Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 89101112 LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 167

Thread: Who Can Speak From Experience About Comparing Vintage Gear to Modern Equipment?

  1. #136
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    chile
    Posts
    14

    Wink TAD COMPONENTS

    Ill ask him which exact pieces he used.
    If my memory dont fail he used :
    A) 1601a ( or b not 100 sure) and 4001 with a 2·" to 1" adaptor to the horn. Crossover JBL N333.
    B ) 1602 +4001+adaptor + custom crossovers from classic audio repro.

    Marcos bought several units from C.A. Repro starting by 2 Hartsfields repros., you may send a mail and ask there which crossovers fits that kind of project.

    The -3db response was never measured with test equipment , but
    the response is clearly better than the original 40HZ or higher.
    The sound of the bass is extremely deep and accurate on both projects .
    I cant say if the 1601 or 1602 is better since are instaled in different setups.
    My own project uses a 1603 , that is enough good but not as the 1601 or 1602.

    I have the luck of buying a Tad Ls-10 or something. Like 5 years ago.
    You may ask what is the ls-10. Well it was one out of 10 units produced
    by TAD circa 1979. It consisted on a huge cabinet with 2 x 15" drivers ,
    the first 4001 that's not the same as the new one and a wood horn plus the tweeter. It looked like the et-703 but with a different model.
    Please remind that them were protos.
    I bought them and sold to Marcos , we had the chance to compare this TAD protos . with the modified everests , everyone liked more the Everests . What is noticeable different is that the Everest were more natural and warmth without loosing dynamics. The tad's are slower and the bass extension was poor despite double 15" bass but still were great units . I think with some modifications it would get to nowadays dynamic requirements. What I had the impression were better than the modified
    everest was the top octaves through the TAD tweeters . That tweeters beguilded my ears like no other I heared yet.

    I have no experience with modern TAD horns or tweeters.
    But if we only compare the horns on that speakers ( LS-10 and mod. Everest) , I remember the FIM CD of three blind mice catalogues
    track 7 , And I Love You So, singer Yoshiko Goto .On the mods. Everests listening with closed eyes you swear Yoshiko was there even you can ask her to go out on a date . No other speaker , with regular cone mids , electrostatics , horns or whatever you talk about give that sense of presence sometimes is scary ....




    Quote Originally Posted by lucfm
    Hi Victor,

    really interesting everest DD55000 modifications with TAD speakers : could you tell us more :
    - wich TAD units have been used ? ( TD 2001 + TL 1603 ?)
    - what LF-3dB point is reached with TAD woofer in the 8 cu. ft everest enclosure ( same vents ?)
    - about the crossovers ( plans if available...) ; I couldn't find the everest clones you mentioned in Classic A mice ction website.
    - about the sonic differences between everest horn and TAD wood horns.

    thanks for your answers.

    Luc

  2. #137
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    chile
    Posts
    14

    steve

    I was kidding the lights were regular bulbs , but them
    looks like 205 tubes exploding.


    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Schell
    Victor, it sounds like they were using some expensive light bulbs! I hope that I am able to meet you someday and hear a few more of those stories. I really appreciate what you and others like you have done to rescue the surviving equipment from the golden era and place it in the hands of the preservationists/collectors.

  3. #138
    RIP 2011 Zilch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Berkeley, CA
    Posts
    9,963
    Quote Originally Posted by vintage-chile
    No other speaker , with regular cone mids , electrostatics , horns or whatever you talk about give that sense of presence sometimes is scary ....
    Defined directivity works.

    Comparing to any other horn type is apples and oranges....

  4. #139
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Valence ( France )
    Posts
    16

    TAD components

    Thanks for these first informations ; I've been quite surprised by the choice of the 2" TD 4001 with a reversed adaptator to mate the 1" throat of the 2346 horn.
    As I understood it the beryllium TAD drivers, thanks to their significantly lower moving mass share a significantly higher mass rolloff with respect to usual compression drivers, around 8 kHz for the TD 2001 : this allows the use of a more " classical " crossover ( without equalisation to compensate the 3,5 kHz rolloff of the 2425/2426 drivers ).
    I wouldn't have tried the strange combination experimented by your brother-in-law...with initial negative flaring...as I have no idea of predictibility of results.Anyway, this was a successfull try according to you. I would like to learn any theoretical background about this configuration.
    I am working on a modification of the 2346 horn profile , to cancel the more significant profile discontinuities from the throat to the conical waveguide , while keeping approximatively the same pattern control limits. I intended to use it with a LE 85/2405 and TAD or fluxmag 15 inch speaker in the everest cabinet.It seems the sensitivity of TL-160X speakers is lower ( 94-95 dB/W/m instead of the 97 claimed by the manufacturer ?)

    Obviously, any suggestion is welcome .
    Regards ,
    Luc

  5. #140
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    chile
    Posts
    14
    Please hold on until he is back to give you the exact drivers used.
    What I agree with you is that the tl-1603 has no 97db no matter what is told on the specs.
    I have one pair of speakers done with JBL 136a's reconed with 2235h and the other pair done with tl-1603.
    Used both loudspeakers with 300b's 8 watts SET and a 300b PSE with 10w, always the 136a seems to get lower and deeper . On the other hand if you use more powerful amplifiers occurs just the opossite.




    Quote Originally Posted by lucfm
    Thanks for these first informations ; I've been quite surprised by the choice of the 2" TD 4001 with a reversed adaptator to mate the 1" throat of the 2346 horn.
    As I understood it the beryllium TAD drivers, thanks to their significantly lower moving mass share a significantly higher mass rolloff with respect to usual compression drivers, around 8 kHz for the TD 2001 : this allows the use of a more " classical " crossover ( without equalisation to compensate the 3,5 kHz rolloff of the 2425/2426 drivers ).
    I wouldn't have tried the strange combination experimented by your brother-in-law...with initial negative flaring...as I have no idea of predictibility of results.Anyway, this was a successfull try according to you. I would like to learn any theoretical background about this configuration.
    I am working on a modification of the 2346 horn profile , to cancel the more significant profile discontinuities from the throat to the conical waveguide , while keeping approximatively the same pattern control limits. I intended to use it with a LE 85/2405 and TAD or fluxmag 15 inch speaker in the everest cabinet.It seems the sensitivity of TL-160X speakers is lower ( 94-95 dB/W/m instead of the 97 claimed by the manufacturer ?)

    Obviously, any suggestion is welcome .
    Regards ,
    Luc

  6. #141
    Charley Rummel
    Guest

    Bottom line, it all boils down to individual taste.

    Greetings, all:

    I've had the profound pleasure of mind-f@#&ing a few individuals over the years who initially laughed at my eccentric system, composed of mostly home-brewed tube gear (now driven primarily by a Mackie CFX16 in conjunction with a variety of other pieces) with 30 and 50 year old JBL and Altec gear on 5 channels ("...Charley, you actually (ha! ha! hee! hee!) have (ho! ho!) turntables?!?!). Ain't nothing like the feeling of turning a self proclaimed audio expert-snob into a broken man, as I'm sure many of you have also done.

    On the other hand, different individuals expect different things from their preception of what fine audio gear should deliver. I lean more towards the effect of having it feel like the stage is actually in the room (like recreating the Grande Ballroom in Detroit with an MC5 concert), or where I'm within the first few rows centrally located in front of the event or orchestra (like Eugene Ormandy conducting the Philidelphia Philharmonic Orchestra), whereas some acquantences of mine find the effect of recreating the ambience of the concert hall or venue more apealing (such as the Lyric Opera from the balcony, or, dare I say, Pink Floyd 30 rows back from the stage).

    Therefore, it's more like deciding what color paint or style of wallpaper an individual will select, rather than striving towards alleged technology perfection. No color at all is still a color, relatively speaking - right?

    Kind Regards,
    Charley Rummel

  7. #142
    RIP 2014 Ken Pachkowsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Baja, Mexico
    Posts
    1,696
    Quote Originally Posted by Charley Rummel

    No color at all is still a color, relatively speaking - right?

    Kind Regards,
    Charley Rummel
    True enough Charley.

    Ken

  8. #143
    Senior Member Steve Schell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    1,456
    Charlie, you made many valid points. Good sound is where you find it, and many people's preconceptions set them up for a mind-blowing reappraisal upon hearing a good vintage system. Converts are made this way; I'm sure many of us have had such an experience, I know I have.

    Just think of the fun the Bell Labs engineers had in 1933 when they conducted the Auditory Perspective experiments and successfully reproduced the sound of a symphony orchestra in a large hall using the Fletcher Horn systems. At that point in time most of the public had heard only small and squeaky reproduction, so it must have been a mind-roasting demo for them.

    As to individual preferences in sound and some folks' intolerance, Joe Roberts once said in Sound Practices magazine something to the effect that if no one has yet invented a hi fi system that is a perfect ten, why shouldn't he be able to enjoy an 8 or 9 that he likes?

  9. #144
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,445
    Charley,

    I suppose that is one trait that will stick with the older..larger systems ..they were very sensitive and dynamic even with the lower power amps back then so you could get that big close up presentation.

    Perhaps the debate is then are the older systems using vintage drivers more natural sounding over the more technically advanced drivers used in like systems today?

    Is more detail better? What I find interesting is that I can vary the degree of detail by using different amps old and new without resorting to fancy driver upgrades or materials.

    Ian

  10. #145
    Senior Member pentictonklaus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Penticton B.C. Canada
    Posts
    103

    MC 5

    like recreating the Grande Ballroom in Detroit with an MC5 concert


    While comparing old and new speakers. The ones in the back are still the No. 1 choice for bringing up the MC 5 when they were asking :" Do you want to be the problem or the solution? "

    The ones in the front make Eugene Ormandy sound very nice too.

    Both models are keepers for shure. Both models are equally painful to move. Also about the same price range. Both belong to my brother.

    Klaus
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  11. #146
    Senior Member HipoFutura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Little Sebago Lake
    Posts
    161
    OK SuperBee, now it's getting personal! I have to enter the fray. I agree with you 100% on the vintage gear. But, the Ford comments are WAY out of line! My 44 year old small block Falcon is just quiverring with the thought of shaming a SuperBee. All in fun!

    I hate to be seen as a troglodyte, but I love my L100s, Phase Linear preamp/poweramps, and tube mono-blocks. It's not about money. I just love the sound and the looks. This is what the hobby is about for me. How it makes me feel when I sit in a dimly lit room enjoying the glow of the tubes and listening to "Little Wing" or "Dark Side of the Moon".

  12. #147
    Super Moderator jblnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Central Mass
    Posts
    897
    Quote Originally Posted by HipoFutura
    How it makes me feel when I sit in a dimly lit room enjoying the glow of the tubes and listening to "Little Wing" or "Dark Side of the Moon".
    What he said.....



    jblnut

  13. #148
    Senior Member edgewound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    2,777
    Quote Originally Posted by HipoFutura
    My 44 year old small block Falcon is just quiverring with the thought of shaming a SuperBee. All in fun!

    .
    It's not all about horsepower only....power to weight ratio, baby. Falcon weighs...what? 2600lbs? Superbee weighs what? 4000+?

    Remember...all in fun now.
    Edgewound...JBL Pro Authorized...since 1988
    Upland Loudspeaker Service, Upland, CA

  14. #149
    Registered User MJC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    800
    Quote Originally Posted by Zilch
    It's not about the actual quality of the sound, rather the perceived "quality" of it, i.e., it's "character" and coloration.

    The technology has moved well ahead in 40 years, and doesn't sound the same anymore.
    No amount of expenditure on restoration, tweaking, or voodoo is going to bring "Vintage" up to today's standards....
    The sound has changed over the years. if only for the change of the source. LP, CD, DVD, DVD-audio, etc.
    But that second sentence, now there is a debate. I've been comparing, over the last two weeks, a new pair of Studio L 890s to a pair of upgraded(mirror imaged, and Charged-Coupled) L212s.
    Now the L890s are more dynamic, but for a wide, 3D soundstage, the L212s have the 890s beat, by a long shot.

  15. #150
    Senior Member HipoFutura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Little Sebago Lake
    Posts
    161
    EdgeWound, It's about 2,900 lbs, 510HP, and a street car. Pump gas, just a carb, and no NOS. Clevelands Rule!!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •