-
Feeling lucky? Check out the AK 24th Anniversary Giveaway thread and join in the fun!
Ren 90's. They're Mine, All Mine! Mwuhahahaha
- Thread starter jazzmans
- Start date
jazzmans
Super Member
the EMIM is actually loaded into a transmission line, and exits the rear, so it's still a Dipole, sort of.
That rear plate is stood off an inch from the speaker enclosure, and has open cell foam between the enclosure and itself.
really weird engineering. Buggers are heavy!
That rear plate is stood off an inch from the speaker enclosure, and has open cell foam between the enclosure and itself.
really weird engineering. Buggers are heavy!
Last edited:
Adda
Super Member
Again to prevent backwave propagation
I don't think you can consider it a dipole though.
Edit: wait is it a transmission line (stuffed folded tube) or just an exit through the rear with a cover on it?
tomlinmgt
Lunatic Member
How about that....technology borrowed from the QLS-1.
The round hole pictured at the bottom is the exit for the transmission line that is routed from the mid-bass coupler (it's stuffed with polyfill)....
[/IMG]
It's amazing how good a job that little Phillips mid-bass driver does integrating with the dome mids and Watkins woofer. Mid and upper bass sounds as big as everything else going on and one has to wonder how that little driver makes such big sound (scale). It never ceases to amaze me...that's for sure. I like to think that transmission line allowing some content out to the rear has something to do with it.
Man, lookin' at that picture sure makes me want to set them back up.
The round hole pictured at the bottom is the exit for the transmission line that is routed from the mid-bass coupler (it's stuffed with polyfill)....
It's amazing how good a job that little Phillips mid-bass driver does integrating with the dome mids and Watkins woofer. Mid and upper bass sounds as big as everything else going on and one has to wonder how that little driver makes such big sound (scale). It never ceases to amaze me...that's for sure. I like to think that transmission line allowing some content out to the rear has something to do with it.
Man, lookin' at that picture sure makes me want to set them back up.
Last edited:
tomlinmgt
Lunatic Member
How about quasi-dipole? :scratch2:
Adda
Super Member
NO!
I guess that depends on what comes out the opening, is it any thing usable, or just something you want out of the way so it's sent out the back of the speaker?
tomlinmgt
Lunatic Member
NO!
I guess that depends on what comes out the opening, is it any thing usable, or just something you want out of the way so it's sent out the back of the speaker?
Ok.. ok!! No quasi-dipole!
But if it's a rear wave of content firing out of phase with the front wave that's a dipole characteristic (with the transmission line making it a "sort of").
Adda
Super Member
That is true, but that could also apply to aperiodic vents, but in that case, the sound that comes out is considered a problem.
That is why such a vent is almost always found the backside of the box.
What I'm thinking, is that if the transmission line is stuffed, it's purpose must be to attenuate, and let out the leftovers of the backwave, at such low amplitude, that it doesn't affect the sound (more or less).
But I could be wrong of cause, I'm just speculating, it is definitely a quite sophisticated design.
jazzmans
Super Member
according to the semi-technical white paper, it's a transmission line, and the purpose is to damp out most of the back wave to make the speaker easier to position vs traditional dipoles, so I'd definitely call it 'quasi' at best dipole. It's not a true monopole, that's for sure. I hear a lot of information coming out the rear of the speaker, but not like my maggies.
they are glorious in their way, very refined, and smooth. as it sits now, I'll use them mostly without subs, and just kick them on when I need an additional 'rock and roll' bump.
they are glorious in their way, very refined, and smooth. as it sits now, I'll use them mostly without subs, and just kick them on when I need an additional 'rock and roll' bump.
tomlinmgt
Lunatic Member
Aperiodic vent..which I always associate with the Dynaco 25. I thought it was a "restricted" port....a tuning method, if you will. But your concept makes perfect sense, as well. And I can see it as a desirable design characteristic.
tomlinmgt
Lunatic Member
So when you put your ear up to the TL exit port the output is pretty noticeable?
Got an SPL meter?
Without subs and at moderate volume levels is the way I've always preferred them. I've always loved them for instrumental recordings. Vocals do come out nice and clean, but they lack in impact. I love Emims and other flat panel drivers for how clean they sound, but I've always preferred cones for the vocal duties. Also, your room size and makeup, as well as speaker placement in the room, will have a huge effect on the sound. Speakers should be matched to the room. I've always found that every room has it's own optimum volume level, at which it will sound best.
Enjoy those 90's. They are great.
SimplySound
Kent Engineering & Fondry
Or sell them to me!!! :yes: :thmbsp:
tomlinmgt
Lunatic Member
Who Me...??? What did I do...???
I love the new look, from 7.62's fine refinishing work! Nice! :thmbsp:
I love the new look, from 7.62's fine refinishing work! Nice! :thmbsp:
Stimpy, You Idiot!
jazzmans
Super Member
I just bought these from an inmate, (7.62, thanks mang!)who bought them from an inmate
7.62 has done a lot of work to these, new spikes, sanded and stained the Oak, (NOT Veneer, and I hated the blond Oak), coated one with Polyurethene, and then decided that they weren't 'rock and roll' enough for him. Fair enough, they really aren't Rock out till your ears bleed speakers.
Knowing how much I want a pair, he offered them to me. I couldn't get there fast enough.
Now I'm the proud owner of a pair of Infinity's last great speaker. They're fabulous!
I took pics, but bad light, (and messy house) made the pictures unfit for viewing. I'll clean and open my windows so I can take pics in the sun tomorrow.
I'm listening to them now, and they are truly wonderful speakers. They are actually very very similar to my maggies in sound from top to bottom. They do bass, but it's very much 'maggie' bass, like a Dipole does.
7.62, I'm not at all surprised you prefer the bass of the Kappa 8 (not .1), these absolutely need a subwoofer to have any of the 'heft' or 'slam' of rock and roll bass. Did you refoam the woofers, or did the PO?
I'll do much more detailed listening (at higher volumes) tomorrow, but I totally hear what you mean. There's so much of a 'lack' of impactfull bass, (like pipe organ pedals) that I'd guess the woofers are out of phase, however putting the signal into mono, and switching between left, right, and both there is no decrease in bass energy with both playing, or loss of focus as you hear when two drivers are out of phase.
Very odd, and I admit this is unexpected. My crescendo 3009's definitely have more impactful bass then the Ren's do, although I don't know that I'd say it's a more accurate bass. The Ren's are doing bass, it's just not emphasized bass, I'm guessing. Both Woofers are definitely working, they're moving, and at higher volumes, they are moving quite significantly. They are less sensitive then my Crescendo 3009's, and less sensitive then my Crescendo 3007's. (I'm not surprised, as the Rens are a single sealed ?10? vs dual ported 12s. I've had to re-adjust my baseline levels to match them, especially the sub(s). It's very hard to tell where one driver 'crosses over', these are really seamless sounding, more so then possibly any speaker I've ever owned, but this is a first impression, so stay tuned, kiddos!
They are stupid revealing of source material, and along the chain, this I can already tell, they are VERY revealing speakers.
Those of you that have had Ren 90's feel free to chime in with your memories, especially regarding bass
Did I say thanks?
Wheee!
