Not mentioning the fact that I've noticed that you've been giving this same answer ("What a revelation!") quite often lately 🙄, I'm (obviously) referring to the fact that the investment would be huge (due to the difficulty of the case) and the return in money (small) not adequate to it (the huge investment), so they will possibly never be made.
I would have thought more about other objections, frankly. 😉
P. S.: In order to correctly quote a sentence or the entire most recent post (since the system in that case does not show the "Quote" button) just select a sentence or the entire post and then choose "Quote" from the right-click menu, it's easy. 🙂
Last edited:
do you maybe mean that it has been not a silly decision ? i did not even have the chance to listen to them But as i said i am looking for some metallic enclosure for the head speaker and the bass speaker
Just today i have met a new friend with a welder He is very willing to help me to build a metallic frame with square iron pipes to make a structure for a bass box Like the old cars with a tubular frame The front baffle will be thick wood and bolted to the frame like the bottom side
To make it from metal is too expensive
all other panels will be held in place by adequate magnets I have seen this solution on a Sonus Faber i think
this will provide huge accessibility to the inside of the speaker
If the magnets are not enough i will use bolts
i have only 5 and the shape does not help They have a rounded back
wait Mine are the 2001 maybe the cheaper ones They were part of a 5.1 home theater systems and actually are 5
I did not ask about the sub
You are referring to a much better model i guess
mines are like these
If binding posts weren't such a ropey way of connecting cable there wouldn't be such a variety of snake oil around getting signal from the wire to the speaker. Binding posts with wings, sooper-dooper preemium ones made with brass melted down from trumpets, wrenches to tighten them down on the wires, and so on, until you end up with the same result as always, a sloppy connection because copper will eventually loosen over time with vibration from the cabinet. Then replace them with the New! Shiny! and marvel at how improved the sound is.
Me, I far prefer Speakons with the wire soldered on. Simple, cheap, effective. Binding posts belong on a ten-year-old's science fair exhibit.
Thank you very much for the very valuable explanation But my reasoning is very basic
I guess that there is an ideal resistor capacitor inductor The ideal component will have some characteristics
Then there are the real parts
If we have two inductors one will be closer to ideality than the other And this deviation from the ideal behaviour could be measured i guess
The more ideal the better imho
Then there are testing signals The more transparent part will alter less the input signal
for me just a subjective opinion is not enough to decide for the purchase of a very expensive part
well i understood that my speakers were poor after listening to a more full range and powerful pair of speakers that were the JBL L166
i see that the new edition of similar speakers (jbl l100 classic) costs about 5k a pair I know that speakers have a big impact on the overall performance but these are too expensive for me In the end the only parts i dream of are the woofers I do not know how they cost as spare parts
So i am focusing the lower portion of the audio range in order to find an efficient and not very expensive solution
I agree However this is the back of a FM Acoustics power amp with the red and black speaker outs They seem pretty basic to me
For speakers connection I like 4 mm BFA type bananas
They allow for a good contact surface
RCA's connectors quality can vary a lot
Sometimes I have the feeling that the plugs are more decisive than the cables between them
They allow for a good contact surface
RCA's connectors quality can vary a lot
Sometimes I have the feeling that the plugs are more decisive than the cables between them
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. It is the KHT 2001 Egg units you must pack carefully and send to me 😊
🤣 i think you overrate them
I have a hint
If you like cheap and decent coaxial try the tannoy gold 7 or 5
They are cheap look cheap but sound really great
If you prefer the passive way just remove the plate amps on the back close with a thick sheet of something an design and build a decent crossover
Imho they will be superior to the kef
I have already 4 or 5 spare pairs of cheap Tannoy DC
But I have made up my mind
I am pretty sure that I will end with a nice Fatal woofer under a decent horn
I intend to use a very high end amp to drive them
But passion justifies some sacrifices
https://www.amazon.it/dp/B00OOP8S10...6QBGMNBJ0BY3Z1GE8&starsLeft=1&skipTwisterOG=1
I have a hint
If you like cheap and decent coaxial try the tannoy gold 7 or 5
They are cheap look cheap but sound really great
If you prefer the passive way just remove the plate amps on the back close with a thick sheet of something an design and build a decent crossover
Imho they will be superior to the kef
I have already 4 or 5 spare pairs of cheap Tannoy DC
But I have made up my mind
I am pretty sure that I will end with a nice Fatal woofer under a decent horn
I intend to use a very high end amp to drive them
But passion justifies some sacrifices
https://www.amazon.it/dp/B00OOP8S10...6QBGMNBJ0BY3Z1GE8&starsLeft=1&skipTwisterOG=1
This post of yours have changed my mind
I see a final solution
A two way but with a horn on top
I am studying the datasheets of the Faitals and i am quite impressed
If we italians don't help Italian audio companies who will do
I will ask for a suitable horn in the proper section
Thank you very much again for helping me in finding a way
94dB efficiency means that even a Cell phone could drive these big boys
A very green approach as well
I'm not an expert, but I guess that it's not only efficiency the driveability parameter regarding a phone amp, maybe impedance also does matter...
I have been a fan of British speakers all my life. Never looked at a measurement only listened, liked and bought it. After recommendations from audiophiles (something that was only introduced in later years) purchasing another culture's speakers at exorbitant prices they ended up in the garage only after a short while and my favorites reintroduced in my system. Interestingly most of the British speakers I enjoyed used KEF drive units apart from Richard Allen, B&W and Quad. One of my favorite past times was spent in demo rooms during lunch breaks. Most hi-fi dealers those days would accept a trade in which I became known for. My brother followed the same tendencies and we often swapped equipment for experiencing the other's choices and stuff. Those were the good old days of audio and photographic shops which was everywhere punting the brad names reviewed in hi-fi magazines.
My dad had a furniture shops with a h-fi section and always stocked some system that either my brother or I recommend him. Hi-fi was quite popular in the country since TV was only introduced in 1974
My dad had a furniture shops with a h-fi section and always stocked some system that either my brother or I recommend him. Hi-fi was quite popular in the country since TV was only introduced in 1974
Last edited:
yes it was a silly joke I do not know if true but someone says that small power amps can provide the best sound Like a small power class A ?
If this is true a speaker with high efficiency is very welcome
hi i have another question very general
I watched a video tour at the Harbeth company At a certain point the chief designer states that what provide the sound of a driver above all other things is the material of the cone
If true like i think this is an extremely important statement
I wonder if measurements that check the behaviour of cones do exist This is tricky i understand But impressive
Therefore cones with different sizes but same material could sound very similar in different ranges of the audio bandwidth
I watched a video tour at the Harbeth company At a certain point the chief designer states that what provide the sound of a driver above all other things is the material of the cone
If true like i think this is an extremely important statement
I wonder if measurements that check the behaviour of cones do exist This is tricky i understand But impressive
Therefore cones with different sizes but same material could sound very similar in different ranges of the audio bandwidth
A SET amp has a certain form of harmonic distortion that some like, but it's certainly not everybody's cup of tea. Most people like clean amps.
High sensitive speakers are more about headroom for most than to use with very low wattage amps. But it can be done and some do it. But i think that some headroom is crucial, so I drive my 98dB big fullrange speakers still with a 35w tube amp. It's not about going loud, it's about not driving your system to it's limits. If the amp does not have to work hard, it sounds a lot better.
I also plan to make a high sensitive (2way) speaker, but i probally will drive it with 75w clean class D amps most of the time, not with flea power. I'll probally use the Faital HF108 tweeter in an 18sound XT1086 horn and a Faital 10FE330 as woofer with crossover (start with MiniDSP, maybe later passive) arround 1000 to 1200Hz. But i'm still in the design phase so it can take a few years untill the speaker is playing...
High sensitive speakers are more about headroom for most than to use with very low wattage amps. But it can be done and some do it. But i think that some headroom is crucial, so I drive my 98dB big fullrange speakers still with a 35w tube amp. It's not about going loud, it's about not driving your system to it's limits. If the amp does not have to work hard, it sounds a lot better.
I also plan to make a high sensitive (2way) speaker, but i probally will drive it with 75w clean class D amps most of the time, not with flea power. I'll probally use the Faital HF108 tweeter in an 18sound XT1086 horn and a Faital 10FE330 as woofer with crossover (start with MiniDSP, maybe later passive) arround 1000 to 1200Hz. But i'm still in the design phase so it can take a few years untill the speaker is playing...
Dudley Harwood used Bextrene when he was with the BBC (1960 IIRC). That started a whole line of cone material development of which we were a (successful) part. I think he still uses unfilled Polypropylene while we used a 'filled' Homopolymer.
I gotta stress that though I've been heavily involved in fancy cone material development and achieved some success with engineered plastics ... UFM (ie paper) is still an excellent material for cones and reigns supreme above a sensitivity of about 90dB/2.83V @ 1m. The only disadvantage of paper is that it isn't as consistent.
You do this with a Scanned Laser Doppler instrument. We were the first to do this. Today, you can buy these beasts for loadsa $$$ but IM not so HO, I'm not sure many people know how to interpret what they see.
Yes. Also the shape and termination.
Last edited:
Hi thank you very much for your kind and extremely valuable reply
Very very interesting
I remember also a paper by Mr Lynn Olson where he was proposing the same material used to make PC floppy disk also for driver cones
Once nailed the material that could be forged in different sizes to cover the bandwidth
Speaking insted of shape imho the perfect shape is an inverted dome of different radius
I love it immensely
It just looks right to me
Very very interesting
I remember also a paper by Mr Lynn Olson where he was proposing the same material used to make PC floppy disk also for driver cones
Once nailed the material that could be forged in different sizes to cover the bandwidth
Speaking insted of shape imho the perfect shape is an inverted dome of different radius
I love it immensely
It just looks right to me