The Smaller Advent Loudspeaker
- Thread starter Zilch
- Start date
Not saying that, merely that among many available options, I'm concentrating the effort upon trying different combinations retaining the stock woofers rather than repeating the proven approach of gutting down to empty boxes.
Data on an array of vintage acoustic suspension woofers/cabs is here:
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=247274
Last edited:
Brian
An Old Geezer
The Smaller Advent woofer may be the less desirable for DIY projects as the design criteria was somewhat different than most other woofers. It and the box size were designed to sound like the original Advent but 3 db less efficient. Most woofers do not have this type of design objective. It had to live with a 1 octave reduction in freq response to acheive this. It also had to mate to a specified tweeter whose parameters were set by the tweeter in the larger brother. All in all, The Smaller Advent was a design effort in some interesting ways for the guys and required a more integrated approach from the beginning of the projoct than most designs most likely.
The result was a speaker that sounds like the original and has eliminated the worst of the original's final design.
The result was a speaker that sounds like the original and has eliminated the worst of the original's final design.
Not, apparently:
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?p=2872971#post2872971
Don't worry, now, ZilchLab is "resourceful;" there is hope:
I'm goin' in.... :tongue:
Last edited:
Let's not presume that objectivists don't also listen.
The Smaller Advents did not rock the world of loudspeaker design, the measurements suggest how they might be improved, and we know how to accomplish what they suggest.... :yes:
Brian
An Old Geezer
Can they be "improved", possibly but, then do they meet the original design goals of Advent? Probably not. Hence what may be perceived as an improvement may infact not be. You can change anything and deem it an improvement and even have measurements to prove it however, if it moves the final result away from the developer's design goals, then it is only a change and not necessarily a real improvement that should come closer to the original developer's design parameters. It is not an objectivist vs subjectivist argument.
Those goals are clear: like many others at the time, the objective was to mate an acoustic suspension woofer having the requisite parameters to play extended bass in a small cabinet with a wide-bandwidth tweeter capable of playing low enough to successfully cross with it in a two-way. That's what the "fried egg" tweeter was about, combining mid and tweeter in a single device, but that approach clearly had issues and compromises.
Fast forward 40 years, and technology has advanced to where it is now possible to economically accomplish those design objectives using a modern compression driver and waveguide such as I have shown above, with the added benefit of constant directivity over a substantially wider dispersion pattern, providing the potential to succeed where Kloss and his contemporaries failed....
Brian
An Old Geezer
Incorrect, the stated design goal of the speaker was to make a speaker that sounded the same as the original Advent in a smaller box and had the same output.
To acheive the latter, the result was a speaker 3 db less efficient so the design parameters included it to be a 4 ohm system to utilize the characteristics of a SS amp the within reason will double the output power ending with an spl equiv of the orginal Advent.
The construction parameters you mention are not the same as the design goal.
To acheive the latter, the result was a speaker 3 db less efficient so the design parameters included it to be a 4 ohm system to utilize the characteristics of a SS amp the within reason will double the output power ending with an spl equiv of the orginal Advent.
The construction parameters you mention are not the same as the design goal.
Uhmmm, the fundamental objective is once removed, then, from the lesser one, by that perspective.
We've already "fixed" the original and new large Advents with considerable success; I propose to apply the same principles here.... :yes:
Brian
An Old Geezer
I'm not sure what you fixed as to the original Advents but, to acheive the orginal goal of The Smaller Advent, you'd need to end up with a pair of The Smaller Advents that were indistunquishable from your "fixed" except for the lowest octave. Assuming your revised original Advent is a better speaker and the cost if put into production met the design goal of Henry as to showing that a very good speaker need not be expensive. Then you'd have acheived success.
I've seen some wonderfully modified cars that take a basic design and turn them into a killer muscle car or road car or whatever by ripping out everything and by investing $10ks to make it into a fantastic car. However, is it better? Not necessarily as the design goal may have been to produce a very basic, simple to repair, low maintenance, affordable, car to be used usually within short disances of the home. By those standards, the modified car is a total failure and not better but far worse.
I've seen some wonderfully modified cars that take a basic design and turn them into a killer muscle car or road car or whatever by ripping out everything and by investing $10ks to make it into a fantastic car. However, is it better? Not necessarily as the design goal may have been to produce a very basic, simple to repair, low maintenance, affordable, car to be used usually within short disances of the home. By those standards, the modified car is a total failure and not better but far worse.
saltwater
Super Member
And i cant wait till to see it, keep up the good work!!
You'll find it documented in this forum's largest and most popular thread. :yes:
At the hand of Wiredguy yesterday, it turned that Bose 301 into something like I've never heard anything Bose ever play before.... :thmbsp:
]
