Mark Audio CHR-70 Application Thread

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Jump to Latest
V

vaughn

Member
Joined 2008
These new designs look great Dave! I have been holding off on the Lotus because of low WAF factor but these look very living room friendly. I have my chr-70's up for sale but this changes the situation.

I do have one question...

If I need to place my speakers about 12" from the rear wall do you think the version with the driver firing up would be better than the opposing "bipole" scheme?:)
 
planet10

planet10

frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
planet10-hifi.com
Paid Member
vaughn said:
If I need to place my speakers about 12" from the rear wall do you think the version with the driver firing up would be better than the opposing "bipole" scheme?:)
Click to expand...

Yes... if you get it this close (or even right up againt the wall) you will likely need to damp the port a bit to curtail the bottom. As well you might want to consider a variation that tips the top driver slightly forward (i just posted an illustration in the other thread that will better explain what i mean)

dave
 
C

chrisb

Member
Joined 2002
vaughn said:
These new designs look great Dave! I have been holding off on the Lotus because of low WAF factor but these look very living room friendly. I have my chr-70's up for sale but this changes the situation.

I do have one question...

If I need to place my speakers about 12" from the rear wall do you think the version with the driver firing up would be better than the opposing "bipole" scheme?:)
Click to expand...


While we were also comparing the metal coned CHR70 to paper coned EL70, I quite preferred top mounted version "Castle" as Dave likes to call them.

Of course, I can't think of any reason either driver couldn't be used in either box. Just verify your amp's comfort with low impedance loads before wiring 2 of these up - we ran ours in series and connected to 8 ohm tap on EL34 P/P triode amp.
 
V

Voldemar1

Member
Joined 2006
HareBrained said:
...
Please post your honest impressions of the design when you've had a chance to listen. I found it took only about 20 hours of playback before the output started to crystallize.
Click to expand...
I have them for about a week now. Overall – that’s exactly I was looking for.
Design is not too complex, to be impossible to implement, same time not too simple – to be interesting and challenging enough.
I like the way they sound – clean and powerful. Way better than my old Quest 5.1 set (to be fair I paid 100CAD for the whole set including active sub).
Treble is incomparable to my other pair of OB-RAW with ribbons, and base is incomparable with my Cerwin-Vega floor standers. But that’s PC speakers – sitting in front of me right now, playing music really-really sweet. They not take half of my room. They even not take a lot of my desk. They don’t mind to play in the corner, right against the wall.
So, one more time: thank you HareBrained, really like them.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3261small .JPG
    IMG_3261small .JPG
    78.3 KB · Views: 1,418
  • IMG_3407small.JPG
    IMG_3407small.JPG
    83.9 KB · Views: 4,517
G

geepee

Member
Joined 2009
chr-70 Pensil Design

Hi, quick question on the chr-70 Pensil design, The measurments on the plan from the MA website, are they internal dimensions? Also the figure of 393mm down for the driver, is that to the driver centre or to the top of the driver where the line arrowhead points to? sorry if this is a dumb question but i am dumb...

Thanks

GP
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Top Bottom