Hello Alan. Thank you for your quick response. Several things I should state: first, I have a slight tendency toward fixation (popular nowadays but not to be confused with wilfulness); second, I want to build brand new cross-overs (so to utilise any of the existing cross-over is a struggle for me to accept); thirdly, I have read that Jantzen Superior Z were good/great caps at a reasonable price (and had therefore set my mind on them) and lastly, I have the money to do this (whilst acknowledging that the Celestions may not warrant such attention – but finding myself unwilling or unable to change them). So forgive me if I sometimes sound like a recalcitrant and petulant (64 year old) child caught out being naughty.
Anyway. The existing cross-overs are in two parts: woofer on one part and mid/tweeter on another. Thus they fit behind the woofer and the passive radiator. However, the new cross-over(s) will be on one board, external to the speakers. Therefore, while size won’t be an issue my skill level probably will be. So, any and all assistance is/will be appreciated.
So. What I understand is this: the use of Sonicap Gen 1 capacitors is, in this application, as “good” as the Jantzen Superior Z and for less money; they will prove easier for me to work with; the use of Jantzen caps will necessitate some compromises . I accept this Alan. Also, I’m not to order anything until I hear further from you about suitable replacements for the mid-range/tweeter inductors.
Regards
Reggie
Anyway. The existing cross-overs are in two parts: woofer on one part and mid/tweeter on another. Thus they fit behind the woofer and the passive radiator. However, the new cross-over(s) will be on one board, external to the speakers. Therefore, while size won’t be an issue my skill level probably will be. So, any and all assistance is/will be appreciated.
So. What I understand is this: the use of Sonicap Gen 1 capacitors is, in this application, as “good” as the Jantzen Superior Z and for less money; they will prove easier for me to work with; the use of Jantzen caps will necessitate some compromises . I accept this Alan. Also, I’m not to order anything until I hear further from you about suitable replacements for the mid-range/tweeter inductors.
Regards
Reggie
Hi Alan . In the topsy turvey world of OB designs damping factor is the first holy cow to get sacrificed . The help one gets from reducing it is considerable . Seeing as there is no box the whole concept of damping becomes different . ESP ( Elliot ) says that as long as damping doesn't get much below 2 there might be a free lunch in it . Naturally an inductor is the better lunch . These days cheap 100 W chip amps change how we might see throwing half our power away . Also if the design is happy the effects of crossover distortion and stability will be enhanced . If you concoct a baffle 4 x 2 feet and install the Celestion driver you might try direct from the amp and via 10 R . I would expect you to find with 10 R the sound is much more open . At times it might even sound as if it has treble . For example I have Magneplanar's , these must be the least coloured speaker bar a few . Listening to TV still says to me am I going deaf , no it is TV doesn't do the job properly . Listening to a 15 inch bass unit without a box I found I could follow every word . This is something like Caruso on 78's . Something is happening which the science says shouldn't . However remove the 10 R series resistance and all the magic is lost . Nasty and constricted . Even with 10 R it is still that way sometimes . As my PA friend said the roll off is smooth and controlled so will be like 78's . I conclude feedback mechanisms are stopping the proper function of the speaker . In a box we will seldom know this as the box is throwing stuff through the cone . I have also found we might be wrongly calling this a valve sound . A Quad 303 + 10 R sounds much like the valve amp I spent months perfecting . The valve is more detailed .
A pair of Celestion 44 ( or 66 - ABR ) and some 4 x 2 ply strikes me as the cheapest fun possible . When boredom sets in the drive units go back in the box .
I am trying to get data on 0.6 mm 500 g reels of copper wire . Perhaps that would be a nice inductor ?
Baffles need EQ . A Quad 405 would be useful . I am not the worlds greatest fan of Quad if asking . Great workhorses . The diagram is a bit of nonsense that might work . As I have 10R it might be OK to EQ as a shunt . This is a crude attempt to define the problems of OB . A nicer near brick wall high pass filter shown ( Butterworth , - 47 dB 10 Hz ) . 10 R helps the drive unit climb at Fs . The plan then is to roll off at 250 Hz to avoid cancellation effects at 500 Hz ( filter and driver add ) . This is where 44's come in . In OB the advantage of a large mid range is considerable . It's defects are less than it's advantages . Liberated from the box it can show the Caruso effect , also it will ignore the baffle better which after 500 Hz is a problem . I think active is a walk in the park compared with passive . The amount of money consumed to get it to work OB would put me off trying . The last op amp might be the power amp . If Cdom is set high enough amplifiers can be configured to work as power filters . I can configure the amplifier to have artificial output impedance . I doubt it is the same thing . This diagram assumes 15 inch bass Qts 0.7 . The 12 inch Celestion could well sit at the baffle top and start at 250 Hz . For me perhaps a Mourdant Short 8 inch bass A la Naim Audio SBL and then ribbon tweeters ( > 7 kHz ) . My main amp NAD 3020 , 15 inch bass via chip amp with external Cdom ( 330 W if so configured ) . These option are upgradable . The idea is real high end for peanuts . The NAD even has phono and pre-amp split . Efficiency will be about like Quad ESL 57 even though the bass unit is 95 dB / W . The EQ reduces it . So far I have spent circa £ 70 / $100 including wood .
A pair of Celestion 44 ( or 66 - ABR ) and some 4 x 2 ply strikes me as the cheapest fun possible . When boredom sets in the drive units go back in the box .
I am trying to get data on 0.6 mm 500 g reels of copper wire . Perhaps that would be a nice inductor ?
Baffles need EQ . A Quad 405 would be useful . I am not the worlds greatest fan of Quad if asking . Great workhorses . The diagram is a bit of nonsense that might work . As I have 10R it might be OK to EQ as a shunt . This is a crude attempt to define the problems of OB . A nicer near brick wall high pass filter shown ( Butterworth , - 47 dB 10 Hz ) . 10 R helps the drive unit climb at Fs . The plan then is to roll off at 250 Hz to avoid cancellation effects at 500 Hz ( filter and driver add ) . This is where 44's come in . In OB the advantage of a large mid range is considerable . It's defects are less than it's advantages . Liberated from the box it can show the Caruso effect , also it will ignore the baffle better which after 500 Hz is a problem . I think active is a walk in the park compared with passive . The amount of money consumed to get it to work OB would put me off trying . The last op amp might be the power amp . If Cdom is set high enough amplifiers can be configured to work as power filters . I can configure the amplifier to have artificial output impedance . I doubt it is the same thing . This diagram assumes 15 inch bass Qts 0.7 . The 12 inch Celestion could well sit at the baffle top and start at 250 Hz . For me perhaps a Mourdant Short 8 inch bass A la Naim Audio SBL and then ribbon tweeters ( > 7 kHz ) . My main amp NAD 3020 , 15 inch bass via chip amp with external Cdom ( 330 W if so configured ) . These option are upgradable . The idea is real high end for peanuts . The NAD even has phono and pre-amp split . Efficiency will be about like Quad ESL 57 even though the bass unit is 95 dB / W . The EQ reduces it . So far I have spent circa £ 70 / $100 including wood .
there is a PROBLEM ! , plus brief replies to 2 other members
Reggie ,
I apologize for the delay in replying to your post ,
and now I will reply , below the Quote box.
.
You may have all the fixations you like , but unfortunately it will do you no good , because there is a problem with what you are wanting to do ,
and that will result in worse sound than you will get via alternates that you seem to not want to do.
I have looked at the web-site of the Australian Jantzen seller , Speakerbug.
Two of the Jantzen inductors are there available.
You will have to ask him to order the other three.
The Superior Z-cap has 3.3uF , 10uF , 3.9uF , but no 24uF nor 25uF nor even a 27uF.
22uF with 2.2uF in Parallel technically sums to 24.2uF , BUT that is one of the worst ways to obtain 24uF ,
because the transient response will be distorted as result of the much faster Pulse Rise Time of the smaller 2.2uF cap versus the relatively much slower of the larger 22uF cap ,
and as result the 2 expensive caps will cause worse sound than can be got from a single slightly lower quality 24uF cap.
Some designers , and most retailers , do not understand this , and will not listen to actually hear the difference.
The other alternate is to connect three of 8.2uF in Parallel so that all the caps have the same Pulse Rise Time when summing to 24.6uF ,
but I see the price of the 8.2uF in Australian dollars , and you will be spending a ridiculous amount of money buying six of those to make two 24.6uF caps !
For much less money you can buy Sonicap Gen I , or the possibly better ClarityCap ESA 250 volt series 25uF cap which is almost certainly equal to Superior Z-cap in audio quality.
The 27uF Jantzen Cross-cap will not be bad , but very unlikely as good as the ClarityCap ESA , nor even quite as good as ClarityCap PX.
If you will only use Superior Z-cap at any price then you will have to be very careful how you connect the three of 8.2uF ,
because if not clean single point connections at each end the sound will not be as good as a single cap , and thus your money wasted ,
and do not expect a local television repairman or similar person to understand how these high performance caps need to be connected together to achieve their potential ,
but do expect most such people to laugh that a fool would buy such things when the assembley person you may decide to take your parts to
is quite content with electrolytic caps or low price Mylar caps in various Parallel combinations and does not even consider that Pulse Rise Time is relevant or audible.
Most of those people have never listened to quality audio.
Also , Speakerbug do not have any resistors of the quality of the Superior Z-caps and the Jantzen air-cored inductors.
Jantzen do not make any of their branded resistors - all three types are made in Asian factories.
The Jantzen MOX are not as good as Mundorf's MOX according to one listener whom I do trust - he has very good hearing.
The new Superes resistors may be good , but the 10 watt version Speakerbug has may not be as good for sound as the 5 watt version which they do not stock ,
because the construction of both is different , with the 10 watter designed for high power , and as the Celestions will not take that level there is no advantage to those ,
but for your expensive Hiquphon tweeter the 5 watter is likely to give better sound.
The 10 watt version , with their Asian brand on them , was tested by an experienced British listener with seemingly one or two other listeners blind testing at his home ,
and in comparison to several other resistors including Mundorf MOX in both 5 and 10 watt The 5 watt MOX was their preference.
{ Mills resistors were not in the test.}
You can ask the Speakerbug seller if he can obtain 5 watt Superes.
The list that Jantzen can obtain includes 1.1 ohm and 27 ohm which you will need for the tweeter L-pad if you persist with having to use a 0.15mH inductor
so that you can use Superior Z-cap in the limited capacitances available to the tweeter , 3.3uF and 10uF.
I would chance a 27 ohm in the 10 watter for the Parallel resistor , but for the 1.1 ohm Series resistor I think the 5 watter is necessary , and preferably for the 27 ohm also.
Mundorf MOX do not have 1.1 ohm , but do have 1.2 ohm however that requires the other resistor to be between 24 <--> 25 ohms , which they do not have ,
so to use MOX you will have to ask a seller to measure samples and choose 1.2 and 27 that both measure in the negative side of their +/- Tolerance ,
and then you will have close to optimum.
One such seller in the UK has ClarityCap ESA in 25uF and 3.9uF for your midrange filter , and also 3.3 and 10 if you want to be sure of Superior Z-cap quality ,
even if very small difference in sound between the two types.
The only Mills seller with 1.1 , 1.2 , 25 , ohms is Soniccraft in USA , thus back to my earlier recommendation for their 24 or 25 uF caps along with their 3.9 or 4uF for the midrange filter.
because Soniccraft apply a US dollar 10 handling charge to all International orders for less than USD 100 , thus to buy the Mills resistors cost-effectively you would have to buy more things ...
If Speakerbug cannot get 1.1 ohm 5 watt Superes , ask if 1.3 ohm available in 5 watt , which can be used with 22 ohm for correct Impedance L-pad ,
albeit with very slightly less tweeter output by about 0.34dB , scarcely audible.
No other company has 1.3 ohms in sufficient power - most in that unusual value are in quarter watt or less.
If I am remembering correctly you already have some MOX resistors , are those Mundorf 5 watters ?
For the Jantzen inductors:
0.15mH , order No.1324 or No.1816.
0.35mH , order No.1453.
2.2mH for Midrange , Speakerbug has No.1564 , which is optimum.
2.2mH and 3.4mH for woofer you know about the No.28 and No.35.
*** *** *** *** ***
Hi Doug ,
I have an idea for you when I get time to post it !
'ullo Nigel ,
I have not forgotten your case.
Do I understand correctly that you want a small cone for dipole midrange ?
and a large cone for dipole bass ?
and if that is correct , then forget that low priced 8"/200mm poly-cone.
If you want low price for a fun project , but still reasonable sound quality ,
then look on ebay with all this in the Search:
Elac 180JM23
Seller is:- Willys-Hifi , in Essex.
He has NOS stock of the 6 1/2"/180mm bass-mid used by JPW in their Sonata years ago.
It is good to 5kHz on axis , and will work with a single inductor there to roll-off.
I think it is the same driver that Mordaunt-Short earlier used in their MS-100 with no inductor , and which sounded a bit upper mids' prominent , but good quality.
It can be used down to lowest-mids/upper bass to cross to a higher efficiency woofer , which ideally should be +6dB more efficient so as to not need an equalizer boost for the open panel bass.
Such woofers are available , and not too expensive.
I'll post more about these when I have time available.
There are better bass/mid cones available now , such as from SEAS , but at higher price ,
so decide your budget , and if necessary buy the Elac before all stock is gone forever , as it is no longer manufactured.
Reggie ,
I apologize for the delay in replying to your post ,
and now I will reply , below the Quote box.
.
-
You may have all the fixations you like , but unfortunately it will do you no good , because there is a problem with what you are wanting to do ,
and that will result in worse sound than you will get via alternates that you seem to not want to do.
I have looked at the web-site of the Australian Jantzen seller , Speakerbug.
Two of the Jantzen inductors are there available.
You will have to ask him to order the other three.
The Superior Z-cap has 3.3uF , 10uF , 3.9uF , but no 24uF nor 25uF nor even a 27uF.
22uF with 2.2uF in Parallel technically sums to 24.2uF , BUT that is one of the worst ways to obtain 24uF ,
because the transient response will be distorted as result of the much faster Pulse Rise Time of the smaller 2.2uF cap versus the relatively much slower of the larger 22uF cap ,
and as result the 2 expensive caps will cause worse sound than can be got from a single slightly lower quality 24uF cap.
Some designers , and most retailers , do not understand this , and will not listen to actually hear the difference.
The other alternate is to connect three of 8.2uF in Parallel so that all the caps have the same Pulse Rise Time when summing to 24.6uF ,
but I see the price of the 8.2uF in Australian dollars , and you will be spending a ridiculous amount of money buying six of those to make two 24.6uF caps !
For much less money you can buy Sonicap Gen I , or the possibly better ClarityCap ESA 250 volt series 25uF cap which is almost certainly equal to Superior Z-cap in audio quality.
The 27uF Jantzen Cross-cap will not be bad , but very unlikely as good as the ClarityCap ESA , nor even quite as good as ClarityCap PX.
If you will only use Superior Z-cap at any price then you will have to be very careful how you connect the three of 8.2uF ,
because if not clean single point connections at each end the sound will not be as good as a single cap , and thus your money wasted ,
and do not expect a local television repairman or similar person to understand how these high performance caps need to be connected together to achieve their potential ,
but do expect most such people to laugh that a fool would buy such things when the assembley person you may decide to take your parts to
is quite content with electrolytic caps or low price Mylar caps in various Parallel combinations and does not even consider that Pulse Rise Time is relevant or audible.
Most of those people have never listened to quality audio.
Also , Speakerbug do not have any resistors of the quality of the Superior Z-caps and the Jantzen air-cored inductors.
Jantzen do not make any of their branded resistors - all three types are made in Asian factories.
The Jantzen MOX are not as good as Mundorf's MOX according to one listener whom I do trust - he has very good hearing.
The new Superes resistors may be good , but the 10 watt version Speakerbug has may not be as good for sound as the 5 watt version which they do not stock ,
because the construction of both is different , with the 10 watter designed for high power , and as the Celestions will not take that level there is no advantage to those ,
but for your expensive Hiquphon tweeter the 5 watter is likely to give better sound.
The 10 watt version , with their Asian brand on them , was tested by an experienced British listener with seemingly one or two other listeners blind testing at his home ,
and in comparison to several other resistors including Mundorf MOX in both 5 and 10 watt The 5 watt MOX was their preference.
{ Mills resistors were not in the test.}
You can ask the Speakerbug seller if he can obtain 5 watt Superes.
The list that Jantzen can obtain includes 1.1 ohm and 27 ohm which you will need for the tweeter L-pad if you persist with having to use a 0.15mH inductor
so that you can use Superior Z-cap in the limited capacitances available to the tweeter , 3.3uF and 10uF.
I would chance a 27 ohm in the 10 watter for the Parallel resistor , but for the 1.1 ohm Series resistor I think the 5 watter is necessary , and preferably for the 27 ohm also.
Mundorf MOX do not have 1.1 ohm , but do have 1.2 ohm however that requires the other resistor to be between 24 <--> 25 ohms , which they do not have ,
so to use MOX you will have to ask a seller to measure samples and choose 1.2 and 27 that both measure in the negative side of their +/- Tolerance ,
and then you will have close to optimum.
One such seller in the UK has ClarityCap ESA in 25uF and 3.9uF for your midrange filter , and also 3.3 and 10 if you want to be sure of Superior Z-cap quality ,
even if very small difference in sound between the two types.
The only Mills seller with 1.1 , 1.2 , 25 , ohms is Soniccraft in USA , thus back to my earlier recommendation for their 24 or 25 uF caps along with their 3.9 or 4uF for the midrange filter.
because Soniccraft apply a US dollar 10 handling charge to all International orders for less than USD 100 , thus to buy the Mills resistors cost-effectively you would have to buy more things ...
If Speakerbug cannot get 1.1 ohm 5 watt Superes , ask if 1.3 ohm available in 5 watt , which can be used with 22 ohm for correct Impedance L-pad ,
albeit with very slightly less tweeter output by about 0.34dB , scarcely audible.
No other company has 1.3 ohms in sufficient power - most in that unusual value are in quarter watt or less.
If I am remembering correctly you already have some MOX resistors , are those Mundorf 5 watters ?
For the Jantzen inductors:
0.15mH , order No.1324 or No.1816.
0.35mH , order No.1453.
2.2mH for Midrange , Speakerbug has No.1564 , which is optimum.
2.2mH and 3.4mH for woofer you know about the No.28 and No.35.
*** *** *** *** ***
Hi Doug ,
I have an idea for you when I get time to post it !
'ullo Nigel ,
I have not forgotten your case.
Do I understand correctly that you want a small cone for dipole midrange ?
and a large cone for dipole bass ?
and if that is correct , then forget that low priced 8"/200mm poly-cone.
If you want low price for a fun project , but still reasonable sound quality ,
then look on ebay with all this in the Search:
Elac 180JM23
Seller is:- Willys-Hifi , in Essex.
He has NOS stock of the 6 1/2"/180mm bass-mid used by JPW in their Sonata years ago.
It is good to 5kHz on axis , and will work with a single inductor there to roll-off.
I think it is the same driver that Mordaunt-Short earlier used in their MS-100 with no inductor , and which sounded a bit upper mids' prominent , but good quality.
It can be used down to lowest-mids/upper bass to cross to a higher efficiency woofer , which ideally should be +6dB more efficient so as to not need an equalizer boost for the open panel bass.
Such woofers are available , and not too expensive.
I'll post more about these when I have time available.
There are better bass/mid cones available now , such as from SEAS , but at higher price ,
so decide your budget , and if necessary buy the Elac before all stock is gone forever , as it is no longer manufactured.
Last edited:
Hello Allan. Thank you for all the new information. Several new questions though please. (i) In my last post (#981) I agreed that I would put aside my life long dream (subtle humour here) to use Jantzen Superior Z caps and instead use the original value Claritycap or Sonicap caps. Therefore your recommendation to use coil #1324/1816 (a 0.15mh inductor) in the treble is/is not now relevant???(if I am intent on using a new inductor in the tweeter section should I not order the Jantzen #1813 (0.14mh 24awg) to conform to original specs? (ii) Even though the Clarity Cap ESA 250v caps get good write-ups, the fact that they do not provide a 3.6uf cap for the treble provides a problem (although they do have everything else). So, unless I use a different cap in that position I guess it would simpler to just buy all (Gen 1) caps and (Mills ERA5) resistors from Sonicap in America who have all the relevant values. (iii) If I felt I wanted a little more volume from my tweeter what specification resistors would I use in my LPad (you originally suggested 1.1/1.2 and 15/18 ohm with the 0.14mh inductor?
Thank you.
Regards
Reggie
Thank you.
Regards
Reggie
update on my #985 for Reggie - tweeter inductor and L-pad
G'day reggie ,
I apologize , I had misread your first post on this page and thought you were stating you would accept the compromises arising from using the Jantzen caps.
Using a 0.14mH inductor allows you more options for L-pads with the available resistance values.
Jantzen coil number 1813 in 24AWG is 0.5 ohm
which is a good resistance to use in a parallel inductor with the Hiquphon tweeter.
For the L-pad options ,
forget the 1.2 ohm + 15 ohm option ,
because with the higher output from the woofer with the new low DCR inductors this L-pad will cause the tweeter to be too low in output relative to the woofer.
The most attenuation of the tweeter you are likely to need is with 1.1 ohm + 18 ohm ,
however I think you may find even that a little too much , but buy those if you want the option.
I recommend you start with 0.75 ohm + 24.9 ohm for the L-pads ,
and then decide whether you want more or less treble.
For less , use 1.1 + 18 ohms.
For more , use 0.50 + 30.9 ohms.
If you want to try the tweeter at full output buy 62 ohms and connect that in Parallel with the tweeter , and no Series connected resistor.
The 62 ohm in Parallel reduces the OWII tweeter's impedance to that required for the 0.14mH inductor.
NOTE to other readers here:- these resistor values are ONLY for use with Hiquphon OWII.
If you have Hiquphon OWI you will need different value resistors.
For the Midrange , the 1.8 ohm in Series with the 24uF input cap will attenuate too much relative to the new higher output from the woofer.
I do NOT know how much resistance you will need here.
Now we are into genuine DIY , because what you will be doing now is Voicing the loudspeaker ,
that is , you will be setting its tonal balance by ear.
That is the only way it can be done , because the new lower DCR inductors in the woofer filter will allow a faster transient response as well as higher output ,
thus the transient response of the midrange , and treble , need to be got to match.
This can be heard a lot more easily than it can be measured ,
thus as you will have out-of-cabinet crossovers you can experiment with a few different resistor values in the midrange to find the type of sound you like.
Probably if no Series resistance to the input cap the midrange output will be too Forward.
I recommend you buy all of: 0.5 ohm ; 1.0 ohm ; 1.5 ohm ,
and start with the 1.5 ohm in circuit as that will be the most attenuation you are likely to need , and possibly it will be too much ,
however listen , and next change to either the 1 ohm or the 0.5 ohm depending on whether you think you need a little or a lot more mids' output.
Remember , as I stated above , the sound will not only be greater or lesser output level , but will also be slightly different transient response ,
and it is possible to hear the option that gets closest to the transient response of the lower midrange and bass from the woofer.
That is what experienced designers of high-end loudspeakers do when fine-tuning crossovers.
Also , the other resistor in the midrange filter , in Series with the 4uF cap.
This one determines the upper midrange sound around the 5kHz crossover region and a little below that.
Again you will have to experiment.
I recommend starting with 3.3 ohms there whilst you are deciding the other mids' resistor and the tweeter L-pad.
Lastly you can change that resistor to 3.9 ohm if you want a slightly more forward upper midrange ... and the difference between the two options there may be subtle ,
and will vary with the recordings you play , so you will have to decide a compromise for the recordings.
Also , given the sample variation between different MD500 domes that sba found with his measurements , I cannot predict which resistance may be optimum ,
and it is possible if each of your mid-domes is slightly different in its upper midrange output you may prefer a 3.3 ohm for one and a 3.9 ohm for the other ...
that you will have to decide by ear.
The mid-dome sample variations are all more at the upper end of their frequency response , and little at the lower end when crossed at 500 Hz or higher.
Woofer inductors:
I see that Jantzen now have a 3.5mH coil in low DCR:
Number 0153 in 14 AWG is 0.552 ohms.
Which inductance is better to use here , 3.4 or 3.5 mH ?
The audible difference will be very small , and heard only at around and a little below the 500 Hz crossover point.
If you want the bass to lower midrange balance to be a little more towards the lower mids , then use 3.4mH ,
and if you want the balance to be a little less lower mids then use 3.5mH.
The difference will be very small.
Given the +/- Tolerance that the coils are wound to I would specify as follows:
" Coils numbers 0035 and 0153 and +/- Tolerance , please measure some samples of both coils and select two that measure in between 3.4mH and 3.5mH."
Ask the Jantzen dealer to send that request with your Order.
You will likely be charged the slightly higher price of the 0153 coil regardless of which coil you are sent , to cover the cost of the selecting.
Resistors:
You have 10 watt MOX in 1 ohm and 1.5 ohm.
As these are 10 watt they will not even get warm in use in the woofer filter ,
thus use those two MOX reistors there.
Any difference in sound between those 10 watt MOX and 5 watt Mills will be indistinguishable in that circuit location.
If you decide later after trying all the resistors options in the midrange that you prefer 0.5 ohms there ,
then you will have Mills 1 ohm and 1.5 ohm spare if you want to then put in the woofer filter ,
though I doubt there will be any audible difference , unless one or more of the resistors happens to be faulty.
Sonic Craft is the only Mills MRA-5 seller that has 1.1 ohm ; 24.9 ohm ; 30.9 ohm ,
so it is good you have decided to use the Sonicap GenI.
You will not need exact matched pairs of caps , however I recommend you send the following with your Order:
" For all the capacitors please measure and select samples that measure on the same side of the +/- Tolerance for each value of capacitance ,
and please measure samples of both 24uF and 25uF and select two which measure in between 24 and 25 uF."
You will likely be charged the 25uF cap price for that.
For the other caps: 3.6uF ; 11uF ; and either 3.9 or 4uF for the Parallel midrange cap , as it does not matter which value ,
so look at their physical dimensions in the list and decide if you want the longer thinner or the shorter fatter as regards which may fit better on your design of board.
Mills MRA-5 are +/- 1% Tolerance , thus no need to measure samples as all values will be very close to pairs.
With Sonic Craft you will have to email the list for you Order in advance , and inform them your address so they can determine price and then set up a PayPal link for you to pay ,
so they will decide the capacitor selection fee then , if any ,
and from what a few buyers have posted elsewhere it seems there is no selection fee if one is buying more than a few parts , as you are ,
and is not specifying very tight value selection , which you aren't and do not need.
_
How to listen to determine balance between mid-dome and woofer , and with not much signal from the tweeter to confuse the ear when deciding the upper mids' resistors.
I use solo Cello recordings , because Cello has little low bass , mostly upper bass and midrange , and very little true treble as what sounds like treble from it is mostly upper midrange.
The most useful recording I have is:
Bach , Suites for solo cello , Pierre Fournier , on Archiv label.
It is a mid-priced 2CD set.
This set is well recorded , has useful tonal balance for this test , and is played in an enjoyable musical manner.
Some other performers of these works are not enjoyable to listen to ,
as some play in too scholarly manner , and some become tedious.
Some do not use sufficient nuance of rhythm to keep the music moving , etc ...
Go to Youtube and find some performances.
Type "Bach cello" in the Search box.
There will be many different performers , and some will be unlistenable in various ways ,
so find one you can listen to and then decide whether you like the music enough to want to buy the Fournier set.
{ EDIT: I have now looked and found several with Fournier , so put "Bach Fournier" in the Search box.}
If no shops have stock and you decide to buy Mail-order ,
then post here first and I'll list a few other CDs you are likely to like { given what you described to me in earlier posts }
so that you have a cost-effective size Order for Shipping cost.
Other sounds for determining wide-midrange balance:
Male vocal ; Acoustic guitar - particually Nylon strung Classical or Flamenco ; solo Piano ;
Toms and Conga drums ; Electric guitar level with respect to other instruments in the mix.
_
Your new board/s:
If you have decided to permanently mount boards outside the enclosure then their size is not restricted ,
however if you think you may want to put the boards inside one day if when selling the loudspeakers ,
then make them slightly less then the diameter of the woofer cut-out so that you can put them through.
That will be not larger than 10.5 inch , however 10 inch will be sufficient width board if all of the crossover is to be on a single board.
You can make the board almost as long as the Internal width of the 66 enclosure ,
though 12 inch will be sufficient to have all the new and some very large physical size inductors at sufficient distance from each other.
You can make the board from Plywood , and if so then buy a type that is specified as any of:
Marine Ply ; Structural Ply ; External Ply ,
because those have a stronger adhesive than Internal ply and Furniture ply and it is a non-toxic emissions type.
Buy in at least quarter inch thickness.
You can use MDF board , again in quarter inch min ,
and I recommend you do not use Particle board , because its edges crumble as it ages when exposed in air.
If you go to a Plywood cutting Business that sells to DIY handymen they will likely have bin of small size off-cuts , thus you will not have to buy large sheets ,
which you do not need and which are expensive.
If you want a better Electrical material , then look at prices for sizes of:
Teflon/PTFE { expensive } ;
Lexan { polycarbonate , and lower price , and very strong , can use one eighth inch thick , though I'd use 3/16 minimum and quarter inch better } ;
Fibreglass , if available in thick enough for strength for those heavy woofer inductors , 3/16 or 1/4 inch.
Do not use ABS plastic , even though it does get used for some Electrical fittings.
You can buy Tag Strips from the Australian Jaycar stores , and bolt them to the board if you want to solder component leads to terminals instead of directly to each other.
G'day reggie ,
I apologize , I had misread your first post on this page and thought you were stating you would accept the compromises arising from using the Jantzen caps.
Using a 0.14mH inductor allows you more options for L-pads with the available resistance values.
Jantzen coil number 1813 in 24AWG is 0.5 ohm
which is a good resistance to use in a parallel inductor with the Hiquphon tweeter.
For the L-pad options ,
forget the 1.2 ohm + 15 ohm option ,
because with the higher output from the woofer with the new low DCR inductors this L-pad will cause the tweeter to be too low in output relative to the woofer.
The most attenuation of the tweeter you are likely to need is with 1.1 ohm + 18 ohm ,
however I think you may find even that a little too much , but buy those if you want the option.
I recommend you start with 0.75 ohm + 24.9 ohm for the L-pads ,
and then decide whether you want more or less treble.
For less , use 1.1 + 18 ohms.
For more , use 0.50 + 30.9 ohms.
If you want to try the tweeter at full output buy 62 ohms and connect that in Parallel with the tweeter , and no Series connected resistor.
The 62 ohm in Parallel reduces the OWII tweeter's impedance to that required for the 0.14mH inductor.
NOTE to other readers here:- these resistor values are ONLY for use with Hiquphon OWII.
If you have Hiquphon OWI you will need different value resistors.
For the Midrange , the 1.8 ohm in Series with the 24uF input cap will attenuate too much relative to the new higher output from the woofer.
I do NOT know how much resistance you will need here.
Now we are into genuine DIY , because what you will be doing now is Voicing the loudspeaker ,
that is , you will be setting its tonal balance by ear.
That is the only way it can be done , because the new lower DCR inductors in the woofer filter will allow a faster transient response as well as higher output ,
thus the transient response of the midrange , and treble , need to be got to match.
This can be heard a lot more easily than it can be measured ,
thus as you will have out-of-cabinet crossovers you can experiment with a few different resistor values in the midrange to find the type of sound you like.
Probably if no Series resistance to the input cap the midrange output will be too Forward.
I recommend you buy all of: 0.5 ohm ; 1.0 ohm ; 1.5 ohm ,
and start with the 1.5 ohm in circuit as that will be the most attenuation you are likely to need , and possibly it will be too much ,
however listen , and next change to either the 1 ohm or the 0.5 ohm depending on whether you think you need a little or a lot more mids' output.
Remember , as I stated above , the sound will not only be greater or lesser output level , but will also be slightly different transient response ,
and it is possible to hear the option that gets closest to the transient response of the lower midrange and bass from the woofer.
That is what experienced designers of high-end loudspeakers do when fine-tuning crossovers.
Also , the other resistor in the midrange filter , in Series with the 4uF cap.
This one determines the upper midrange sound around the 5kHz crossover region and a little below that.
Again you will have to experiment.
I recommend starting with 3.3 ohms there whilst you are deciding the other mids' resistor and the tweeter L-pad.
Lastly you can change that resistor to 3.9 ohm if you want a slightly more forward upper midrange ... and the difference between the two options there may be subtle ,
and will vary with the recordings you play , so you will have to decide a compromise for the recordings.
Also , given the sample variation between different MD500 domes that sba found with his measurements , I cannot predict which resistance may be optimum ,
and it is possible if each of your mid-domes is slightly different in its upper midrange output you may prefer a 3.3 ohm for one and a 3.9 ohm for the other ...
that you will have to decide by ear.
The mid-dome sample variations are all more at the upper end of their frequency response , and little at the lower end when crossed at 500 Hz or higher.
Woofer inductors:
I see that Jantzen now have a 3.5mH coil in low DCR:
Number 0153 in 14 AWG is 0.552 ohms.
Which inductance is better to use here , 3.4 or 3.5 mH ?
The audible difference will be very small , and heard only at around and a little below the 500 Hz crossover point.
If you want the bass to lower midrange balance to be a little more towards the lower mids , then use 3.4mH ,
and if you want the balance to be a little less lower mids then use 3.5mH.
The difference will be very small.
Given the +/- Tolerance that the coils are wound to I would specify as follows:
" Coils numbers 0035 and 0153 and +/- Tolerance , please measure some samples of both coils and select two that measure in between 3.4mH and 3.5mH."
Ask the Jantzen dealer to send that request with your Order.
You will likely be charged the slightly higher price of the 0153 coil regardless of which coil you are sent , to cover the cost of the selecting.
Resistors:
You have 10 watt MOX in 1 ohm and 1.5 ohm.
As these are 10 watt they will not even get warm in use in the woofer filter ,
thus use those two MOX reistors there.
Any difference in sound between those 10 watt MOX and 5 watt Mills will be indistinguishable in that circuit location.
If you decide later after trying all the resistors options in the midrange that you prefer 0.5 ohms there ,
then you will have Mills 1 ohm and 1.5 ohm spare if you want to then put in the woofer filter ,
though I doubt there will be any audible difference , unless one or more of the resistors happens to be faulty.
Sonic Craft is the only Mills MRA-5 seller that has 1.1 ohm ; 24.9 ohm ; 30.9 ohm ,
so it is good you have decided to use the Sonicap GenI.
You will not need exact matched pairs of caps , however I recommend you send the following with your Order:
" For all the capacitors please measure and select samples that measure on the same side of the +/- Tolerance for each value of capacitance ,
and please measure samples of both 24uF and 25uF and select two which measure in between 24 and 25 uF."
You will likely be charged the 25uF cap price for that.
For the other caps: 3.6uF ; 11uF ; and either 3.9 or 4uF for the Parallel midrange cap , as it does not matter which value ,
so look at their physical dimensions in the list and decide if you want the longer thinner or the shorter fatter as regards which may fit better on your design of board.
Mills MRA-5 are +/- 1% Tolerance , thus no need to measure samples as all values will be very close to pairs.
With Sonic Craft you will have to email the list for you Order in advance , and inform them your address so they can determine price and then set up a PayPal link for you to pay ,
so they will decide the capacitor selection fee then , if any ,
and from what a few buyers have posted elsewhere it seems there is no selection fee if one is buying more than a few parts , as you are ,
and is not specifying very tight value selection , which you aren't and do not need.
_
How to listen to determine balance between mid-dome and woofer , and with not much signal from the tweeter to confuse the ear when deciding the upper mids' resistors.
I use solo Cello recordings , because Cello has little low bass , mostly upper bass and midrange , and very little true treble as what sounds like treble from it is mostly upper midrange.
The most useful recording I have is:
Bach , Suites for solo cello , Pierre Fournier , on Archiv label.
It is a mid-priced 2CD set.
This set is well recorded , has useful tonal balance for this test , and is played in an enjoyable musical manner.
Some other performers of these works are not enjoyable to listen to ,
as some play in too scholarly manner , and some become tedious.
Some do not use sufficient nuance of rhythm to keep the music moving , etc ...
Go to Youtube and find some performances.
Type "Bach cello" in the Search box.
There will be many different performers , and some will be unlistenable in various ways ,
so find one you can listen to and then decide whether you like the music enough to want to buy the Fournier set.
{ EDIT: I have now looked and found several with Fournier , so put "Bach Fournier" in the Search box.}
If no shops have stock and you decide to buy Mail-order ,
then post here first and I'll list a few other CDs you are likely to like { given what you described to me in earlier posts }
so that you have a cost-effective size Order for Shipping cost.
Other sounds for determining wide-midrange balance:
Male vocal ; Acoustic guitar - particually Nylon strung Classical or Flamenco ; solo Piano ;
Toms and Conga drums ; Electric guitar level with respect to other instruments in the mix.
_
Your new board/s:
If you have decided to permanently mount boards outside the enclosure then their size is not restricted ,
however if you think you may want to put the boards inside one day if when selling the loudspeakers ,
then make them slightly less then the diameter of the woofer cut-out so that you can put them through.
That will be not larger than 10.5 inch , however 10 inch will be sufficient width board if all of the crossover is to be on a single board.
You can make the board almost as long as the Internal width of the 66 enclosure ,
though 12 inch will be sufficient to have all the new and some very large physical size inductors at sufficient distance from each other.
You can make the board from Plywood , and if so then buy a type that is specified as any of:
Marine Ply ; Structural Ply ; External Ply ,
because those have a stronger adhesive than Internal ply and Furniture ply and it is a non-toxic emissions type.
Buy in at least quarter inch thickness.
You can use MDF board , again in quarter inch min ,
and I recommend you do not use Particle board , because its edges crumble as it ages when exposed in air.
If you go to a Plywood cutting Business that sells to DIY handymen they will likely have bin of small size off-cuts , thus you will not have to buy large sheets ,
which you do not need and which are expensive.
If you want a better Electrical material , then look at prices for sizes of:
Teflon/PTFE { expensive } ;
Lexan { polycarbonate , and lower price , and very strong , can use one eighth inch thick , though I'd use 3/16 minimum and quarter inch better } ;
Fibreglass , if available in thick enough for strength for those heavy woofer inductors , 3/16 or 1/4 inch.
Do not use ABS plastic , even though it does get used for some Electrical fittings.
You can buy Tag Strips from the Australian Jaycar stores , and bolt them to the board if you want to solder component leads to terminals instead of directly to each other.
Last edited:
Hello Alan.
Thank you for all the extra advice. I have now ordered all my pieces. Soniccraft have found some 24.5uf capacitors for me but have run out of 0.5ohm Mills resistors so they are sending 0.51ohm instead? Speakerbug are arranging, amongst other things, several 3.45mH coils for me (ah, is there nothing money cannot buy?) As regards Cello music I have several pieces: Beethoven's Concerto for Piano, Cello and Orchestra in C (Opus 56); Boccherini's Concerto for Cello and Strings in G and Cello Concerto in B flat. I also have a CD entitled Musicall Humors, a rendering of tunes by a 17th century English soldier and mercenary by the name of Captaine Tobias Hume who spoke 4 languages and played a mean viol de Gambo. His works are played by Jordi Savall on the viol in a solo performance. I'm not sure where the viol sits in relation to a cello but its a good recording and, being of a single instrument, quite legible.
I'll be checking out your recommendations for xover boards and interior stuffing - might as well do everything at the same time!
Regards.
Reggie
Thank you for all the extra advice. I have now ordered all my pieces. Soniccraft have found some 24.5uf capacitors for me but have run out of 0.5ohm Mills resistors so they are sending 0.51ohm instead? Speakerbug are arranging, amongst other things, several 3.45mH coils for me (ah, is there nothing money cannot buy?) As regards Cello music I have several pieces: Beethoven's Concerto for Piano, Cello and Orchestra in C (Opus 56); Boccherini's Concerto for Cello and Strings in G and Cello Concerto in B flat. I also have a CD entitled Musicall Humors, a rendering of tunes by a 17th century English soldier and mercenary by the name of Captaine Tobias Hume who spoke 4 languages and played a mean viol de Gambo. His works are played by Jordi Savall on the viol in a solo performance. I'm not sure where the viol sits in relation to a cello but its a good recording and, being of a single instrument, quite legible.
I'll be checking out your recommendations for xover boards and interior stuffing - might as well do everything at the same time!
Regards.
Reggie
a reply to #988 , and Viol da Gamba/s
G'day Reggie ,
the 0.51 ohm resistor would cause a very small , probably tiny , difference in the tone in the tweeter circuit , and even less in the mid-range circuit.
I doubt it will be distinctly noticeable in the 66 , and if it is it may be better or worse , depending on whatever sample variations your drivers are ,
but don't worry about it , just listen when you install it , if you need to install it.
Hume's music for solo Viol - I listened to some of Savall's performance on youtube.
The instrument sounds wide-range from mid-bass to upper-mids/low treble ,
and the recording seems quite good , so far as one can decipher from a youtube up/down load.
If you happen to like this music a lot , and would like to hear another version to compare , I recommend Susanne Heinrich on Hyperion label.
It is very well recorded , and she is an evocative performer of this music.
There is some from hers on youtube.
Bach's solo cello compositions are the next development after the Hume style.
In the Viol and Gamba families of instruments , there seems to have been at least 7 variations ,
including a 7 string bass version , and two 6 string bass versions of Gambas ,
and in the Viols there are: bass ; tenor ; alto and treble sized instruments.
Those Hume compositions sound like bass viol , but some could be tenor viol.
The 6th of Bach's pieces was actually composed for a 6 string viol da gamba ,
however , Fournier and a few other cellists make it sound good on whatever versions of Cellos they played for it.
For both the Boccherini and Beethoven concerti ,
it will be how the various instruments were balanced in the particular recordings you have that will determine their usefulness in evaluating the tonal balance of loudspeakers ,
eg: less than optimally balanced recordings will not allow the 66s to be critically evaluated.
Also , if I've understood your post correctly , I think the Beethoven concerto you are referring to is the Triple Concerto , and includes Violin.
For a different style of music entirely , and if I'm remembering correctly you listed a King Crimson album ,
the 40th Anniversary remaster of their "Red" album sounds very good ,
and has some particually good low bass frequencies.
There are some extra tracks including alternate mixes , etc ...
at least on the very well manufactured Japanese copy I bought.
There are a few other albums I can recommend for you that I think you will like , given those you listed in earlier posts.
G'day Reggie ,
the 0.51 ohm resistor would cause a very small , probably tiny , difference in the tone in the tweeter circuit , and even less in the mid-range circuit.
I doubt it will be distinctly noticeable in the 66 , and if it is it may be better or worse , depending on whatever sample variations your drivers are ,
but don't worry about it , just listen when you install it , if you need to install it.
Hume's music for solo Viol - I listened to some of Savall's performance on youtube.
The instrument sounds wide-range from mid-bass to upper-mids/low treble ,
and the recording seems quite good , so far as one can decipher from a youtube up/down load.
If you happen to like this music a lot , and would like to hear another version to compare , I recommend Susanne Heinrich on Hyperion label.
It is very well recorded , and she is an evocative performer of this music.
There is some from hers on youtube.
Bach's solo cello compositions are the next development after the Hume style.
In the Viol and Gamba families of instruments , there seems to have been at least 7 variations ,
including a 7 string bass version , and two 6 string bass versions of Gambas ,
and in the Viols there are: bass ; tenor ; alto and treble sized instruments.
Those Hume compositions sound like bass viol , but some could be tenor viol.
The 6th of Bach's pieces was actually composed for a 6 string viol da gamba ,
however , Fournier and a few other cellists make it sound good on whatever versions of Cellos they played for it.
For both the Boccherini and Beethoven concerti ,
it will be how the various instruments were balanced in the particular recordings you have that will determine their usefulness in evaluating the tonal balance of loudspeakers ,
eg: less than optimally balanced recordings will not allow the 66s to be critically evaluated.
Also , if I've understood your post correctly , I think the Beethoven concerto you are referring to is the Triple Concerto , and includes Violin.
For a different style of music entirely , and if I'm remembering correctly you listed a King Crimson album ,
the 40th Anniversary remaster of their "Red" album sounds very good ,
and has some particually good low bass frequencies.
There are some extra tracks including alternate mixes , etc ...
at least on the very well manufactured Japanese copy I bought.
There are a few other albums I can recommend for you that I think you will like , given those you listed in earlier posts.
Last edited:
If you ever are in Oxford and this type of music is at the Sheldonian buy some tickets . Some of the coloration I don't mind sound like that building . Bach B Minor Mass I remember . It was sponsored by Quad . I think it was the last corporate thing they ever did as the original company ? I listened to Poulenc's the Gloria recently there ( BBC Radio 3 session ) .
I have Magneplanar speakers . I have a hunch most people here would like them . They would especially like them because when the music is not properly recorded they sound for all the world like Ditton 44's ( I know 44 better ) . That is high praise and missing in the Quads . It's like the Quads would eat fish and chips , no way they would .
I was listening to the open of the film Ipcress file last night . It is the perfect mix of why a Ditton 44 is needed and a pair of Quads also . Beyond stunning with traces of awfulness . I wouldn't change a note or do it better . One needs great speakers to enjoy that . The fish and chips version is the latter . When I listening to the film it was about 300 % better than youtube ( spine tingle and depth ) . Optical sound track at it's best . Admittedly optical is quirky . The voices espeailly .
John Barry - The Ipcress File (theme) - YouTube
The Ipcress File - John Barry opening credits music - YouTube
I was listening to the open of the film Ipcress file last night . It is the perfect mix of why a Ditton 44 is needed and a pair of Quads also . Beyond stunning with traces of awfulness . I wouldn't change a note or do it better . One needs great speakers to enjoy that . The fish and chips version is the latter . When I listening to the film it was about 300 % better than youtube ( spine tingle and depth ) . Optical sound track at it's best . Admittedly optical is quirky . The voices espeailly .
John Barry - The Ipcress File (theme) - YouTube
The Ipcress File - John Barry opening credits music - YouTube
Zuill Bailey - recordings , including for Celestion 66 evaluation
G'day DennyG ,
as you mentioned Zuill Bailey , I decided it was time I listened to how he plays , as I had read favourably of him.
I listened on Youtube to some of his Bach solo cello playing , and some other things he plays ...
He is undoubtably a good player of the cello , and I think his Bach performance is good , though it needs a bit more depth in the interpretation.
Some players record these works when they are too young , and too soon in their careers ...
when later after years of performing these works they develop more insight into what Bach put into them.
You have heard him playing a few years after he made the solo Bach recording , thus you may have heard a better performance ,
and it seems you did.
If you like these works I thoroughly recommend you hear the Pierre Fournier recording on Archiv label I recommended to Reggie.
If the shop is trying to find it in a catalog , then give them the spelling:" violoncello " for the instrument.
With other composers' musics , his one that really held my attention is:
"Brahms" works for cello and piano , by Zuill Bailey and Awadagin Pratt , on Telarc label.
I listened to Brahms first cello & piano sonata from that , and this what Z.B. is good with ! ... as also is pianist A.P.
and the sound is very good as usual for Telarc.
As this recording is Cello and Piano , its frequency range is from mid-bass through all midrange to upper mids , and little treble - only a small amount above the 5kHz crossover to the tweeter in the 66 ,
so this will be a good recording to hear how well your crossover is working between woofer and mid-dome , and the quality and relative balance between those two drivers.
It seems to be a well balanced recording between the cello and the piano , thus it should demonstrate how well or otherwise the 66 can separate the instruments tonally and spacially.
Additionally , as the performance seems so good it will likely be an enjoyable recording to own.
There is a lot of variety in Brahms' compositions , and some are very different to others , thus if you have have heard another type of Brahms' composition you do not much like ,
then try again with some of these , particually the first Sonata for cello and piano.
Yes , its Chamber Music , and it is good you got to a real live Chamber Music festival Denny !
Did Zuill Bailey play with any other musicians there in Trios or Quartets or Quintets ?
*** *** ***
'ullo Nigel ,
thanks for your recommendation of the venue.
Now that "Ipcress File" music ... I think it will sound quite spectacular through your Magneplanars ,
and a lot more so than through Celestion 44.
G'day DennyG ,
as you mentioned Zuill Bailey , I decided it was time I listened to how he plays , as I had read favourably of him.
I listened on Youtube to some of his Bach solo cello playing , and some other things he plays ...
He is undoubtably a good player of the cello , and I think his Bach performance is good , though it needs a bit more depth in the interpretation.
Some players record these works when they are too young , and too soon in their careers ...
when later after years of performing these works they develop more insight into what Bach put into them.
You have heard him playing a few years after he made the solo Bach recording , thus you may have heard a better performance ,
and it seems you did.
If you like these works I thoroughly recommend you hear the Pierre Fournier recording on Archiv label I recommended to Reggie.
If the shop is trying to find it in a catalog , then give them the spelling:" violoncello " for the instrument.
With other composers' musics , his one that really held my attention is:
"Brahms" works for cello and piano , by Zuill Bailey and Awadagin Pratt , on Telarc label.
I listened to Brahms first cello & piano sonata from that , and this what Z.B. is good with ! ... as also is pianist A.P.
and the sound is very good as usual for Telarc.
As this recording is Cello and Piano , its frequency range is from mid-bass through all midrange to upper mids , and little treble - only a small amount above the 5kHz crossover to the tweeter in the 66 ,
so this will be a good recording to hear how well your crossover is working between woofer and mid-dome , and the quality and relative balance between those two drivers.
It seems to be a well balanced recording between the cello and the piano , thus it should demonstrate how well or otherwise the 66 can separate the instruments tonally and spacially.
Additionally , as the performance seems so good it will likely be an enjoyable recording to own.
There is a lot of variety in Brahms' compositions , and some are very different to others , thus if you have have heard another type of Brahms' composition you do not much like ,
then try again with some of these , particually the first Sonata for cello and piano.
Yes , its Chamber Music , and it is good you got to a real live Chamber Music festival Denny !
Did Zuill Bailey play with any other musicians there in Trios or Quartets or Quintets ?
*** *** ***
'ullo Nigel ,
thanks for your recommendation of the venue.
Now that "Ipcress File" music ... I think it will sound quite spectacular through your Magneplanars ,
and a lot more so than through Celestion 44.
This is the strangest and most marvelous recording . This is the origin point . To play like this when the world is falling apart . No processing used apart from the digital encoding.
Beethoven (1944, Stereo): Allegro from Concerto for piano and orchestra No.5 - Gieseking/RO Berlin - YouTube
Worked a bit at the Whittlebury hi fi show yesterday ( and today perhaps , Loricraft , no wages , friend ) . Inspire Hi fi's Lenco got my vote , better than an SP 10 to my ears . He uses ATC speaker to demo . They are what every Ditton 66 owner would love I feel . So accurate and so able to go load . Spendor out of Proac .
http://www.inspirehifi.co.uk/enigma.html
Beethoven (1944, Stereo): Allegro from Concerto for piano and orchestra No.5 - Gieseking/RO Berlin - YouTube
Worked a bit at the Whittlebury hi fi show yesterday ( and today perhaps , Loricraft , no wages , friend ) . Inspire Hi fi's Lenco got my vote , better than an SP 10 to my ears . He uses ATC speaker to demo . They are what every Ditton 66 owner would love I feel . So accurate and so able to go load . Spendor out of Proac .
http://www.inspirehifi.co.uk/enigma.html
Last edited:
Hearing something like the Bach suites live with someone as good as Bailey is something that no one should pass up.
Didn't go to all the performances but Zuill played in many including:
Hindemith's 'Kammermusik' No. 1 for 12 instruments Op24 No.1
Beethoven Trio for clarinet, cello & piano Op 11 with Michael Collins
Schubert Piano trio D898
Mendelssohn Piano trio No1 Op.49
Rachmaninoff Sonata for cello & piano Op.19 with Piers Lane
Mendelssohn 'Songs without words' with Piers Lane
There was a performance of Bach Brandenberg No. 5 which was probably the best musical performance (sound + art) I have ever heard.
Will try to get the recommended Pierre Fournier performance as many put it up there! I must say the 66's will never match the sound of the live cello Bailey plays. It is very large and deep sounding and quite different to the smaller instruments many cellists play.
The Brahm's sounds good. Find much of Brahms a bit much. I have only that haunting Brahm's clarinet quintet. Had it for years on lp and CD. Love it.
Should add that Townsville is in the tropics and an ideal place to be in the southern winter.
Didn't go to all the performances but Zuill played in many including:
Hindemith's 'Kammermusik' No. 1 for 12 instruments Op24 No.1
Beethoven Trio for clarinet, cello & piano Op 11 with Michael Collins
Schubert Piano trio D898
Mendelssohn Piano trio No1 Op.49
Rachmaninoff Sonata for cello & piano Op.19 with Piers Lane
Mendelssohn 'Songs without words' with Piers Lane
There was a performance of Bach Brandenberg No. 5 which was probably the best musical performance (sound + art) I have ever heard.
Will try to get the recommended Pierre Fournier performance as many put it up there! I must say the 66's will never match the sound of the live cello Bailey plays. It is very large and deep sounding and quite different to the smaller instruments many cellists play.
The Brahm's sounds good. Find much of Brahms a bit much. I have only that haunting Brahm's clarinet quintet. Had it for years on lp and CD. Love it.
Should add that Townsville is in the tropics and an ideal place to be in the southern winter.
Paul Hindemith - Organ Sonata No. 1 (Kevin Bowyer) - YouTube
If you slightly liked that perhaps this ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1Qxixombe0
If you slightly liked that perhaps this ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1Qxixombe0
Last edited:
Brahms . This should be good .
Brahms Symphony No. 4 in E Minor, Op. 98 - I. Allegro non troppo (Part 2) --- KARAJAN - YouTube
Brahms Symphony No. 4 in E Minor, Op. 98 - I. Allegro non troppo (Part 2) --- KARAJAN - YouTube
more recordings , + a Turntable motor
G'day Denny ,
I have a recording with Piers Lane and the Goldner String Quartet , an Australian group ,
playing Frank Bridge's Piano Quintet and one of his string quartets , recorded for Hyperion , and the sound is good.
Lane is a good pianist , as also are the Goldner players.
Did you get to hear Lane playing at the Festival ?
As you like Brahms' Clarinet Quintet , you may like his Clarinet Trio.
I particually recommend the recording of the Trio by Karl Leister on Clarinet , Ferenc Bognar on Piano , Wolfgang Boettcher on Cello.
Leister has also recorded the Quintet , several times and I have not heard all the recordings ,
however they will all be different owing to different strings players each time , and such does determine also whether one likes the performance.
Whose recordings do you have ?
For Brahms Cello sonatas , I am not stating that Bailey and Pratt will be the best performance ever ,
but that the sound will be good for loudspeaker evaluation.
For very good performances of the sonatas listen to Rostropovich with Rudolph Serkin on Deutsche Grammophon , and which has good sound ,
and Piatigosky with Rubinstein on RCA -{ now BMG owned by Sony }- which is older sound , but quite good.
It is Stereo , and not vintage , but from Rubinstein's middle period.
No loudspeakers can reproduce the full dynamics and timbre of a cello , nor even of an acoustic guitar , much less a piano or orchestra , etc ...
We have to use our imagination , and our brains do manage that when sufficient aspects of the loudspeaker's sound is close to optimum.
*** *** ***
'ullo Nigel ,
thank you for the links to the music.
I do like Gieseking's playing , and for several composers.
Of the Brahms' symphonies my favorite is the 3rd , and next the 2nd and the 4th.
I like Kurt Sanderling's East German recordings best for 3rd and 2nd , but not so much for 4th for which I prefer Carlos Kleiber.
I have two new unused turntable motors , both are samples of:
Papst GS 38.09 ,
Two-phase low-speed-brushless D.C. motor with variable reluctance auxilary torque.
My samples are from later than the ones that Oracle first used in their turntables.
Mine have date codes for November 1987.
Do you know anything about these versions ?
and if so , do you think good or less than ?
G'day Denny ,
I have a recording with Piers Lane and the Goldner String Quartet , an Australian group ,
playing Frank Bridge's Piano Quintet and one of his string quartets , recorded for Hyperion , and the sound is good.
Lane is a good pianist , as also are the Goldner players.
Did you get to hear Lane playing at the Festival ?
As you like Brahms' Clarinet Quintet , you may like his Clarinet Trio.
I particually recommend the recording of the Trio by Karl Leister on Clarinet , Ferenc Bognar on Piano , Wolfgang Boettcher on Cello.
Leister has also recorded the Quintet , several times and I have not heard all the recordings ,
however they will all be different owing to different strings players each time , and such does determine also whether one likes the performance.
Whose recordings do you have ?
For Brahms Cello sonatas , I am not stating that Bailey and Pratt will be the best performance ever ,
but that the sound will be good for loudspeaker evaluation.
For very good performances of the sonatas listen to Rostropovich with Rudolph Serkin on Deutsche Grammophon , and which has good sound ,
and Piatigosky with Rubinstein on RCA -{ now BMG owned by Sony }- which is older sound , but quite good.
It is Stereo , and not vintage , but from Rubinstein's middle period.
No loudspeakers can reproduce the full dynamics and timbre of a cello , nor even of an acoustic guitar , much less a piano or orchestra , etc ...
We have to use our imagination , and our brains do manage that when sufficient aspects of the loudspeaker's sound is close to optimum.
*** *** ***
'ullo Nigel ,
thank you for the links to the music.
I do like Gieseking's playing , and for several composers.
Of the Brahms' symphonies my favorite is the 3rd , and next the 2nd and the 4th.
I like Kurt Sanderling's East German recordings best for 3rd and 2nd , but not so much for 4th for which I prefer Carlos Kleiber.
I have two new unused turntable motors , both are samples of:
Papst GS 38.09 ,
Two-phase low-speed-brushless D.C. motor with variable reluctance auxilary torque.
My samples are from later than the ones that Oracle first used in their turntables.
Mine have date codes for November 1987.
Do you know anything about these versions ?
and if so , do you think good or less than ?
Last edited:
I usually think of the belt as the problem . It is a solution for cheap turntables . Much of a better motor gets lost in the belt . Platine Verdier is correct in this . I know little about Oracle except the stiffness of the belt is a reliable a path to improvement . As a reviewer said of the LP12 , slightly drunk .
The Hindemith . Atonal seems not to apply . Devoid of cyclic symphonism , not really .
If you will forgive . My favourite opera sang by a man who might know how . How lucky it was possible to record this . Sicily especailly Scopello , wonderful .
Enrico Caruso - O Lola (Cavalleria rusticana) 1905 - YouTube
The modern ( ish ) version I like is technically worse .
Di Stefano - O Lola - YouTube
1903 . Even better voice quality .
Cavalleria Rusticana SICILIANA (announced) 1903 - YouTube
The Hindemith . Atonal seems not to apply . Devoid of cyclic symphonism , not really .
If you will forgive . My favourite opera sang by a man who might know how . How lucky it was possible to record this . Sicily especailly Scopello , wonderful .
Enrico Caruso - O Lola (Cavalleria rusticana) 1905 - YouTube
The modern ( ish ) version I like is technically worse .
Di Stefano - O Lola - YouTube
1903 . Even better voice quality .
Cavalleria Rusticana SICILIANA (announced) 1903 - YouTube
Last edited:
Goldner were there along with the Australian String Quartet. Most musicians play on and off all through the festival. Piers Lane is the artistic director of the festival and plays a lot. He lives in London.
The music selection was interesting as well. The second half of the opening concert was superb:
Poulenc
Le Bal Masqué
Marcus Farnsworth
Piers Lane
Atle Sponberg
Li-wei Qin
Nicholas Daniel
Michael Collins
Andrew Barnes
David Elton
Timothy Constable
Ravel arr. Winther
La Valse
Australian String Quartet
Michael Collins
Piers Lane
Marshall McGuire
Hindemith
Kammermusik 1
Conducted by Dene Olding
Giovanni Guzzo
Zoë Black
Philip Dukes
Zuill Bailey
Kirsty McCahon
Bridget Bolliger
Michael Collins
Andrew Barnes
Tristram Williams
Andrew West
Ksenija Siderova
Timothy Constable
The music selection was interesting as well. The second half of the opening concert was superb:
Poulenc
Le Bal Masqué
Marcus Farnsworth
Piers Lane
Atle Sponberg
Li-wei Qin
Nicholas Daniel
Michael Collins
Andrew Barnes
David Elton
Timothy Constable
Ravel arr. Winther
La Valse
Australian String Quartet
Michael Collins
Piers Lane
Marshall McGuire
Hindemith
Kammermusik 1
Conducted by Dene Olding
Giovanni Guzzo
Zoë Black
Philip Dukes
Zuill Bailey
Kirsty McCahon
Bridget Bolliger
Michael Collins
Andrew Barnes
Tristram Williams
Andrew West
Ksenija Siderova
Timothy Constable
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.