v-bro said:
It would definitely help but a sub should not be needed here.
In a stereo setup we have FOUR 8 inch drivers working below 250Hz!!
This should be enough to loosen any recent dental work.
The cabinets are a decent size too so what is the problem? Higher power amps are seemingly helpful for the quality of bass but not the relative quantity.
I have the same problem with my MK1's.
Firstly, I found that removing the tannoy plinths helped. My plinths are not the originals but are modified from 609 (etc) stands so your mileage may vary.
These plinths and stands are mainly made from what looks like compressed cardboard!!! Removing these gave a noticable improvement in my case. Not magic but a definite improvement. I guess that solid floor coupling helps.
Sand in the base cavities helps to tighten up what bass is already there but no increase was noticed.
I have experimented with cabinet stuffing to increase effective cabinet size with no great change, although it did help to dampen the midrange near the crossover frequency. I own the MK1 and I don't think this a real problem with the MK2.
In fact, in a straight shootout the MK2 had more apparent bass.
The MK2 611's in my test had the same bass drivers. Yours may be slightly different at least in model number.
The Mk1 and MK2 IMO are both too forward but in different ways.
Acoustic music lacks bass. It's all there and it is effortless but the balance is just completely wrong somehow. Try some double bass or indeed drum n' bass and you quickly realise that these speakers can really pump bass as low and as loud as you could ever want. It's just not balanced.
I don't have the room here but, given their shape and Tannoys history, could they be intended for corner placement? I've never heard this mentioned but you never know!
What could be the problem here?
What's gan on: Sorry for posting in all you threads but I am your internet stalker!!
Regards,
Martin.
Hi,
The shape of the 611's and the others from the range was never about placing them in corners. The idea behind the shape was to do with internal air movement. A conventional speaker has a single backboard, as the driver moves, the air within is compressed, very much like a piston, the air has only lateral movement ie backwards and forwards.
With the 6 series, there are 3 backboards or to be more specific 1 backboard and 2 angled. From memory this theory was included in the literature available when new, Tannoy were trying to evolve speaker systems further and they felt this was a revolutuionary concept.
I own a pair of 611's and have done since new in 1991. I have a son aged 17 (speakers are older by a month or so).
My son must have been 2 at the time, it was a Sunday and I was reading my newspaper and not paying enough attention to him, I looked up from my newspaper and to my horror, there was my son standing with the big black plastic dust cap from the passive driver which he had managed to prise off and a big smile on his face. Luckily for me Tannoy are/were based a couple of miles up the road, I paid them a visit taking my broken driver and was given not only a tour of their facility but also a replacement driver free of charge. Was thoroughly impressed with everything Tannoy.
I still use the 611's daily and just recently replaced my Cyrus IIIi with an Audiolab 8000A. I always wanted the Audiolab, now I have one, I wish I had never bought the Cyrus.
I'm looking for a CD player for my system so any advice/pointers would be much appreciated.
Dave
Hi Dave,
Yes, I'm aware of the thinking behind the shape of the sixes cabinets. The unusual shape of the sixes was to reduce standing waves and to allow differently sized, smaller panels to be used. Different sized panels have different resonant frequencies and smaller panels have a higher resonant frequency. This means that the resonant frequencies are spread out rather than reinofrcing each other and also that the higher resonance is affected less by the strong low frequency energy.
I also remember Tannoy mentioning that angled sides reduced diffraction but I don't really know enough to believe that it makes much difference.
They were also implementing their differential Material Technology (D.M.T.) in the sixes so maybe more glue joints was another side benefit in their view?
The lack of bass I had, over two years ago now, just made me wonder if they were 'voiced' to sound better in close proximity to corners or failing that, close to a back wall. I mentioned this because some of the older 'classic' Tannoys that were a similar shape and designed specifically for corner placement.
Interestingly, I moved them closer to a back wall with good bass results but not so great imaging.
Some time after this old thread, I made my own active baffle step filter or 'bass boost'. The bass was awesome but adding something else into the signal chain affected the Tannoy magic. Oh well, It was a very interesting experiment.
What happenned next? I'm actually very happy with the bass at the moment. Some new/higher capacitance caps in the Low frequency/mid-range amplifier give it 'solid' bass and attenuating the HF driver helped resolve the issue of balance. I think a lot of the problem is based in psycho-acoustics and the rather forward nature of the compression driver.
Best wishes,
Martin.
Yes, I'm aware of the thinking behind the shape of the sixes cabinets. The unusual shape of the sixes was to reduce standing waves and to allow differently sized, smaller panels to be used. Different sized panels have different resonant frequencies and smaller panels have a higher resonant frequency. This means that the resonant frequencies are spread out rather than reinofrcing each other and also that the higher resonance is affected less by the strong low frequency energy.
I also remember Tannoy mentioning that angled sides reduced diffraction but I don't really know enough to believe that it makes much difference.
They were also implementing their differential Material Technology (D.M.T.) in the sixes so maybe more glue joints was another side benefit in their view?
The lack of bass I had, over two years ago now, just made me wonder if they were 'voiced' to sound better in close proximity to corners or failing that, close to a back wall. I mentioned this because some of the older 'classic' Tannoys that were a similar shape and designed specifically for corner placement.
Interestingly, I moved them closer to a back wall with good bass results but not so great imaging.
Some time after this old thread, I made my own active baffle step filter or 'bass boost'. The bass was awesome but adding something else into the signal chain affected the Tannoy magic. Oh well, It was a very interesting experiment.
What happenned next? I'm actually very happy with the bass at the moment. Some new/higher capacitance caps in the Low frequency/mid-range amplifier give it 'solid' bass and attenuating the HF driver helped resolve the issue of balance. I think a lot of the problem is based in psycho-acoustics and the rather forward nature of the compression driver.
Best wishes,
Martin.
I'm looking at the 6's and search's keep bringing me back here, to posts about inadequate or missplaced bass. So sorry for the old post bump but i thought i should comment.
The cabs used are very poor. Each of the boards seem to of been held in place while someone wrapped the cabs in fablon and called it done. I looked at lots when i bought some 603(maybe5)se's. Every single demo set of 6s were split and it took a few shops/boxes to find some that were not. Soon after which these also split. There just not a good cab, so i feel confident that in all case's of poor bass you need to glue them up. There was no sign of this being done from new.
I'm actually looking for tatty one's as i won't want to use the cabs.
Im yet to see a set that are not split. Check ebay for confirmation. Your cabs will most certainly want a smear of epoxy up the inside. For which i turn to pillar cement. Used to stick short galvo pillars to a concrete floor, upon which large block floor panels rest. It's a cheap way of getting lots of epoxy.
The cabs used are very poor. Each of the boards seem to of been held in place while someone wrapped the cabs in fablon and called it done. I looked at lots when i bought some 603(maybe5)se's. Every single demo set of 6s were split and it took a few shops/boxes to find some that were not. Soon after which these also split. There just not a good cab, so i feel confident that in all case's of poor bass you need to glue them up. There was no sign of this being done from new.
I'm actually looking for tatty one's as i won't want to use the cabs.
Im yet to see a set that are not split. Check ebay for confirmation. Your cabs will most certainly want a smear of epoxy up the inside. For which i turn to pillar cement. Used to stick short galvo pillars to a concrete floor, upon which large block floor panels rest. It's a cheap way of getting lots of epoxy.
Hello !
sorry to resurrect a very old 3D but i happen to have bought recently the same speakers, i.e. Tannoy 611 mk II
Just to want share my opinion that they have indeed a great potential with heavy mods by the way.
The 8" DC is not the best but it is still very very nice.
I believe is crossed at 400 Hz a little too high i think.
Looking at some of the best 3 ways around i see that the cone midwoofers are crossed usually at 150 Hz and this would be my first choice also for this DC.
The woofer is decent but hardly the best around.
A great quality 8-9" new woofer coping with freqs from 150 down would give a great bass that coupled with the already nice mid and highs ....
Kind regards,
gino
sorry to resurrect a very old 3D but i happen to have bought recently the same speakers, i.e. Tannoy 611 mk II
Just to want share my opinion that they have indeed a great potential with heavy mods by the way.
The 8" DC is not the best but it is still very very nice.
I believe is crossed at 400 Hz a little too high i think.
Looking at some of the best 3 ways around i see that the cone midwoofers are crossed usually at 150 Hz and this would be my first choice also for this DC.
The woofer is decent but hardly the best around.
A great quality 8-9" new woofer coping with freqs from 150 down would give a great bass that coupled with the already nice mid and highs ....
Kind regards,
gino
Last edited:
Hi just to say ... me too.
A reasonable move is to keep the DCs and discharge both woofers and cabinets (i mean not in the garbage bin, at least the woofers).
However ... sorry for the last question/provocation about this speakers
But this question is very important to me in general
In the 609 we have a 8" woofer crossed to a 8" dual concentric with the cut fixed at 400 Hz by Tannoy (see link)
Speakers
Have they really done the best choice ?
I think it is too high.
A better cut freq for me would be around 150 Hz in order to send more bass to the DC.
A 8" can take 125 Hz without sweating i guess.
What is you opinion ?
Thanks a lot again, gino
Crossing the frequency down lower than 400Hz to the bottom driver wont send more bass to the bottom driver will it? its about balance, you probably want less output around the 200 to 500hz range perhaps? they probably chose the 400Hz crossover as BSC especially when placed on stands away from the wall.
Arthur.
Arthur.
Hi and thanks a lot for the kind and valuable reply
No i do not think so. But the woofer of the DC will take charge of the range let's say 150-2500 instead of 400-2500.
I have also another model equipped only with the DC i like the sound better
It seems that the added woofer complicates things instead of being a real benefit.
yes indeed it is about balance.
I think that the lower woofer should only fill the very bass relieving the DC of this duty.
Looking at the 611 as a 3 ways with a big cone midrange i see that a usual crossover cut is around 150 Hz. A 8" cone can sustain quite comfortably that freq i guess.
Thanks again, gino
No i do not think so. But the woofer of the DC will take charge of the range let's say 150-2500 instead of 400-2500.
I have also another model equipped only with the DC i like the sound better
It seems that the added woofer complicates things instead of being a real benefit.
yes indeed it is about balance.
I think that the lower woofer should only fill the very bass relieving the DC of this duty.
Looking at the 611 as a 3 ways with a big cone midrange i see that a usual crossover cut is around 150 Hz. A 8" cone can sustain quite comfortably that freq i guess.
Thanks again, gino
Hi Gino, I think you're misunderstanding how these speakers work.
The horn plays from 2500Hz UP. The top cone plays everything up to 2500Hz. The bottom cone plays everything up to 400Hz.
Below 400Hz both cones are playing together. These speakers are 2.5 way and not 3 way.
Crossover is ~ 2/3 down this page:
Tannoy ?? ??????? ? ???????? ?? ????? ????
I'd say replace the inductor on the .5 woofer with one with lower DCR, and/or vent the box...
Tannoy ?? ??????? ? ???????? ?? ????? ????
I'd say replace the inductor on the .5 woofer with one with lower DCR, and/or vent the box...
Hi and sorry for the late reply. Thanks a lot for the valuable advice.
Unfortunately i had to sell the speakers one month ago because i am moving and i cannot bring them with me.
I gave them away very sadly. Because i liked them.
Anyway ... i like much more the 3 ways arrangement ... i prefer to take out the very low bass from the midrange like almost all top quality speakers do.
The 2.5 way solution does not look very popular to me looking around.
And a 8" woofer working up to 2.5 kHz ... is it not too high ?
But they are gone now. Hard times.
Thanks a lot again.
Kind regards, gino
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.