HH Scott S-15 speakers with Rola drivers

I picked up 2 pairs of Scott S-15 3 way speakers (one pair for a buddy of mine who needs them and one pair for me as "loan out" speakers). The seller originally bought these for a quad system he had back in '74.

I was expecting (hoping) to find the usual CTS built doped fabric woofer and cone mid / tweeter array, and since the grills are such a PITA to remove I didn't take them off figuring that the CTS drivers would be in there. When I got them home and powered them up I was kind of disappointed with the sound - lots of midrange and almost no bass at all. When I hooked up the second pair I heard that awful, all to familiar rattle of an unsupported cone due to rotted foam surrounds.

I'm quite familiar with the S-15 and other Scott speakers from that era (at least I thought I was) but this is the first time I have ever run across Scotts from this era without CTS drivers. Apparently these are all Rola drivers built in the 21st week of 1974. Same nice crossover network and beautifully built cabinet, same brown tweed grill covers, just different drivers with a different sound balance that so far seems to be much more forward and with far less bass.

From what I've heard so far (from the pair that didn't have rotted surrounds) I was much more impressed with the bass response from the CTS woofers in S-15 and S-20s that I've heard and owned in the past. Although the Rola woofers are much heavier and use larger magnets than the CTS it certainly doesn't mean that they sound better (at least not in this application). The tweets and mids sound different too, just a tad too forward compared to the CTS drivers that I'm used to in these speakers. We'll see how things shape up after a re-foaming and re-sealing.

Just a heads up if you run across a pair this Summer at a garage sale or a thrift - watch out 'cause apparently not all of them have the nice rot-proof drivers that we normally see. Rolas are nice musical instrument speakers, not sure that they will be so great in a pair of home stereo speakers.

TNX for the info and pix.
Picked up a pair at the local S.V. dePaul for $20 a few weeks ago. Pretty good cosmetically and soundwise. Mine were dated Jan. 1971 on the back of the grills. Sound close to a pair of Utah A-70A's I got a few weeks before-same efficiency and sound quality-be nice for a front/rear system.
I haven't ripped into the Scott's yet, but the drivers were in A-1 shape. Like the 3-position tweeter control on the back too.

HackerJohn1 said:

TNX for the info and pix.
Picked up a pair at the local S.V. dePaul for $20 a few weeks ago. Pretty good cosmetically and soundwise. Mine were dated Jan. 1971 on the back of the grills. Sound close to a pair of Utah A-70A's I got a few weeks before-same efficiency and sound quality-be nice for a front/rear system.
I haven't ripped into the Scott's yet, but the drivers were in A-1 shape. Like the 3-position tweeter control on the back too.

Click to expand...

Nice - sounds like you got the original design with the CTS drivers. You shouldn't have any problem with those, and they are well suited for the cabinet volume and size. These Rola woofers seem way too big for the cabinet volume, maybe that's why the bass is so thin. Not sure when or why they switched from CTS to Rola, but 1974 must have been just about the end of the production run for the S-15 I'd imagine.

Interesting, I ran across a pair of these at the local flea market today. The owner was using them as shelf supports, along with dozens of other cheap speakers.

I eventually passed on the Scotts as the cabinets were a bit rough, she wanted twenty for the speakers but I'm trying to be a bit more selective with my purchases, and not just dragging every piece of gear home that I think has value.

That said, I wonder how they'd sound on a Marantz 2226B.:scratch2:

Just a quick question, these had the three position switch for the tweeter as well, does this mean that they have the CTS drivers?

Looks like these have the same Temple caps that KLH used. Not the best by a long shot.

John

tonyk said:

Just a quick question, these had the three position switch for the tweeter as well, does this mean that they have the CTS drivers?

Click to expand...

Can't tell by the switch - they look identical in every way to the CTS version and the crossovers are the same. The Rolas make 'em very heavy for their size (but you'd have to have a CTS version to compare the weight to).

Probably the easiest way to tell them apart is to look through the grills with a flashlight and try to spot the surround material. If you can try them out before you buy 'em that would be a good idea too - had I powered these up before buying them they probably wouldn't be here now. The grills are such a PITA to remove that I didn't want to start tearing into them with the seller standing right there (don't think he would have appreciated that).

boreas said:

Looks like these have the same Temple caps that KLH used. Not the best by a long shot.

John

Click to expand...

Yep, they look exactly like the crappy NP electros used in KLH and a few others. The last thing in the world I need now is another project, was really hoping this would be a done deal. Since all four sound the same in the mid / tweet department I'm going to leave them alone for now. Next time I order from PE I'll get replacements, and I'll take care of my friend's pair then too.

HH Scott S-15 update:

Just a quick update to complete this thread. I replaced the rotted foam surrounds with butyl rubber surrounds instead of foam on all 4 woofers (just to see how they would work). The rubber surrounds and woofer cones sat in their most natural position when the surrounds were inverted (roll facing inward) and when attached to the back of the woofer cone instead of the front. This left the cone sitting at it's natural resting point, allowed the most excursion and gave the most flexibility / least resistance.

I managed to damage one of the cone tweeters on the pair that I kept for myself so I replaced both cone tweeters with a pair of Sony titanium dome tweeters that I had sitting around. I tried a few other tweeters that fit the cutouts but these ones matched the output of the other drivers and blended in with the crossover the best. Oh, and just for the record all of the tweeters and midranges in these S-15's were made by Fisher (EIA code 1056), not Rola or CTS. I wouldn't be surprised if many of the other cone tweeters and midranges in speakers of this type were made by Fisher as well (found the same 1056 coded Fisher tweeters and midranges in a pair of Criterion speakers last week too).

I also replaced all of the caps in both pairs with new standard electrolytics even though the old ones measured just fine. Finally I covered the grills on my pair with a nice oatmeal colored linen. My buddy asked that his be covered in brown grill fabric so I did those up with Parts Express brown grill fabric (sorry, no pics of the brown ones). Both sets came out looking fantastic, the walnut cabinets were already in mint condition and replacing the original brown orange and gold tweed grill fabric was a major improvement :yes:

I can't believe how excellent these speakers sound with the rubber surrounds on the woofers - it totally transformed them from thin and midrangey to monster performers with controlled but very abundant bass response that goes much lower than I would have thought possible with such a small and shallow cabinet. The titanium dome tweeters are super crisp and clear without being overbearing and they add a nice "airy" character to the overall sound without compromising any of the upper midrange response. The original cone tweeters in the other pair were actually pretty nice too, just not as articulate and delicate sounding as these.

All in all a very fun and rewarding project. My buddy couldn't be happier with his new pair of S-15's (big improvement over what he was using before) and I'm loving this "modified" pair over here. I've been listening to them for a couple of weeks now and I just can't seem to switch back to my regular main speakers.

Inverted and back mounted rubber surrounds:


Sony titanium dome tweets:


Oatmeal linen (didn't get a shot of the brown cloth):




Fisher made the midranges and tweeters (1056 EIA code indicates Fisher built, date code indicates 38th week of 1973):

audiojones said:

Although the Rola woofers are much heavier and use larger magnets than the CTS it certainly doesn't mean that they sound better [/IMG]

Click to expand...

Just looking at magnet size does not equate to optimal system parameters. Don't blame Rola, blame Scott for poor design.

jlovda said:

Just looking at magnet size does not equate to optimal system parameters. Don't blame Rola, blame Scott for poor design.

Click to expand...

Yep, my point exactly :yes:

Scott speakers were built to a relatively low price point (much like the Lafayette Criterion, Harman/Kardon and Realistic Optimus lines of that era) so I would imagine that the components used to build them were selected for their lower initial cost while still matching the cabinet / crossover parameters (which probably had plenty of room for compromise). It seems strange that Scott would start putting heavy duty Rola drivers in these since they are much beefier and (one would think) more expensive than the CTS woofers used in earlier versions. The foam surrounds on the Rolas were very thick and stiff as well, making them less than ideal for a sealed acoustic suspension design. Maybe they just got a great deal on a load of these woofers and started chucking 'em in to the last of the S-15 run. All I can tell you is that the rubber surrounds make them sound much, much better in this application IMO.

Freq response and other specifics

hello this is my first post,

The Scott s-15 speakers have a frequency response of 35-20000 hz

I know this after researching the S-15's as i have purchased a pair, i hope they are in good condition, i paid just under £15 and will probably collect them in a week or less.

Hear is the website i eventually found the specs on, although it is in french which i cant read, certain specs are recognizable to me, such as frequency response.

http://www.audiovintage.fr/leforum/viewtopic.php?t=27809

it is a french advert that has the info on

Today i also purchased a pair of marantz imperial 6's which i paid £15 for

"Scott speakers were built to a relatively low price point (much like the Lafayette Criterion, Harman/Kardon and Realistic Optimus lines of that era)". This is true. But one has to be careful. Most often these speakers were not made in house. Because a speaker factory is a heafty piece of cash. So it's cheaper to buy them. Or have them made to spec. Now that's where the caution comes in. The speaker you get called Lafayette Criterion may well be made by ESS or EV. It may have a Heil Air Motion high end. It made be as exact a copy of a Teledyne or AR as they could manage with their engineering and price point. Strange things happen in the world of hifi manufacturing. Long ago I picked up a white van speaker which was absolutely identical inside and out to a Pioneer DSS-9D. I think my Lafayette Criterion 5X 2-way acoustic suspension sound better than any comparable AR from the period. And after rebuilding it, I doubt they used better drivers or electronics. Easrly Sansui are usually Coral. EV made Marantz and Circuit City's house brand Royal in the same factory with the same box. There's a lot of hype and BS in hifi. Now there are few brands like some early Polk, Klipsch, Empire, Mirage, Warfedale, Bose, and so on that built statements, sort of little wooden monuments to their experiments and sound philosophy. But they were unusual. Most affordable speakers that sounded OK were simple 3-way ported boxes that all sounded the same with some decals added to tell them apart and charge more or less $.

OK. So specifically, I just took a 10 minute listen to these Scott S-15s BUT before I talk about sound. Man! Are they small! Remind me a lot of the better ARs and Teledynes in their size and acoustic suspension. And, speaking of sound, they sound similar. Rather precise with a surprisingly BIG sound. Though I admit they look pathetic sitting atop my Klipsch Cornwalls! Talk about a BIG SOUND!

Well, these little guys from Scott are no bad speakers after 60 years of gethering dust somewhere with caps leaking and the switches corroding. Fortinately, I have the doped cloth surrounds on the woofers. They lack the last but of sparkle and transparency that one would get from the best Teledynes. They lack the exaggerated bass of most modern woomphers, thank God! These are nice respectable speakers, well designed, affordable, make no promises they can't keep, with just a bit of blurring of the instrumental timbre. They are not in the same league with Polk Monitor 7, almost with KLH Model 6, not quite Mirage SM3 or Design Acoustics PS10; but they beat the tar out of most every house brand like Royal that I used to sell at Circuit City back in the day and all the big, cheap 3-way ported boxes unless you only play rock and roll. In that case get a JBL, Pioneer, Royal, Marantz, Cerwin Vega, or a killer modern surround sound from Sony, Denon, Klipsch, or Polk, crank that beastly puppy, and YOU ARE THERE! Go for it! Louder than the Filmore, especiall the upper bass!!!

Let me add this to end on an up note: If you should ever run across any of the house brand that Stirling sold, especially the Cathedral, take a serious listen. Some of those old Stirling Cathedrals give the warfedale W70 series a run for its money despite the oversized 15" woofer and the simple inexpensive drivers. It's a sweet design. And about the best loudspeakers I have ever heard for Nelson Riddle's trombone arrangement of "Summer Wind" for Mr. Sinatra. Good listening!