I know this is a difficult question but what are the sound differences between the Markaudio Alpair 10M and 10P?
My intention is to put them in a properly tuned bass reflex cabinet, but then again there is probably not so much difference in the low end.
My amplifier is an Ortofon KS601.
Thanks,
Jens.
My intention is to put them in a properly tuned bass reflex cabinet, but then again there is probably not so much difference in the low end.
My amplifier is an Ortofon KS601.
Thanks,
Jens.
The metal cone is capable of going a bit lower than the paper cone. The biggest differences are really in the top thou, with the paper cone having a more vintage top end. The paper about 2.5 dB more sensitive than the metal.
The metal does need some serious break-in to become its best, and at that point it really is a case of 6 of one, half-dozen of the other.
My personal preference is for the paper by a tiny bit, and i seems too of those who come over for a listen.
The amplifier a PP EL84?
dave
The metal does need some serious break-in to become its best, and at that point it really is a case of 6 of one, half-dozen of the other.
My personal preference is for the paper by a tiny bit, and i seems too of those who come over for a listen.
The amplifier a PP EL84?
dave
Thanks Dave,
Another unit I have thought of is the Fostex 165WK. How does that compare to the Markaudio Alpair 6"?
My Ortofon is PP 6963.
It has been sitting on the shelf for years and I think I better replace all the electrolytics before firing it up. Bit of a shame though, since it for the most have the original Jensen Capacitor caps.
Jens.
Another unit I have thought of is the Fostex 165WK. How does that compare to the Markaudio Alpair 6"?
My Ortofon is PP 6963.
It has been sitting on the shelf for years and I think I better replace all the electrolytics before firing it up. Bit of a shame though, since it for the most have the original Jensen Capacitor caps.
Jens.
We constructed a trio of XLs - for both flavors of the Alpair10 as well as the FF165WK. As Dave noted, the Fostex's characteristic tonality and dynamic "jump" factor might be a better choice for rock'n'roll - of which I don't consume much by choice these days. I find it harder to choose between the two Alpairs in this design, but would maybe give the paper the slight edge.
Would you mind to share your impression of 10P vs 10M? I am facing the same dilemma, though I am considering sealed enclosures. Thanks!
mudihan,
My impressions in a few words - the 10.3M has more pronounced treble, highs sound more extended and prominent to my ears; whereas with the 10P, the mid-range sounds a bit more prominent, with softer highs. In a similar (ported) enclosure, the Alpair 10.3M will probably have slightly more extension.
My impressions in a few words - the 10.3M has more pronounced treble, highs sound more extended and prominent to my ears; whereas with the 10P, the mid-range sounds a bit more prominent, with softer highs. In a similar (ported) enclosure, the Alpair 10.3M will probably have slightly more extension.
Thank you! Definition wise, would you say they are at the same level, but just of different presentation, or would you say that 10.3M can actually convey more information? Thanks again!
Tough call, and this will probably be affected by listener/user preference... however because of the brighter top, I feel that most folks would tend to hear more detail with the Alpair 10.3. But I might be mistaken.
mudihan - having heard most of the MA drivers over the past decade or so, I’d be inclined to concur with Zia. While individual hearing acuity - my own affected by a combination of age (67 next month) and years of industrial noise exposure- and listening preferences will vary, I think most folks would definitely find more detail from the metals. Neither may look perfect on paper, but I find them eminently musical, and to refer to another current conversation, the A10.3 in Pensils are a pretty nice speaker. In fact I’m currently running a pair of those as front L&R mains in my 7.1 system - all MA drivers except for the subs.
We have done a comparison of the Eikona with the new Alpair 11ms, and ENABLed A10.3.
It is hard to pick a winner between the A10.3eN and the Eikona, the treated MA driver delivering the best imaging/soundstage, the Eikona doing some other things better.
But the new A11ms design is better yet. I expect its imaging will jump ahead of the A10.3eN, but i am waiting for my batch of A11ms/A7ms to arrive before EnABLing them.
While it may not move as much air, the A7ms — on paper — looks to be even better than the A11ms, with a tiny bit better lower bass extention (in a miniOnken at least). I am ploting how to swap out the A7.3eN in my Ellipsa WAW with A7mSeN. A really thick foam gasket should do the job.
It is unfortunate that Ted Jordan is not around to jump back into the lead.
dve
It is hard to pick a winner between the A10.3eN and the Eikona, the treated MA driver delivering the best imaging/soundstage, the Eikona doing some other things better.
But the new A11ms design is better yet. I expect its imaging will jump ahead of the A10.3eN, but i am waiting for my batch of A11ms/A7ms to arrive before EnABLing them.
While it may not move as much air, the A7ms — on paper — looks to be even better than the A11ms, with a tiny bit better lower bass extention (in a miniOnken at least). I am ploting how to swap out the A7.3eN in my Ellipsa WAW with A7mSeN. A really thick foam gasket should do the job.
It is unfortunate that Ted Jordan is not around to jump back into the lead.
dve
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.