• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

AVID thread

That's the speaker I recall, except the tweeter looks different - more similar to the Philips in the first generation 102, but not exactly.

I didn't mean to imply that they're bad speakers, just not as dynamic and clean as the earlier version. But worth the price they were usually sold for - ie cheaper than a Boston A-100 etc.
 
Avid 232ab Speakers

I picked up a pair of Avid 232ab speakers a couple years ago.
Rare model.
They are currently doing bedroom bookshelf duty.
If anyone knows any history (Vintage, MSRP) or any specs please share.
 
All I have is they were made from 81-85 (must've been pretty good for a 5 year run) and they retailed for $580 pair.
 
I just picked up some Avid 101 speakers from Craigslist for very little money. I like them, though one tweeter is non-functional. I'll open her up and see what the deal is.

Nice open sound, definitely not bass heavy, but relatively accurate. Those vinyl bases and the brown grill cloth are not going to woo the spouse, though. I may send these off to college with the kid.
 
I liked the pair of 101's I had for a while, and I agree with your assessment.

The tweets are good old-fashioned phenolic ring tweeters, and modern replacements are available if necessary.
 
Well, I just opened up the 101 with the bad tweeter. It tested OK at 8 ohm, so I re-installed it and it now works fine!

I gave these a test in the garage (sorry neighbors) and I like them. Lots of sparkle when playing The Civil Wars, but the real test was Prince Johnny by St. Vincent. Plenty of bass! I guess I hadn't really stretched their legs. I'm pleased with the Avid 101! The wife may have to put up with vinyl clad speakers for a while as I bring them into rotation and pull the KEF Corelli pair I am running now.

For posterity, from the April 1977 Stereo Review of the AVID 101:
Impedance: 8 ohms
Sensitivity: 89db at 1 watt at 1 meter
Frequency Response: 30hz to 18,000hz +/- 3db
Recommended Power: 15-70 watts
Dimensions: 29" high, 13" square, approximately 40lbs
 
Octaven said:
Avid captured lightning in a bottle during the 70's with the original 100 series. By the end of the decade, there were lots of new buzzwords in the marketplace... 'phase coherence', 'diffraction', etc. They introduced new models in an effort to regain some traction, but they pretty much fizzled.

Peerless had some operations in the US at that time. They bought, I don't know, either the whole Avid operation, or just the name, and marketed a few new Avid models. If I'm not mistaken, the 102ab's were one of those.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but they used drivers that were pretty much bottom of the line by Peerless standards, and the cabinets were kinda homely, too... I never saw one of the crossovers, but my guess is that it was also cheapened, relative to the original Avid units.

If I remember correctly, your 102ab's had a poly woofer cone that was whitish in color, and a 1" dome that was recessed into its housing..
Click to expand...

http://www.athanas.com/design-history.html
Avid was originally a respected New England speaker maker that went belly-up and was purchased lock, stock and barrel by Genesis. Avid became their second tier product line. Designing these speakers was the tin pan alley of speaker design. Like the song writers of old, we just kept cranking out Avids for various stores, regions, what-have-you, with an ever changing array of cabinets, drivers, x-over parts or whatever was procured on the surplus market and dumped in my lab. I remember once having to design a great speaker before lunch for a large order to be shipped the following day.

How this fits in with your Avid history I'm not sure. It could have happened after the Peerless acquisition. I have an Avid 103 in the attic. It's hooked up, but haven't listened to it in a while, but did like it.
 
Sorry to bump an old thread.

Pair of 102s here. I assume the original ones, no letter. Does anyone have sensitivity figures for the 102s?

I saw the link for the brochure for the 102As, rated at 85, but are the 102s like that as well?
 
similar, I am sure - I don't have any other literature on the 102 either (although I have a pair).
Sensitivity wasn't always quoted in those days; often, you'd see "minimum recommended amplifier power" instead.
 
Yes, I have seen that. I wonder how well that tracks. I believe the aforementioned Avid literature quoted 15 watts for the 85db 102As. I have seen 10 watts quoted for a set of 90db speakers from another brand.
 
90 db is a lot more sensitive than 85. Basically, going from 85 to 90, you probably need three times the amp for equivalent performance, in an average 2500 cu ft living room. But that's a rough ratio that assumes a lot. The ratio is smaller for small rooms, and bigger for really big rooms. It will be smaller for acoustically live rooms, and bigger for 'dead' rooms.

There are no standards for calculating 'minimum wattage requirements,' and manufacturers can, if they wish, assume tiny rooms with bare walls, as well as assuming you just want quiet music in the background. Or they can just say whatever they want. The specification dB with 1 watt at 1 meter is, on the other hand, an actual specification.
 
A lot of good information above. . . One other thing to keep in mind is this. To make modest 3db gain in volume, you have to double the power. . . Take for instance a speaker that is rated at 88db at 1 Watt. Double the power to two watts, and you get 91db. Continuing the math, 16 watts yields 100db. . . 256 watts gives 112 db (which is deafening). The innaresting thing is, going from one watt to two results in a gain of three decibels. And going from 128 watts to 256 watts results in a gain of. . . three decibels.
 
Octaven said:
A lot of good information above. . . One other thing to keep in mind is this. To make modest 3db gain in volume, you have to double the power. . . Take for instance a speaker that is rated at 88db at 1 Watt. Double the power to two watts, and you get 91db. Continuing the math, 16 watts yields 100db. . . 256 watts gives 112 db (which is deafening). The innaresting thing is, going from one watt to two results in a gain of three decibels. And going from 128 watts to 256 watts results in a gain of. . . three decibels.
Click to expand...

OK, I'm going to make a picky point. Often you'll see an interval of 6 dB quoted as the decibel increase obtained by doubling the power. Which is correct, 3 or 6? It depends on what you're measuring. Measuring amplifier power, 3 is correct. Measuring SPLs, 6 is correct.That's because a dB number is basically a ratio to some reference level, on a log scale, and the reference and ratios calculate differently for power vs SPL.

Another little fact to muddy the water: volume perception by the listener is not directly proportional to input power You need about a 10 dB difference in SPL for a listener to perceive a doubling in volume, so this requires more than a doubling of input power.
 
Also sensitivity is generally measured at a specific frequency, usually 1000 hz, and given the relatively wide divergence from absolutely flat response of all speakers, and all speakers in actual rooms, sensitivity can't be much more than a general guideline -- if a speaker has a peaky midrange with a bump at 1000 hz, it might measure more sensitive than it actually sounds.
 
Very good read. I just stumbled onto a pair of 101's although mine do not have the Ring Tweets, they have domes. Front firing. The side mounted I have no ideal yet? I will cracks them open in a bit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom