Welcome to the bright future of active loudspeaker electronics.
I wonder what specific parts failed in that ps. I would first consider repairing that myself, and once I was sure of not being able to do that for whatever reason, I'd consider a passive version of it.
Abbot Review, Hi-Fi Choice, May 1993 | Royd Audio Loudspeakers
I bought a pair of these recently and mostly dislike them. They have first class build and parts. I suspect the mechanical box Q is the problem. One can see the 1 kHz peak. I like Royd speakers, Socerers especially. This is an attempt to use other make bass units. Not a great sucesss.
My next move is to use an old Quad 303 with active crossover to the bass mid.
These speakers can have very nice moments. To be married to them it needs more.
I put a thin sheet of toilet paper over the tweeter. It is actually doing good! It's not anything like it should be. I am also using 172 uH 0.15 ohms aircored to the bass mid. That seems to do what I want. The tweeter out of phase is nice but boring. The designer had a tough time. Royd Apex before this design was nicer and sometimes best of it's price range. Rega Ela was a version. I doubt the bass loading is the problem. I have a mains filter. I even thought that might cause a problem here. It's a nice problem if it does.
The speakers lack space and depth. That seems to be mechanical. Wrong Q?
I bought a pair of these recently and mostly dislike them. They have first class build and parts. I suspect the mechanical box Q is the problem. One can see the 1 kHz peak. I like Royd speakers, Socerers especially. This is an attempt to use other make bass units. Not a great sucesss.
My next move is to use an old Quad 303 with active crossover to the bass mid.
These speakers can have very nice moments. To be married to them it needs more.
I put a thin sheet of toilet paper over the tweeter. It is actually doing good! It's not anything like it should be. I am also using 172 uH 0.15 ohms aircored to the bass mid. That seems to do what I want. The tweeter out of phase is nice but boring. The designer had a tough time. Royd Apex before this design was nicer and sometimes best of it's price range. Rega Ela was a version. I doubt the bass loading is the problem. I have a mains filter. I even thought that might cause a problem here. It's a nice problem if it does.
The speakers lack space and depth. That seems to be mechanical. Wrong Q?
I have worked harder on this over the weekend and found some improvements that are for most people using too much knowlegde they could not have. Like asking a vet to be a doctor and expecting it to be easy. I was a hi fi repairman for 23 years. A Vet if you like. In hi fi one learns the hi fi like a dog can be very important. I am the worst for that and no different. I don't think valves do it better. I would if being lazy.
Reverse phasing the tweeter was on retesting almost an answer ( no extra choke ). Boring but nice. BBC speakers can be boring. Linn Kan is a less boring one with obvious colourtions. Some Kans ( mk99 perhaps ? ) almsot do it all.
I am using a slightly modified NAD 3020 and soon you will see why. Like the VW Golf GTi mk1 it is good enough and your granny can drive it. The mods were mostly dried up caps I upgraded. Panasonic FCs are cheap and good. I down sized the PSU from 4 x 2200 uF to 4 x 1250 uF 63V ( 8 amps ripple rating, 4+4 ). This was because it would be sweeter and good enough. It sounds very fast. Bass is fine and maybe better. The NAD having no Re to the transistor outputs can swing current. 192W transient 1 ohm.
The NAD has a LAB input ( less HF filtering ). This gamble worked. Almost a complete answer. Less harsh and brighter. You can never tell if this will work as the speaker designer may have already done this. This is where Active and Passive may never be the same. DSP can make it totally different as DSP can do any pahse shift you like. Passive is never 180 degrees. Tweeters either adds or subtracts near the crossover frequency if tweeter distancing is OK. DSP active and old style active are not the same.
At this point the NAD starts to be a real high end amp as it guesses all the problems and solves them like a butler might. I have had a few high end amps to try in my work. NAD 3020, made of junk, but not junk. The Proton version is very different using better parts. Sad to know that. It's not tonal. Again it's boring and a bit thin.
The NAD allows inserion of a passive notch filter between pre and power. On the whole this is good ( Royd has a 1 kHz defect ). I must do some tweaking to make it more accurate. Twin T if asking. Try passive, it won't be as easy as active. It is if possible a more direct signal path. The NAD impedances are tricky.
One of the bigger upgrades would be to use two NADs. One pre and one power. Slightly more hi fi without being too much. Like a Meridian amp on a budget.
On reflection to convert an active speaker to passive whould be needing a lot of luck. Funny thing is I would be jealsous of this sound I now have if someone else had it.
Garrard 401/Hadcock GH228/ DL110/ Own pre amp ( active + passive )/ Arcam Alpha + / Sony ST3950/ NAD3020 mk1. I have a hunch the Royd man didn't finish the design. I have 3 felt pads on each bass mid near the outer edge and have loosened the screws to try to reduce energy reflection ( it is a nice free lunch ). The box is non reasonant but harsh. I have that 80 % cured.
Hope someone finds this useful. I did.
Reverse phasing the tweeter was on retesting almost an answer ( no extra choke ). Boring but nice. BBC speakers can be boring. Linn Kan is a less boring one with obvious colourtions. Some Kans ( mk99 perhaps ? ) almsot do it all.
I am using a slightly modified NAD 3020 and soon you will see why. Like the VW Golf GTi mk1 it is good enough and your granny can drive it. The mods were mostly dried up caps I upgraded. Panasonic FCs are cheap and good. I down sized the PSU from 4 x 2200 uF to 4 x 1250 uF 63V ( 8 amps ripple rating, 4+4 ). This was because it would be sweeter and good enough. It sounds very fast. Bass is fine and maybe better. The NAD having no Re to the transistor outputs can swing current. 192W transient 1 ohm.
The NAD has a LAB input ( less HF filtering ). This gamble worked. Almost a complete answer. Less harsh and brighter. You can never tell if this will work as the speaker designer may have already done this. This is where Active and Passive may never be the same. DSP can make it totally different as DSP can do any pahse shift you like. Passive is never 180 degrees. Tweeters either adds or subtracts near the crossover frequency if tweeter distancing is OK. DSP active and old style active are not the same.
At this point the NAD starts to be a real high end amp as it guesses all the problems and solves them like a butler might. I have had a few high end amps to try in my work. NAD 3020, made of junk, but not junk. The Proton version is very different using better parts. Sad to know that. It's not tonal. Again it's boring and a bit thin.
The NAD allows inserion of a passive notch filter between pre and power. On the whole this is good ( Royd has a 1 kHz defect ). I must do some tweaking to make it more accurate. Twin T if asking. Try passive, it won't be as easy as active. It is if possible a more direct signal path. The NAD impedances are tricky.
One of the bigger upgrades would be to use two NADs. One pre and one power. Slightly more hi fi without being too much. Like a Meridian amp on a budget.
On reflection to convert an active speaker to passive whould be needing a lot of luck. Funny thing is I would be jealsous of this sound I now have if someone else had it.
Garrard 401/Hadcock GH228/ DL110/ Own pre amp ( active + passive )/ Arcam Alpha + / Sony ST3950/ NAD3020 mk1. I have a hunch the Royd man didn't finish the design. I have 3 felt pads on each bass mid near the outer edge and have loosened the screws to try to reduce energy reflection ( it is a nice free lunch ). The box is non reasonant but harsh. I have that 80 % cured.
Hope someone finds this useful. I did.
I guess like music it's the sum of the parts. Beethoven and Mahler. Same place, same musicians. The Beethoven sounds warm, deep and has a stereo only Disney understood. The Mahler is like a CD. Sometimes something like that says Mahler is hi fi and Beethoven music. I think a good hi fi can show this. The BBC radio 3 is sounding good again in this way.
Some weeks Pink Floyd, others Beethoven. 888 ( 808 ? )State and Messiaen. 808 State - Pacific 97 (original) - YouTube
I have some Magnepans the NAD can be butler with. Mostly 4 ohms resistive. SMGa's. I use a thin cable ( 0.6 mm ). It is helpful to have a small resistance. The impedance is 150 ohms 200 kHz measured by L and C. It is constant voltage drive almost. Like ideal active if so. However a cleaner signal path. The sound is sublime but with a very narrow HF window. Livable. The Royd is a wide window.
My Sharp TV computer monitor is a HK design. Very nice tweeters. Silk!
Some weeks Pink Floyd, others Beethoven. 888 ( 808 ? )State and Messiaen. 808 State - Pacific 97 (original) - YouTube
I have some Magnepans the NAD can be butler with. Mostly 4 ohms resistive. SMGa's. I use a thin cable ( 0.6 mm ). It is helpful to have a small resistance. The impedance is 150 ohms 200 kHz measured by L and C. It is constant voltage drive almost. Like ideal active if so. However a cleaner signal path. The sound is sublime but with a very narrow HF window. Livable. The Royd is a wide window.
My Sharp TV computer monitor is a HK design. Very nice tweeters. Silk!
Last edited: