Comment on vintage "bookshelf" speakers

bully

member
Hi y'all.
I've seen comments in posts for a long time about 'bookshelf' speaker systems, specifically the 60s-70s systems.
That was a 'type' of speaker system, and, as noted, many were QUITE large.
"Bookshelf" was usually a term used by the manufacturer. It seemed to indicate a speaker that would provide its best sound when mounted off the floor.
I had Pioneer CS-99A systems, a 15-in, 5-way 6-speaker system, it weighed over 50 lbs, and Pioneer called it a "bookshelf" system.
Even bulkier (if not heavier) systems from Sansui and Kenwood were also called 'bookshelf' systems.
Many of the classic JBL designs were 'bookshelf' types. The L100, was a bit smaller dimensionally than my 99A, but weighed about the same :D (I like 'em stout)(uh, speaker systems, guys, getcher minds on the subject here).
When 'tower' style systems began to get popular, the idea of a 'bookshelf' system also evolved. Now, they do seem to be of a size that would comfortably fit on a bookshelf.
I hope some of y'all younger folks' understand what we geezers mean by a bookshelf speaker. We're not talking about one of the new mini-mini-monitor types. We're talking about something that could be very large.
:D

Pete, bummin' a bit 'cause ol' Roxie the boxer is at the vet for some knife-work. bummer. poor ol' girl.
 
Before they were bookshelfs they were monitors or a bit later mini moniters. Note the JBL 2 way made as a studio monitor in I believe the late 50s. They look to be around 1.5' deep a bit taller than that and 2' wide easy. Mine have screw on conical legs but I understand it was commonn practice to install these on shelves in upper corners.
Thatch
 
Yup, short 'legs' sound about right.
I found with my Pioneers that about 7-9 inches and a very slight tilt back really made a difference.
Never knew if it was 'better' 'cause the floor really reinforced the bottom ... and that's a good thing when you're young and have parties a lot :D
But that half-foot got the tweets up, opened the bass a bit, so yeah that would be an improvement in quality of sound.

pete, sometimes a grumpy ol' fart but good at heart, eh?
 
Yeah, definitely good at heart Pete ... ;)

So why did they call them bookshelves then, when in reality they were just smaller floorstanders? And were there any design from the 70's that were of the same dimension as todays mini-monitors?

PS - what's Roxie in for?
 
This may sound like a dumb question, but should one follow the same "rule of thumb" one would use with newer bookshelves, where the tweeter should be roughly at "ear level".

My monitor 3's are bookshelves too... and they aren't that small either...

BTW - That Rum bottle in the pic is GOOD! it's Havana Club (great with coca cola and some Hendrix).

Chris
 
I think that the "bookshelf" name type/ started about the same time as SS in the market which was the early 60s. My oldest pair of bookshelfs were made here in Dallas around 62 and had an 8" full range and a 3" tweeter. Lots of port room so far from acoustic suspension. But compared to the speakers of the time they were quite small, were ported to the front and so a back wall or corner would not improve the sound. So I am guessing the first small front ported speakers were called bookshelves and they really were small compared to corner horns and Altec made for the home VOT types and light compared to Wharfdales that were built with a glue/sand layer in the plywood. Later as acoustic suspension speakers came in to the market the size really did go down and most floor standers were actually smaller than the bookshelf speakers of a few years ealier. Now a bookshelf seems to mean somethimg you can hang on the wall because it weighs less than 10 lbs.
Thatch
 
Or maybe they coined the term bookshelf to describe a 2-way, non-horn, dynamic driver, ported design to distinguish it from the rest?

Mmmm ... could be just a marketing term then ...
 
Originally posted by Thatch_Ear
Ron Rico is the rum of choise in Panama. Glad to know that you are not a big Pisco fan.
Thatch

I don't like pisco all that much, occasionally it's OK along with a BBQ and music played "stupid loud". Also... it doesn't compare to some good cuban rum :)

Also it depends, some pisco can be good, and some that are AWFUL :puke:

Ron Rico is good... and Cacique is better ;)

Chris
 
I dunno, the CS-99A has a big 15-inch woofer, a 5" and 4" mids, and three tweeters in an 'infinite baffle' sealed box. Weigh about 50 lbs each.
By far most speakers I remember were placed on the floor. Since the ol' volume dial was usually cranked over to at least 2 o'clock, well, we thought the sound was fine, but we weren't always nitpicking the bowing of the 3rd violin :D :D :eek:
But called 'bookshelf' speakers they were. Even those monster-sized Kenwoods!
Compared to the true monsters of the 50s & 60s, a 50-plus pound box really was small.
I do remember some makes in the mid-70s touting a very much smaller type speaker, probably one of the precursors to the Pro Ac , mebbe Braun. There were also some designs beginning to use multiple, smaller woofers that combined met or exceeded the cone area of 12 and 15 inchers.
Oh, sure there was 'always' bose and his 901. When did he bring that baby out? very early 70s wasn't it?

pete
 
Since I took some new pictures and I am pimping my speakers (again ;) ) here is one more:
 
Movin' next door!?
Now I KNOW you're just teasin' me! ;) :D
You'd fit right in here, just another 300+ lbs ex-footballer.
Gawd, but this place has lots of BIG boys around here. And, that's just in the middle schools ... :D

pete
 
Mebbe we're all big cuz vintage amps and recievers and big ass speakers are so heavy and you gots to be big to move em' around ;)
 
Folks,

Seems like "bookshelves" were anything smaller than "floorstanders" in those days. I guess it goes back to the original AR and KLH designs -- the first anyone figured out how to get "enough bass" out of something smaller than a huge box full of horns. It seems that the first ones really were relatively "bookshelf sized," but I guess most everyone wants "bigger and better," so they grew. It certainly was a whole lot cheaper to buy a "bookshelf" speaker than a floorstander, even if it was a whole heck of a lot bigger than what most bookshelves could handle...

The bottom line is that floorstanders are designed to stand on the floor, for optimal woofer placement, whereas bookshelf speakers really ought to be raised off the floor in order to sound their best -- the big ones really ought to go up somewhere between half a foot and a foot and a half, if not higher.

Anyhow, that's how I see it... :p:
 
IIRC, my Polk Monitor 7s were sold as "bookshelves" but were also sold with floor stands that tilt them back slightly. They are still my main speakers.

Lots of people stood their bookshelf speakers on teh floor or put them on a selsf on their sides. The manufactures said that putting them on their sides would not adversly effect the sound.
 
Well I think the original AR were part of the Bookshelf revolution. All you had before them were either infinite baffles or bass reflex and horns. With the Acoustic Suspension speakers you had a small box with big bass where previously if you wanted good bass extension you needed a big box or horn. They really changed things when they first appeared.

Rob2:)
 
Sure Ward I'll sell ya the Model 15's.............when I find another pair of CV 1215MKII's to be my rear speakers ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom