Todays Speakers vs Vintage Speakers

[IPADave]

This thread is like the majority of the Equipment threads on AK. Two camps with opposite views that can't see across the chasm. Fortunately, there is a 3rd camp, although in small numbers. They are the ones trying to achieve good sound regardless if it's new or vintage. Chocolate! Peanut Butter!. I'll have a Reeses Peanut Butter Cup.

-Dave

 

[musichal]

This thread is like the majority of the Equipment threads on AK. Two camps with opposite views that can't see across the chasm. Fortunately, there is a 3rd camp, although in small numbers. They are the ones trying to achieve good sound regardless if it's new or vintage. Chocolate! Peanut Butter!. I'll have a Reeses Peanut Butter Cup.

-Dave

I have both new and vintage, and love both. Agree.

 

[Alobar]

Vintage speakers often need work and tweaking to perform well. New speakers perform well right out of the box, if they are good.
I am vintage for several reasons, but none are because of superior SQ to new.

 

[z-adamson]

Depends entirely upon who assesses the performance. Your opinion is clear, but that's all it is.

If you were assessing performance what would your conclusion be?

Considering I was talking to 3db, I though it was clear that his assessment was asked for.

 

[musichal]

If you were assessing performance what would your conclusion be?

Considering I was talking to 3db, I though it was clear that his assessment was asked for.

Then pardon me for interrupting. I missed that.

My assessment would require a comparison, not conjecture.

Now, before long I will be comparing my Klipsch Forte with my Monitor Audio Silver 6. Will begin a thread when I do; watch for it.

 

[tubed]

Vintage speakers often need work and tweaking to perform well. New speakers perform well right out of the box, if they are good.
I am vintage for several reasons, but none are because of superior SQ to new.

"Out of the box", I've heard that some manufacturers recommend 100+ hours of break in time, myth, ploy or reality

 

[Tom Bombadil]

I've owned a number of vintage speakers: Dynaco A25, Ohm H, JBL L26, more, and some new speakers. Certainly have listened to many new speakers. I favor new. I really like definition, soundstage/imaging, instrument separation and find, to my ears, that newer designs do these things better. More advanced materials and computer modeling yields some precise drivers / speakers. Older speakers have their strengths and I cannot fault anyone for liking them. In general I find paying the extra amount for a high quality new speaker is money well spent.

 

[Colin Oddy]

Hello room, Im a newbi and hope my enquiry is appropriately placed in this room.
My nostalgia got the better of me and I have recently purchased a Sansui QRX5500 – a model I owned back in the 70’s-80’s.

I’m not an audiophile so have little insight into what speakers I need. I now know the Sansui SP1700 (I still have) probably aren’t the best that I can do these days – and my wife would like less intrusive speakers in the lounge room.

Here is a link to the unit description:
https://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/sansui/qrx-5500.shtml

In the Service Manual under “Specifications” it lists; Audio Power Output:
Music Power:
220W (4 Ohm 1,000Hz)
160W (8 Ohm 1,000Hz)

Continuous Power: (each channel driven)
45W/ch (4 Ohm 1,000Hz)
30W/ch (8 Ohm 1,000Hz)

Continuous Power (4 channels driven) (THIS IS WHAT I'D LIKE)
25W X 4 (8 Ohm 1,000Hz)
22W X 4 (8 Ohm 20 to 20,000Hz)

Hopefully all that means more to you than it does to me, and if you can recommend appropriate speakers I’d very much appreciate that.

Would Tannoy Mercury F4 or TDL Studio 5 speakers be appropriate for the QRX5500 Sansui Amp? Any others?

kind regards and thanks in advance.

 

[Drum]

You only want to use 8 ohm speakers if you are going to use 4. Probably want something fairly efficient with only 22 watts.

I would probably say the Tannoy just because they are more efficient. Or you could go more vinatagy?

 

[BMWCCA]

This thread is like the majority of the Equipment threads on AK. Two camps with opposite views that can't see across the chasm. Fortunately, there is a 3rd camp, although in small numbers. They are the ones trying to achieve good sound regardless if it's new or vintage.

I can see all sides. Not to brag, but simply by way of setting the stage, I likely have more vintage speakers than any of you participating in this thread, save maybe a couple. That's over a dozen JBLs, an Infinity, Mordaunt Short, Mission, and a few others. At least two pair of JBLs have been in my home for over 35-years. I also have a couple of pairs of speakers that are just a few years old. They are not expensive but they are impressive. I believe you'd be quite surprised to hear the JBL LSR305 powered monitors A—B'd blind with an L110 or L112. And I love my L112s, L150A, L96, L1, L3, L5, L7, 4412A, 250ti, etc. But the LSR305 for $200 per pair, amps included, is a remarkable achievement. I happen to prefer them to the LSR308, but that may just be me. That's modern technology for you when a 5-inch woofer can make you think it's a 10, or 12-inch playing. Cheers!

 

[Alobar]

I can see all sides. Not to brag, but simply by way of setting the stage, I likely have more vintage speakers than any of you participating in this thread, save maybe a couple. That's over a dozen JBLs, an Infinity, Mordaunt Short, Mission, and a few others. At least two pair of JBLs have been in my home for over 35-years. I also have a couple of pairs of speakers that are just a few years old. They are not expensive but they are impressive. I believe you'd be quite surprised to hear the JBL LSR305 powered monitors A—B'd blind with an L110 or L112. And I love my L112s, L150A, L96, L1, L3, L5, L7, 4412A, 250ti, etc. But the LSR305 for $200 per pair, amps included, is a remarkable achievement. I happen to prefer them to the LSR308, but that may just be me. That's modern technology for you when a 5-inch woofer can make you think it's a 10, or 12-inch playing. Cheers!

+1 for the LSR 305's . I liked the 305s so much I bought the 308's for my shop. I've had both playing side by side and I can hear very little difference. The 308's maybe just slightly deeper bass but it is slight. I think the spl can go a bit higher with the 308's which is good for the larger area in shop and I got them for almost the same price as the 305s. I like them both!

 

[3db]

Major players KEF and Infinity used computer design and analysis as early as the late 60's early 70's

Please show me the proof. Everything I found so far on the internet indicated a designer's intuition rather than modelling tools. I'm open to looking at this as I find speaker design fascinating. Dr. Flloyd Tool really broght speaker design and modelling into the 21 century with his work at the NRC.

 

[Akustic]

I know that the west coast sound was a deliberate move after doing some more research on the topic and was prevalent in the 60s and 70s. Designers used intution and simple crossover networks as they lacked the modelling tools back then. Please show me the tools if you are so certain thatvthey existed.

Just gotta poke the thread ay ..
The EAR was the judge then and the EAR is the judge now ..
Enjoy listening to your modeling tools ...

 

[3db]

Just gotta poke the thread ay ..
The EAR was the judge then and the EAR is the judge now ..
Enjoy listening to your modeling tools ...

Its the result of extensive testing and modelling done on the speakers that I end up listening too, not the tool

 

[3db]

If I / we have it all wrong, then set it straight.

Name brand new speakers that I can purchase today at a retail store for less than $1000 that will outperform the JBL L112.

Name brand new speakers that I can purchase today at a retail store for less than $500 that will outperform JBL L110.

Its your subjective assessment, not mine. And like I said before, I liked the JBL110s when I heard them but the little Energy 22s that came on the market a few years later totally blew away the JBLs in every category from bass, mids, highs and imaging. Those things rocked.

 

[tubed]

Please show me the proof. Everything I found so far on the internet indicated a designer's intuition rather than modelling tools. I'm open to looking at this as I find speaker design fascinating. Dr. Flloyd Tool really broght speaker design and modelling into the 21 century with his work at the NRC.

Arnie Nudell and John Ulrich of Infinity were aerospace physicists and used computer tech to design speakers from the very beginnings of their company.
From a Stereophile interview,
"Nudell: Understand that, although I designed the first speakers in a condo in Beaver Creek, I had actually turned it into a laboratory. In fact, the living room was hilarious. I wish I had pictures of it. I had a computer, MLSSA, the dbx spectrum analyzer, and a custom switching system. I had state-of-the-art equipment for design."

KEF boasts about it in many of their publications
http://www.kef.com/uploads/files/THE_REFERENCE/REF_White_Paper_preview_path_200514.pdf

As to Floyd Toole, his speaker design such as the TOTL 1993 Harman Kardon Model Sixty was a huge disappointment, really not a pleasurable listen.
Probably at the time, speakers designs like this and a few others I heard were responsible for keeping my interest in "new" speakers at bay.

 

[z-adamson]

Its your subjective assessment, not mine. And like I said before, I liked the JBL110s when I heard them but the little Energy 22s that came on the market a few years later totally blew away the JBLs in every category from bass, mids, highs and imaging. Those things rocked.

Those are vintage also by definition.

The Energy 22 is an 80s product.

We were talking about vintage vs new and you are talking vintage vs vintage.

I am seeing a trend......nobody can come up with a new product that can compete with vintage, dollar for dollar. All anyone can do is dodge the question.

I am not saying it does not exist, but if it does, I would love to know about.

 

[3db]

Arnie Nudell and John Ulrich of Infinity were aerospace physicists and used computer tech to design speakers from the very beginnings of their company.
From a Stereophile interview,
"Nudell: Understand that, although I designed the first speakers in a condo in Beaver Creek, I had actually turned it into a laboratory. In fact, the living room was hilarious. I wish I had pictures of it. I had a computer, MLSSA, the dbx spectrum analyzer, and a custom switching system. I had state-of-the-art equipment for design."

KEF boasts about it in many of their publications
http://www.kef.com/uploads/files/THE_REFERENCE/REF_White_Paper_preview_path_200514.pdf

As to Floyd Toole, his speaker design such as the TOTL 1993 Harman Kardon Model Sixty was a huge disappointment, really not a pleasurable listen.
Probably at the time, speakers designs like this and a few others I heard were responsible for keeping my interest in "new" speakers at bay.
View attachment 1227320

Just because Infinity has some modelling tools does not mean that it was used by JBL. That's stretching the assertion. How many Floyd Tool products did you listen too? Were they all not your liking?
Liking a speaker is a subjective value and the pro Vintage peeople are pushing their subjective preferences as fact. BTW.. thankyou for the Sterophile quote Do you have the issue and year of release?

 

[Retrovert]

Some of the reasons to prefer vintage vs. new have not been discussed.

Here's a comment I elsewhere made on the subject.

Older drivers were made with heavier frames, often cast, whereas newer units have stamped frames which are not as rigid. The lack of rigidity causes resonance issues.

Nobody has mentioned the biggest issue: ringing. The more rigid the basket the less prone it is to ringing. Stamped frames are notorious for ringing. Bud Fried wrote about how the inexpensive stamped speakers had audible (to him) ringing and this caused him to reject the drivers.

The other issue which was touched on is manufacturing tolerance. It is easy to machine an aluminum casting to very high tolerance, and the casting is very resistant to warping or other deformation. It is nearly impossible to do that sort of machining with sheet metal. Every step (punching cutouts, bending, adding mounting holes, etc.) runs the risk of damage.

I have machined a lot of sheet metal in my day and the thinner it is the easier it is to bend or warp it when cutting or welding. I have many times reached the end and then bent something because of slightly too much force. I quietly put down the object, which usually has many hours invested, and then go watch a movie until I am able to return and attempt to carefully undo whatever I did. This is not possible in a production environment. I've learned to make jigs, or use sacrificial supports.

Jigs are required to support thinner metal during forming steps. So the accuracy of the die is critical, as is the alignment of a jig to protect the metal at each step. This is a lot harder to do right than you might think, and it adds to the cost.

You don't have to take my word for it. Go look at speakers and observe the price differential. Look at the difference in reputation for such drivers as the Acoustic Research AR3 which changed from cast to stamped baskets. Or the early KLH. Those changes were made to hit a price point.

I have some stamped metal drivers where overzealous tightening (isn't anyone taught to not use hundreds of foot pounds and to tighten in an alternating star parttern?) warped the frame.

Some castings, btw, use a lower cost pouring technique instead of die cast. It's a compromise between cast and bent.

 

[tubed]

Just because Infinity has some modelling tools does not mean that it was used by JBL. That's stretching the assertion. How many Floyd Tool products did you listen too? Were they all not your liking?
Liking a speaker is a subjective value and the pro Vintage peeople are pushing their subjective preferences as fact. BTW.. thankyou for the Sterophile quote Do you have the issue and year of release?[/QUOTE