Pioneer CS-99A
- Thread starter Van_Isle
- Start date
Every single one of the 99as I have seen have rotted tweeters....that is not foam?
toxcrusadr
Omelette au Fromage
Just for fun I googled up a frequency response graph for the 99a. This is from Pioneer's brochure:
http://www.kallhovde.com/pioneer/cs-99a-b.pdf
It is very much as described above in this thread: no humps in the bass. Very flat from 300 hz down to about 90.
The -3db point is about 75 Hz and that's where many speaker manufacturers would put their bottom end rating (-3db). -10db is about 50 hz. It has an impressively smooth curve in the bass region even if it doesn't dig very deep.
Compare that to, say, the HPM-100, a classic Pioneer rock & roll speaker.
Using 90 db as a reference point (=100 Hz), it does have a hump between 50 and 100 which gives it that punch. -3db is about 45 Hz and -10 db is 35 Hz so it has more bass extension if you can tolerate (or prefer) the hump. Two very different sounding speakers in the bass region, one would expect.
I always did appreciate 'flat' bass, which the 99a definitely has. It just doesn't go as deep as some other speakers, but what it does have down there may be easier to hear since it's not overwhelmed by humps.
None of which is meant to be a criticism or promotion of one speaker or the other. I'm just following the old Zilch adage, "more data, less wank."
I think the graphs actually bear out exactly what listeners say about both of these speakers. Again, not that one or the other is better.
I really should dig out my half-restored pair and figure out why there are drivers not playing after the recap, and get them going and listen to them. Otherwise I am kinda just wanking here.
http://www.kallhovde.com/pioneer/cs-99a-b.pdf
It is very much as described above in this thread: no humps in the bass. Very flat from 300 hz down to about 90.
The -3db point is about 75 Hz and that's where many speaker manufacturers would put their bottom end rating (-3db). -10db is about 50 hz. It has an impressively smooth curve in the bass region even if it doesn't dig very deep.
Compare that to, say, the HPM-100, a classic Pioneer rock & roll speaker.
Using 90 db as a reference point (=100 Hz), it does have a hump between 50 and 100 which gives it that punch. -3db is about 45 Hz and -10 db is 35 Hz so it has more bass extension if you can tolerate (or prefer) the hump. Two very different sounding speakers in the bass region, one would expect.
I always did appreciate 'flat' bass, which the 99a definitely has. It just doesn't go as deep as some other speakers, but what it does have down there may be easier to hear since it's not overwhelmed by humps.
None of which is meant to be a criticism or promotion of one speaker or the other. I'm just following the old Zilch adage, "more data, less wank."
I think the graphs actually bear out exactly what listeners say about both of these speakers. Again, not that one or the other is better.I really should dig out my half-restored pair and figure out why there are drivers not playing after the recap, and get them going and listen to them. Otherwise I am kinda just wanking here.
ragtopolds6
Active Member
look at the size of a klipsh cornwall and that will tell ya need bigger cabinet fir big drivers nice speaker to play with for 80 bucks you can have a party and hook 300 watts up and at midnight blow them..lol
0Hz
Active Member
I was actually kind of surprised at some of the bass on my CS-M551 speakers as well. I don't really have a proper room to stick them in at the moment, but I imagine they would do quite well in a large room on the floor.
Just the brief testing I did with them in my room, listening to a lot of rock, and some other pop stuff (Madonna, Ace of Base, etc) the low end of a lot of those tracks seemed to shine.. Now its gonna be total horse shit for hip-hop or something, I mean you realistically want a subwoofer for most of that stuff anyway. But even some of that they played rather well. The bass felt really clean and mostly balanced. I think there were some frequency peaks but that's about it.
I can only imagine what the 99a's sound like
Just the brief testing I did with them in my room, listening to a lot of rock, and some other pop stuff (Madonna, Ace of Base, etc) the low end of a lot of those tracks seemed to shine.. Now its gonna be total horse shit for hip-hop or something, I mean you realistically want a subwoofer for most of that stuff anyway. But even some of that they played rather well. The bass felt really clean and mostly balanced. I think there were some frequency peaks but that's about it.
I can only imagine what the 99a's sound like
Thank you .... that's very informative and helpful.
toxcrusadr
Omelette au Fromage
Well, let's assume, as you say, that the speaker is physically capable of matching the freq response curve of the HPM-100, and that it can be achieved with an EQ. There might be many reasons this isn't actually feasible, but just for the sake of discussion.
There are other characteristics of a speaker besides frequency response curves. For example dispersion and off axis response. This is going to be very dependent upon the type of drivers, placement on the baffle, etc. Time alignment - again, driver mounting. Bass distortion from the cabinet vibrating. Clarity or muddiness in certain parts of the spectrum, from crossover effects or what range each driver is trying to play in - i.e. how far up into the midrange is the woofer expected to play, etc.
So, for a lot of reasons, it is probably quite difficult to get one speaker to sound exactly like another with different drivers, cabinet, crossover etc.
quiet
Addicted Member
I do believe it's flat to 100 like the grapf shows, from what I can tell. If it would do what it does all the way to 40 that would be better.
As for the HPM 100, I would not want to match that. Totally different speaker.
I think I'm going to try and extend the bass response on the 99s without changing/raising anything else. But my modest RadioShack EQ in the closet isn't going to do it.
As for the HPM 100, I would not want to match that. Totally different speaker.
I think I'm going to try and extend the bass response on the 99s without changing/raising anything else. But my modest RadioShack EQ in the closet isn't going to do it.
SDA SRS 1.2
Well-Known Member
Can’t find any foam on my 99a’s either. Maybe the CS-99’s (no “a”) has them as that’s a completely different speaker. This older thread mentions the differences: http://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/pioneer-cs99s.445341/
I could be just the 88A has the foam tweeters......I was sure it was both on them but it has been a long time since I have seen any so I surrender the point, Lol. One thing I am very sure of is that the CS 88 stomps the CS 99 in bass. The 99As? Not sure as it has been years and years since I have heard them. In the past month I have heard the 88 and 99 in the same room on the same amp and it was no contest. It reminds me of the Imperial 6s vs the Imperial 7s. The 7 have the 12 in woofer vs the 6s with the 10 and the 6 spank them.
But my Imperial 6s go deeper than my cs 88s all day long.
But my Imperial 6s go deeper than my cs 88s all day long.
Have a pair of 99a's that I bought new and a pair of Akai sp155's that I bought new, way back in the day. All are still going strong and still pristine. Hooked up to a Marantz 2325 bought new. I'm just a regular guy and nowhere near an audiophile ace. But I love those speakers!
