Mach One 4024, 4024A, 4029 Information and Upgrades!

Funny you should mention Klipsch. They are one of my favorite brands, I have a pair of CF3 and Kg2. One day I hope to treat myself to something from the middle of their line! One of the reasons I was attracted to the MachOne was the horn midrange and tweeter. "If only", I thought, "those could be cleaned up and made to sound like some Klipsch Belle".

You are right about the speakers of course, they were intended for a large-ish room and maybe close in listening is not their forte (Trilobyte make pun!) Certainly the size of the cabinet and woofer would keep them off your desk. When I get close to one it definitely is not reminiscent of a point source. However, while we are making comparisons to Klipsch speakers, you may note that the larger Klipsch models have similar spatial relations between midrange horn and woofer. I am talking about the aforementioned Belle, La Scalla and the mighty Klipschhorn they all look like the MachOne. But there is so much more difference between the realistic brand and Klipsch that it might be too far a reach to be fair. Unless...

Well I have buttoned up both ModMach's and they are as identical as I can make them. Both have many of VL's suggested modifications tier 1. Here are the exceptions:
1. 10uF capacitor in the crossover is a new 10uF instead of the VL suggested 8.4uF. I would have changed this but I could not find one in time due to impatience. I didnt see a huge difference in VL's FRC anyway.
2. Ditto with the coil and the other capacitor. NOTE: I might go back and do these at a later date.
3. Did NOT open the main compartment into the midrange compartment. I thought I had a better idea but that turned out to be false. But that wrong turn led me to an alternative approach, the famous little box, and that, in addition to my modifications to the plastic tweeter mounting plate, made me very very happy!
4. VL said that stands may cause unpleasant diffraction effects. However, speakers on the floor cause unpleasant dust collection effects. So mine are on stands and tilted back a bit. See photo.

So modifications are done for now. The speakers were moved to my main listening room.
1. The room is typical; roughly rectangular, about 20' x 30' with 9' ceilings, over a basement, mostly carpeted floors, gypsum walls, one wall has two large penetrations one leading to an open stair the other to a kitchen with lots of hard surfaces. The furniture is mostly soft.
2. The hardware is an adcom pre with a Hafler amp. Also tested with a Kenwood KA-7300. Media was played on a Magnavox CDB 570. Tracks are from a compilation disk called Dinner for Two, a Starbucks CD with a good mix of music to compare speakers with.

Results: Wonderous. I bought these for 30$ and they sound better, yes better, than the Klipsch CF3. The CF3 dont perform well in this room because they are so large they need to be placed close to a wall. That and the floor over basement produces an untamed thunderous effect. I love all else about these speakers. However the ModMAchs come out ahead in rendering base tones. You can feel it, but it doesn't make the glassware tinkle or the room sound like Top Gun at the local AMC theater. Lovely. Everything else the ModMachs touch is so fine too. I dont hear the harsh tones from the midrange driver others report since the mods I made.

IMG_2523.JPG
 
Funny you should mention Klipsch. They are one of my favorite brands, I have a pair of CF3 and Kg2. One day I hope to treat myself to something from the middle of their line! One of the reasons I was attracted to the MachOne was the horn midrange and tweeter. "If only", I thought, "those could be cleaned up and made to sound like some Klipsch Belle".

You are right about the speakers of course, they were intended for a large-ish room and maybe close in listening is not their forte (Trilobyte make pun!) Certainly the size of the cabinet and woofer would keep them off your desk. When I get close to one it definitely is not reminiscent of a point source. However, while we are making comparisons to Klipsch speakers, you may note that the larger Klipsch models have similar spatial relations between midrange horn and woofer. I am talking about the aforementioned Belle, La Scalla and the mighty Klipschhorn they all look like the MachOne. But there is so much more difference between the realistic brand and Klipsch that it might be too far a reach to be fair. Unless...

Well I have buttoned up both ModMach's and they are as identical as I can make them. Both have many of VL's suggested modifications tier 1. Here are the exceptions:
1. 10uF capacitor in the crossover is a new 10uF instead of the VL suggested 8.4uF. I would have changed this but I could not find one in time due to impatience. I didnt see a huge difference in VL's FRC anyway.
2. Ditto with the coil and the other capacitor. NOTE: I might go back and do these at a later date.
3. Did NOT open the main compartment into the midrange compartment. I thought I had a better idea but that turned out to be false. But that wrong turn led me to an alternative approach, the famous little box, and that, in addition to my modifications to the plastic tweeter mounting plate, made me very very happy!
4. VL said that stands may cause unpleasant diffraction effects. However, speakers on the floor cause unpleasant dust collection effects. So mine are on stands and tilted back a bit. See photo.

So modifications are done for now. The speakers were moved to my main listening room.
1. The room is typical; roughly rectangular, about 20' x 30' with 9' ceilings, over a basement, mostly carpeted floors, gypsum walls, one wall has two large penetrations one leading to an open stair the other to a kitchen with lots of hard surfaces. The furniture is mostly soft.
2. The hardware is an adcom pre with a Hafler amp. Also tested with a Kenwood KA-7300. Media was played on a Magnavox CDB 570. Tracks are from a compilation disk called Dinner for Two, a Starbucks CD with a good mix of music to compare speakers with.

Results: Wonderous. I bought these for 30$ and they sound better, yes better, than the Klipsch CF3. The CF3 dont perform well in this room because they are so large they need to be placed close to a wall. That and the floor over basement produces an untamed thunderous effect. I love all else about these speakers. However the ModMAchs come out ahead in rendering base tones. You can feel it, but it doesn't make the glassware tinkle or the room sound like Top Gun at the local AMC theater. Lovely. Everything else the ModMachs touch is so fine too. I dont hear the harsh tones from the midrange driver others report since the mods I made.

View attachment 808577

The capacitor and coil change get rid of the hole in the frequency range that they have from the factory, if I remember correctly it was around 1000hz..
 
I come here now and then to see the Mach One fans write ups. Your speakers look better than new. The Mach One as we all know have a powerful look to them that is hard to beat visually. You guys made a great find. The newer six screw plate cracked under heavy use back when I was a teen. Those plates in just months gave me problems. That plastic plate saved some pennies, made it look good, but really hurt the sound as far as noise a person could hear.
At this point in my work, I have done all the upgrades to ModMach's sister speaker with the exception of the so called "little box". The little box was installed in ModMach to isolate the tweeter and potentiometers from the main cabinet housing the woofer. The original point of it was to get that plastic plate that holds the tweater and pots isolated from the main cabinet. The plastic plate is thin and flexy and leaks air. So I fixed that by applying modeling clay to the back of plate to make it more massive and less flexy and leaky. Just to make the whole thing more robust I bult the little box to house the tweeter and pots. This of course had the effect of reducing (!) the size of the cabinet a bit. I went ahead just to see what would happen. This is just curiosity here and it flies in the face of convention. VL suggested increasing the size of the cabinet by cutting ports into the upper midrange compartment, sealing it tight and I think she even put a bit of fiberglass in there for good measure. I tried to do the same by building a compartment UNDER the speaker but that bombed (I think I know why but that option is no longer feasible for me). Long story short, ModMach sounds great. Was it the little box? Was it the cyanoacrylate on the woofer cone ? Was it everything put together? I didnt know so I decided to operate on ModMach's unmodified sister to answer the question. ModMach the younger got everything ModMach has except little box.

Little box helps A LOT. ModMach the younger without little box still has traces of boomy hollowness that ModMach (with little box) does not have. Maybe this could have been predicted, I am not sure. I am not sure why either except that perhaps a completely hollow rectangular box is going to sound hollow, but a not hollow box (little box inside) creates more opportunity to break up reflections in the main cabinet. Dont know, dont care. I love the sound of ModMach and am going to immediately install a little box in ModMach the Younger.

Whats next: ModMach the Younger gets a little box then both speakers get moved into my main listening room for final tweaking. By the way, ModMach is pretty much done and the cosmetics are ship shape. Here it is adjacent to a Klipsch CF3:
:View attachment 808227

Great looking speakers! I am a owner of over 30 years. Bought with paper route money at 16 when Radio Shack had them on sale for half off $125 each! Still have them today. I just want to make a few comments however.

You made a great find ahead of time. If you played loud music those plates crack around the screws to cabinet. Mine started to crack when I used them as a teen. I used glue to hold them together. The plates also made a noise I traced to the tweeter and had to glue it. To this day I remember it being the two screws that hold the horn to body. The middle plate (between magnet and horn) letting the tweeter rattle. I also see glue between the tweeter and plate. I don't remember if I did that or if it came like that! However let me go back 30 plus years ago (mid life crisis). I was playing records and FM. No CDs even heard of yet. I read stereo review and it was my magazine; I believed. Lets just say I don't pay $50 or even $20 a foot for speaker cable.

I am a Hi-Fi geek since I was 13; three years ago :) . I tried to guess the lower limit. I figured since radio shack gave the resonance of 65Hz I knew it would be about 12db down at ~35Hz (at best). Back then that did not make me happy. As I knew it really could not hit 25Hz :( . I think only true nerds read how to build your own loud speakers around age 16 for fun. But I knew this stuff at 16.

As for the small woofer cabinet; in hindsight. Music material back then had little to no bass below 50Hz. The bass peak was perfect for people playing rock, disco, funk, and pop music (see colored lights yet). That's where you would want to boost the bass.The Mach One had the stiffest woofer I ever pushed back on. And It could move about one inch it seemed. However I read if building for high playing levels, high input power, you don't want the woofer to move a lot, you want it tightly controlled, a high Q (logical). But I think it also helps to keep the voice coil in the magnetic gap. All material I played on the Mach Ones pounded other speakers in the ground for bass thump, and making it sound like the electric guitar was playing in the room. Against anything.

That mid horn has very low distortion. Its also tightly controlling the directivity, lessening room effect in its range. I played them on the ground tilted back as needed.Everyone liked big equalizers. You had to have one. I never did. I just turned the bass and treble to the default all the way boosted position :) . But this is what I bought from Radio Shack (some time latter) and was like the perfect mate for it. Like the EQ for Bose 901. It boosted the bass in the 40Hz region. It was perfect to let the Mack One keep its thump at 65Hz and keep it flat to 40Hz. It rolled off below 40Hz even with this EQ (as I remember). But that's pretty darn good. Now you guys (Video lady: I know she is not here now) make it sound good for todays program material. Amazing years latter! I love it!

BassEQ.jpg
M1Tweeter.jpg M1TweeterMount.jpg M1TweeterSide.jpg
 
Last edited:
I come here now and then to see the Mach One fans write ups. Your speakers look better than new. The Mach One as we all know have a powerful look to them that is hard to beat visually. You guys made a great find. The newer six screw plate cracked under heavy use back when I was a teen. Those plates in just months gave me problems. That plastic plate saved some pennies, made it look good, but really hurt the sound as far as noise a person could hear.


Great looking speakers! I am a owner of 30 years. Bought with paper route money at 16 when Radio Shack had them on sale for half off $125 each! Still have them today. I just want to make a few comments however.

You made a great find ahead of time. If you played loud music those plates crack around the screws to cabinet. Mine started to crack when I used them as a teen. I used glue to hold them together. The plates also made a noise I traced to the tweeter and had to glue it. To this day I remember it being the two screws that hold the horn to body. The middle plate (between magnet and horn) letting the tweeter rattle. I also see glue between the tweeter and plate. I don't remember if I did that or if it came like that! However let me go back 30 years ago (mid life crisis). I was playing records and FM. No CDs even heard of yet. I read stereo review and it was my magazine; I believed. Lets just say I don't pay $50 or even $20 a foot for speaker cable.

I am a Hi-Fi geek since I was 13; three years ago :) . I tried to guess the lower limit. I figured since radio shack gave the resonance of 65Hz I knew it would be about 12db down at ~35Hz (at best). Back then that did not make me happy. As I knew it really could not hit 25Hz :( . I think only true nerds read how to build your own loud speakers around age 16 for fun. But I knew this stuff at 16.

As for the small woofer cabinet; in hindsight. Music material back then had little to no bass below 50Hz. The bass peak was perfect for people playing rock, disco, funk, and pop music (see colored lights yet). That's where you would want to boost the bass.The Mach One had the stiffest woofer I ever pushed back on. And It could move about one inch it seemed. However I read if building for high playing levels, high input power, you don't want the woofer to move a lot, you want it tightly controlled, a high Q (logical). But I think it also helps to keep the voice coil in the magnetic gap. All material I played on the Mach Ones pounded other speakers in the ground for bass thump and making it sound like the electric guitar was playing in the room. Against kids.

That mid horn has very low distortion. Its also tightly controlling the directivity, lessening room effect in its range. I played them on the ground tilted back as needed.Everyone liked big equalizers. You had to have one. I never did. I just turned the bass and treble to the default all the way boosted position :) . But this is what I bought from Radio Shack (some time latter) and was like the perfect mate for it. Like the EQ for Bose 901. It boosted the bass in the 40Hz region. It was perfect to let the Mack One keep its thump at 65Hz and keep it flat to 40Hz. It rolled off below 40Hz even with this EQ (as I remember). But that's pretty darn good. Now you guys (Video lady: I know she is not here now) make it sound good for todays program material. Amazing years latter! I love it!

View attachment 809024
View attachment 809062 View attachment 809063 View attachment 809064
Thanks for the comments. Regarding the plastic plate that supports the tweeter and potentiometers: This was my approach to fixing them. I used modeling clay to fill in the back of the plate. This approach added about a pound of mass to the plate and now it is fully damped. The clay around the tweeter made for a better seal for the cabinet. Not shown is the sealing compound around the perimeter of the plate where it mates with the cabinet.
IMG_2489.JPG

The capacitor and coil change get rid of the hole in the frequency range that they have from the factory, if I remember correctly it was around 1000hz..

Okay Okay! I ordered the electronic components to finish the full VL tier one requirements. Thanks to RS Steve for the inspiration!
The capacitor and coil change get rid of the hole in the frequency range that they have from the factory, if I remember correctly it was around 1000hz..
 
Thanks for the comments. Regarding the plastic plate that supports the tweeter and potentiometers: This was my approach to fixing them. I used modeling clay to fill in the back of the plate. This approach added about a pound of mass to the plate and now it is fully damped. The clay around the tweeter made for a better seal for the cabinet. Not shown is the sealing compound around the perimeter of the plate where it mates with the cabinet.
View attachment 810120



Okay Okay! I ordered the electronic components to finish the full VL tier one requirements. Thanks to RS Steve for the inspiration!


I got rid of the plastic and made my own plates, no more problems!

015.JPG
 
I got rid of the plastic and made my own plates, no more problems!

View attachment 810166
Yeah I saw that someone in this thread had milled some of there own as well. Are those steel plates or milled? The metal changes the looks of these things doesnt it? I like it. And functional too! I was going to make some of walnut to match the cabinet at one point but decided to lave it as is and come up with an other idea to bring the aesthetics up to modern standards and at the same time keep the speakers "semi-period". Like a mid-century ranch house remodel.
 
Last edited:
Yeah I saw that someone in this thread had milled some of there own as well. Are those steel plates or milled? The metal changes the looks of these things doesnt it? I like it. And functional too! I was going to make some of walnut to match the cabinet at one point but decided to lave it as is and come up with an other idea to bring the aesthetics up to modern standards and at the same time keep the speakers "semi-period". Like a mid-century ranch house remodel.


I made it out of aluminum, and made decals by copying an original plate. The pictures don't show the decals installed.
 
By the way what version are those? They look slightly different than my 4029. Sides of the cabinets radius-ed? Did you do that yourself or is that stock?

Look more closely at the proportions of the cabinet...RS Steve had some fun with those a while back. I'll let him reveal the details.
 
i tried what you said. the horn plays but mid and bass are dead. horn is weak

Fred

It's probably time to remove the separate drivers and test on an ohm meter to see if they reading open. If they test good, it is most likely in the crossover.
 
Since the distance between the woofer and the mid was brought up again, I wonder what if? RS Steve, since you made those larger cabs, did you ever consider swapping the position of the mid and tweeter horns? Use pots with longer posts and you could get rid of that tweeter/level control plate altogether. I know it would mess with the classic Mach One look but with a full length grill it would look more understated like the Mac Two. Maybe the drivers would blend together better acoustically and maybe the speaker would have better imaging with a more conventional arrangement. If someone didn't want to build bigger cabs, the could just make a new front baffle for the original Mach One cabs.
Any thoughts on the idea?
 
Since the distance between the woofer and the mid was brought up again, I wonder what if? RS Steve, since you made those larger cabs, did you ever consider swapping the position of the mid and tweeter horns? Use pots with longer posts and you could get rid of that tweeter/level control plate altogether. I know it would mess with the classic Mach One look but with a full length grill it would look more understated like the Mac Two. Maybe the drivers would blend together better acoustically and maybe the speaker would have better imaging with a more conventional arrangement. If someone didn't want to build bigger cabs, the could just make a new front baffle for the original Mach One cabs.
Any thoughts on the idea?


I considered a mod to use the mid horn for a mid / tweeter, and doing away with the stock tweeter, making it a true two way speaker. But the problem of getting the mid to go lower in frequency to blend with the woofer would still be an issue. It really needs a mid that goes down to around 700HZ in my opinion. Even VL had said that he/she thought the VL mods would be the best possible choice for keeping the stock look, but making the Mach 1 as good as it could be. The 3rd level was to add another woofer to the process for mid bass, which would help with the limiting factor of the stock midrange. It's a shame VL left us before that could happen.
 
It's probably time to remove the separate drivers and test on an ohm meter to see if they reading open. If they test good, it is most likely in the crossover.

woofer tested at 8 ohms other driver at 2.9... woofer moves freely and quietly
 
Back
Top Bottom