It would definately sound better. That
still sounds like too much trouble.

greg

I could further have the big-box speakers inspected/tested, and if there
are problems I could have the woofers replaced/upgraded. I do agree that
there would be issues with the baffles, etc.; but at these low freqs, I'm
not sure that my ears could tell the difference anyway. What would you
think of this idea?

Thank you again,
~~DJ

[GregS]

In article , Eeyore wrote:

Laurence Payne wrote:

On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 01:17:30 GMT, "JohnR66" wrote:

What is wrong with Bose?

The 802 was OK :-)

Don't even get me started on that POS. The equaliser box had 16dB of boost at
LF
and 14dB at HF IIRC !

The 802 professional had a limited bass, cutoff around 50 HZ, and had more like 10 dB LF boost.
The 901 had 18 dB boost for a 30 Hz LF cutoff.

I found a bunch of strange things about the Bose equalizers, both performance and build.

greg


The domestic stuff is "lifestyle" crap. And vastly over-priced.

Very true. They're selling an image not a sound.

Graham

[Adrian Tuddenham]

GregS wrote:

In article . invalid,
(Adrian Tuddenham) wrote:
wrote:

GS [Wed, 20 Sep 2006 18:43:04 GMT]:
...
Take a look at these hiighly rated speakers,
and see if size and price are good.
http://www.axiomaudio.com/

Odd that the specs for the m80 claims:

Freq Resp +/-3dB (Hz): 34 - 22kHz [Graph]

yet looking at that graph (M80 SPL)

http://www.axiomaudio.com/gallery_m80ti_diagram.html

shows it to be about 20 dB down at 19 kHz (let
alone 22 kHz) and about 10 dB down at 34 Hz.
The 3 dB end points on the graph are about 60
and 17000 Hz. That's according to their graph.
Maybe they'll change one or the other, or add
a footnote to clear things up, some day.

It's not the first time I've come across stupid specifications that a
simple graph showed to be false. I don't know why they do it; because
they actually have a very good flat response there, which doesn't need
to be lied about in order to sell it.

My only worry would be the notch just above 200 c/s. It isn't deep
enough to give serious concern, but I would worry that the rapid phase
shift from something so sharp might be audible. I wonder what is
causing it - at that frequency it has to be something physically large
or rather heavy (mass of speaker unit resonating on stiff front panel?).

Graphs tell it like it is as measured, but have little bearing
on room response. The response at two meters would be different also.

I was assuming they had measured it on-axis in an anechoic room or
equivalent. That would at least have shown up any vices in the drive
units, crossover and basic construction.

If it passes that test, then there is a whole lot more work to do to
check how it would sound in a real room. Dispersion information is even
more difficult to find than truthful basic specifications.

'Classic' designs like the LS 3/5A had a lot of work done to check that
the directional characteristics were suitable for the intended listening
environment:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1976-29.pdf

--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

[Arny Krueger]

"Eeyore" wrote in
message ...

Laurence Payne wrote:

On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 01:17:30 GMT, "JohnR66" wrote:

What is wrong with Bose?

The 802 was OK :-)

Don't even get me started on that POS. The equaliser box had 16dB of boost
at LF
and 14dB at HF IIRC !

Yeah, but the 802 was for SR. Efficiency mattered, so the drivers had to
have even less unequalized bass response than the 901. The drivers were
so-called "full range", but AFAIK lacked whizzers or creative break up
modes.

If you had to choose, would you pick peaky response, or a smoother roll-off
that could be equalized into something semi-useful. The only thing worse
than a box that size that needed eq like that would be one that didn't.

The domestic stuff is "lifestyle" crap. And vastly over-priced.

Agreed. Bose isn't as highly profitable as they are because they sell stuff
for their cost.


Very true. They're selling an image not a sound.

See former comments about Bose being highly profitable. Selling the sizzle
and delivering a poor peice of meat with spicing and tenderizer is an old
story.

OTOH compare and contrast Bose and Monster Cable.

[David]

On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 14:55:18 GMT, (GregS) wrote:


If you got an extra amp and active crossovers you could go to a modern
minimonitor for the upper end. It would definately sound better. That
still sounds like too much trouble.

Greg, to make sure that I understand, do you mean that I should probably
just chuck the big-boxes, and go with a modern set completely?

[David]

On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 15:38:15 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:



David wrote:

I can relate well to the points made about bass response vs. speaker size,
as that has been my experience as well.

Listen to a PMC and you'll instantly forget that idea !

Graham, would you have a link to one that you might suggest?

[Eeyore]

GregS wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Laurence Payne wrote:
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 01:17:30 GMT, "JohnR66" wrote:

What is wrong with Bose?

The 802 was OK :-)

Don't even get me started on that POS. The equaliser box had 16dB of boost at
LF and 14dB at HF IIRC !

The 802 professional had a limited bass, cutoff around 50 HZ, and had more like 10 dB LF boost.
The 901 had 18 dB boost for a 30 Hz LF cutoff.

I'm sure you're right there. The 802 probably wouldn't have survived with that much LF boost.


I found a bunch of strange things about the Bose equalizers, both performance and build.

Do tell.

Graham

[Eeyore]

Adrian Tuddenham wrote:

'Classic' designs like the LS 3/5A had a lot of work done to check that
the directional characteristics were suitable for the intended listening
environment:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1976-29.pdf

And now available in all but name as a PMC loudspeaker.

Graham

[Laurence Payne]

On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 12:10:57 +0100, Eeyore
wrote:

What is wrong with Bose?

The 802 was OK :-)

Don't even get me started on that POS. The equaliser box had 16dB of boost at LF
and 14dB at HF IIRC !

In its day, it did its job OK as a SR speaker though.

[Eeyore]

David wrote:

On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 15:38:15 +0100, Eeyore wrote:
David wrote:

I can relate well to the points made about bass response vs. speaker size,
as that has been my experience as well.

Listen to a PMC and you'll instantly forget that idea !

Graham, would you have a link to one that you might suggest?

I'll ask which model it was I heard. It was round at a friend's. They were quite
modestly sized floorstanding ones. Is that what you're looking for ?

Graham

[Eeyore]

Laurence Payne wrote:

On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 12:10:57 +0100, Eeyore wrote:

What is wrong with Bose?

The 802 was OK :-)

Don't even get me started on that POS. The equaliser box had 16dB of boost at LF
and 14dB at HF IIRC !

In its day, it did its job OK as a SR speaker though.

It didn't even manage that ! Its efficiency was dreadful.

Around the mid 70s I was hiring out a decent sound rig based around some EV Sentry
IVs for FOH. Whilst we only had about 1kW to begin with it was more than adequately
loud and a number of times times we provided sound for the support act in the local
'Arena' which has a capacity of 1000 and it did the job just fine.

One evening I went there to see a new act called Alberto Y los Trios Paranoias.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto...rios_Paranoias

I'd already heard they were using Bose so I was quite curious. There were IIRC no
less that 6 Bose 1kW amps sat on the stage driving 802s.

No sooner had they started than the clip lights came on and you could hear the
distortion clearly.

And yet - they were using it *only for vocals* !!!!!!!!!! It wasn't especially loud
either.

Graham

[Adrian Tuddenham]

Eeyore wrote:

Adrian Tuddenham wrote:

'Classic' designs like the LS 3/5A had a lot of work done to check that
the directional characteristics were suitable for the intended listening
environment:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1976-29.pdf

And now available in all but name as a PMC loudspeaker.

I've tried looking on their website but the first page just comes up
black with no links.


--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

[GregS]

In article , Eeyore wrote:


Laurence Payne wrote:

On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 12:10:57 +0100, Eeyore wrote:

What is wrong with Bose?

The 802 was OK :-)

Don't even get me started on that POS. The equaliser box had 16dB of boost
at LF
and 14dB at HF IIRC !

In its day, it did its job OK as a SR speaker though.

It didn't even manage that ! Its efficiency was dreadful.

Around the mid 70s I was hiring out a decent sound rig based around some EV
Sentry
IVs for FOH. Whilst we only had about 1kW to begin with it was more than
adequately
loud and a number of times times we provided sound for the support act in the
local
'Arena' which has a capacity of 1000 and it did the job just fine.

One evening I went there to see a new act called Alberto Y los Trios Paranoias.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto...rios_Paranoias

I'd already heard they were using Bose so I was quite curious. There were IIRC
no
less that 6 Bose 1kW amps sat on the stage driving 802s.

No sooner had they started than the clip lights came on and you could hear the
distortion clearly.

And yet - they were using it *only for vocals* !!!!!!!!!! It wasn't especially
loud
either.

That would be surprising. Perhaps there was some LF wind noises causing
additional problems.

greg

[GregS]

In article , wrote:
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 14:55:18 GMT, (GregS) wrote:


If you got an extra amp and active crossovers you could go to a modern
minimonitor for the upper end. It would definately sound better. That
still sounds like too much trouble.

Greg, to make sure that I understand, do you mean that I should probably
just chuck the big-boxes, and go with a modern set completely?

Thats a good suggestion. I thought you were reluctant to haul those
away to your new location.

greg

[Arny Krueger]

"Adrian Tuddenham" wrote in message
lid.invalid...
Eeyore wrote:

Adrian Tuddenham wrote:

'Classic' designs like the LS 3/5A had a lot of work done to check that
the directional characteristics were suitable for the intended
listening
environment:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1976-29.pdf

I can't believe that this oldie hasn't been thoroughly eclipsed in every
way.

And now available in all but name as a PMC loudspeaker.

I've tried looking on their website but the first page just comes up
black with no links.

Their home page is Flash.

I can't find a current product that I would see as a 1:1 replacement for the
LS 3/5A.

[Adrian Tuddenham]

Arny Krueger wrote:

"Adrian Tuddenham" wrote in message
lid.invalid...
Eeyore wrote:

Adrian Tuddenham wrote:

'Classic' designs like the LS 3/5A had a lot of work done to check that
the directional characteristics were suitable for the intended
listening
environment:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/reports/1976-29.pdf

I can't believe that this oldie hasn't been thoroughly eclipsed in every
way.

I think it has done extremely well considering it was never intended by
its designers to be the epitome of accurate high fidelity. It was
intended for use in the cramped conditions of mobile control rooms.

Within the constraints of the original design, it would be difficult to
do significantly better, even nowadays. If the original constraints are
ignored, no doubt better results can be obtained.


And now available in all but name as a PMC loudspeaker.

I've tried looking on their website but the first page just comes up
black with no links.

Their home page is Flash.

Ah, another manufacturer who has a web page designer too clever for the
company's good.


I can't find a current product that I would see as a 1:1 replacement for the
LS 3/5A.

The reason I tried looking at the PMC page was to see what they were
using as a replacement for the KEF B110 of the original design.

I had been offered an 'equivalent' drive unit to the B110 by Wilmslow
Audio (who have always been excellent suppliers in every possible way);
but delving into the specification, I came across an anomaly: The
replacement speaker claimed at least as good a bass response as the
B110, but the cone travel was far less because it did not have a roll
surround. Presumably the manufacturers had measured the frequency
response under considerably reduced power.

There was no possible way this speaker could be used as a direct
replacement in a two-way unit like the LS 3/5A, it would have caused
very significant bass distortion. In a three-way unit, where it wasn't
called upon to handle the extreme LF end of its range at full power, it
would probably have been all right.


--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

[David]

On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 12:29:30 GMT, (GregS) wrote:

In article , wrote:
On Thu, 21 Sep 2006 14:55:18 GMT, (GregS) wrote:


If you got an extra amp and active crossovers you could go to a modern
minimonitor for the upper end. It would definately sound better. That
still sounds like too much trouble.

Greg, to make sure that I understand, do you mean that I should probably
just chuck the big-boxes, and go with a modern set completely?

Thats a good suggestion. I thought you were reluctant to haul those
away to your new location.

I should have expressed myself more clearly in the first place...
Actually, I am on the fence. Eventhough they are big, I rather like the
old girls. (Maybe even a bit of sentimentality here, since I've had them
for so long). And shipping weight/volume isn't a problem. I guess I was
looking for an excuse to keep them if there is any technological
(audiological?) reason for doing so; but willing to leave them if there is
not... I guess that pretty well captures my feelings.

Thanks again,
David