walsh tweeter design/rebuild

that is an excellent and informative picture. particularly good look at the spider. i don't see the ragged remains of the original tweeter dome like others documented. did you trim?

nail polish as an insulation was a good call. i've used it with success on the tonearm wire on early AR turntables, which is enameled magnet wire of similar size and delicacy.

since its been established the continuity issues can be addressed, and cones can successfully be reshaped and reattached, a source for the proper foam seems to be the last big concern. no doubt it is out there. finding it will likely be more a matter of knowing what to look for than anything else.



.
 
the nail polish worked pretty well, but ideally i would have just rewrapped the voice coil, which is pretty small, but not hard to wrap, finding the wire would have been an issue a little bit at least.

there were no remains of the dome in here, actually, it looks like there cant be for assembly, unless im mistaken, the cone goes through where the dome is after cutting out the dome. i almost wonder if Infinity may have ordered some of the tweeters with just the VC and no dome to ease assembly.

also there is only one other piece inside the assembly, and i forgot to get a pic of it, it is a black insulator washer that has small cutouts where the wires go. it goes on the back of the spider's base and puts pressure on the base against the mount piece with the terminals in it, when you remove the voice coil, the plastic piece should stay in the magnet but will come out in your hand easily.

I used some very off the shelf foam on my wtlc's, and i can tell absolutely no difference in sound, so i am not sure how much to buy into the absolute importance of the foam, also i used a very light bit of elmers on the foam on my wtlc's to hold the foam in place, there was no way the old glue was gonna reattach.

so til we figure out the foam thing i think im going to find something around 5/16-3/8 thick.

side note about the wire, while its really thin, it has good tensile strength and can take a bit of a tug to unwrap it, BE VERY CAREFUL THOUGH. aditionally to solder it i used a 30 watt iron, not a gun as some prefer, the wire didnt seem to have any issue with full heat, but my iron is also old as hell.
 
Last edited:
god the AXTs sound so good after this repair, i dont think the silver cones sound better neccessarily but they do sound very different than the gold cones, the gold ones i feel are a bit more open on the top end, this becomes very apparent when listening to cassette tapes, as the hiss is more prominent on the WTLC then the AXT. but its easily compensated if needed, i am aware the walsh is crossed over lower in the AXT, but that wouldnt effect the high frequencies which is where i hear the difference in them. this is the first really serious listening i have put the 2000AXT through since getting it, never felt like it since the walshes didnt all work, and im really happy with these now, very very curious about how they compare to the 2000 II, the 2000AXT looks like they would breathe better.

I think we should start an "early infinity thread" like maybe everything up to the QLS and we can all post pics so their all in the same place and anyone can look at all the series and differences, not just walsh stuff but early all early infinity. IDK, maybe ill try it and see what happens. Plus I would really like to see some other pics of AXTs as mine are in dire need of new grills and i will have to fabricate them, so i need to get ideas for how to fab them.
 
Last edited:
I thoroughly enjoyed my 2000AXT's for a year even with only one Walsh working. My P362's that started me back into the audio obsession after 25+ years (that and an audiophile friend who shares my love of Blues) got sent to the bedroom by the AXT's. I keep thinking I need to put the AXT's back on the BA-F1 in the main listening room. Even as "TV speakers" driven by a Kenny receiver right now (in place of the Qb's I recapped) they are totally invisible and "real" from anywhere in the room.

For break-in (actually, I think that was done a while ago) I've got the Qb's playing on the BA-F1 in the same room as the 2.5's (the 2.5's really fill in the low bass) and the Emits in them are just as sweet as the ones in the 2.5's. The Walshes add something different - though I can't describe what - so as much as I'm enjoying this it's got me wondering what 2.5's and 2000AXT's would sound like together. Hell, I should try driving the 2.5's with the QSC 850 USA, the Qb's with the Rotel 990BX and the AXT's with the BA-F1, all in the same room at once. Too much for a 14x11 room? :) I like being able to hear and feel the music throughout the house. WAF hasn't been a concern for 10 years now.

That's some Lucite rods and a piece of glass on top of mine. Came with the speakers. The grill foam is a replacement that's thinner than the originals. It would be perfect for the side and top, if I could get thicker beveled foam for the front. Did these originally have foam over the side and top gratings?

If the above reads odd, it's because I've begun my birthday tradition - Tulamore Dew and the Blues. This is the first year in quite a while I didn't get to finish it off with a weekend racing though. I always put on a vintage audio Blues fest at the track each night.
 

Attachments

  • 2000AXT.jpg
    2000AXT.jpg
    72.1 KB · Views: 317
Hi,

I just found this thread and it's great to see. I will be religiously following it from now on.

I have a question. I owned a pair of the original Infinity Monitors (1973 vintage- 22hz–21,000hz), and listened to them for 10 years and loved them! I reluctantly sold them as part of a complete system when I moved. I've really missed them all these years. I just got off the phone with the President of Ohm. I told him I'm looking for speakers with the same (or very, very similar) type sound that came from the original Walsh Dome tweeters. He told me he used to sell both Ohm's and Infinity's back in the 70s, and not surprisningly said the current Ohm series sounds better, although the tweeter design is different.

You guys all seem very knowledgeable, so my question is directed toward anyone who is familiar with Infinity Walsh Dome tweeter models (preferably the original Monitor series) and current, or recent Ohm models. Do Ohm's sound similar in any way to the original Infinity's with Walsh Dome tweeters? I'm mostly concerned with very high end, and the distinctive tonality the Infinity Walsh Dome tweeters were famous for. That's what I'd like to hear again!

So, am I on the right track looking into Ohm speakers, using the original Infinity Monitors as a reference point? Or will I be disappointed? It's all about the great sound of the Walsh Dome tweeters to me. I know Ohm has speakers to sell, that's why I'm asking here, hoping to find a few unbiased opinions.

Thank you for any replies!

Ed
 
hi ed,

welcome aboard.

a couple things right off. the infinity walsh tweeter is not a dome tweeter, though its drive is sourced from a dome tweeter (with the dome removed). it is quite a different animal from a dome tweeter. the infinity walsh tweeter is actually a transmission line super tweeter, whereas the dome tweeter is a conventional dynamic driver.

the true ohm walsh driver is a full range transmission line driver (actually more of a mid-range) that needs to be supplemented with conventional drivers to cover the range of human hearing. in fact, they cross over to a conventional dome tweeter for the high frequencies. they are less efficient than the old infinitys, and have a narrower frequency range.

the ohm's claim to fame is the soundstage, and it will better the old infinitys in that regard if you have the right space for them. however the infinitys are easier to drive, amp-wise, and have a significantly wider frequency response (not to mention you can buy a lot of old infinitys for the price of a pair of ohms).

speaker preference is a personal thing. you say you'd like to have the sound of the infinity monitors again. good or bad, only an infinity monitor is going to give you that. is that sound better than an ohm, or an HHR? again, a matter of personal preference. one nice thing about the ohms, they offer an in home trial period so you can decide if you really like them enough to keep them.


.
 
Last edited:
I have a set of Ohm 4's sitting in the basement in their original boxes. Sounded like crap when I got them. The cabinets are nearly perfect though and I was curious about their sound. Both surrounds need redone and one of the piezo tweeters is dead - or the glue on the bracket came unstuck and it fell over inside the can. As I understand it from some of the threads around here, the current Ohms aren't even Walsh drivers anymore. Just a downward firing open conventional driver with a tweeter mounted to an L-bracket stuck to the top (magnet) of the main driver with double-sided tape.

I had called Ohm about sending in the cans for a refurb and was told John wasn't in at the time, but would call me back. Never did. With the AXT's and now the RS 2.5's I haven't given them a thought in quite a while.
 
for the record, can some kind owner post the dimensions of the cone of an infinity walsh tweeter? large end diameter, small end diameter, and height?


.
 
Height from top of mounting plate to top of cone, I get 3.41" - though it's not precisely the same all the way around.

Top OD = 3.21". Not perfectly round though.

OD at top of mounting plate = ~1.1". A little less at the spider (maybe 1"?), but can't get in to measure there without total disassembly, including ungluing from mounting plate (which I never do during repair).

This is a gold cone internal tube support version. The center tube is 4" tall, 1/2" OD.

The early silver cones with external support measure:

Height from top of mounting plate to top of cone = 3.55"

Top OD = 3.31". Again, not perfectly round (I cut the foam with an Exacto knife around a coffe mug)

OD at top of mounting plate = 1.16". Again, a little less at the spider. I suspect 1" would be a good number to use. It fits around the base of the original tweeter dome. So the donor tweeter was a 1" dome.
 
OD at top of mounting plate = ~1.1". A little less at the spider (maybe 1"?), but can't get in to measure there without total disassembly, including ungluing from mounting plate (which I never do during repair).

This is a gold cone internal tube support version. The center tube is 4" tall, 1/2" OD.

Just to concur since I have a trashed Walsh apart and just measured the bottom of the cone removed from the mounting plate at 1".
 
hi ed,

welcome aboard.

a couple things right off. the infinity walsh tweeter is not a dome tweeter, though its drive is sourced from a dome tweeter (with the dome removed). it is quite a different animal from a dome tweeter. the infinity walsh tweeter is actually a transmission line super tweeter, whereas the dome tweeter is a conventional dynamic driver.

the true ohm walsh driver is a full range transmission line driver (actually more of a mid-range) that needs to be supplemented with conventional drivers to cover the range of human hearing. in fact, they cross over to a conventional dome tweeter for the high frequencies. they are less efficient than the old infinitys, and have a narrower frequency range.

the ohm's claim to fame is the soundstage, and it will better the old infinitys in that regard if you have the right space for them. however the infinitys are easier to drive, amp-wise, and have a significantly wider frequency response (not to mention you can buy a lot of old infinitys for the price of a pair of ohms).

speaker preference is a personal thing. you say you'd like to have the sound of the infinity monitors again. good or bad, only an infinity monitor is going to give you that. is that sound better than an ohm, or an HHR? again, a matter of personal preference. one nice thing about the ohms, they offer an in home trial period so you can decide if you really like them enough to keep them.


.

Thanks for the reply, and also the clarification. I'll make sure I never refer to the tweeters as "Domes" again.

Since I posted, I've been offered a pair of Monitor II's. I've enclosed some pix. Since you seem to be more knowlegdgable on them than myself, is there anything I should be concerned about?
The tweeters on my original Monitor I's (1973) looked different. Also seems like two different mid range speakers to me. Seller says they all work fine. He's from the midwest, I'm from NYC. So this might not be any easy transaction to size up, that's why I' showing the photos. Any comments would be appeciated. Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • 1_cr.jpg
    1_cr.jpg
    79.2 KB · Views: 82
  • 2_cr.jpg
    2_cr.jpg
    87.7 KB · Views: 73
  • 3_cr.jpg
    3_cr.jpg
    82.5 KB · Views: 69
  • 4_cr.jpg
    4_cr.jpg
    83.3 KB · Views: 98
  • 5_cr.jpg
    5_cr.jpg
    85.4 KB · Views: 96
the true ohm walsh driver is a full range transmission line driver (actually more of a mid-range) that needs to be supplemented with conventional drivers to cover the range of human hearing. in fact, they cross over to a conventional dome tweeter for the high frequencies. they are less efficient than the old infinitys, and have a narrower frequency range.
cy
.

I think you have your Walsh's mixed up?

The original (and true) Walsh driver, the F, is a full range driver. Frequency response is something like 32-17khz.

The latter Walsh drivers, the ones in the cans, those are the ones with the supplemental tweeter.

bs
 
Since I posted, I've been offered a pair of Monitor II's. I've enclosed some pix. Since you seem to be more knowlegdgable on them than myself, is there anything I should be concerned about?
The tweeters on my original Monitor I's (1973) looked different. Also seems like two different mid range speakers to me. Seller says they all work fine. He's from the midwest, I'm from NYC. So this might not be any easy transaction to size up, that's why I' showing the photos. Any comments would be appeciated. Thanks!

Based on the midrange drivers one of those pictured is a Monitor II, the one with the metal grill over the midrange, and the other with the open dome is a Monitor IIa. I don't know how much difference there would be in the sound but as long as all of the drivers are working, including the ever important Walsh tweeters, they are great speakers. I suppose one or the other of the mids could be swapped out so they match if the disparity is a problem and the crossovers changed to match because I do believe they are different.

Also, obviously the tops are different. The IIa's came with two different tops, wooden ones to match the cabs and cloth to match the grills. I don't know if that was also the case with the II's but since it looks like there is one of each I'd ask if the seller has both pair or at least a matching one for one or the other.

Shipping speakers of this size and weight however would another issue altogether.
 
Last edited:
I think you have your Walsh's mixed up?

The original (and true) Walsh driver, the F, is a full range driver. Frequency response is something like 32-17khz.

The latter Walsh drivers, the ones in the cans, those are the ones with the supplemental tweeter.

bs

no, not mixed up. i'll admit i was lumping all ohms together in one brief post, as well as lumping all walsh equipped infinitys together. this was for purposes of generalized comparison in response to the question of how an (unspecified) ohm compared to a walsh tweetered infinity.

i do know the "true walsh" ohm A and F are what you call "full range" drivers. my point was that 32 - 17khz falls well short of the full range of human hearing, and needs to be supplemented in order to achieve that. the "untrue walsh" ohms (with tweeters) have a frequency response of 47 - 20khz. better, but still not great. in comparison the infinity monitor IIa, like the poster was considering, has a far better frequency response of 22 - 28khz.



.
 
Shipping speakers of this size and weight however would another issue altogether.

Thanks for the reply. A couple of questions.

Could you clarify further on shipping the speakers?

Naturally, I'd prefer to buy new speakers. Are there any other speakers you would recommend that come close to sounding like the Infinity Monitors? Primarily, the high end. I love the sound of the Walsh tweeters. Thanks again.
 
Thanks for the reply. A couple of questions.

Could you clarify further on shipping the speakers?

Naturally, I'd prefer to buy new speakers. Are there any other speakers you would recommend that come close to sounding like the Infinity Monitors? Primarily, the high end. I love the sound of the Walsh tweeters. Thanks again.

Hmmm . . . . . clarify on shipping Monitor II's. Well they're big and heavy and I can't imagine trying to box them for shipping let alone doing so well enough to prevent destruction at the hands of UPS or Fedex. Picking them up or palletizing them for transport via commercial carrier would be the desired method of delivery which might prove inconvenient or expensive.

I wouldn't presume to recommend any new speakers that have the sound of Walsh tweeter equipped vintage Infinity's. All I have is vintage gear and none of the other speakers I am currently using, including some later Infinity models with EMIT and EMIM planar drivers as well as a pair of Ohm Walsh 2's, sound like the mid-70's Walsh tweeter equipped speakers that I own. That doesn't mean they don't sound good - just different, and each serves a unique purpose depending on where I have them and with what other gear they are used.

Finding new speakers that you like is really very subjective and so going out and listening to as many as you can before making your decision is really the best plan.

Sorry I can't be of more assistance.
 
Last edited:
need some tips of where to start looking

Hmmm . . . . . clarify on shipping Monitor II's. Well they're big and heavy and I can't imagine trying to box them for shipping let alone doing so well enough to prevent destruction at the hands of UPS or Fedex. Picking them up or palletizing them for transport via commercial carrier would be the desired method of delivery which might prove inconvenient or expensive.

Finding new speakers that you like is really very subjective and so going out and listening to as many as you can before making your decision is really the best plan.

Thanks for your thoughts on shipping. Can you recommend any stores or sites (other than eBay and Craigslist) that speciaiize in selling used high-end equipment? Living in NYC, I feel I have a fair to good chance of eventually finding a used pair of Infinity Monitors, that I can audition locally in one of the five boroughs (or NJ, Long Island, etc.) and transport back to Staten Island in my van. This would solve the shipping problem entirely. Just need some additional tips on how and where to start the search. Thanks again for your help and suggestions.
 
Thanks for your thoughts on shipping. Can you recommend any stores or sites (other than eBay and Craigslist) that speciaiize in selling used high-end equipment? Living in NYC, I feel I have a fair to good chance of eventually finding a used pair of Infinity Monitors, that I can audition locally in one of the five boroughs (or NJ, Long Island, etc.) and transport back to Staten Island in my van. This would solve the shipping problem entirely. Just need some additional tips on how and where to start the search. Thanks again for your help and suggestions.

I'd start a thread in the General Audio forum asking for suggestions for finding vintage gear in the NYC area besides CL and eBay. It seems like there should be some good sources in such a large metropolitan area like yours. Personally I'd also scan your area CraigsList on a daily basis. You just never know what will turn up. Persistence pays off.
 
this thread is about the design of / history of / repair of infinity walsh tweeters, not shopping for speakers. please start a separate thread for off-topic subjects.

you are new here. hijacking threads is not proper forum etiquette. that said, good luck with your search. you are in nyc, your options are limitless.



.
 
this thread is about the design of / history of / repair of infinity walsh tweeters, not shopping for speakers. please start a separate thread for off-topic subjects.... hijacking threads is not proper forum etiquette.


loquatious,

Likewise, your post. It only adds to the meandering of the thread. It's redundant and unnecessary, as Coastsider already made the same point politely and intelligently. No one was attempting to "hijack the thread".
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom