Hi
i have always been intrigued by the idea to mod and possibly improved decent commercial units. I see building from the scratch much more challenging.
I have one question that has remained unanswered in the Multi-way forum.
I have a pair of old Tannoy 611 speakers, here below depicted
from the specifications i see that in Tannoy they have decided to cross the 8" woofer with the 8" DC at 400 Hz.
I wonder if this is really the best choice
I ask this because i see many 3 ways with cone mid and 1st cut placed at around 150 Hz, lower than in the 611.
I have also a pair of 609 mk II (that uses the same DC as the only driver ) and i prefer the sound from them ... strange isn't it ?
I find the sound coming from the two drivers in the 611 a little disconnected ... like not omogeneous/continuous.
Any opinion would be welcome and appreciated.
Thanks and regards, gino
i have always been intrigued by the idea to mod and possibly improved decent commercial units. I see building from the scratch much more challenging.
I have one question that has remained unanswered in the Multi-way forum.
I have a pair of old Tannoy 611 speakers, here below depicted
from the specifications i see that in Tannoy they have decided to cross the 8" woofer with the 8" DC at 400 Hz.
I wonder if this is really the best choice
I ask this because i see many 3 ways with cone mid and 1st cut placed at around 150 Hz, lower than in the 611.
I have also a pair of 609 mk II (that uses the same DC as the only driver ) and i prefer the sound from them ... strange isn't it ?
I find the sound coming from the two drivers in the 611 a little disconnected ... like not omogeneous/continuous.
Any opinion would be welcome and appreciated.
Thanks and regards, gino
Last edited:
Is the DC driver also HP filtered at 400 Hz? If not, they may be adding in the woofer at that frequency to counteract the baffle step? (Actually, that might work even with the HP filter, if levels & slopes were done correctly...)
-- Jim
Hi and thanks for the helpful reply and i see your point
You mean that also the DC could be full range ?
I do not know precisely ... i will try a sweep only on the DC (there is a biwiring option). I will report after that.
Thanks for the hint, gino
Hi and actually not. I have not run any measurement.
But i prefer the sound from the simpler 609 that have only the same DC without the woofer. It seems to me that the additional woofer in the 611 is not very well integrated with the sound of the DC.
But maybe as you say it is just an impression. I have to try a sweep separately on the woofer and on the DC.
I have also the feeling that a better woofer would help a lot. A really serious 10" for instance (even if this would mean to build another cabinet completely).
That would be very very interesting.
I have always in mind loudspeaker like this one ...
the driver on the top is a coaxial like the DC
Thanks a lot, gino
Last edited:
I just found the schematic for the xover. Sort of standard setup where both bass drivers do bass, and one of them xovered higher also does mid. As Jim mentioned a form of BSC.
Tannoy 611
Tannoy 611
They can most likely be improved..the trick is realizing the difference between a subjective improvement, like giving them a bass bump or more midrange presence..and an objective improvement, like improving driver integration and phase, which you'd probably need measure - tweak - measure - tweak to get right.
The latter, you'd have to be sure the R&D you're prepared to invest exceeds what Tannoy originally did, which may or may not be worth it, considering the absolute sea of high quality drivers available for homebrew.
The latter, you'd have to be sure the R&D you're prepared to invest exceeds what Tannoy originally did, which may or may not be worth it, considering the absolute sea of high quality drivers available for homebrew.
Hi and yes again. You are very right.
But i have this feeling that something is not ok ... maybe it is only what i eat 🙄
No seriously. I like the simpler 609 quite better.
Actually i like the 609 better in general ... i love this little speaker deeply.
I am not sure to understand rightly ... what means BSC ?
Badly Sorted-out Concept ?
What is your opinion ? would you do differently ?
Personally i do not like this arrangement.
I would prefer a real 3 ways and it can be done
i guess. In general i do not like different drivers emitting the same freq.
To each its own 😱
If only i would be better at wood works i know what i had to do.
Sat + bass ... would be a killer combination.
Thanks a lot again, gino
They can most likely be improved .. the trick is realizing the difference between a subjective improvement, like giving them a bass bump or more midrange presence..and an objective improvement, like improving driver integration and phase, which you'd probably need measure - tweak - measure - tweak to get right.
The latter, you'd have to be sure the R&D you're prepared to invest exceeds what Tannoy originally did, which may or may not be worth it, considering the absolute sea of high quality drivers available for homebrew.
Hi and thanks a lot for the very helpful advice
I cannot help but notice that for the best speakers like the Kingdom Royal Tannoy has decided for a different solution, with a real woofer completing the range in the low
i like this solution better. Of course there is no need of this kind of drivers.
Just an honest 10" ... something able to deal with the 50-150 range
It would be a killer speaker.
Thanks again, gino
They`ve crossed them at 400Hz with BSC in mind (very probable) and to restrict the cone movement of the upper DC unit as its cone profile also acts like a waveguide for the tweeter outlet. Those units have light polycones that can be used very high (with a Chebyshev function), I still have a pair somewhere around which I bought from ebay for testing purposes.
You can change their sound, but improvement I think may come only from fortifying the cabinets and changing the crossover components with higher quality ones.
You can change their sound, but improvement I think may come only from fortifying the cabinets and changing the crossover components with higher quality ones.
Hi and thanks a lot indeed for the very kind and valuable advice.
I love the coaxial driver concept in general and so also Tannoys.
I would like to try to explain the reason of my ramblings.
First i know of this old rule that 4 is the number of conventional drivers needed to cover the whole freq range: low, mid low, mid and high.
On this basis a 3 ways is always a compromise.
Then i saw a lecture of the very famous Mr. Joseph D'Appolito mentioning how important is the midrange in a speaker. I am attaching the link to the lecture
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5qBl-r0zao
Unfortunately he forgot to mention what midrange is. I mean which freq range the midrange covers.
Assuming that it extends from 150 to 2000 Hz the idea would be to reproduce it with just one driver, i.e. the woofer part of the DC.
Leaving the range from 150 down to the woofer.
But i am sure that a mod on the cabinets would be extremely beneficial.
The walls are very thin and the material cheap.
Maybe some stiffening and some damping could make wonders.
Thanks again and kind regards, gino
Ginetto, BSC stands for baffle step compensation. It is needed because the baffle supports (reinforces) frequencies above a certain cut-off point, which is determined by the baffle width. The bass frequencies are radiated in full space, but the frequencies above that cut of point only radiate in half space (simply put, obviously it slowly transitions from full space to half space and even tighter as you progress in frequency).
For that reason, you want more sound output at the lower frequencies than at the frequencies where the loudspeaker starts to beam, this in order to get a flat frequency response on axis.
The way Tannoy accomplished this with this loudspeaker is the textbook way to do it, although it is difficult to judge at a distance and without measurements if they did it right.
Now, the problem is that 'if they did it right' means different things under different circumstances. For example, if a speaker is placed close to hard surfaces, the bass driver does not radiate in full space, since much of its output is reflected and in phase, so the bass frequencies are reinforced. In such a situation, the BSC designed into the speaker may be too much, and the speaker may become bass heavy. Conversely, a loudspeaker designed with some room reinforcement in mind, but operated on a high stand far from walls may become bass light.
In other words, it is impossible to design a BSC that works under all circumstances. Fortunately, some amplifiers have tone controls, so in that case it can be remedied easily. Otherwise, you would have to modify the crossover, but again, you need careful measurements before jumping to that.
For that reason, you want more sound output at the lower frequencies than at the frequencies where the loudspeaker starts to beam, this in order to get a flat frequency response on axis.
The way Tannoy accomplished this with this loudspeaker is the textbook way to do it, although it is difficult to judge at a distance and without measurements if they did it right.
Now, the problem is that 'if they did it right' means different things under different circumstances. For example, if a speaker is placed close to hard surfaces, the bass driver does not radiate in full space, since much of its output is reflected and in phase, so the bass frequencies are reinforced. In such a situation, the BSC designed into the speaker may be too much, and the speaker may become bass heavy. Conversely, a loudspeaker designed with some room reinforcement in mind, but operated on a high stand far from walls may become bass light.
In other words, it is impossible to design a BSC that works under all circumstances. Fortunately, some amplifiers have tone controls, so in that case it can be remedied easily. Otherwise, you would have to modify the crossover, but again, you need careful measurements before jumping to that.
Hi and thanks a lot for the very helpful advice.
I see clearly now. They are very room-dependent speakers, more than other designs.
As i said i have also the 609 (made using just the DC) that i prefer overall.
Maybe they are more room-friendly ? I love Tannoy DCs in general.
I think that the driver can be a very good corner stone for a nice DIY project. I would like to be able to build a box like the Tannoy grey monitors ... DTM, DMT, NFM ... amazing quality.
but this needs a lot of skill.
Thanks a lot again, gino
Gino,
Tannoy indeed made some very nice speakers. Presently, I am putting new surrounds on my K3838's, which have been serving me very well for over two decades now.
It's a big job, but the drivers are more than worth it.
Good luck with your projects!
Tannoy indeed made some very nice speakers. Presently, I am putting new surrounds on my K3838's, which have been serving me very well for over two decades now.
It's a big job, but the drivers are more than worth it.
Good luck with your projects!
Improving speakers
As a previous poster already said, you can improve the crossover components and make modifications to the box to reduce sound transmission and reduce resonances (a perfect speaker would only have sound transmission from the drivers). Both of these adjustments can have a significant improvement to a speaker.
I would try using an application to speaker drivers called enABLe which was "invented" by Bud Purvine. This technique can be used on the speaker boxes as well.
Of course, the placement of the speakers in the room and room treatments which are designed for this particular speaker's radiation pattern will also have a huge effect.
Retsel
As a previous poster already said, you can improve the crossover components and make modifications to the box to reduce sound transmission and reduce resonances (a perfect speaker would only have sound transmission from the drivers). Both of these adjustments can have a significant improvement to a speaker.
I would try using an application to speaker drivers called enABLe which was "invented" by Bud Purvine. This technique can be used on the speaker boxes as well.
Of course, the placement of the speakers in the room and room treatments which are designed for this particular speaker's radiation pattern will also have a huge effect.
Retsel
Hi,
EnABL is pure and utter nonsense, but mostly harmless,
that should never be used on any decent speaker or drivers.
rgds, sreten.
EnABL is pure and utter nonsense, but mostly harmless,
that should never be used on any decent speaker or drivers.
rgds, sreten.
About enABLe...
"EnABL is pure and utter nonsense, but mostly harmless,
that should never be used on any decent speaker or drivers."
Have you heard speakers treated with enABLe versus ones without?
I had the chance to borrow a pair of Lowther DX4 speakers treated with enABLe (for months on end) and compared them to a pair without; the differences are stunning, with the enABLed pair much clearer and with better tone. There are many testamonials by audiophiles who rave about the benefits of enABLe. The only real debate I see is how does it have the effect that it does.
Retsel
"EnABL is pure and utter nonsense, but mostly harmless,
that should never be used on any decent speaker or drivers."
Have you heard speakers treated with enABLe versus ones without?
I had the chance to borrow a pair of Lowther DX4 speakers treated with enABLe (for months on end) and compared them to a pair without; the differences are stunning, with the enABLed pair much clearer and with better tone. There are many testamonials by audiophiles who rave about the benefits of enABLe. The only real debate I see is how does it have the effect that it does.
Retsel
Hi,
The world of EnaBL is full of ridiculous claims and no methodology.
Its utterly useless for normal commercial speakers.
Improving Lowthers is a different kettle of fish, as they
are so bad it can't be that hard to get an improvement.
As you admit you have no idea how it works, and
no-one really does, (except the basic "operation"
as described by BudP is nonsense), so it is an
apply and hope for the best scenario. There is
no method to the madness and it has set back
modding drivers to the superstitious Dark Ages.
rgds, sreten.
The world of EnaBL is full of ridiculous claims and no methodology.
Its utterly useless for normal commercial speakers.
Improving Lowthers is a different kettle of fish, as they
are so bad it can't be that hard to get an improvement.
As you admit you have no idea how it works, and
no-one really does, (except the basic "operation"
as described by BudP is nonsense), so it is an
apply and hope for the best scenario. There is
no method to the madness and it has set back
modding drivers to the superstitious Dark Ages.
rgds, sreten.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.