Ricardo, the Super12/RS/DD should be OK without the super tweeter,
with a few "cautions"
The earlier models with the blue metal dome sound too harsh on a S-S amp IMO. Back in their day, they were OK on tube amps / vinyl. Recording methods have improved since then.
The later ones with the Mylar dome are not as bad.
Either way, I'd remove the dome, fit phase plugs, and treat the cones with PVA, and the surrounds with bitumen paint.
Mine are currently without tweeter cones, undergoing further treatment, hoping not to need tweeter cones and associated phase problems.
Geoff
with a few "cautions"
The earlier models with the blue metal dome sound too harsh on a S-S amp IMO. Back in their day, they were OK on tube amps / vinyl. Recording methods have improved since then.
The later ones with the Mylar dome are not as bad.
Either way, I'd remove the dome, fit phase plugs, and treat the cones with PVA, and the surrounds with bitumen paint.
Mine are currently without tweeter cones, undergoing further treatment, hoping not to need tweeter cones and associated phase problems.
Geoff
Thank you for the tips Geof.
Meanwhile I have found an alternative that might suit my chip amp better:
http://www.supravox.fr/anglais/haut_parleurs/215_SBIC.htm
At the moment I am still gathering information on the available drivers, let's see which one I end up buying.
Cheers,
Ricardo
Meanwhile I have found an alternative that might suit my chip amp better:
http://www.supravox.fr/anglais/haut_parleurs/215_SBIC.htm
At the moment I am still gathering information on the available drivers, let's see which one I end up buying.
Cheers,
Ricardo
Hi,
I found what I was looking for:
http://www.selenium.com.br/site2004/catalogo/pdf/D205ti.pdf
Victório Benatti
I found what I was looking for:
http://www.selenium.com.br/site2004/catalogo/pdf/D205ti.pdf
Victório Benatti
RS DD Super12s
Hi, this is the first time I have ever subscribed to a forum of any kind, but I have been reading the various submissions regarding the RS DD Super 12 drivers.
I have just recently scrapped a pair of enclosures that housed these units and would dearly like to rebuild them one day with a smaller footprint. There are numerous designs out there on the net but they require some kind of starting point regarding the performance of the drive units.
As other people have found the original records at Wharfedale are no longer available and although I was in possession of the original booklet that came with the speakers it has long since been borrowed and lost.
The booklet showed a number of designs from wharfedale, including brick and concrete pipe enclosures, mine were 3 cubic foot bass reflex enclosures.
Any info regarding the above would be appreciated and the best of luck to all you others trying to build the same, they are great speakers.
Hi, this is the first time I have ever subscribed to a forum of any kind, but I have been reading the various submissions regarding the RS DD Super 12 drivers.
I have just recently scrapped a pair of enclosures that housed these units and would dearly like to rebuild them one day with a smaller footprint. There are numerous designs out there on the net but they require some kind of starting point regarding the performance of the drive units.
As other people have found the original records at Wharfedale are no longer available and although I was in possession of the original booklet that came with the speakers it has long since been borrowed and lost.
The booklet showed a number of designs from wharfedale, including brick and concrete pipe enclosures, mine were 3 cubic foot bass reflex enclosures.
Any info regarding the above would be appreciated and the best of luck to all you others trying to build the same, they are great speakers.
j.albrow
I did the most practical and simple project with the Super 12/RS/DD. I got they on a great sealed box, installing them in top, on the point of audition while hearing seated. In this way, they practically already the loudspeaker. I added a driver for trebles from 8 khz. Also I use a subwoofer. My electronics have an active crossover of two way. A way for the Super 12 and another way for the sub.
Victório Benatti
I did the most practical and simple project with the Super 12/RS/DD. I got they on a great sealed box, installing them in top, on the point of audition while hearing seated. In this way, they practically already the loudspeaker. I added a driver for trebles from 8 khz. Also I use a subwoofer. My electronics have an active crossover of two way. A way for the Super 12 and another way for the sub.
Victório Benatti
RE: Wharfedale super 12s
I too recently acquired a mint pair of super 12 drivers, unfortunately the seller was in a hurry to get rid of the cabinets do to there size so I didn't receive them with the drivers. Thinking that there may be a better design out there for them nowdays I didn't think it an issue. My question is apparently the original cabinets had an a baffle on an angle and a couple of wholes in the bottom and that was it? I mounted one of the super 12s in a Goodmans cabinet that was made in 1963 and it has a large square hole in the back which is again covered with wood only leaving it open at the sides if you know what I mean. Is there any reason other then size why these wouldn't work well? They were used with a Goodmans 301 driver and built from factory specs? Does anyone out there know if the super 12 and the 301 are similiar as far as cabinets needed etc? I will try the web search suggested also GA Briggs. Daren
I too recently acquired a mint pair of super 12 drivers, unfortunately the seller was in a hurry to get rid of the cabinets do to there size so I didn't receive them with the drivers. Thinking that there may be a better design out there for them nowdays I didn't think it an issue. My question is apparently the original cabinets had an a baffle on an angle and a couple of wholes in the bottom and that was it? I mounted one of the super 12s in a Goodmans cabinet that was made in 1963 and it has a large square hole in the back which is again covered with wood only leaving it open at the sides if you know what I mean. Is there any reason other then size why these wouldn't work well? They were used with a Goodmans 301 driver and built from factory specs? Does anyone out there know if the super 12 and the 301 are similiar as far as cabinets needed etc? I will try the web search suggested also GA Briggs. Daren
RE: Wharfedale super 12s
After checking the measurements of the cabinets I realize they may be too small for the super 12s. As they measure 24" tall x 17x18. and may have been too small for the original 301s as I have the factory book for them and the demensions they suggest are a lot bigger it seems? Also it was mention that adding a phase plug and removing the dustcap was the way to go,my question is how does the phase plug attach.? Thanks Daren
After checking the measurements of the cabinets I realize they may be too small for the super 12s. As they measure 24" tall x 17x18. and may have been too small for the original 301s as I have the factory book for them and the demensions they suggest are a lot bigger it seems? Also it was mention that adding a phase plug and removing the dustcap was the way to go,my question is how does the phase plug attach.? Thanks Daren
Was just given a pair of Wharfedale Super 8/RS/DD - yes the ones so lambasted here: http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/WharfedaleSuper8.htm
They are NIB from the 1960s and I will do something with them.
Lot of talk about doping cones and treating the surround, any specific brand recommendations or sources?
These will be used fullrange for background music with a small 45 DHT SE amplifier.
They are NIB from the 1960s and I will do something with them.
Lot of talk about doping cones and treating the surround, any specific brand recommendations or sources?
These will be used fullrange for background music with a small 45 DHT SE amplifier.
RE: super 8's
Hi Kevin, well it depends really as I just bought a pair as I love the 12's as they are probably the best 12" full range I have heard and I prefer them to Tannoy's. So I am not sure really what is up with the super 8's as I cant see Briggs designing a bad driver unless everyone is missing something about how and why they were designed ? not sure what is up with that? Had I read that post first I may have passed though? that being said mine are different and early versions it seems as mine have the huge red magnet the same as the super 12's I have. I guess the difference being allnico and not allnico? There are many threads talking about how to tweak the old Wharfedales but I have yet to try as my 12's are mint and I am not that brave. Look for info on the 12's as most posts should have good tips on products etc and also the guys on this site are extremely sharp and no all the in's and outs which will save you much grief. Sorry but I dont remember all the tricks I read on here but there is lots of them. Don't be shy as they will be very helpful. Daren
Hi Kevin, well it depends really as I just bought a pair as I love the 12's as they are probably the best 12" full range I have heard and I prefer them to Tannoy's. So I am not sure really what is up with the super 8's as I cant see Briggs designing a bad driver unless everyone is missing something about how and why they were designed ? not sure what is up with that? Had I read that post first I may have passed though? that being said mine are different and early versions it seems as mine have the huge red magnet the same as the super 12's I have. I guess the difference being allnico and not allnico? There are many threads talking about how to tweak the old Wharfedales but I have yet to try as my 12's are mint and I am not that brave. Look for info on the 12's as most posts should have good tips on products etc and also the guys on this site are extremely sharp and no all the in's and outs which will save you much grief. Sorry but I dont remember all the tricks I read on here but there is lots of them. Don't be shy as they will be very helpful. Daren
Re: RE: super 8's
Hi,
You have obviously not understood the Wharfedale ethos or
the sheer lack of enginneering delevelopment that used to
not go into the development of some older drivers.
e.g. Ted Jordans famous Goodmans 8" driver :
He had to push hard for a flared cone. The dies for the cone press
were going to be made once and once only and then the driver
sold whatever the measurements.
Turns out he was correct, and the driver had good measurements,
better than those expected from the alternative cone shapes.
/sreten.
movingcoilguy said:
Hi,
You have obviously not understood the Wharfedale ethos or
the sheer lack of enginneering delevelopment that used to
not go into the development of some older drivers.
e.g. Ted Jordans famous Goodmans 8" driver :
He had to push hard for a flared cone. The dies for the cone press
were going to be made once and once only and then the driver
sold whatever the measurements.
Turns out he was correct, and the driver had good measurements,
better than those expected from the alternative cone shapes.
/sreten.Re: RE: super 8's
Hi,
You have obviously not understood the Wharfedale ethos or
the sheere lack of enginneering delevelopment that used to
not go into the development of some older drivers.
e.g. Ted Jordans famous Goodmans 8" driver :
He had to push hard for a flared cone. The dies for the cone press
were going to be made once and once only and then the driver
sold whatever the measurements.
Turns out he was correct, and the driver had good measurements,
better than those expected from the alternative cone shapes.
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/WharfedaleSuper8.htm
Ignore the information here at your peril.
/sreten.
movingcoilguy said:
Hi,
You have obviously not understood the Wharfedale ethos or
the sheere lack of enginneering delevelopment that used to
not go into the development of some older drivers.
e.g. Ted Jordans famous Goodmans 8" driver :
He had to push hard for a flared cone. The dies for the cone press
were going to be made once and once only and then the driver
sold whatever the measurements.
Turns out he was correct, and the driver had good measurements,
better than those expected from the alternative cone shapes.
http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/WharfedaleSuper8.htm
Ignore the information here at your peril.
/sreten.super 8
hi sreten, thanks for the reply how about you take the same amount of time and write something constructive that would actually help with the question asked. If you read it carefully I am sure you could come up with something that may be of help instead of some pompous reply that does little but ruffle feathers! I am well aware of Wharfedales history and if it wasn't for design achievements there I am not sure where audio would be today.You can't ignore the great things they achieved at the time when things were really taking off. My only point was that they made plenty of great drivers for what equipment was available, I have had several that sound amazing the super 12 being one of them, along with the barclay Duode which you have probably never heard of is one of my favorite drivers. Many not just me prefer the Super 12 over tannoys, now for a Company like Wharfedale to be able to achieve a product like the Super 12 that certainly he wasn't quite as fly in the pants as you should suggest. Thanks I also previously read the info at the posted link, its amazing what is cabable today with computers thanks to the groundwork done by men with brains like Briggs. Daren
hi sreten, thanks for the reply how about you take the same amount of time and write something constructive that would actually help with the question asked. If you read it carefully I am sure you could come up with something that may be of help instead of some pompous reply that does little but ruffle feathers! I am well aware of Wharfedales history and if it wasn't for design achievements there I am not sure where audio would be today.You can't ignore the great things they achieved at the time when things were really taking off. My only point was that they made plenty of great drivers for what equipment was available, I have had several that sound amazing the super 12 being one of them, along with the barclay Duode which you have probably never heard of is one of my favorite drivers. Many not just me prefer the Super 12 over tannoys, now for a Company like Wharfedale to be able to achieve a product like the Super 12 that certainly he wasn't quite as fly in the pants as you should suggest. Thanks I also previously read the info at the posted link, its amazing what is cabable today with computers thanks to the groundwork done by men with brains like Briggs. Daren
I did read Troels article on the Super 8, (in fact it was hard to miss as it was the first thing that came up in google) but they were given to me by a friend and they are NOS/NIB.. I am just wondering whether treating the surround and cone might help their performance and if so what should I be treating them with and where to get it. The application is non-critical and I don't plan to invest much time, effort or money in the cabinets.
Some people rave about these drivers despite the very obvious measured shortcomings which is why I want to try them myself.
I spent almost 10yrs ignoring SE amplifiers because they were "technically unsound" - then finally designed and built my first one 11yrs ago, a 45 dht fixed bias design with relatively terrible measured performance in some areas like distortion and yet it sounded so good - and still does. This old amplifier will actually be the one used with these speakers.
I've built much better measuring and significantly better sounding SE amps since that time, but it was far more than acceptable sounding despite the obvious technical deficits, I'm just wondering if that is the case here.
One thing I really don't get is that the surround as noted by Troels seems to be very porous, and that makes no sense. I did note that the on axis spl levels are very high in his measurements and I wonder what effect that has on cone break up and other parameters. I expect the levels I would run them at would be significantly lower.
I'm not sure I understand your point about engineering Sreten, the double negative followed by comments about tooling cost issues confused me. (I worked in an audio sweatshop where you had one chance to "get it right" even as their chief engineer, and that was ultimately part of my undoing - so I get it.) Can you elaborate?
I find a lot of vintage drivers perform far better than expected despite the obvious lack of computer aided design tools, as yet to be invented TS parameters, and the level of scientific rigor often applied today, sometimes empirical derived knowledge results in surprisingly good devices even by today's standards. Materials and tools today are obviously far better, but I am not sure dedication to good results has kept apace. Here at least the respected manufacturers were conscientious about quality and performance and I think most UK manufacturers had a similar attitude even if everything seemed very seat of the pants by today's standards?
Daren - thanks for all of the positive comments and encouragement. I'm going to try them with no expectation and see what happens. I heard a lot of Wharfedale speaker systems as a kid and kind of liked them. (UK and BE) Popular here too, this pair came out of a friend's dad's hifi shop in Needham, Ma. Drivers are dated 1966 and even have the original warranty cards.. They aren't even run in obviously.
Worst case if they're just horrible sounding the baskets and magnets are very nice and I can get these reconed with new spiders and VC at a local speaker rebuilder I know.
Some people rave about these drivers despite the very obvious measured shortcomings which is why I want to try them myself.
I spent almost 10yrs ignoring SE amplifiers because they were "technically unsound" - then finally designed and built my first one 11yrs ago, a 45 dht fixed bias design with relatively terrible measured performance in some areas like distortion and yet it sounded so good - and still does. This old amplifier will actually be the one used with these speakers.
I've built much better measuring and significantly better sounding SE amps since that time, but it was far more than acceptable sounding despite the obvious technical deficits, I'm just wondering if that is the case here.
One thing I really don't get is that the surround as noted by Troels seems to be very porous, and that makes no sense. I did note that the on axis spl levels are very high in his measurements and I wonder what effect that has on cone break up and other parameters. I expect the levels I would run them at would be significantly lower.
I'm not sure I understand your point about engineering Sreten, the double negative followed by comments about tooling cost issues confused me. (I worked in an audio sweatshop where you had one chance to "get it right" even as their chief engineer, and that was ultimately part of my undoing - so I get it.) Can you elaborate?
I find a lot of vintage drivers perform far better than expected despite the obvious lack of computer aided design tools, as yet to be invented TS parameters, and the level of scientific rigor often applied today, sometimes empirical derived knowledge results in surprisingly good devices even by today's standards. Materials and tools today are obviously far better, but I am not sure dedication to good results has kept apace. Here at least the respected manufacturers were conscientious about quality and performance and I think most UK manufacturers had a similar attitude even if everything seemed very seat of the pants by today's standards?
Daren - thanks for all of the positive comments and encouragement. I'm going to try them with no expectation and see what happens. I heard a lot of Wharfedale speaker systems as a kid and kind of liked them. (UK and BE) Popular here too, this pair came out of a friend's dad's hifi shop in Needham, Ma. Drivers are dated 1966 and even have the original warranty cards.. They aren't even run in obviously.
Worst case if they're just horrible sounding the baskets and magnets are very nice and I can get these reconed with new spiders and VC at a local speaker rebuilder I know.
Hi,
I'm sorry but you are living in cuckooland, and being a little pompous.
The super 12's I've seen had exactly the same surround problems
as my Father's Super 8's - which I did not understand at the time.
If yours do not, all well and good, but it is worth checking.
Suggesting you do not stick your head in the sand is being
constructive. Suggesting the super 12's are "amazing" when
available measured evidence for a similarly built driver suggests
all might not be rosy in the garden is IMO not at all constructive.
Is does not take much other than a Pink noise band test CD / PC
and an open mind to investigate any midrange peaking / dipping.
I may be somewhat biased against Wharfedales full ranges ......
They came in Bronze, Silver and Gold versions when my Father
bought his Golds, they were not good, and had no bass .....
/sreten.
I'm sorry but you are living in cuckooland, and being a little pompous.
The super 12's I've seen had exactly the same surround problems
as my Father's Super 8's - which I did not understand at the time.
If yours do not, all well and good, but it is worth checking.
Suggesting you do not stick your head in the sand is being
constructive. Suggesting the super 12's are "amazing" when
available measured evidence for a similarly built driver suggests
all might not be rosy in the garden is IMO not at all constructive.
Is does not take much other than a Pink noise band test CD / PC
and an open mind to investigate any midrange peaking / dipping.
I may be somewhat biased against Wharfedales full ranges ......
They came in Bronze, Silver and Gold versions when my Father
bought his Golds, they were not good, and had no bass .....
/sreten.RE: super 8
Sounds good Kevin, I may have even ended up with a pair of the 8's from the same place as I recently purchase 2 in there original boxes etc from an old audio shop? in the last month. Strange ? Anyway my point was exactly what you are referring too and unless we had the original notes etc its hard for us to put are heads around some of the design concepts like a felt surround? Thats the difficult thing here for me , maybe he had his reasons? some of the Super 8' s went into speakers along with the super 3 pointing up so maybe that had something to do with his logic and design issues, not sure. I do know that the 12's are wonderful and at the moment I am playing them over my lowthers , they are not as dull and warm sounding as tannoys at about 1/10 the cost are better drivers. Try the 8's out and if they are not up to snuff nothing lost,sell them on Ebay and someone like me will buy them for $200. bucks. There are lots of great vintage drivers that I love ,the Hartleys are good if you can find a pair? I believe mine are 9" I plan on using my 8's in my Lowther cabinets just for curiosity more then anything else. So we will find out together if they have the balls the 12's have. Like you despite the specs I dont think there is any harm in trying. Daren
Sounds good Kevin, I may have even ended up with a pair of the 8's from the same place as I recently purchase 2 in there original boxes etc from an old audio shop? in the last month. Strange ? Anyway my point was exactly what you are referring too and unless we had the original notes etc its hard for us to put are heads around some of the design concepts like a felt surround? Thats the difficult thing here for me , maybe he had his reasons? some of the Super 8' s went into speakers along with the super 3 pointing up so maybe that had something to do with his logic and design issues, not sure. I do know that the 12's are wonderful and at the moment I am playing them over my lowthers , they are not as dull and warm sounding as tannoys at about 1/10 the cost are better drivers. Try the 8's out and if they are not up to snuff nothing lost,sell them on Ebay and someone like me will buy them for $200. bucks. There are lots of great vintage drivers that I love ,the Hartleys are good if you can find a pair? I believe mine are 9" I plan on using my 8's in my Lowther cabinets just for curiosity more then anything else. So we will find out together if they have the balls the 12's have. Like you despite the specs I dont think there is any harm in trying. Daren
kevinkr said:
Hi,
TG did not treat the cone, just the surround. As it is straightsided
coating it might move things around a bit but not change it much.
PVA as used by GH will effectively seal the cone somawhat though.
Get a test CD / PC with pink noise bands and use your ears .....
As TG states the immediate emphasis of hiss is a giveaway of peaks.
Sorry about the double negative. Wharfedale did spend a period
resting on their considerable reputation and producing some
distinctly average / mundane stuff.
I cannot see the point of reconing - move them on to an enthusiast.
Otherwise depending on your investigations you may need a notch
filter (or two) to run them full range, or TG's suggestions may appeal,
though to some a high order might be considered a travesty.
Note TG builds in around 3 to 4 dB of baffle step compensation.
See MJK's quarterwave.com for full range BSC circuits.
/sreten.- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.