Vintage Tannoys with their very low Qts do not perform well in sealed cabs.
Make excellent mids in a 3way though...
Hi I have a pair of Tannoy Monitor Gold 15" which I am just going to fit into a pair of Berkeley cabs just for development purposes - 97 litre and tuned to about 30Hz Long term plan is to have a pair of 220litre reflex cabs which are about as big as I can manage. Half built at the moment...
The suggested 300 litre cabinet for the Monitor Gold 15 is fairly well explained in the 44bx Tannoy website
url=http://www.44bx.com/tannoy/garner1.html]Tannoy Monitor Gold Cabinets[/url]
A good collection of pics of the Pass Imperial back loaded horns here "Клуб любителей Tannoy" - номер страницы 145 - Hi-Fi.ru
And info on the Jensen Imperial Jensen Imperial
I have heard Tannoy Monitors in back loaded horns before - Very impressive!
The suggested 300 litre cabinet for the Monitor Gold 15 is fairly well explained in the 44bx Tannoy website
url=http://www.44bx.com/tannoy/garner1.html]Tannoy Monitor Gold Cabinets[/url]
A good collection of pics of the Pass Imperial back loaded horns here "Клуб любителей Tannoy" - номер страницы 145 - Hi-Fi.ru
And info on the Jensen Imperial Jensen Imperial
I have heard Tannoy Monitors in back loaded horns before - Very impressive!
Sim suggests ~30 litre damped box will give you a 2-pole butterworth HP at 85 Hz. Adding helper woofers is gonna give you the best mids.
dave
Attachments
Well, the pioneers concluded that Vas/1.44 was the optimal compliance balance and due to driving them with a high output impedance, tuning was always to Fs, so ~335-340 L based on a couple of different specs and guessing the 300 L cab spec is an average of the various models available at the time.
Max flat sealed/0.707 Qtc is tiny at ~51 L, so a ~48 Hz F6. If driven with a matching impedance though, it swells to ~300 L/25 Hz F6 with Qtc dropping to 0.5 transient perfect as the performance perk.
At the 300+ size, a well damped MLTL has proven to be a nice trade-off between vented, sealed WRT the 'fast'/'tight', etc., bass response required for a good match-up with compression horns and with such a low Fs/Fb, the ultimately faster roll off down below tuning will be moot even if playing pipe organ symphonies if tuned to ~16 Hz. Such alignments tend to blend well with room gain to boot.
GM
I have to say I struggled to get the HPD 385s sounding right in my medium sized room despite trying a range of cabinet sizes and tunings.I think they suit a bigger lossy sort of room.The Gold 15s in a 270 litre box,the Gold 12 in a 150 litre box and a pair of Cheviots [HPD315s] all worked well in the same room.The HPD 385s always sounded boomy.
Perhaps using them in a smaller sealed box and adding a woofer/sub might be the best option but I also think that the midrange of the Tannoy drivers sounds best when they are in a large box .You might gain tighter bass and lose some of the magic in the midrange.
I also agree they sound best in simple and lossy 18/19mm ply box.I have tried them in 25mm MDF boxes and they were not as good. I would also not recommend the back loaded horn.I tried a GRF Rectangle horn and it sounded terrible-all that negative phase coming out of the horn mouth screws everything up and the horn loading just emphasises mid bass.
Perhaps using them in a smaller sealed box and adding a woofer/sub might be the best option but I also think that the midrange of the Tannoy drivers sounds best when they are in a large box .You might gain tighter bass and lose some of the magic in the midrange.
I also agree they sound best in simple and lossy 18/19mm ply box.I have tried them in 25mm MDF boxes and they were not as good. I would also not recommend the back loaded horn.I tried a GRF Rectangle horn and it sounded terrible-all that negative phase coming out of the horn mouth screws everything up and the horn loading just emphasises mid bass.
Last edited:
Didn't have them tuned low enough and if tuning < ~Fs makes it worse, then start damping the vent and/or just 'stuff a sock in it' to completely seal it off, so either way still ideally requires a 300+ L cab to maximize efficiency down into the room's gain curve.
Of course if the room is acoustically 'tiny' relative to the speaker's roll off response, i.e. has a 1st room mode [longest dimension] < ~565 ft/~55 Hz = ~ 10 Ft, then shrinking the cab while sealed or tuned to Fs is the way to go.
As you can see, short of mapping the room's modes, best to go acoustically large and tuned to 'taste' in room rather than maybe winding up 'short' when too small a cab for the app is used.
GM
Of course if the room is acoustically 'tiny' relative to the speaker's roll off response, i.e. has a 1st room mode [longest dimension] < ~565 ft/~55 Hz = ~ 10 Ft, then shrinking the cab while sealed or tuned to Fs is the way to go.
As you can see, short of mapping the room's modes, best to go acoustically large and tuned to 'taste' in room rather than maybe winding up 'short' when too small a cab for the app is used.
GM
Naww disagree... the 'fish' is correct.. Tannoy's rectangular horn boxes are simply a Poor sounding / Pi** poor contraption.
Fairly widely accepted review as well. Fanboys notwithstanding
Sadly..been there tried that one myself.. 'horns' being a timeless Siren
:
Nothing actually fixed their poor one note, not quite deep enough to be bass output..
Lots of careful work wasted and the things proved much lesser than a simple stoopid temporary BR box..
A frustrating detour is understatement.
Fairly widely accepted review as well. Fanboys notwithstanding
Sadly..been there tried that one myself.. 'horns' being a timeless Siren
:Nothing actually fixed their poor one note, not quite deep enough to be bass output..
Lots of careful work wasted and the things proved much lesser than a simple stoopid temporary BR box..
A frustrating detour is understatement.
Last edited:
Actually do it. You might learn something. I have no idea how one quantifies "midrange magic" but based upon my actual experience of doing it, you lose nothing, only gain benefits. Why anyone would want the midbass in a coax cone baffles me.
Well in my experience the worst thing you can do to the midrange of Tannoys is put them in a box which is too small-or even technically optimal.To me they sound best in an oversized box in which the box Q is greater than 0.7.[more like 1 seems to be good].It is difficult to describe the difference but in general terms you get a more relaxed,easy ,calm presentation which enhances musical engagement.Smaller boxes and they sound a bit PA-like.
I had friend with Gold 15s who did that and used an active bass cutting in at about 70Hz but I much preferred the sound in a cheap meranti ply 300 litre Onken style box.
I built boxes in which the back could be removed and sand bags added to change the box volume .Reducing the box volume seemed to result in a less enjoyable sound .
Last edited:
Well we can disagree on some of the finer points but I think the bottom line is that if you love Tannoys then you probably have far more insight into what makes great music great than the average audiophile.
And if you want something as musically communicative [maybe even more so] in a smaller box /room then Toshiba SS 30s are what you want.Wonderful sounding things but missing the bottom octave.I know a bloke who used an Audionote Ongaku with them.
+1
Historically, a pristine [flat response/phase, 'uncolored'] telephone BW [250-2500 Hz], so XOs limited to ~125/5 kHz, though Altec kept rewriting it in their 'Architecture and Engineering Specifications' as required based on the speaker system going out for bids, though 800-3000 Hz is the narrowest I can recall ATM with 500-2500 Hz the most common.
+1 unless the horn is large enough to go low enough to make it viable.
GM
Not of the big HPD boxes. Here is the 12” Gold in Tan-Ken.
The XOs on these were never refurbished, and that held them back. Bass is very good.
dave
Beautiful! Thanks for posting. I have a pair of MG15. They are sort of a long term project. I've built a crossover that is getting close to good. Next step is re-coning them... Have the original spec cones from Lockhart, just need to do it. I have tried them in their original lancaster cabinets with backs removed, out from the wall, as per the suggestion of a Tannoy enthusiast. There is a surprising amount of bass. I've also crossed them over with a B5 to some other woofers, and it seemed to enhance the detail of the mid range. No plans to make giant cabinets for them - I'd rather just add a pair of woofers.
Had the exact same horrible boxes, and drivers at one stage.
Stick the HPDs in about 40L sealed. Add in a good pro 18" pro driver in it's own (sub) enclosure. Actively cross at about 200Hz.
Actually been there done this and it's a vast improvement over stock.
Not of the big HPD boxes. Here is the 12” Gold in Tan-Ken.
The XOs on these were never refurbished, and that held them back. Bass is very good.
dave
Beautiful, but do you have any plans? I am going to be building new enclosures for these, as well as transmission line enclosures for my bottom end. (2x10" and 2x12")
I have full access to a woodworker's shop (evanfabrick on instagram, Evan Fabrick (@evanfabrick) • Instagram photos and videos ) and the talent of said Evan for anything I can dream up. So wild not mild is the build for this one...
Also looking for an updated XO kit/parts list. I am pretty handy with a soldering iron. (Was an electrician for 8 years, have worked as an audio engineer for the past 19)
My objectives are to (1) get the best sound quality possible and (2) have them finished by the most talented person I know where wood is concerned.
Size, WAF and money are not a concern (I'm not about to waste it though)
Thank you for all the advise.
Warm regards,
Nicholas J. G. Papai
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.