Richard Long's Waldorf restoration

[Lee in Montreal]

We all have fantasies, don't we? My fetish is RLA's Waldorf. So, after months of research, I finally I found more details on four of RLA's Waldorf. Showing details unseen (by me) before.

http://www.myspace.com/soundmanshorty/photos/33491904#{%22ImageId%22%3A33444481}

Thanks Shorty for the nice documentation of that restoration.

[JeffW]

Pretty sure Shorty was buds with Scotty Fitlin, if it's the same guy.

[Lee in Montreal]

I'd be actually very interested to hear from people who have factual experience with such Waldorf because numbers themself don't make sense to me. Let me explain. From redrawing a Waldorf, and with the confirmation from Shorty's restoration pictures, I can say with assurance than the horn path is not longer than a 4520. 8ft for the 4520 vs around 6.5ft, which is in fact even shorter than a 4530. So, theorically, the Waldorf is not designed to go low. The main differences that I see are as follow: bigger mouth than the 4520 and a bigger rear chamber which should translate into a rounder type of bass at, I suspect, a certain loss of efficiency.

The advantage of the Waldorf horn design compared to a 4520-4530 is that the Waldorf doesn't have two consecutive U shaped corners. In fact the Waldorf has only one 90° bend at the upper back (like the Jensen Imperial from which it was inspred), and that bend can even be easily rounded up to avoid resonance and cancellation.

I still think that a back loaded horn with a 2.9m path (9.5ft) tuned to 30Hz and using a pair of 2240 woofers with Fs30 remains a better alternative. But first I must hear from people who have compared the Waldorf with a 4520.

[JeffW]

I wish the search was more functional here, I'm pretty sure I remember Scotty talking about some "modified" scoop horns in some club or set up. I bet that's the same ones Shorty has, but I don't remember the Waldorf part.

[Lee in Montreal]

^^^Whenever I do a search on scoops, I usually end up with this great seminal thread. With Scott mentionning his double 2240h scoops.

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...t-throw-horn.&

I still want to squeeze two 2240h in a 5' tall scoop. Be it of 4520 or Jensen Imperial design.

[Don C]

A bit off topic, but google can do a good job of searching here, just put in a search term, then add "site:audioheritage.org" to the end.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...3203l0.4.11l15

[Ruediger]

... In fact the Waldorf has only one 90° bend at the upper back ...

That is true. And another much larger one in the lower back, right?

Ruediger

[Lee in Montreal]

That is true. And another much larger one in the lower back, right?

Ruediger

The Jensen Imperial sounds great without a Boombox and Richie didn't have digital crossover. Therefore I can ^robably do much better in 2012 than Rich did in 1979. Also I don't have a boombox on my but used eq from the DCX2496 and the 4520s sound real good.

[louped garouv]

The Jensen Imperial sounds great without a Boombox and Richie didn't have digital crossover. Therefore I can ^robably do much better in 2012 than Rich did in 1979. Also I don't have a boombox on my but used eq from the DCX2496 and the 4520s sound real good.

I had thought his nickname back then was 'dick short' or something.....
but i wasn't there, don't really know nuthin... only have heard a few old timers talking...

anyhow.....

Please Don't discount the old gear Lee...

I have a few of the RLA and Acoustilog pieces mentioned in that AES paper that Long/Fierstein submitted back when... although not nearly as flexible as a DCX2496, they do still sound very nice when carefully deployed...

you don't need the flexibility of digital when you are having custom electronics manufactured for your installations -- is how I see it...

[Lee in Montreal]

That is true. And another much larger one in the lower back, right?

The tall gap at the back is a cost cutting measure. Instead of using a 60" tall rear panel, it is only 48" tall. Therefore a 48" x 96" sheet can do two rear panels.

Carl contacted me to know if he could start posting his progresses. Expect some pictures soon. Notice that I made the first bend differently from a Waldorf. It is rounder and therefore avoids any return/reflection. More difficult to build but bass shall be cleaner.

only if you are playing the older disco, soul, and funk cuts...

those boomboxes can add too much synthesized
bass to more modern productions/works -- of course -- IMHO and YMMV

May I add that such a boombox may be needed with bad vinyl pressings only. I have hundreds of 12" singles that sound much better than any CD. They are extremely dynamic and they go loooooooooooowww. No need for enhancement there.

[Ruediger]

The tall gap at the back is a cost cutting measure. Instead of using a 60" tall rear panel, it is only 48" tall.

I did not mean the tall gap at the back. I meant the SCOOP itself, it is the 2nd 90-degree bend.

I also did not mean to suggest that You integrate a boom box. I meant that what You remember as the sound of the Waldorf may be the sound of the dbx and the Bertha combined.

Ruediger

[bigh1229]

The pix of those waldorfs are cool but to stand next to them is something else!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! My 10 year old son is the proud owner of them now along with the single ones restoring 8 lenses now

[Carl_Huff]

Pioneer is offering what looks to be clones of the old Richard Long dance club cabinets ...

http://pioneerproaudio.com/en/produc...gs_wave_series

_____________
Best Regards,
Carl Huff

[Charles0322]

I have heard these style Waldorfs from RLA and believe this cabinet was meant to be used in a double configuration, utilizing 4 15" drivers.. with the real low end provided by the enormous "Bertha" cabinet

Great to see another fellow Montrealer dedicated to JBL and its mutations.. I fell in love with JBL for it's use in disco systems in local Quebec nightclubs.

All the best, Charles

I'd be actually very interested to hear from people who have factual experience with such Waldorf because numbers themself don't make sense to me. Let me explain. From redrawing a Waldorf, and with the confirmation from Shorty's restoration pictures, I can say with assurance than the horn path is not longer than a 4520. 8ft for the 4520 vs around 6.5ft, which is in fact even shorter than a 4530. So, theorically, the Waldorf is not designed to go low. The main differences that I see are as follow: bigger mouth than the 4520 and a bigger rear chamber which should translate into a rounder type of bass at, I suspect, a certain loss of efficiency.

The advantage of the Waldorf horn design compared to a 4520-4530 is that the Waldorf doesn't have two consecutive U shaped corners. In fact the Waldorf has only one 90° bend at the upper back (like the Jensen Imperial from which it was inspred), and that bend can even be easily rounded up to avoid resonance and cancellation.

I still think that a back loaded horn with a 2.9m path (9.5ft) tuned to 30Hz and using a pair of 2240 woofers with Fs30 remains a better alternative. But first I must hear from people who have compared the Waldorf with a 4520.

[Lee in Montreal]

In some ways, I prefered the sound from my 4530 over the 4520.

4530 have a tight articulate bass and impressive kick. It's missing some roundness in the bass though. The Waldorf has the same 7ft horn length as the 4530 but with larger mouth and much bigger rear chamber. which should allow to get tight yet deper bass. I think it will be an improvement over the 4520 and 4530.