What do Tannoy speakers sound like?

[70salesguy]

I've never heard a pair of Tannoy speakers. It seems like they are highly regarded by some here. How would you characterize the sound? Please compare and contrast them to some well-known examples of other speakers.

Thank you.

 

[sealy]

Lots of different Tannoys. Canadian-built conventional speakers (C series). Vintage speakers with woofers and separate compression tweeters. Dual-concentric speakers of all sizes and vintages - System series, 6 series, DCM series, older classic dual-concentric Tannoys with names like Westminster, Belvedere, Churchill and drivers names like gold, red, silver in sizes of 10-15 in. There are also studio monitors and constructor dual-concentrics that are used in studios and churches or gyms, respectively.

I think the System series Tannoys sound very good, with excellent power handling and great imaging. The Studio Monitors are equally as good. Some Tannoy aficionados prefer the sound of the smaller classic Tannoys of 10-12 in. over the 15 in. versions, apparently for overall cohesiveness of sound. Many people who own the older Tannoys add super tweeters to add a bit more high frequency reach and "air".

The older Tannoys are limited in terms of power handling, although they play plenty loud with little power. Many of the later models such as the Studio Monitors are still fairly efficient, but will handle much more power than their ancestors.

Quite frankly, I've yet to hear a Tannoy I hated. Many sound wonderful, at least to my ears. The strength of the dual concentric sound is the cohesiveness of the sound. The driver alignment is the key. The sense of scale with some of the larger, older Tannoys is amazing. They still make the Churchill and Westminster. Regarding the Westminster. Each speaker is the size of a fridge and costs a bundle. I've heard my friend's pair. If you can afford them and have the room, they are definitely worth a listen. , especially if they're accompanied by a $3000 pair of Tannoy's ultra-sonic tweeters.

 

[Cosmos]

I have limited experience.. Owned a pair of Tannoy M1000 for a few months. They were designed to be studio monitors. They were OK.. smooth midrange.. Highs were a little rolled off and bass was very deep on these, but not terribly well defined. I felt like I was listening to a nice pair of speakers (not wonderful). They did not sound very live...

In all, I wasn't terribly impressed. They were sold to fund things I do want. Perhaps other models are killers.. Can't answer that.

 

[voltcontrol]

I think you should always audition yourself and not rely on lacking descriptions from others, but here goes ;

Compare them with designs in their own league, these Tannoy Sixes series with KEF (i)Q series/(Jim) Thiel point source designs for instance.

Bass defenition on the sixes (I've only got experience with these and on a 6o9MKII) is not 'crisp', but as you can expect from an 8" midbass driver.
Other than that these are absolute keepers for me. Crisp, detailed, coherent sound, I don't notice the highend roloff due to my years as dj. (and remember, radio transmission cuts of sound at what frequency? )
Next to aforementioned similar designs perhaps a "league" classification would be nice, but I feel I don't know enough of their designs to be a judge on that.

But, as you can already read, if Tannoy (dualconcentrics) represent good sound quality is out of the discussion, it's more a matter of taste.

 

[westend]

Tannoy dual concentrics are laid back, antithetical to JBL, smaller consumer pairs. As was mentioned, the magic is in the cohesiveness of the single point source.

 

[Deczor]

Personally, I like the HDP dual concentrics. They have that fat, wet bass that I like. Quite mellow-sounding. A dual concentric design is had to describe to someone who hasn't heard it, but you do notice a big difference having all the sound coming from one point.

Monitor golds are nice, but seemed a bit-bass challenged to me when it came to more poppy recordings. nice and smooth for Jazz and Classical though. The Reds are similar, but more neutral and monitorish.

Heard some 15" blacks ages ago. They were dreadful.

 

[sealy]

Fat, wet bass? I like it! My DCM200's were lacking bass, fat, wet or otherwise, but the rest of the frequency spectrum was nicely reproduced.

 

[Simpson]

Nowhere near as impressive as all the others mentioned, but I have had a pair of Mercury M-2s for over a decade now. For about half that time, I have paired them with a Velodyne 12" sub which provides the bass they're missing, mainly due to size. When I bought them new, I preferred them to every PSB I auditioned, as well as some smaller Linn speakers.

They are a little more power hungry than you might expect, but all that means is that a 20 rms amp won't cut it. I would still be listening to them nearly everyday now, except I acquired a pair of Musical Fidelity MC-2s from the late 80s that have been consuming my listening interest of late. FWIW, the Mercurys aren't any worse that the Musical Fidelities IMO.

 

[AaronM]

In a word... Great!

I've had a pair of Mercury MX-1's for years and they sound fantastic, not much bass as others have said (these are bookshelf speakers, though), but nice, clean sound, especially if they're positioned right.
Mind, I'm no expert on speakers, as others have said, it's best to try some for yourself, it's all taste!

 

[jetblack]

I think the System series Tannoys sound very good, with excellent power handling and great imaging.

I agree, especially if they're spaced about 8 ft apart, and you plop yourself in the sweet spot. Some of the best imaging speakers I've heard in awhile.

 

[cornwallguy]

A neighbor once had a set of Cheviots that i thought were excellent !
Zoot Sims never sounded better