So for the xover illiterate can anyone point out the specific changes. I had complete xovers built for the MFC. and I might consider the ULD and am curious how many parts I'd have to swap out of the xovers. I'll try to decifer on my own but like I said, pretty clueless on this stuff.
Edit...after looking at that post its pretty clear what's happening. Where are the US builders getting their Purifi drivers?
Last edited:
So if I'm reading your post correctly going from MFC to ULD is a pretty much a complete overhaul if all the magenta values change and R5 R5 C5 need to be added. I'm going to pull my xovers out of the cardboard box they've been in for two years and see if I can decipher things. Thanks Allen.
Back on September 18 I reported my experimentation with changing the drivers in my MK6 Elsinores.
I changed all the mid/woofers to SB Acoustics SB17NBAC35-8 drivers. Then I replaced the ScanSpeak D2608 tweeter with the SB Acoustics SB26CDC-C000-4/Ceramic dome tweeters. While refining my crossovers to suit the new drivers I lowered the tweeter crossover point from the original 6kHz down to 2.5kHz.
For the last week I have had my good friend Sean's original MK6 Elsinores next to my modified Elsinores for a direct side by side listening comparison.
With the external crossovers it was relatively easy to compare the different tweeter drivers with the different mid and bass mid/woofers.
Yes the original SB17NRXC35-8 mid/woofer are slightly more efficient than my "new" SB17NBAC35-8 drivers, but the difference is small.
From what I heard it was clear that the SB Acoustics SB26CDC-C000-4 tweeter has quite noticeably less distortion that the original ScanSpeak D2608 tweeter.
Added to this the SB17NBAC35-8 mid/woofer drivers have less distortion in my listening tests than the original SB17NRXC35-8 mid/woofer drivers.
All in all I am very pleased my upgraded Elsinores, making my great speakers even better.
I changed all the mid/woofers to SB Acoustics SB17NBAC35-8 drivers. Then I replaced the ScanSpeak D2608 tweeter with the SB Acoustics SB26CDC-C000-4/Ceramic dome tweeters. While refining my crossovers to suit the new drivers I lowered the tweeter crossover point from the original 6kHz down to 2.5kHz.
For the last week I have had my good friend Sean's original MK6 Elsinores next to my modified Elsinores for a direct side by side listening comparison.
With the external crossovers it was relatively easy to compare the different tweeter drivers with the different mid and bass mid/woofers.
Yes the original SB17NRXC35-8 mid/woofer are slightly more efficient than my "new" SB17NBAC35-8 drivers, but the difference is small.
From what I heard it was clear that the SB Acoustics SB26CDC-C000-4 tweeter has quite noticeably less distortion that the original ScanSpeak D2608 tweeter.
Added to this the SB17NBAC35-8 mid/woofer drivers have less distortion in my listening tests than the original SB17NRXC35-8 mid/woofer drivers.
All in all I am very pleased my upgraded Elsinores, making my great speakers even better.
this side by side comparison was very interesting to be present for as the comparison was not subtle. in general the ScanSpeak D2608 had a noticeably harsher sound than the SB Acoustics SB26CDC-C000-4, it was very obvious to me every time we changed them around in different combinations. i'll be getting a pair of SB Acoustics SB26CDC-C000-4 for my setup asap. i built my Elsinores while working in the uk and brought them back with me and just got them out of the box before this test they're working well, they were built to spec mk6. the change of tweeters is a must after this comparisonBack on September 18 I reported my experimentation with changing the drivers in my MK6 Elsinores.
I changed all the mid/woofers to SB Acoustics SB17NBAC35-8 drivers. Then I replaced the ScanSpeak D2608 tweeter with the SB Acoustics SB26CDC-C000-4/Ceramic dome tweeters. While refining my crossovers to suit the new drivers I lowered the tweeter crossover point from the original 6kHz down to 2.5kHz.
For the last week I have had my good friend Sean's original MK6 Elsinores next to my modified Elsinores for a direct side by side listening comparison.
View attachment 1106251
With the external crossovers it was relatively easy to compare the different tweeter drivers with the different mid and bass mid/woofers.
Yes the original SB17NRXC35-8 mid/woofer are slightly more efficient than my "new" SB17NBAC35-8 drivers, but the difference is small.
From what I heard it was clear that the SB Acoustics SB26CDC-C000-4 tweeter has quite noticeably less distortion that the original ScanSpeak D2608 tweeter.
Added to this the SB17NBAC35-8 mid/woofer drivers have less distortion in my listening tests than the original SB17NRXC35-8 mid/woofer drivers.
All in all I am very pleased my upgraded Elsinores, making my great speakers even better.
Thanks again to Sean for loaning his MK6's to me for a week.
I don't have any saved measurements to share at the moment, but they will come in the future.
Yes, the SB Acoustics SB26CDC-C000-4 tweeters are surprising good and VERY affordable,
This change has been well worth it
All the best
Steve
I don't have any saved measurements to share at the moment, but they will come in the future.
Yes, the SB Acoustics SB26CDC-C000-4 tweeters are surprising good and VERY affordable,
This change has been well worth it
All the best
Steve
My Mother warned me not to get into DIY. But I did not listen... sigh.
Just a few corrections, the crossover is not 6KHz and describing the D2608 as 'harsher' is bewildering to me. For some reason, that tweeter is seen as some kind of weakness and for some time has been under constant pressure as not to be good enough. Sorry, but I don't accept that. If the price tag had been higher it might have been more acceptable? The D2608 might well feel that it is being persecuted, so many have been after it.
Brian Gurr is in Auckland, New Zealand. He was a long-time President of the Auckland Audio Society for many years and heard all sorts of high-end systems with the usual crop of high-end brands costing up to $100.000 plus price tags. He also had a few goes about the tweeter ("try a Beryllium dome tweeter") and the ones he had heard in these expensive speakers. Brian has also built and rebuilt electro-static speakers and high frequencies are important to him. Then about two months ago he called me and told me he had changed his mind after hearing the Elsinore Mk6 in the best system he had ever heard and it made him change his mind, now he wants me to stick with the tweeter after all.
This has been going on for years now. So...
Anybody feel free to visit and listen to this:
NOTE THE BASE:
If you are going to use the ULD drivers, you need to now look very carefully at what you are putting them on. Brian in Auckland has also looked at this very carefully and applied it to the standard MK-6 with SB drivers.
I will have a bit more to say on that very shortly.
So when the above pictures were taken, I decided to measure the ULD Elsinores using 1/6th Octave pink noise using the Clio system. The Clio system may be considered old-tooth but it is still very current (you can still buy new) and I have spoken to speaker designers around the world that are using it for design work. It is certainly preferable to its rival, the MLSSA system from DRA Labs.
But I also spent some time seeing what kind of result I could get with my two SVS SB3000 Subs. This model occupies a sweet spot in the SVS range and is quite a performer. It is preferable to have twin SB3000 Subs than a single and more expensive SB4000 - even SVS say that themselves.
Again the Clio system was invaluable to setting up and integrating the two Subs, both of which are behind the Elsinore ULDs and you can make out the left one in the darker area.
The first with the integrated Subs:
Here is without Subs:
We can see that with the twin SVS SB3000 Subs, the response in the room is flat down to 20 Hertz. The slight elevation between 20Hz to 30Hz is following the advice of Earl Geddes and needed because at these frequencies rooms tend to leak bass. I recall he suggests 5-6dB boost.
Finally, let us look at both together:
We can see that the Subs are creating minimal interference above 40Hz.
Please note that the microphone was an Earthworks M30 measurement mic and one that is highly recommended by Clio (Audiomatica) themselves as it works very well with the +24V phantom supplied by the Clio box. The mic can handle up to +48V.
Two separate independent Pink Noise signals (dual-mono) were sent to the speakers, the microphone was at the listening position, almost a near perfect triangle, and right on the height of the tweeter, which at the listening position was near 15 degrees off-axis.
So how does it sound? First of all, the measurements above are in the room where I listen to them. What they show is what reaches my ears. The room has a wide range of absorption, reflection, and most importantly, diffusion. The best ears I know (and maybe the best on the planet) is Phil Punch of Electric Avenu Studios and he says that he hears a slight bass bloom on the left side, but overall this room is well above average. The one anomaly could be fixed by hanging a curtain of the right stuff there, but that is not an option because then we would have no door. But when I went over to "the Base" that seems less obvious... more later.
So how does it sound?
Actually pretty much like it looks. The peaks and troughs largely average out, everything seems to be in balance (I am BIG on balance). Particularly pleasing is above 1KHz, but here a good room should not have too much of an effect. The biggest problems are always going to be under 1KHz and that is what we see. Still, The peaks at 45Hz and 130Hz and the trough at 300Hz, this is the room imposing itself (so-to-speak) on the speaker.
There ain't no harshness there!!!
Maybe it needs something?
THE BASE!
The next post will be about "The Base" that the ULD speakers sit on. Oh dear, do they make a difference? If you have spent a lot of money on ULD drivers, then I am afraid you are going to spend some more money there. It really does clean up the sound and you have gone so far and not gotten everything that the ULD drivers can offer.
So let me prepare another post with the details.
Oh, what about the Subs? Since I can turn them on/off while listening, to both music and pink noise, they don't really announce themselves, hardly at all. The extension of the Elsinores is already pretty significant and we are only augmenting the bass extension, so for the most, you don't really have that great a need for them. Unless you seek out tracks with near 20Hz content, then it seems to cut in seamlessly and can certainly pressurise the room. The bass is very clean, on both note and tone, but most of the time you just don't hear the Subs. Again, if anybody wants to drop in, and then maybe even then report later here, I would be happy about that.
Cheers, Joe
PS: I must make a quick comment of the SB Acoustics SB17NBAC35-8 - this driver is of the 'hard' cone variety, the ULD and SB17MFC drivers are of the 'soft' kind, the ULD being fibres and the MFC being a polycone. If you are using the NRX version, that is fibres and also 'soft' cone variety.
Can the SB Acoustics SB17NBAC35-8 be used as an alternative? Generally, I would say no, but if there is one 'hard' cone that you might get away with it, then the NBAC might be the one. Most drivers of this kind I would not look at, but let us look at the NBAC and the affect at around 4-10KHz range, the area that are a problem with harder cones, some can be rather violent cone behaviour:
OK... I do see something...?
Ignore the on axis (Blue) response. Look at the Green 30 degrees off axis response. The Elsinores were always designed to be listened off-axis. If this was to become an Elsinore Mk7, then I would need to do the work. That would require a lot of work, but what I see with this driver is that some kind of network centered around 7-8KHz would be needed, and then see how things hang together. Will this be a 2023 project? We shall see. I have a suitable pair of naked MDF boxes, but need $1500 Australian to get started. We shall see, but if it has to be done, it has to be done properly. Keep in mind, they are less sensitive speakers! But their load on the amp will still be sweet as honey pie.
I will have a discussion with Steve and see where this might be going.
Just a few corrections, the crossover is not 6KHz and describing the D2608 as 'harsher' is bewildering to me. For some reason, that tweeter is seen as some kind of weakness and for some time has been under constant pressure as not to be good enough. Sorry, but I don't accept that. If the price tag had been higher it might have been more acceptable? The D2608 might well feel that it is being persecuted, so many have been after it.
Brian Gurr is in Auckland, New Zealand. He was a long-time President of the Auckland Audio Society for many years and heard all sorts of high-end systems with the usual crop of high-end brands costing up to $100.000 plus price tags. He also had a few goes about the tweeter ("try a Beryllium dome tweeter") and the ones he had heard in these expensive speakers. Brian has also built and rebuilt electro-static speakers and high frequencies are important to him. Then about two months ago he called me and told me he had changed his mind after hearing the Elsinore Mk6 in the best system he had ever heard and it made him change his mind, now he wants me to stick with the tweeter after all.
This has been going on for years now. So...
Anybody feel free to visit and listen to this:
NOTE THE BASE:
If you are going to use the ULD drivers, you need to now look very carefully at what you are putting them on. Brian in Auckland has also looked at this very carefully and applied it to the standard MK-6 with SB drivers.
I will have a bit more to say on that very shortly.
So when the above pictures were taken, I decided to measure the ULD Elsinores using 1/6th Octave pink noise using the Clio system. The Clio system may be considered old-tooth but it is still very current (you can still buy new) and I have spoken to speaker designers around the world that are using it for design work. It is certainly preferable to its rival, the MLSSA system from DRA Labs.
But I also spent some time seeing what kind of result I could get with my two SVS SB3000 Subs. This model occupies a sweet spot in the SVS range and is quite a performer. It is preferable to have twin SB3000 Subs than a single and more expensive SB4000 - even SVS say that themselves.
Again the Clio system was invaluable to setting up and integrating the two Subs, both of which are behind the Elsinore ULDs and you can make out the left one in the darker area.
The first with the integrated Subs:
Here is without Subs:
We can see that with the twin SVS SB3000 Subs, the response in the room is flat down to 20 Hertz. The slight elevation between 20Hz to 30Hz is following the advice of Earl Geddes and needed because at these frequencies rooms tend to leak bass. I recall he suggests 5-6dB boost.
Finally, let us look at both together:
We can see that the Subs are creating minimal interference above 40Hz.
Please note that the microphone was an Earthworks M30 measurement mic and one that is highly recommended by Clio (Audiomatica) themselves as it works very well with the +24V phantom supplied by the Clio box. The mic can handle up to +48V.
Two separate independent Pink Noise signals (dual-mono) were sent to the speakers, the microphone was at the listening position, almost a near perfect triangle, and right on the height of the tweeter, which at the listening position was near 15 degrees off-axis.
So how does it sound? First of all, the measurements above are in the room where I listen to them. What they show is what reaches my ears. The room has a wide range of absorption, reflection, and most importantly, diffusion. The best ears I know (and maybe the best on the planet) is Phil Punch of Electric Avenu Studios and he says that he hears a slight bass bloom on the left side, but overall this room is well above average. The one anomaly could be fixed by hanging a curtain of the right stuff there, but that is not an option because then we would have no door. But when I went over to "the Base" that seems less obvious... more later.
So how does it sound?
Actually pretty much like it looks. The peaks and troughs largely average out, everything seems to be in balance (I am BIG on balance). Particularly pleasing is above 1KHz, but here a good room should not have too much of an effect. The biggest problems are always going to be under 1KHz and that is what we see. Still, The peaks at 45Hz and 130Hz and the trough at 300Hz, this is the room imposing itself (so-to-speak) on the speaker.
There ain't no harshness there!!!
Maybe it needs something?
THE BASE!
The next post will be about "The Base" that the ULD speakers sit on. Oh dear, do they make a difference? If you have spent a lot of money on ULD drivers, then I am afraid you are going to spend some more money there. It really does clean up the sound and you have gone so far and not gotten everything that the ULD drivers can offer.
So let me prepare another post with the details.
Oh, what about the Subs? Since I can turn them on/off while listening, to both music and pink noise, they don't really announce themselves, hardly at all. The extension of the Elsinores is already pretty significant and we are only augmenting the bass extension, so for the most, you don't really have that great a need for them. Unless you seek out tracks with near 20Hz content, then it seems to cut in seamlessly and can certainly pressurise the room. The bass is very clean, on both note and tone, but most of the time you just don't hear the Subs. Again, if anybody wants to drop in, and then maybe even then report later here, I would be happy about that.
Cheers, Joe
PS: I must make a quick comment of the SB Acoustics SB17NBAC35-8 - this driver is of the 'hard' cone variety, the ULD and SB17MFC drivers are of the 'soft' kind, the ULD being fibres and the MFC being a polycone. If you are using the NRX version, that is fibres and also 'soft' cone variety.
Can the SB Acoustics SB17NBAC35-8 be used as an alternative? Generally, I would say no, but if there is one 'hard' cone that you might get away with it, then the NBAC might be the one. Most drivers of this kind I would not look at, but let us look at the NBAC and the affect at around 4-10KHz range, the area that are a problem with harder cones, some can be rather violent cone behaviour:
OK... I do see something...?
Ignore the on axis (Blue) response. Look at the Green 30 degrees off axis response. The Elsinores were always designed to be listened off-axis. If this was to become an Elsinore Mk7, then I would need to do the work. That would require a lot of work, but what I see with this driver is that some kind of network centered around 7-8KHz would be needed, and then see how things hang together. Will this be a 2023 project? We shall see. I have a suitable pair of naked MDF boxes, but need $1500 Australian to get started. We shall see, but if it has to be done, it has to be done properly. Keep in mind, they are less sensitive speakers! But their load on the amp will still be sweet as honey pie.
I will have a discussion with Steve and see where this might be going.
Attachments
Last edited:
One of the graphs that shows both with and without Subs went missing, so here it is:
Black is with twin Subs and Red is without.
Any mention of Elsinore Mk-7 with 'hard' cones is speculatory at this stage. It does not mean that it will be intended as better than Mk-6 or indeed we might call it Elsinore Mk-6 "NBAC" version instead. In that case we will have "ULD" version on top and then three variations of SB Acoustics drivers, the old discontinued driver "NRX" and the current polycone "MFC" and finally a hard cone version "NBAC" and possibly a change in tweeter?
Black is with twin Subs and Red is without.
Any mention of Elsinore Mk-7 with 'hard' cones is speculatory at this stage. It does not mean that it will be intended as better than Mk-6 or indeed we might call it Elsinore Mk-6 "NBAC" version instead. In that case we will have "ULD" version on top and then three variations of SB Acoustics drivers, the old discontinued driver "NRX" and the current polycone "MFC" and finally a hard cone version "NBAC" and possibly a change in tweeter?
Last edited:
I have been sitting on a complete kit for about 2 years now. Its a complete kit with assembled and upgraded xovers, tweeters, MFC drivers, wave guides, ports. I had it sold and backed out on @Mikerodrig27 who was very gracious and has moved onto his own kit). But we're moving in the spring and don't see the build happening. I won't clutter this thread beyond this but if anyone is looking for a turn key kit sans boxes you'll find it here in the swap meet.
Elsinore MFC Kit
Any questions just PM me. I take care of Paypal, you take care of shipping. Will meet within a reasonable distance from southwest Missouri. Will consider splitting the kit but would rather just let it go all at once. Apologies if inappropriate for this thread and if requested I will delete the post.
Elsinore MFC Kit
Any questions just PM me. I take care of Paypal, you take care of shipping. Will meet within a reasonable distance from southwest Missouri. Will consider splitting the kit but would rather just let it go all at once. Apologies if inappropriate for this thread and if requested I will delete the post.
I have ordered samples (2) and should have them sometime this week.
What is interesting is the near lack of near 30KHz major resonance/peak you get often from 'hard' dome tweeters. There is still something happening in the 25-40KHz area, but no great upwards peaks above the regular passband, or frequencies below 20KHz.
Please note, the relatively low cost of this tweeter is neither here nor there to me. And this time I didn't choose it.
The phase shield does a good job of suppressing it on axis but off axis it can be seen around 26 to 27KHz in the plain aluminium version in Hificompass's measurements.
That does seem to be the case, I too looked at another SB tweeter that uses it, the aluminium SB26ADC.
I have had a pair of SB26ADC -C000-4 tweeters for a couple of weeks.
I have measured them attached to a a flat piece of plywood and attached to a VISATON WG220 x 150 wave guide.
The SB26ADC -C000-4 tweeters are nice tweeters.
My preference is a little less on axis peaking of the on axis tweeter response of the 2608 tweeter. They do sound nice. I do have a pair with the cone waveguides attached.
The sweet spot to sit gets wider with Controlled or Constant Directivity waveguides. If there is on axis peaking, that peaking also shows up in the 10, 20, 30 ..... degree off axis measurements as well
It is my impression that that we personally can get used to something and develop a preference.
What is not included in much of the conversation here is the need for waveguides to smooth the the transition of wide directivity of the tweeter with the narrowing directivity of the mid-woofer at the crossover frequency.
Thanks DT
As an update most of this kit is sold. The crossovers are still available. These have upgraded components recommended by one of the members. I'll post a few pics so folks who might be interested in the easy button on this build.
Well, the D2608 sounds like a modern electrostat with a back-chamber: "Clear and Crispy" and a bit over-damped.
Basically a change to another good dome tweeter will result in a modest change of "flavor", but I don't think the result (overall) could be described as "better".
I think certain dome tweeter substitutes could provide "smoother" and perhaps present a bit more depth of field, but in many instances would end-up with slightly less perceived detail.