You've convinced me Chris. Wait just a minute while I ask my wife!
scuttled again, eh mate? Oh well, it never hurts to ask. A year or so ago my wife was the one to tell me that I needed a bigger screen TV downstairs - of course that meant she ended up with the 42” in her bedroom, so it was a win/win - much harder to accomplish after 45 yrs than one might hope.
As for the parting out of drivers from old NS1000s, while there may be “better” drivers available today - certainly some at lower prices - the upside would be that unless the existing crossovers have been hacked, they - or proven updates such as Troels’- would make for a much simpler restoration. Of course, all of this is assuming the beryllium units are undamaged, and that restoration is the intent.
To be fair I don't view them as quite the curate's egg that some do. Mine has the Yam tweeters disconnected and a pair of RAALS sat on top of them. Coincidentally the RAALs require exactly the same values for the XO as the Yamaha tweeters do, and of course the RAALs don't drop off that cliff at 15khz. My only wish is for a little more depth and detail bottom, but that's what DSP subs are for...
Can you share a part RAAL part numbers for your tweeters? I may consider swapping the original tweeters.
I can't speak from personal experience, but clearly your highly negative opinion about Raal tweeters is clearly in the minority based on what many, many people have said about their listening experiences. The most prevalent comment is that the Raal tweeters simply disappear by making no sonic "comments" of their own, just letting the music flow with no distortion or other negative attributes.
Paul
Paul
Wouldn't call it highly negative but it is just a ribbon with the same shortcomings of any other ribbon. I use one myself as a supertweeter, a job they are very, very well suited for.
I'm used to be in the minority, happens all the time.
As for listening experiences they are just anecdotes unless backed up with measurements.
I'm used to be in the minority, happens all the time.
As for listening experiences they are just anecdotes unless backed up with measurements.
Woofer suggestions for Yamaha Ns 1000
Hi,
Welcome to the Yamaha Ns 1000 Club. The Cabinet of these speakers are rock solid and I would say dont trouble them until they are in unsuable condition. Few days back there was a slip in the magnets of my Yamaha Ns 1000 and I tried reading forums to get the best replacement( I dont prefer the originals since they are used and available in market but cant invest on 40 years old stuff). If you prefer to replace the woofer go with long reading and analysis found few Eminence and Cerwin 12'' woofers fit exactly to the Original Box.But I prefer to have some hifi speakers and not PA so ordered for Dayton DC300 8 Woofers from parts express and waiting for Delivery. I shall post my impressions once I get hold of the woofers.
In case the Box are in usable condition, pls use the above drivers and in case you like to build new box pick the driver
SB Acoustics SB34NRX75-6 driver Which is recommended in many forums.
Note: These are 40 years old speakers hence the magnet glue could have lost its stuff, so carefully remove the drivers and mount them without physical shock.
Hi,
Welcome to the Yamaha Ns 1000 Club. The Cabinet of these speakers are rock solid and I would say dont trouble them until they are in unsuable condition. Few days back there was a slip in the magnets of my Yamaha Ns 1000 and I tried reading forums to get the best replacement( I dont prefer the originals since they are used and available in market but cant invest on 40 years old stuff). If you prefer to replace the woofer go with long reading and analysis found few Eminence and Cerwin 12'' woofers fit exactly to the Original Box.But I prefer to have some hifi speakers and not PA so ordered for Dayton DC300 8 Woofers from parts express and waiting for Delivery. I shall post my impressions once I get hold of the woofers.
In case the Box are in usable condition, pls use the above drivers and in case you like to build new box pick the driver
SB Acoustics SB34NRX75-6 driver Which is recommended in many forums.
Note: These are 40 years old speakers hence the magnet glue could have lost its stuff, so carefully remove the drivers and mount them without physical shock.
Unfortunately I don't have the original boxes (or fortunately). I have a transmission line box that is about 3X or 4X the volume of the original NS1000M that I would like to keep. Thanks for reminding me about the old glue in those drivers. I was going to give them a bit of a shake up to remove midrange and tweeter drivers. I thought only woofers had this problem though.
BTW I've had the speakers relocated from my garage to my music room. They are sitting on 14" wood blocks right now to get the tweeters/midrange closer to ear axis. New binding posts are on order. Currently I am using different speaker wire (my main speakers are tri-wired). The speakers sound really good and simply amazing considering the price I paid for them. They have very nice warm sound that blends in easily with my subs. No port chuffing or other bass reflex anamolies. I haven't done measurerements yet (but listening to some test tones) they do not dig deep enough to exercise my main room modes. I can listen to them for hours without fatigue. There are a few complains though:
a) they simply do not disappear like my Energy Veritas V2.8 do. They do not image that well. Right now I have them with tweeters closer to me, but I believe they sounded better with tweeters closer to outer edge (the way I had them setup initially). Perhaps this will be cured when I place midrange and tweeter in skinny baffle.
b) they don't have the same dynamic slam like Energy. I can play Energy at ridiculous levels without hearing any struggle what so ever. These guys simply cannot handle the same amount of power thrown at them (not that critical to me though).
c) they don't have much up top. Basically tweeter doesn't have much output above 15.5kHz. So there is definitely a miss there. This is likely the biggest shortcoming. Perhaps adding a second tweeter would be wise or trying another tweeter. I am open for all kinds of ideas.
d) they are not very resolving. Perhaps using better speaker wire or twi-wiring them would improve this...
BTW I've had the speakers relocated from my garage to my music room. They are sitting on 14" wood blocks right now to get the tweeters/midrange closer to ear axis. New binding posts are on order. Currently I am using different speaker wire (my main speakers are tri-wired). The speakers sound really good and simply amazing considering the price I paid for them. They have very nice warm sound that blends in easily with my subs. No port chuffing or other bass reflex anamolies. I haven't done measurerements yet (but listening to some test tones) they do not dig deep enough to exercise my main room modes. I can listen to them for hours without fatigue. There are a few complains though:
a) they simply do not disappear like my Energy Veritas V2.8 do. They do not image that well. Right now I have them with tweeters closer to me, but I believe they sounded better with tweeters closer to outer edge (the way I had them setup initially). Perhaps this will be cured when I place midrange and tweeter in skinny baffle.
b) they don't have the same dynamic slam like Energy. I can play Energy at ridiculous levels without hearing any struggle what so ever. These guys simply cannot handle the same amount of power thrown at them (not that critical to me though).
c) they don't have much up top. Basically tweeter doesn't have much output above 15.5kHz. So there is definitely a miss there. This is likely the biggest shortcoming. Perhaps adding a second tweeter would be wise or trying another tweeter. I am open for all kinds of ideas.
d) they are not very resolving. Perhaps using better speaker wire or twi-wiring them would improve this...
Yeap. It looks like this
And the line is filled up with
acoustic material.
I can provide measurements.
And the line is filled up with
acoustic material.
I can provide measurements.
Thank you Dave. What would be a good program to model performance of new driver for this particular enclosure?
I found this site mh-audio.nl - Announcement
Last edited:
The info at MH-audio is a skimmed down version of classic TL design which typically yields a very substandard line.
Martin King’s MathCAD worksheets are the gold standard (but hard to get ahold of, he has a Yahoo discussion site), but HornResp and Leonard Audio’s TL software are also useful.
dave
Martin King’s MathCAD worksheets are the gold standard (but hard to get ahold of, he has a Yahoo discussion site), but HornResp and Leonard Audio’s TL software are also useful.
dave
Yes...I seem to recall posting a TL alignment, but Google failed me, so from dim memory it's very high Vas, Qts, so were in the 400-500 L range/actual Fs tuning, which was low 20s.
For acoustically small cabs then, very lossy such as open back, stuffed to 'taste'.
GM
I assume you are referring to this thread on audio asylum
Here is c/p
"Anyhow, the T/S parameters are there for the RS Poly woofer that Immediately preceeded the ones you have the 40-1026A which would have been a mid-late 90s model. The statistics you do have look pretty close--the FR is exactly the same, so my hunch is that the T/S parameters are pretty close between the 40-1026A and 40-1034 and we might reasonably be able to use the 1026A numbers. Here are the stats on both. 12" Polypropylene Cone (400-1026A) Specifications Faxback Doc. # 15876 Woofer
The 1034 appears to be a 1026A with only minor tweaking to handle a little more power. Out of this the number that is most critical is the Qts or "Total" Q which in large measure determines the optimal enclosure volume."
Here is c/p
"Anyhow, the T/S parameters are there for the RS Poly woofer that Immediately preceeded the ones you have the 40-1026A which would have been a mid-late 90s model. The statistics you do have look pretty close--the FR is exactly the same, so my hunch is that the T/S parameters are pretty close between the 40-1026A and 40-1034 and we might reasonably be able to use the 1026A numbers. Here are the stats on both. 12" Polypropylene Cone (400-1026A) Specifications Faxback Doc. # 15876 Woofer
Code:
Nominal Impedance:...................................................8 ohms
Frequency Response:.........................................30 Hz - 3000 Hz
Free Air Resonance (Fs) Frequency:....................................25 Hz
Infinite Baffle Resonance Frequency:..................................23 Hz
Piston Area (SD):.................................................0.0523 m2
Rated Power Input - Nominal:...........................................50 W RMS
Thermal Power Limit (PMAX):.......................................100 W
Flux Density (BL):..................................................6.66 TM
DC Voice Coil Resistance (RE, ohms):...............................5.6 ohms
Voice Coil Inductance (LVC at 1 kHz):...............................0.45 mH
SPL:......................................................88 +/- 2 dB/1W/1m
Moving Mass (Mms):...................................................61.5 g
Electrical Q Factor (QES):.............................................1.13
Mechanical Q Factor (QMS):.............................................3.13
Total Q Factor:........................................................0.83
Equivalent Acoustic Volume (VAS):..................................297.19 I
Mechanical Suspension Compliance (CMS, UM/N):......................766 UM/N
Mechanical Mass of Cone Assembly and Free Air Load:.................61.46 g
Mechanical Mass of Cone Assembly Only:..............................54.59 g
Peak-to-Peak (maximum) Linear Excursion:............................2.90 mm
Cutout:...............................................10 1/4 Inches/28.5 cm
Depth:.................................................5 1/4 Inches/14.3 cm
Power Handling:................................................50 Watts RMS
Magnet Weight:......................................................17.7 oz
Speaker Weight:.....................................................72.9 oz
12 Inch Polypropylene Woofer (400-1034) Specifications Faxback Doc. # 60536
Impedance: ........................................................ 8 Ohms
Frequency Response: ........................................ 30 - 3,000 Hz
Free Air Resonance: ................................................ 30 Hz
Power Handling: ............................................. 75 Watts RMS
Input Power: ......................................... 150 Watts (Maximum)
Sensitivity: ........................................... 88 +/- 2 dB/1w/1m
Cone Material: ............................................. Polypropylene
Dimensions (HWD): 5-5/16 x 12-3/16 x 12-3/16 Inches (15 x 31.1 x 31.1 cm)
Magnet Weight: .......................................... 17.8 ozs (504 g)
Speaker Weight: .......................................... 71.8 ozs (2 kg)
Specifications are typical; individual units might vary. Specifications are subject to change and improvement without notice.I did join that discussion group on yahoo a few weeks ago. Though haven't much chance to dig through...
Doesn't look/read like it's mine, plus IIRC it was most likely on the HT forum [long gone now] where DIY in general and tube subs in particular really flourished for numerous years and where a couple of DIYers picked clean mine and a few others brains, then 'disappeared' to the AVS forum to become SVS.
Anyway, your link just opens this thread in a new tab nor could find this particular one at AA, though did find a similar one on the Pi Speaker Forum: AudioRoundTable.com: Pi Speakers >> RatShack 40-1034 Sub
GM
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.