Todays Speakers vs Vintage Speakers

[woofercooker]

New top of the line speakers may beat out old top of the line speakers.

That's not what it's about though.

It would cost THOUSANDS to get a new pair of speakers that will perform better than let's say.....HPM100, L100, L110, 4311, L112.

That's what it's about.

Hey! Did you ever finish restoring those vintage Optimus 400 with the 12" woofer and leaf tweeters.. Classy lookin' speakers.. Love to hear your impressions especially compared to some newer speakers.

 

[z-adamson]

Hey! Did you ever finish restoring those vintage Optimus 400 with the 12" woofer and leaf tweeters.. Classy lookin' speakers.. Love to hear your impressions especially compared to some newer speakers.

Yes, I did. Recapped them and refoamed the mids and woofers. Bypassed the Lpads.

In the right room (smallish) and with the right amount of power (80wpc) they can perform quite well in my opinion.

I have not put them side by side with modern day new speakers, but they are outclassed by HPM100, L100.

 

[Hobie1dog]

After going to the CES Show and listening to many high end speakers, and owning many speakers through the years, I don't think it matters how you excite the air and reproduce music. Wether it's a new or older design, it's just the final result that you end up with in your own room.

 

[BilboBaggins]

I think that many people forget that computers don’t really do anything we didn’t do before. The real advantage of computers is they can do what we have done before much faster, making it practical to do repetitive tests or virtualization that simulate what would take a very long time before inexpensive computers became the norm.

There are new materials available now that have characteristics we might want to see in speakers, but quality is limited by the accountants.

 

[Akustic]

I know all the technical reasons the Rectilinears got it wrong. But they just sound good, and I prefer them over many more modern speakers that did all that stuff right.

Maybe I’m deaf.

This is off-topic, but ..

Many years, many systems and an uncountable number of speakers ago I owned the Rectilinears ..
They were tonally nice but inaccurate, and they certainly couldn't image. They were designed before imaging or time alignment became a design goal. They were the first Big speakers that I bought as a teen.
The cone tweeters broke up easily and began to distort in complex musical passages. They were pleasant enough to listen to, and I paid dear 1970's dollars to buy a set but they were a limited design.
Nice enough to listen to and I understand why people like them..but accuracy isn't their forte'.

(and spitty cone tweeters always made me nuts .. beautiful one second and trashy the next..
Yet here I sit, listening to cone tweets spit daily in a pr of vintage 3-ways in my Ipod system,,
go figure, but I like the sound of the full range, unchoked 8" mid-range in the buggers .. and it's intermittent spit,

 

[drumbum]

This is off-topic, but ..

Many years, many systems and an uncountable number of speakers ago I owned the Rectilinears ..
They were tonally nice but inaccurate, and they certainly couldn't image. They were designed before imaging or time alignment became a design goal. They were the first Big speakers that I bought as a teen.
The cone tweeters broke up easily and began to distort in complex musical passages. They were pleasant enough to listen to, and I paid dear 1970's dollars to buy a set but they were a limited design.
Nice enough to listen to and I understand why people like them..but accuracy isn't their forte'.

(and spitty cone tweeters always made me nuts .. beautiful one second and trashy the next..
Yet here I sit, listening to cone tweets spit daily in a pr of vintage 3-ways in my Ipod system,,
go figure, but I like the sound of the full range, unchoked 8" mid-range in the buggers .. and it's intermittent spit,

Were your examples restored/recapped?

 

[kirk57]

This is off-topic, but ..
Many years, many systems and an uncountable number of speakers ago I owned the Rectilinears ..
They were tonally nice but inaccurate, and they certainly couldn't image. They were designed before imaging or time alignment became a design goal. They were the first Big speakers that I bought as a teen.
The cone tweeters broke up easily and began to distort in complex musical passages. They were pleasant enough to listen to, and I paid dear 1970's dollars to buy a set but they were a limited design.
Nice enough to listen to and I understand why people like them..but accuracy isn't their forte'.

(and spitty cone tweeters always made me nuts .. beautiful one second and trashy the next..
Yet here I sit, listening to cone tweets spit daily in a pr of vintage 3-ways in my Ipod system,,
go figure, but I like the sound of the full range, unchoked 8" mid-range in the buggers .. and it's intermittent spit,

I came upon my Highboys in a thrift store after many years of listening to 'correctly' designed Dynaudios.

My experience is more recent one, and I was driving them with very good amplification (MacCormack DNA 1.0 Deluxe and Audible Illusions Modulus 3.0 preamp) and did not encounter the tweeter breakup/distortion that you did as a teenager. I don't listen at high SPL (maybe 90db at the listening chair at the upper end) Agreed they aren't imaging champs, but that can be (and I did) improved by mirror-imaging the front baffles. The listening area cannot be close to the speaker as the drivers cannot blend.

I stand by my opinion that tonally they get it right, and that is, to me, more important than imaging.

 

[Akustic]

Were your examples restored/recapped?

Thanks for the suggestion ..
They were mostly new ..IMHO it's just a cone tweeter phenomenon .. the world moved on to domes and ribbons.
Not a bad Idea to replace the one cap that constitutes the crossover in these three ways but I'm getting lazy in my
old age... and since they sound great in uncomplicated passages, I'm assuming that it's just standard cone tweeter breakup that I'm hearing...

 

[Akustic]

Well my much more recent ex



I came upon my Highboys in a thrift store after many years of listening to 'correctly' designed Dynaudios.

My experience is more recent one, and I was driving them with very good amplification (MacCormack DNA 1.0 Deluxe and Audible Illusions Modulus 3.0 preamp) and did not encounter the tweeter breakup/distortion that you did as a teenager. I don't listen at high SPL (maybe 90db at the listening chair at the upper end) Agreed they aren't imaging champs, but that can be (and I did) improved by mirror-imaging the front baffles. The listening area cannot be close to the speaker as the drivers cannot blend.

I stand by my opinion that tonally they get it right, and that is, to me, more important than imaging.

All that counts is that you like them .. obviously I did too at some point .. I'm still listening to cone tweets.
Obviously what you're listening to makes a difference too... I like the sound of cone tweeters in quieter less complicated riffs. It's when the music gets complicated with multiple simultaneous instruments in the high end that cone tweeters display what I call spitting, which is probably cone breakup... but it's audible to me, and probably explains why I like tubes and hybrid electronics with metallic ribbons or dipoles, or soft domes if I'm listening to Solid State electronics.

 

[quiet]

The Big Rec 111 sucks up a lot of power, yet can take only so many watts. If I feed it to many the tweets complain. Haven't noticed the complicated problem.
Nice sound. Mostly flat response. I like them.

 

[3db]

My preference is for tonally accurate speakers of today' design...today being the last 20 years or so. I understsnd the liking of vintage speakers as I like them too but only in short stints. I want my speakers to let me know if the recording/production engineer did a good or a bad job.

 

[infullview]

My preference is for tonally accurate speakers of today' design...today being the last 20 years or so. I understsnd the liking of vintage speakers as I like them too but only in short stints. I want my speakers to let me know if the recording/production engineer did a good or a bad job.

So, your opinion is that there are no vintage speakers that are tonally accurate?

 

[3db]

So, your opinion is that there are no vintage speakers that are tonally accurate?

Wow!! Do you always put words into people's mouths?

 

[infullview]

Wow!! Do you always put words into people's mouths?

Hardly. I was asking a question. you said, "My preference is for tonally accurate speakers of today' design...today being the last 20 years or so", so my question is do you regard all speakers older than 20 years to be tonally inaccurate?

 

[3db]

Hardly. I was asking a question. you said, "My preference is for tonally accurate speakers of today' design...today being the last 20 years or so", so my question is do you regard all speakers older than 20 years to be tonally inaccurate?

No I dont, but there are far more vintage speakers that are inaccurate tonely than there is in today's designs.

 

[infullview]

No I dont, but there are far more vintage speakers that are inaccurate tonely than there is in today's designs.

I would agree with that. Engineers as far back as the 30's understood phase alignment, and did have adequate test equipment with ribbon mics and scopes to test a speaker. But the whole field of hi fidelity was new, and you had a lot of people who were not only trying to sell new designs but also to create super efficient speakers, as amplifier power was very limited, often sacrificing linearity and tonality as a result.

 

[300man]

So by now I think the OP has figured out the answer to his question. But for those like him who are at the crossroads of buying vintage or buying new? It really comes down to budget and how much time/effort are you willing to put in. There are great vintage speakers out there and there are great new speakers available.

If you are on a very tight budget, are willing to spend time educating yourself and seeking out a great deal. Then I say go vintage and be sure to listen to the speakers prior to purchase. Try to evaluate the condition of speaker and if you are capable of doing needed repairs.

If you have a larger budget, and prefer to not have to take the longer route of hunting down a good vintage speaker and all that can go with that. Then go to a reputable shop and listen to several options and purchase new.

 

[Bill Murray]

I was at a Audio store and the guy there said that although Vintage speakers are nostalgic. They don't even come close to the sound that is produced with today's speakers.

He basically said that with all of the 3D modeling and technology they can create speakers that produce the absolute best sound.

I had another person say he didn't understand that because all you are doing is pushing air out of box.

I am sure components and materials have improved over the years along along with technology.

Anyone have any input on Today's speakers vs the Advents and Kloss and other vintage speakers of yesteryear?.

Don't wanna hear no crap about how today's 6" woofers in a 3 thousand dollar tower sound better than my vintage 15" and 12" woofers in their big floor standing boxes. Worshiping superior technology (supposedly) rather than trusting your ears and other senses is folly.

 

[Guest159]

I was at a Audio store and the guy there said that although Vintage speakers are nostalgic. They don't even come close to the sound that is produced with today's speakers.

He basically said that with all of the 3D modeling and technology they can create speakers that produce the absolute best sound.

I had another person say he didn't understand that because all you are doing is pushing air out of box.

I am sure components and materials have improved over the years along along with technology.

Anyone have any input on Today's speakers vs the Advents and Kloss and other vintage speakers of yesteryear?.

Stereophile compared a pair of Advents, I think, to a pair of modern price equivalent speakers and it wasn't even a contest.

Don't wanna hear no crap about how today's 6" woofers in a 3 thousand dollar tower sound better than my vintage 15" and 12" woofers in their big floor standing boxes. Worshiping superior technology (supposedly) rather than trusting your ears and other senses is folly.

My Focal here, with their 3 6.5" drivers, dig deeper in bass than almost everything in the JBL Synthesis line. Very few speakers at any price make bass like the 3 5"x9" woofers in the Golden Ear Triton One.R. Those things will throw deep bass at you with truly stupifying power and detail.

 

[Akustic]

The basic design hasn't changed ... It's a cone vibrating in a magnetic field (with a few notable exceptions) ..
If it sounds like the music that it's reproducing, then it doesn't matter when it was made, or what it was made of ...
Just play me good tunes .. and if one sounds better than the other, I'll keep the better one, thanks
Full Stop ..