I've heard Magneplanars, and loved the sound. They take a lot of power. Not SET friendly at all. If they were, I'd buy a pair in a heartbeat. SET amps do limit the speaker options considerably. They must be very efficient, preferably horns.
The Audio Equipment Corner
- Thread starter NW-Bound
- Start date
My last stereo preamp was two small custom made boxes with switched audiophile resistors, pure passive. Very nice.
ERD50
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Yes, that would be nice as well. That is what I planned to do, maybe with a simple FET class A stage as a buffer, or maybe 3 to 6 db gain for low signal sources.
But once again, procrastination paid off, and this DAC with volume control suits me very well.
-ERD50
OP
OP
NW-Bound
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2008
- Messages
- 35,712
The flatness of the amp is no longer a problem, now that I figure out how to set it up right. At 6Hz, you can watch the woofer cone moving without making any sound. Very cool!
Anyway, I had to look up SET to see what it means. Now, the simplicity of something like that makes sense. I can quite understand the allure of getting nice room-filling sound from a single tube like that 2A3 driving a highly efficient speaker.
But part of this would be for nostalgic reasons, you guys have got to admit. I grew up playing with tubes too, starting when I was 12 or 13, before switching to transistors for my projects. However, I have no fond memories of tube audio amps, and please let me tell further.
In the early 60s, the audio equipment of my parents consisted of a Garrard phonograph with a mono ceramic stylus. The amp was a Sony, a bit bigger than a toaster. It got 3 tubes: 1 diode rectifier, a triode preamp, then a pentode for the output stage. The built-in oval speaker was perhaps 3"x5". If a 2A3 puts out 5W, then I guess what this Sony would have an output of 1W. The whole thing was pretty low-fi!
Later, my parents got a console. It was stereo, but still low-fi. I remember looking inside the thing, and can recall that the output tubes weren't any bigger than that of the little Sony. And I still remember the output transformers. It looked like they used 6.3V 60Hz filament transformers for the audio. Well, maybe not, but the sound had not much high frequency, nor the bass. The speakers were two simple 6" jobs. No, the output transformers were truly audio, as the output stages were class B. Still, good audio transformers were never cheap, and these looked like it.
Then, in the early 70s, my parents got a solid-state amp, a Sansui 4000. That thing was marvelous! It was powerful enough to drive two pairs of 8-ohm speakers in parallel. Wow! I had to open it up to look. The user manual included schematic diagrams, which I spent so much time studying. The speakers were the smaller Pioneer CS-33. The tape deck was a Panasonic, whose model I forgot.
My parents got money, but they were not really into audio. I really wished that they had bought the bigger Pioneer speakers, or the Sansuis which I liked even better. I spent countless hours looking over Allied catalogs, drooling over these equipments.
In 1980, when I finished my graduate work and made money, I finally bought the Pioneer and Sansui dream speakers of my youth. Of course they were already discontinued, and these second-hand units had been somewhat abused when I got them. I knew there were something wrong with them, because the high-frequency was lacking compared to the smaller bookshelf JBLs I had.
Hence, I have been using these big speakers just to supplement the JBLs, using my own simple crossover of big 10mH coils that I happened to have and 150uF caps. The crossover frequency using these coils is about 120Hz, which seems about right. Come to think of it, these big speakers have sensitivities of around 96dB as I found out recently, while the smaller JBLs are only around 88dB. No wonder I have way too much bass!
Anyway, after 30 years, I finally get around to revive these big speakers to listen to them as they should be. While some other series of Sansui and Pioneers have problems with foam surround rot, my series were made with cloth surround. They still look perfect. The only thing wrong with them so far were blown tweeters, and a burned L-pad. These were due to abuses from previous owners.
I am still checking out their crossovers. The surviving L-pads were also scratchy. Perhaps I should replace them too, rather than just use Deoxit. But whatever it is, I will take the time to do it right.
Anyway, I had to look up SET to see what it means. Now, the simplicity of something like that makes sense. I can quite understand the allure of getting nice room-filling sound from a single tube like that 2A3 driving a highly efficient speaker.
But part of this would be for nostalgic reasons, you guys have got to admit. I grew up playing with tubes too, starting when I was 12 or 13, before switching to transistors for my projects. However, I have no fond memories of tube audio amps, and please let me tell further.
In the early 60s, the audio equipment of my parents consisted of a Garrard phonograph with a mono ceramic stylus. The amp was a Sony, a bit bigger than a toaster. It got 3 tubes: 1 diode rectifier, a triode preamp, then a pentode for the output stage. The built-in oval speaker was perhaps 3"x5". If a 2A3 puts out 5W, then I guess what this Sony would have an output of 1W. The whole thing was pretty low-fi!
Later, my parents got a console. It was stereo, but still low-fi. I remember looking inside the thing, and can recall that the output tubes weren't any bigger than that of the little Sony. And I still remember the output transformers. It looked like they used 6.3V 60Hz filament transformers for the audio. Well, maybe not, but the sound had not much high frequency, nor the bass. The speakers were two simple 6" jobs. No, the output transformers were truly audio, as the output stages were class B. Still, good audio transformers were never cheap, and these looked like it.
Then, in the early 70s, my parents got a solid-state amp, a Sansui 4000. That thing was marvelous! It was powerful enough to drive two pairs of 8-ohm speakers in parallel. Wow! I had to open it up to look. The user manual included schematic diagrams, which I spent so much time studying. The speakers were the smaller Pioneer CS-33. The tape deck was a Panasonic, whose model I forgot.
My parents got money, but they were not really into audio. I really wished that they had bought the bigger Pioneer speakers, or the Sansuis which I liked even better. I spent countless hours looking over Allied catalogs, drooling over these equipments.
In 1980, when I finished my graduate work and made money, I finally bought the Pioneer and Sansui dream speakers of my youth. Of course they were already discontinued, and these second-hand units had been somewhat abused when I got them. I knew there were something wrong with them, because the high-frequency was lacking compared to the smaller bookshelf JBLs I had.
Hence, I have been using these big speakers just to supplement the JBLs, using my own simple crossover of big 10mH coils that I happened to have and 150uF caps. The crossover frequency using these coils is about 120Hz, which seems about right. Come to think of it, these big speakers have sensitivities of around 96dB as I found out recently, while the smaller JBLs are only around 88dB. No wonder I have way too much bass!
Anyway, after 30 years, I finally get around to revive these big speakers to listen to them as they should be. While some other series of Sansui and Pioneers have problems with foam surround rot, my series were made with cloth surround. They still look perfect. The only thing wrong with them so far were blown tweeters, and a burned L-pad. These were due to abuses from previous owners.
I am still checking out their crossovers. The surviving L-pads were also scratchy. Perhaps I should replace them too, rather than just use Deoxit. But whatever it is, I will take the time to do it right.
Last edited:
OP
OP
NW-Bound
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2008
- Messages
- 35,712
Yes, I have been there recently as a lurker. There's a guy who called my 70-vintage speakers "Kabuki". 
And then, there's another poster, can't recall if the same guy or not, who said that if he was walking and saw these speakers on the other curb side, he would not even bother to cross the street to set fire to them.
As an EE, I know how these things work, but I am willing to see other views. I just have not spent the time to carefully listen to different set ups for myself. Same as wine, speakers have different characteristics that are difficult to quantify. The frequency response and distortion are just the first place to start, and I am doing these objective measurements with these speakers first.
And then, there's another poster, can't recall if the same guy or not, who said that if he was walking and saw these speakers on the other curb side, he would not even bother to cross the street to set fire to them.
As an EE, I know how these things work, but I am willing to see other views. I just have not spent the time to carefully listen to different set ups for myself. Same as wine, speakers have different characteristics that are difficult to quantify. The frequency response and distortion are just the first place to start, and I am doing these objective measurements with these speakers first.
Last edited:
robnplunder
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Yes. Music system testing is like wine tasting. It's very evident if you read an equipment review from Stereophile.
Well, you'll just have to uncloak and set them straightYes, I have been there recently as a lurker. There's a guy who called my 70-vintage speakers "Kabuki".
And then, there's another poster, can't recall if the same guy or not, who said that if he was walking and saw these speakers on the other curb side, he would not even bother to cross the street to set fire to them.
As an EE, I know how these things work, but I am willing to see other views. I just have not spent the time to carefully listen to different set ups for myself. Same as wine, speakers have different characteristics that are difficult to quantify. The frequency response and distortion are just the first place to start, and I am doing these objective measurements with these speakers first.
OP
OP
NW-Bound
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2008
- Messages
- 35,712
I dunno. People are entitled to their opinion. And who knows, perhaps these guys happened to listen to the speakers that had been blown up, and they really sounded as bad as they heard. I don't think I need to join any more forum. I have caused enough trouble on this one, not about audio per se but spilling it into other threads.
However, in looking for ideas to revive my vintage speakers, I surfed the Web a bit to look for replacement parts. That was when I ran across these forums. Some of the posters on these forums are really, what should I say, unusual. Here are some examples.
One guy claimed that he spent 5 years to find the perfect placement of his speakers, such that the listener could have perfect stereo imaging anywhere in the room. When he showed off his set up to his friend, the latter said "Wow". And then, to demonstrate how critical his set up was, he moved one speaker 2 inches. The stereo image collapsed, and that huge sweet spot was gone, he claimed!
And then, there was a guy who kept his speaker cords off the ground so that they did not pick up static! He also said that his cords would also pick up all kinds of radiation from cell phones, and wireless devices from the neighborhood and that ruined the sound.
Aye, aye, aye...
However, in looking for ideas to revive my vintage speakers, I surfed the Web a bit to look for replacement parts. That was when I ran across these forums. Some of the posters on these forums are really, what should I say, unusual. Here are some examples.
One guy claimed that he spent 5 years to find the perfect placement of his speakers, such that the listener could have perfect stereo imaging anywhere in the room. When he showed off his set up to his friend, the latter said "Wow". And then, to demonstrate how critical his set up was, he moved one speaker 2 inches. The stereo image collapsed, and that huge sweet spot was gone, he claimed!
And then, there was a guy who kept his speaker cords off the ground so that they did not pick up static! He also said that his cords would also pick up all kinds of radiation from cell phones, and wireless devices from the neighborhood and that ruined the sound.
Aye, aye, aye...
Last edited:
OP
OP
NW-Bound
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2008
- Messages
- 35,712
ERD50 talked earlier about a bit of even-harmonics making the sound better. Now, this is something that I understand, and can agree with to some extent.
As I explained earlier, I have never had a good tube amp, nor listened to one. But I recalled this experience. It used to be that when one bought a DVD-burner for the PC, there was usually some freebie software thrown-in. With one version of Nero, I got a utility (forgot its name), which would enliven some MP3 that had been ruined by low sampling rates. I tried that, and it seemed to work.
I remember distinctly that what that program appeared to do was to run an FFT to get the spectral content, then add some even-harmonics, and reconvert it back from the frequency domain to the time domain. So, something like that has some basis, and I would have no problem with. Of course, if the program material is sufficiently rich and close to the original recording, one would not need that, right?
As I explained earlier, I have never had a good tube amp, nor listened to one. But I recalled this experience. It used to be that when one bought a DVD-burner for the PC, there was usually some freebie software thrown-in. With one version of Nero, I got a utility (forgot its name), which would enliven some MP3 that had been ruined by low sampling rates. I tried that, and it seemed to work.
I remember distinctly that what that program appeared to do was to run an FFT to get the spectral content, then add some even-harmonics, and reconvert it back from the frequency domain to the time domain. So, something like that has some basis, and I would have no problem with. Of course, if the program material is sufficiently rich and close to the original recording, one would not need that, right?
Last edited:
I dunno. People are entitled to their opinion. And who knows, perhaps these guys happened to listen to the speakers that had been blown up, and they really sounded as bad as they heard. I don't think I need to join any more forum. I have caused enough trouble on this one, not about audio per se but spilling it into other threads.
However, in looking for ideas to revive my vintage speakers, I surfed the Web a bit to look for replacement parts. That was when I ran across these forums. Some of the posters on these forums are really, what should I say, unusual. Here are some examples.
One guy claimed that he spent 5 years to find the perfect placement of his speakers, such that the listener could have perfect stereo imaging anywhere in the room. When he showed off his set up to his friend, the latter said "Wow". And then, to demonstrate how critical his set up was, he moved one speaker 2 inches. The stereo image collapsed, and that huge sweet spot was gone, he claimed!
And then, there was a guy who kept his speaker cords off the ground so that they did not pick up static! He also said that his cords would also pick up all kinds of radiation from cell phones, and wireless devices from the neighborhood and that ruined the sound.
Aye, aye, aye...
You mean to tell me you don't wear one of these when listening to your gear?
Attachments
OP
OP
NW-Bound
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2008
- Messages
- 35,712
Hey, that guy's got an HP Spectrum Analyzer similar to mine, perhaps in the same series - the one on the shelf, not the one he's got his hand on. My baby cost me $25K in 1999, and it was nowhere near top of the line. It's for microwave work, not audio stuff though.
Anyway, back on audio thinggys, all of the speakers that I have are inexpensive point-source kinds.
I love speakers. I do not care much about amps, because to me they should be flat and distortion-free and that's that. Speakers have different radiation patterns. I know that tall column speakers and the Maggies are line-source, and they do have different characteristics than the ones I have. I may have to get a pair just to [-]see[/-] hear for myself, but one thing at a time.
Another thing is that the room acoustics account for a lot. My homes all have wood floors now, and I do not have room nor care for a home theater. I guess that's why I do not consider myself an audiophile, and perhaps will never be more than a dilettante.
I will be showing you what I have been doing with my vintage speakers soon.
Anyway, back on audio thinggys, all of the speakers that I have are inexpensive point-source kinds.
I love speakers. I do not care much about amps, because to me they should be flat and distortion-free and that's that. Speakers have different radiation patterns. I know that tall column speakers and the Maggies are line-source, and they do have different characteristics than the ones I have. I may have to get a pair just to [-]see[/-] hear for myself, but one thing at a time.
Another thing is that the room acoustics account for a lot. My homes all have wood floors now, and I do not have room nor care for a home theater. I guess that's why I do not consider myself an audiophile, and perhaps will never be more than a dilettante.
I will be showing you what I have been doing with my vintage speakers soon.
OP
OP
NW-Bound
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2008
- Messages
- 35,712
OK, I will show you my first baby, the Pioneer CS-88, circa 1968-1970. Following are some pictured linked from Web sites. It weights 50lbs, and has a diecast woofer basket as most of them did in those days.
Front and back photos:
Here's the inside:
Front and back photos:
Here's the inside:
In the early days of CDs (mid 80s) there were people that used a green magic marker to put a green edge on their CDs. They claimed that it made a tremendous difference in the sound. There were also places that sold rubber bands to put around the edge of a CD to improve its sound. There has never been a shortage of weird ideas on how to improve the sound of stereo systems.
OP
OP
NW-Bound
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2008
- Messages
- 35,712
Here's my own photo of the front with the grill off.
As you can see, it's a 3-way bass-reflex, with a 12" woofer, a mid-range of 5" inside its own metal enclosure, and 3 tweeters. The center one is the main tweeter, a 2" horn of 13 ohms, I think, cannot measure because both speakers got them blown out. The two side tweeters are 2.5" paper cone, with impedance of 7 ohms. The side tweeters are wired in series, then in parallel with the main horn. That brings the impedance close to 8 ohms, and that makes sense.
The arrangement of 3 tweeters is controversial, I think, because of phase cancellation when the listener is off-axis. My Sansui of the same vintage also has 3 tweeters! Did they do that for better dispersion?
As you can see, it's a 3-way bass-reflex, with a 12" woofer, a mid-range of 5" inside its own metal enclosure, and 3 tweeters. The center one is the main tweeter, a 2" horn of 13 ohms, I think, cannot measure because both speakers got them blown out. The two side tweeters are 2.5" paper cone, with impedance of 7 ohms. The side tweeters are wired in series, then in parallel with the main horn. That brings the impedance close to 8 ohms, and that makes sense.
The arrangement of 3 tweeters is controversial, I think, because of phase cancellation when the listener is off-axis. My Sansui of the same vintage also has 3 tweeters! Did they do that for better dispersion?
Last edited:
OP
OP
NW-Bound
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2008
- Messages
- 35,712
Here's the photo of the blown original horn tweeter, along with the new Vifa that I found for replacement. That little horn is diecast; no cheap plastic there. It weighs perhaps 10X the new Vifa which is all plastic. However, that Vifa's got a heatsink in the back. Maybe it won't burn out like the original.
Last edited:
OP
OP
NW-Bound
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2008
- Messages
- 35,712
As posted yesterday, I had a hell of a time with checking the crossover responses due to ground loop between the PC I/O, the amp, and the speaker. So, I took time off to build a little differential amplifier which will make the measurement more "precise". Well, it really does not matter much, but if I publish a curve that looks goofy, people will say that I do not know what I am doing.
So, here's that little differential amp. Connections to the crossover and the PC input port are via the little headers.
So, here's that little differential amp. Connections to the crossover and the PC input port are via the little headers.
OP
OP
NW-Bound
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2008
- Messages
- 35,712
So, Keim asked for the crossover. Here it is, being hooked up for measurements.
Note the big aircore inductor. No ferrite there to avoid saturation and non-linearity.
Note the big aircore inductor. No ferrite there to avoid saturation and non-linearity.
Last edited:
OP
OP
NW-Bound
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2008
- Messages
- 35,712
OP
OP
NW-Bound
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2008
- Messages
- 35,712
And here's the response curves of each section of the 3-way crossover. They are all 2nd-order, but there's some extra "stuff" to cancel out the woofer's coil inductance, and an obvious padding of the midrange to attenuate it.
The above padding is strange, because they already put in L-pads in the back for listeners to attenuate the mid and high range. You can see the obvious 5-dB down for the mid-range. Was it because the enclosed midrange driver had too much sensitivity?
Also note how the woofer's section comes bouncing back after 4KHz. It does not really matter much as the woofer cannot move at that frequency, but why? In the end, I think it is a side-effect of the inter-turn capacitance of the coils, the internal series resistance of the caps, and the inductance of the wire-wound resistor that they use for impedance control.
The curves show crossover frequencies of 800Hz and 5.5KHz. How do these compare to specs? I need to surf the Web!
The above padding is strange, because they already put in L-pads in the back for listeners to attenuate the mid and high range. You can see the obvious 5-dB down for the mid-range. Was it because the enclosed midrange driver had too much sensitivity?
Also note how the woofer's section comes bouncing back after 4KHz. It does not really matter much as the woofer cannot move at that frequency, but why? In the end, I think it is a side-effect of the inter-turn capacitance of the coils, the internal series resistance of the caps, and the inductance of the wire-wound resistor that they use for impedance control.
The curves show crossover frequencies of 800Hz and 5.5KHz. How do these compare to specs? I need to surf the Web!
Last edited:
ERD50
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Yes, some people go to some real out-there extremes. I'm hesitant to poo-poo some of it, who knows what others can hear? But I can't help rolling my eyes when they get into areas where my electronics knowledge just tells me - 'no way!'.
The stereo imaging story is at least plausible. Years ago, I made a small portable 'boom-box' style speaker system as a project to work on with my son. We used some car speakers, and mounted them in a mid-sized box, and I ran him through some of the reasons the box needed to be this shape/size, etc (he wasn't that interested, but played along politely). So these were not great speakers, and they ended up in the basement hooked to my receiver. One day, I had it tuned to a classical station, and as I walked by as I was working on some other project, I walked in one spot and I was astounded by the stereo imaging. I actually stopped in my tracks and moved around to get back in that 'sweet spot'. I've never heard anything like it. It was maybe a combination of the source and everything else, but it was remarkable. When I spoke to a friend of mine about it, he said that small speakers can sometimes give an imaging that is hard to get with larger systems. I don't know what all makes up the difference between good/bad imaging, but I've heard it!
But putting speaker cables up on little Styrofoam cups (or $$$$ magic 'isolation systems' from some high end vendor, made from moon rocks or something) to isolate them from the floor, that just doesn't make sense to me. Speakers are such a low impedance, and so inefficient, I just can't imagine static inducing any audible signal on those wires, and if it could be heard why lifting them off the floor would change anything. I'll call snake oil on that one. Signals getting induced into the pre-amp side is a concern, but I just don't think decent equipment and reasonable cables are very susceptible, though certain setups could have problems.
The high-end magazines are much like the 'financial porn' magazines. If they kept it simple, I guess they feel they wouldn't have much to write about. I disagree, with all the real issues and all the various equipment out there, I think there would be plenty. But talking about the 'pace & rhythm' of a power amp is probably easier than doing real engineering work on the subject. When I would read one those mags, I had to have the mindset it is 99% 'entertainment', and maybe I'll get something worthwhile, maybe not.
Another that makes me say WTH? is when they review a $15,000 power amp, and then later talk about how the 'sound-stage' and the way 'sounds came out of a velvet blackness' were all greatly improved when they replaced the power cord with an after market one that supposedly had superior properties. Really? A $15,000 power amp scrimped on the power cord? Gimme a break!
Yes, I remember having some demo tapes that showed off how the "Aural Exciter" (I was afraid to google that one!) could be used to enhance voices and especially cassettes that had some high-freq roll off. This was done in circuitry at the time, no DSP, so basically, they ran some signal to the side, filtered out a spectrum they wanted, ran that through an amplifier that would intentionally distort in a specific way, subtracting the original signal so they had only the distortion. Then, filter, maybe phase shift that distortion, and add it back to the original signal. The following article says it was dynamic, they added in more at low volumes, and almost none at high volumes. The demos I heard were very effective, and I may look into a 'plug in' for Audacity to enhance my recent cassette transfers. Overdone, it sounds awful.
Apparently, some big name singers used it to get a little more sparkle in their recorded voices. I recall hearing Andrea Bocelli on TV and being super impressed, so I got one of his CDs out of the library. I couldn't stand it - his voice was so processed, it sounded all 'tizzy' to me - like someone humming an aluminum foil kazoo along with his voice. Terrible, hurt my ears.
Aphex Model 204 Aural Exciter
-ERD50
ERD50
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
NW-B - that sure is a lot of drivers!
From what I recall from investigating building a speaker, the placement of those tweeters does affect dispersion. Lots of considerations in order to optimize it, distance from the mid-range and each other, the effective plane that each driver sits in, the surrounding surfaces. Sometimes the speakers are wired in what would seem to be out-of-phase, to compensate for some other phase-shift or delay. I have no idea how much this affects the sound, but speaker builders go on about it, just like investments and withdraw rates.
-ERD50
From what I recall from investigating building a speaker, the placement of those tweeters does affect dispersion. Lots of considerations in order to optimize it, distance from the mid-range and each other, the effective plane that each driver sits in, the surrounding surfaces. Sometimes the speakers are wired in what would seem to be out-of-phase, to compensate for some other phase-shift or delay. I have no idea how much this affects the sound, but speaker builders go on about it, just like investments and withdraw rates.
-ERD50
OP
OP
NW-Bound
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2008
- Messages
- 35,712
Well, that's just two extra side tweeters. If I disconnect them, then I have a standard 3-way speaker, and some manufacturers still make these.
I may experiment a bit, after I am sure I have restored the speakers back to as close to original condition, and listened to them for a while. The problem with experimenting is that I need to open the back (with two dozen screws!) to change the wiring. Well, perhaps I can run the wires through the vent hole.
Anyway, I have not gotten to my Sansuis, which is a 4-way with 6 drivers!
Oh, I am going to go sweep the speakers in the back yard with the new tweeter. May drive the neighbors nuts! Heh heh heh...
I may experiment a bit, after I am sure I have restored the speakers back to as close to original condition, and listened to them for a while. The problem with experimenting is that I need to open the back (with two dozen screws!) to change the wiring. Well, perhaps I can run the wires through the vent hole.
Anyway, I have not gotten to my Sansuis, which is a 4-way with 6 drivers!
Oh, I am going to go sweep the speakers in the back yard with the new tweeter. May drive the neighbors nuts! Heh heh heh...
