Mar-Kel70 in Sweden

frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
Paid Member
In my room, just the other day, listening to Maeshowe with EL70eN, turned up to "fairly loud" the SPL meter was hoovering around 75-80 dB. The ear's safety reflex starts kicking in at 80-90 dB, reducing the ears sensitivity.

By Hoffmann's Iron Law, In Mar-Kel70 we have small size, fairly deep bass, hence they need to be fairly inefficient. That said, the MArk Audios all seem to be more efficient than they measure -- possibly due to good downward dynamic range.

dave
 
In my room, just the other day, listening to Maeshowe with EL70eN, turned up to "fairly loud" the SPL meter was hoovering around 75-80 dB. The ear's safety reflex starts kicking in at 80-90 dB, reducing the ears sensitivity.

By Hoffmann's Iron Law, In Mar-Kel70 we have small size, fairly deep bass, hence they need to be fairly inefficient. That said, the MArk Audios all seem to be more efficient than they measure -- possibly due to good downward dynamic range.

dave

Haha cool. I think i played quite loud today when i was pushing them a little bit ;)

By the way, are you the guy with a read cap on his head?
 
Now i'll tell you about the idea that struck me yesterday!

The EL70 is a really really really good driver. It play everything very well, from the sweetest jazz to the heaviest metal. The bass is extremely good for it's size, goes deep enough for pretty much all music i listen to. Infected Mushroom, blues and everything. The only thing i lack is some physical "pressure" for the bass guitars and beats in electronic music. But for that you WILL need larger drivers than 4", or just very many of them!

So, i was thinking of NOT building any subwoofers. Save the subs for future car audio use (hey, it's only like two years left!). Since i already have two EL70 drivers why not get another pair and build a floorstander? I got the space for one, it can be really big if it has to. I have a 220cm wide wall dedicated to audio and if you count in the equipment rack i will have maybe 160cm, so they could be 80cm wide (but no speakers are).

Now the question is, which cabinet for multiple drivers? I don't know if a dipole/bipole (i don't know the differences between them really :p) would fit in my nasty room. What i like to achieve with another driver is to play a little louder with a little more bass (the few times you want it). And with a bigger cabinet i guess i would gain some sensitivity AND it would play deeper bass(?). I'd like to keep the baffle at a maximum of 65-70cm from the wall. The drivers can be placed at around 2m apart, but that would mean one speaker is pretty much in a corner and the other is right next to a door.

If i don't build subwoofer i wont have to spend money on that, which means more money for a new amplifier and DAC :D
 
Well I can certainly attest that 2 EL70 in the little microtower enclosure do s decent job of pressurizing a big room, and Dave has imagined versions with 4 per box.

Mind you for a smallish room a single pair of cheap/small bass drivers ( 6-8") could do at least as good a job for less money than larger multiples of the EL70. If you're thinking of future project(s)( who coulda predicted that? :rolleyes:) - whether you put them in separate boxes or incorporate into a "FAST" type design is the question.
 
No doubt I mentioned it earlier in the planning stages of your system, but take another look at the Castle (not conventional bipole) version of Dave's Micro-tower design. 2 EL70s in one of these boxes do an amazing job in the low end, and the top firing driver adds a lot to soundstage, and dramatically simplifies placement issues.

A relatively simple build compared to the Mar-Kels. If you can, try to budget for good plywood this time, but if not 5/8" (15mm) particle board would be sufficient.
 
Yeah. I was thinking of the one with a top mounted driver. And have one driver front-firing and one top-firing and the top one is angled.

I'm tempted to rebuild the pair in my wife's system with angled top, and maybe some other cosmetic tweaks.

I will try to build in Birchply, since it would fit on one sheet i guess. Looks better and should sound better.


I think you're right on both
 
I'm tempted to rebuild the pair in my wife's system with angled top, and maybe some other cosmetic tweaks.




I think you're right on both

I guess the angled top removes some placing difficulties. The sound is facing more forward and up to the roof. But i saw on the planet-10 hifi site (which is GREAT!) that if you had an angled top it was facing backwards, and not to the front, as i had imagined it would be.

Edit: I see the drivers will end up quite low. So i will sit pretty much off-axis. I sit higher than in a sofa. I could use a stone plate to get them up almost 5cm, but that still wont be enough to get it on-axis.

And yes, i will build with something thicker than 12mm. I want to feel that if i really have to i can unscrew the drivers without having to change baffle. By the way, is there a fix coming for the mounting holes? Dave, do you remember i told you that they were very very close to the mounting hole? That's a problem that would need to be fixed.
 
Last edited:
A friend of mine said that paper cones still get better and better even after hundreds of hours of playtime. Is that correct?



That's certainly a famous characteristic of drivers like Fostex Full Range - although possibly as much due to their moderately high sensitivity motors as the cone materials. At over 90dB sensitivity and the resultant very short strokes at average listening levels, it takes longer for the suspension parts (pleated spider and particularly pleated paper or fabric surrounds) to "soften" up.
 
frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
Paid Member
Hi dave, just wondering if you ever did this? I've got some spare 18mm marine ply I'd prefer to use for my EL70's rather than buy new 15mm.

Yes. Attached is the Mar-Kel70 planset subscription title page with the drawings done (or mostly done) as well as drawings (in red) still to do (and i can think of a few more that aren't listed -- dedicated centre, wall mount)

dave
 

Attachments

  • title-110211.pdf
    39.2 KB · Views: 86