You're welcome!
Please let us know what specs you wind up with; can't have too many published specs, especially with the myriad changes vintage driver designs have been subject to over the decades.
Please let us know what specs you wind up with; can't have too many published specs, especially with the myriad changes vintage driver designs have been subject to over the decades.
Quick update here. The 604s are out of the house... likely permanently. I've been running Altec 416-8gb drivers in the ~6.3 cu ft 612/Iconic replica cabs, and while they do render a touch more midnass authority, I immediately missed the subtly of the 515ish LF section of the 604s in 620 cabs. They are not authoritative in the midbass or bass region, but do f3 to about 40hz in my room. Subjective difference in sound quality between the 416 in a 6.3 cu ft enclosure and 515-like driver in a 9 cu ft vented enclosure is virtually night and day. The 515b sounds better textured, more revealing, more nuanced, shows me to hear deeper into the recording, etc etc. They play surprisingly low and sound very linear doing it, but they retain a slight overall character of reticence in LF and midbass. Of that had a touch more heft, my search would be over.
So, unless I were to look at building big enclosures again (which I'd prefer not to) it looks like the 416 isn't going to be in the running. I'm looking at the JBL 2216nd-1 and TAD 1601a or 1603. This experience has given me some insight into the exorbitantly high prices for 515 drivers. They have a lithe quality in the mid bass that, once grown accustomed to, makes other, less sophisticated sounding drivers sound ham fisted by comparison.
All the above applies to 515 in 9 cu ft, and 416 in 6.3 cu ft. In this setup the 416 doesn't give the kind of extension or midbass punch it produces in the giant Model 19 cabs. I sold mine a while back.
I'm not even sure of there's a question here, just wanted to share this subjective experience and enclosure volume information. One caveat is that the 612s I've acquired probably do not have optimal vent area. Not sure how much revising the vent to ports might help. I think they are tuned higher than I would tune based on WinISD guidance - to the stock vent dimensions of the 612. Again, I needd to play around in WinISD, but I've been having trouble getting it to load the driver library upon install..
Actually, I do have a question.... are any of the drivers we've discussed capable of the fine texture retrieval and linear midbass down to 40hz, while doing so with a bit more authority than the 515, while not entirely giving up all the efficiency (I know I'd have to give some up)?
I'm in particular curious about the 2216, as I 'get' where JBL is coming from with this driver, but I've seen very little subjective impressions of the 2216 performance from 200-600hz.
None of you guys who've been around for a minute will be surprised to hear that the LF section of the 604 sounded markedly better crossed an octave below the 604-8g's 1600hz, and all my impressions above are of that driver crossed at 780. Significant performance improvements across the board.
So, short of acquiring a pair of 515b and resigning myself running them in 9+ cu ft cabs, is there any chance 2216 or early TAD drivers (or others), in vented 6.3 cu ft boxes will sound as good - or even better than the 515 in a 9 cu ft box?
The 612 enclosures I'm running were professionally made and construction reflects it. I may need to
go through and seal them thoroughly and look at what vent alignment is truly optimal for a given driver. I like the fact that these enclosures allow me to swap in/out baffles on a whim.
If my big limiting factor is the 6.2 cu ft enclosures, please tell me - might as well rip that bandaid off now. On the up side, my 6 year old daughter derisively described the 612 cabs today as "too small." One point for the good guys!
So, unless I were to look at building big enclosures again (which I'd prefer not to) it looks like the 416 isn't going to be in the running. I'm looking at the JBL 2216nd-1 and TAD 1601a or 1603. This experience has given me some insight into the exorbitantly high prices for 515 drivers. They have a lithe quality in the mid bass that, once grown accustomed to, makes other, less sophisticated sounding drivers sound ham fisted by comparison.
All the above applies to 515 in 9 cu ft, and 416 in 6.3 cu ft. In this setup the 416 doesn't give the kind of extension or midbass punch it produces in the giant Model 19 cabs. I sold mine a while back.
I'm not even sure of there's a question here, just wanted to share this subjective experience and enclosure volume information. One caveat is that the 612s I've acquired probably do not have optimal vent area. Not sure how much revising the vent to ports might help. I think they are tuned higher than I would tune based on WinISD guidance - to the stock vent dimensions of the 612. Again, I needd to play around in WinISD, but I've been having trouble getting it to load the driver library upon install..
Actually, I do have a question.... are any of the drivers we've discussed capable of the fine texture retrieval and linear midbass down to 40hz, while doing so with a bit more authority than the 515, while not entirely giving up all the efficiency (I know I'd have to give some up)?
I'm in particular curious about the 2216, as I 'get' where JBL is coming from with this driver, but I've seen very little subjective impressions of the 2216 performance from 200-600hz.
None of you guys who've been around for a minute will be surprised to hear that the LF section of the 604 sounded markedly better crossed an octave below the 604-8g's 1600hz, and all my impressions above are of that driver crossed at 780. Significant performance improvements across the board.
So, short of acquiring a pair of 515b and resigning myself running them in 9+ cu ft cabs, is there any chance 2216 or early TAD drivers (or others), in vented 6.3 cu ft boxes will sound as good - or even better than the 515 in a 9 cu ft box?
The 612 enclosures I'm running were professionally made and construction reflects it. I may need to
go through and seal them thoroughly and look at what vent alignment is truly optimal for a given driver. I like the fact that these enclosures allow me to swap in/out baffles on a whim.
If my big limiting factor is the 6.2 cu ft enclosures, please tell me - might as well rip that bandaid off now. On the up side, my 6 year old daughter derisively described the 612 cabs today as "too small." One point for the good guys!
Last edited:
Yeah, 'gonna' have to pry my cold, dead hands off to get my 515s!
If you think they 'resolve', etc., in 9 ft^3, try a Vb = Vas, Fb = Fs MLTL [measured specs] to allow them to properly 'breathe', better load the bottom end to ~416 'fullness'.
From some other comments; these type drivers with having really high HF BW, yet relatively low XO points [AKA horn drivers], it's because the pioneers learned that the lower the frequency, the wider its BW [i.e. DC = infinite BW], so to get max resolution, etc., the BW needs to extend to well above the XO point.
Again, no clue about modern consumer/prosound driver's wide range performance beyond comparing specs, HF BW. Altec, JBL, etc., were never cheap, so doubt there's going to be inexpensive 'clones' that perform as well.
Again, my limited experience with TAD is that they're more like JBL than Altec for better or worse. No longer have all my TAD data other than the 1601a in a 'classic' BR [Vb = Vas/1.44, Fb = Fs], so at 612's ~6.3 ft^3 it's a little cramped, but doable if you don't need its high power handling capability that dictates a large/long vent unless you don't mind it being on the outside. 😱
If you think they 'resolve', etc., in 9 ft^3, try a Vb = Vas, Fb = Fs MLTL [measured specs] to allow them to properly 'breathe', better load the bottom end to ~416 'fullness'.
From some other comments; these type drivers with having really high HF BW, yet relatively low XO points [AKA horn drivers], it's because the pioneers learned that the lower the frequency, the wider its BW [i.e. DC = infinite BW], so to get max resolution, etc., the BW needs to extend to well above the XO point.
Again, no clue about modern consumer/prosound driver's wide range performance beyond comparing specs, HF BW. Altec, JBL, etc., were never cheap, so doubt there's going to be inexpensive 'clones' that perform as well.
Again, my limited experience with TAD is that they're more like JBL than Altec for better or worse. No longer have all my TAD data other than the 1601a in a 'classic' BR [Vb = Vas/1.44, Fb = Fs], so at 612's ~6.3 ft^3 it's a little cramped, but doable if you don't need its high power handling capability that dictates a large/long vent unless you don't mind it being on the outside. 😱
Well I think you highlight the very compromise between these two woofers : bass extension vs midbass slam. And sadly, the way to improve these are horn loaded for better midbass slam or a very large volume for more bass extension. Another compromise for the 416 is cross them as low as you can (300 hz or lower) to let the compression driver do the job. Note that at these frequencies horn starts getting huge and heavy.
Hi, you can achieve bass extension by adding subs, as many as you can afford and fit. In this regard it feels silly to sacrifice anything for bass extension because there is easy way to add more. Sacrifice the low extension if you get better something else as return. If it has to be 2 way only, without subs, you just have to live with it. You already know all this, I'm trying to get your thinking clear so you can get going on with the project and have it finished 😉
Last edited:
Dear OP...regarding Acoustic Elegance drivers...though I did get shafted on the Q specs of my 16ohm 15m....the other specs are still impressive...the main issue it seems, is that the advertised specs are bloated out of proportion and unnecessarily, if you ask me....maybe the numbers represent the Apollo upgrade? We'll never know...my point is that the 15m might be worth looking into. Mms is low and that seems to be a factor in the other highly sought after designs. I think the cone shape is proper? And the phase plug/heatsink seems to be a smart idea. I cant imagine they developed such a good reputation solely on my experience.
My cabs are ~8cuft fyi
If I ever go for altec 604s, they should fit right in lol
My cabs are ~8cuft fyi
If I ever go for altec 604s, they should fit right in lol
Last edited:
I'm interested to know what you've got them in too GM.
Does anyone have experience with the new(er) GPA Classic Series 515c alnico drivers?
I's wager GM's are of the 'b' variety.
So I'm thinking about the 515... likely GPA, as the subtle mismatches that sometimes occur after (quality) rebuilds . I'm guesstimating something like 14-15 ft^3 is about as big as I could go in my room, if I were to go with larger enclosures for the 515.
GM - would a 14-15ft^3 (50% bump in enclosure volume vs 620) get me a worthwhile i.e., significant, obvious, mprovement over 9 ft^3 with a 515? I feel like they lacked juuuust a bit of presence in the 100-300hz range. I'm talking 3-4db. Even though they lacked a touch of mid bass, in a corner loaded arrangement they had outstanding linearly to 40hz.. surprisingly low.
Even despite the reticence in mid bass on the 515, which was most obvious, (e.g., in not being able to adequately resolve, say, an electric bass run mixed low and in the back of the mix), crossing them an octave lower than the 604s at 1600hz, I got gobs off additional information out of recordings I've long used as references. Better fine texture resolution, better articulation even than dual or single 414s, which I've run in the past and love. Far out of the league of the 416s I'm currently running.
Based on my recent comparision of the 416 va 515, my conclusions are:
1) I'd almost certainly want new GPA drivers (my 604s were reconed, and I've owned had Bill recone 416s in the past). Current 416b's are original, and sound a little rough to me.
2) 416 may be just fine in 9+ft^3 for lots of folks, but they're not standouts to me in 6.3 ft^3 cabs, and even in large boxes, I don't think they can be persuaded to do the finesse the 515 is capable of from 200-800hz in 9 ft^3. Maybe a different story in horns.
If I were to go 515, is FLH something I should be considering at this point, given my preference not to run subs (for now)?
Would Onken change any of the above enough to consider it? I know the 360L version was designed for the 416, but still. Any other enclosure types I should look at other than refrigerator boxes?
Thanks again-I'll reply to other posts tomorrow.
Does anyone have experience with the new(er) GPA Classic Series 515c alnico drivers?
I's wager GM's are of the 'b' variety.
So I'm thinking about the 515... likely GPA, as the subtle mismatches that sometimes occur after (quality) rebuilds . I'm guesstimating something like 14-15 ft^3 is about as big as I could go in my room, if I were to go with larger enclosures for the 515.
GM - would a 14-15ft^3 (50% bump in enclosure volume vs 620) get me a worthwhile i.e., significant, obvious, mprovement over 9 ft^3 with a 515? I feel like they lacked juuuust a bit of presence in the 100-300hz range. I'm talking 3-4db. Even though they lacked a touch of mid bass, in a corner loaded arrangement they had outstanding linearly to 40hz.. surprisingly low.
Even despite the reticence in mid bass on the 515, which was most obvious, (e.g., in not being able to adequately resolve, say, an electric bass run mixed low and in the back of the mix), crossing them an octave lower than the 604s at 1600hz, I got gobs off additional information out of recordings I've long used as references. Better fine texture resolution, better articulation even than dual or single 414s, which I've run in the past and love. Far out of the league of the 416s I'm currently running.
Based on my recent comparision of the 416 va 515, my conclusions are:
1) I'd almost certainly want new GPA drivers (my 604s were reconed, and I've owned had Bill recone 416s in the past). Current 416b's are original, and sound a little rough to me.
2) 416 may be just fine in 9+ft^3 for lots of folks, but they're not standouts to me in 6.3 ft^3 cabs, and even in large boxes, I don't think they can be persuaded to do the finesse the 515 is capable of from 200-800hz in 9 ft^3. Maybe a different story in horns.
If I were to go 515, is FLH something I should be considering at this point, given my preference not to run subs (for now)?
Would Onken change any of the above enough to consider it? I know the 360L version was designed for the 416, but still. Any other enclosure types I should look at other than refrigerator boxes?
Thanks again-I'll reply to other posts tomorrow.
It's funny because, before I started my thread and came across yours, I was dead set on AE drivers. I get your point about their reputation having to be based on something other than your experience. I had read several very favorable comparisons to some of the drivers we're discussing here. My hangups now are mainly: a) I lack the patience to wait that long for anything and b) your travails gave me some pause. Much of the main point for me in going with modern production drivers would be knowing exactly what you're going to get, and knowing that thing would be the same from unit to unit.
I haven't completely written them off. Used pairs come up for sale periodically. I'd be turned to jump on something like that. The only thing I could see myself waiting months for at this point in my life is a frame-off restoration of a '94 Land Cruiser. lol.
Speaking of waiting... how long did it take to get your JMLC horns? Just curious.
Interresting thread 🙂
I am today running a pair of corner placed 2-ways with a GPA 416 in a flow restricted 280l BR cabinet and a TD-4001 on a E-JMLC 300. It is very pleasing and have stayed a 2-way for over a year even though it was planned to become a full 4-way. I have in the past used both Altec 416 and 515 and i would say from memory of those units that tha GPA 416 lands somewhere inbetween the two Altecs. I have no experience of the GPA 515.
I can say that as it is now, the GPA 416 is NOT leaving my living room anytime soon 🙂 but I plan to give them a new home in the form of a corner variant of the 825/A7.
BR,
Anders
I am today running a pair of corner placed 2-ways with a GPA 416 in a flow restricted 280l BR cabinet and a TD-4001 on a E-JMLC 300. It is very pleasing and have stayed a 2-way for over a year even though it was planned to become a full 4-way. I have in the past used both Altec 416 and 515 and i would say from memory of those units that tha GPA 416 lands somewhere inbetween the two Altecs. I have no experience of the GPA 515.
I can say that as it is now, the GPA 416 is NOT leaving my living room anytime soon 🙂 but I plan to give them a new home in the form of a corner variant of the 825/A7.
BR,
Anders
Last edited:
Might be of interest ~ you may not know:
I know we’re talking about 15 inch drivers, but there are some very good 12 inch drivers’ quite comprehensive measurements
18 Sound 12NDA520
AE Speakers TD12M
B&C 12HPL76
Eminence Kappalite 3012HO
FaitalPRO 12PR300
GPA/Altec 414, 16 ohm
The GPA 414 certainly has a lot more distortion
And ~ four 15 inch drivers on another page
12" - drivervault
I know we’re talking about 15 inch drivers, but there are some very good 12 inch drivers’ quite comprehensive measurements
18 Sound 12NDA520
AE Speakers TD12M
B&C 12HPL76
Eminence Kappalite 3012HO
FaitalPRO 12PR300
GPA/Altec 414, 16 ohm
The GPA 414 certainly has a lot more distortion
And ~ four 15 inch drivers on another page
12" - drivervault
Attachments
Last edited:
The Onken 360 reputation is of a neutral bass charge. The 825 VOTT family are the best for low midrange because de short bass horn seems to allow a smooth blend with the compression driver up to 800hz. If you do not want refrigirator box, you will need to sacrifice efficiency or energy and définition in the bass region by incorporating a subwoofer under 100hz or so.
Last edited:
The only data point that I can offer ( re; the GPA 515c ) is Gary Dahl's opinion that it wasn't noticeably better ( I paraphrase here ) than the GPA 416-8B that he settled on ( he eventually put the 416 in a small, sealed box > & used an TD15X ? for bass underneath the GPA ).
Read Gary Dahl in POST 11056 ( if the link goes astray ).
His original opinion found in POST 10964
🙂
I really appreciate this succinct description of the Onken's sonics, sans hyperbole. The good-sized Altec 620 cabs have been out of my house for less than a week, and I've already come back around to the virtues of larger boxes.
Great points here, and you're right, I was aware. Still, I'm attracted to the simplicity of a two way. I think my biggest mistake from the outset was thinking that by moving to modern designs I have a better chance of breaking Hoffman's Iron Law.
Your post had me laughing... it reminded me of the scene in the American movie 'Airplane.' You know... the one where all the airplane passengers all line up to, um, 'encourage' their hysterical fellow passenger to "get ahold of herself." 😀
This is fantastic information I wasn't aware of before EarlK. Thanks very much. Based on my limited listening experience, if I can't have both in the same driver, something between the 416 and 515 is exactly what I'm shooting for.
Just wanted to take a sec and say thanks to everyone for sharing such insightful and helpful information, thoughts and data.
I keep meaning to say this - or better - put it in my signature line, but please forgive my constant egregious typos. I'm 100% on mobile and for some reason my phone's autocorrect settings act all wonky on this site's comments field. That plus a 4 month old at home has made for some awesomely bad responses, so mea culpa.
I keep meaning to say this - or better - put it in my signature line, but please forgive my constant egregious typos. I'm 100% on mobile and for some reason my phone's autocorrect settings act all wonky on this site's comments field. That plus a 4 month old at home has made for some awesomely bad responses, so mea culpa.