Lowther is the best and I will suggest you to go for it...
Lowther is the best and I will suggest you to go for it...
I owned a pair of Lowther TP1 corner horns. I tried everything I could to get them to sound right including sending the drivers back to Lowther for new surrounds. Not only did they mess up the job - I had to align the driver myself - but they still sounded like crap. One good thing though was that I sold them for $5000.00 and bought a real pair of speakers - the JBL 3100 - never looked back.. I have also owned Tannoy and they are way better than the Lowther.
Definately NOT just my opinion.
JBL S3100, VPI HM19 MKIV w/SAMA, Moerch UP4 ,Hana ML cart, Blackdog VTP , Audio Note M2 line stage, Perreaux PMF 1850.
Tannoy Golds with a truextent diaphram ..... anyone ?
You are not alone in your appreciation of Lowthers, but I am curious. What exactly do you like about them?Originally Posted by Mike11
Widget
I guess all fans of fullrange speakers love the sound of evenly distributed breakup modes in the cone
Well. To be honest, thats what keeps the JBL Midwoofers going as well
2213 + 2435HPL w/aquaplas + H9800 (Matsj edition)
Please explain
I wonder if Tannoy will try out Be at some point.
Its a huge market for the truextent guys ! I suppose the purists may be offended ,but Tannoy still build a world class pro studio monitor line .
Please explain
might be best, to use an amp with a low damping factor,
with the Lowthers.
like they were designed with.
Yep, I had that problem. I have really nice eico mono blocks...but with the lowther speakers...I was over powering them by at least 30watts. It was always scary when the volume went up while watching a move or accidentally hitting the headphone jack on the laptop. It would be nice to find an amp that match the speakers...but your talking about some serious coin for any european amp. Now with the tannoy, I don't have to worry about over powering them as they were designed to take 50watts. I think the speakers that will replace the tannoy at some time will be trusonic...I am holding hope of finding a matching cabinet for the one I have upstairs on a mono rig.
Sorry if my comment might have offended anyone out there. The TP1 was a fun project considering they were found at a garage sale. I had never heard of the marque up till then. Unfortunately though, they had a nasty papery/nasal sound to them that I just could not dial out. I tried dampening the cab and smoothing out the throat, deflex paneling in strategic locations.. even lead shot in the curve of the horn all to no avail. The only thing that did sound reasonably good was driving them with a 3 watt Phillips Single Ended integrated amp with TONE controls. That did kind of defeat the notion of purity that a crossoverless design is all about. The other problem was that all of the other SE amps I used - Wavac 811A and Audio Note Kit1 all hummed and with 100+ db sensitivity that did not cut it either.
No doubt more modern cabinets will sound better than those mid 50's monster TP1's did. I have heard a Lammhorn with similar drivers sound way better.
JBL S3100, VPI HM19 MKIV w/SAMA, Moerch UP4 ,Hana ML cart, Blackdog VTP , Audio Note M2 line stage, Perreaux PMF 1850.
It seemed like you were asking for opinions, and you got plenty, I hope you enjoy your journey to sonic nirvana!
Harry
There's just a little bit of difference between a lightly-modified Eminence Beta 12LT with a cheap tweeter diffracting off its rim (and whatever Zu uses, though the main problem with the Zu is that they're incompetent hacks when it comes to crossover design; what do you expect from wire people?) and a properly-designed Dual Concentric.
The Hammer Dynamics Super 12 is not lightly modified. Only the frame is untouched. It sounds nothing like the Zu product, by the way. I would say not to judge the Super 12s unless you have heard a well built pair. I for one find dual concentric drivers to be less coherent, but all of the speakers we are discussing are capable of fine sound. They all need to be heard to be evaluated; examining the designs will tell you nothing beyond theory. In the case of the Hammers it is one big breakthrough idea, and then in the details.
John Wyckoff's description of the Super 12 (compared to the Eminence Beta-12LT)
Cone composition: Beta-12LT is conventional Kraft type. Super 12 is slightly heavier (different mix of fibers).
Voice coil: Super 12 has smaller gauge wire with a Nomex former. (I dropped the Kapton former after the first ten samples.) Beta-12LT uses Kapton former which is not quite as neutral in the mids. Super 12 coil is slightly lighter bringing moving mass to about the same. Super 12 uses one shorted voice coil turn to reduce inductance and improve high frequency response.
Motor: Super 12 has a soft-iron polepiece to improve BL. Beta-12LT has low carbon steel. Super 12 has shorting ring at the base of the polepiece and is capped with an aluminum shorting ring (also called Faraday ring).
Spider and suspension: Super 12 spider is woven Kapton fiber and is slightly softer. The suspension on the Super 12 is doped to be slightly stiffer.
Glue: Super 12 uses a lower-mass, harder formulation, and less of it. Improves high frequency response.
As for the tweeter, inexpensive perhaps but hardly cheap. It is a fine sounding Audex unit. I mounted my examples with hardware I worked up to minimize the profile. The real breakthrough here is taking the top octave off the full range driver. The trick is to use a tweeter that integrates well with the big cone. The system has greatly improved dynamics and more even frequency response. John had great ears, a lot of patience, and he got it right.
Information is not Knowledge; Knowledge is not Wisdom
Too many audiophiles listen with their eyes instead of their ears
When at technical explanation includes statements like this, my BS warning lights flashes bright red.
-Tim
2213 + 2435HPL w/aquaplas + H9800 (Matsj edition)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote