416's vs. 515's

[Carl Bill]

Does anyone know if the ferrite 416 frames are the same as the ferrite 515's? And can the 416's be reconed as 515's?

I understand that the 515's are superior to the 416 in the 828 (VOTT) caninets, but what anout Model 19's? Anyone try 515's in a Model 19?

Just curious.

[RonSSS]

Carl,

I'm afraid I don't know if the two frames are the same. That would be a good question for GPA, but you will have to give Bill a call.

If you go here: http://www.soundpractices.com/images/LargeVOT.pdf
This article has a good dissertation on the 515 series of woofers.

You also might want to read:
http://www.soundpractices.com/images/smallVOT.pdf
this speaks about the 416 series of woofers.

The T/S parameters of the driver dictate what size of box the speaker would like to be in for optimal performance.

If you had some enclosure design software, you could input the numbers and figure out if the 515 would work well in the model 19 cabinet. I don't know what the internal volume of the 19 is. It is sort of hard to figure out because the upper horn portion is open to the lower cabinet and adds to the volume. And with the horn in there, and the way the two are connected, it will be a bit tough to come up with an answer.

Ron

[Russellc]

I happen to own both 515 8G as well as 4168c and I can tell you, they do not have the same magnet. Ask Bill @ great plaines to be sure, but I believe you can put 515 8g cones in the 416 8C. That being said, I do also use them in 828 cabs and both do sound great, but I believe I prefer the 416 8C in this application. Not that the 515s don't sound great, I feel the 416 8c is more transparent in the mid range and seems to have a better low end in my setup anyway (P_P 6550/KT88 amp of 65 watts or so.) The 515 mid range really does not suffer in the mid, its just different, maybe more lush or majestic. either are great and I switch back and forth about every 6 months. After numerous switches, seems like I always have to adjust to the 515s but the 416s are immediately welcome. Just to point out how much I like both, when I first went back to A7s a couple of years ago I bought both pairs intent on selling the one I liked the least. Not only have I also kept the 515s, but have also had Bill recone them after an unfortunate cat-speaker interface (scratched up cones) If you have cats, or children,housecleaner, etc., (this has never happened again) put some kind of grid between your drivers face side and the inside of the cabinet. I found in the housewares dept of bed bath and beyond some small bakers racks for putting baked item on to cool that were made of the perfectn sized metal mesh, very thin wire and holes too small for prying hands and paws to get through. Just use wire snips to cut away the heavy outer wire part that supports it. the actual opening to be covered really isn't that large. If making a fresh decision, I'd get the 416 8c, but if a nice 515 presents itself first, you will not be dissapointed.

Have fun,
Russellc

[Russellc]

Just reread your post and I see you are looking to put these drivers in a model 19? If so, I myself would definately go with the 416 8c. The 515 8G was specifically tailored for the A7 type of cab, horn on front, reflex bass on back type of setup. Frames and magnets are different, but I think a 515 cone will fit the 416 8C, but I wouldn't do it, again, ask Bill to be sure. Unless he now uses the same cone for both applications, I would go for the one made for the 416 for a model 19. Todd will probably reply with further more experienced advice on the 515 416 cone fitment.

Regards, Russellc

[GM]

Greets!

These are indeed two different driver designs optimized for entirely different apps, so mixing n' matching rebuild kits nets you a driver optimized for neither.

The 515-8G is optimized for the 'A' series theater horns, while the 416 series is the 803 descendent, ergo is optimized for all sealed, BR and A7 apps. The 515 series is a poor choice for any A7/A5 HI-FI app unless a sub XO'd around 100-120 Hz is used, defeating much of the cab's potential BW. That, or significant series R is used and the cab tuned much lower to get rid of the serious Fb peaking.

WRT using the 515 series in the M-19, it would be preferred if corner loaded, a 'tighter' LF sound is desired, or if a high output impedance amp such as a typical SET is used. If SS driven, it can still be a better choice if a 'tighter', more detailed mid-bass on up to the XO point is desired. This will require some series R to be used if not corner loaded, so in some apps the horn may need to be shelved more.

FWIW, early on I followed Altec's 'lead', using the 803/416 in BR, A7 designs though they never sounded quite right to me since I was comparing them to what I heard in the theaters, which I was assured by the local Altec rep had more to do with the larger horns firing through a perforated screen than the drivers themselves.

Once I was able to get some 210 loaded 515Bs to compare to my 416-8A loaded A7s though, I found this to be mostly BS. I have auditioned many ~15" drivers over the decades and none matched the 515's clarity, so while the 416 series is more tonally balanced right out of the box due to its higher Qts, the 515 series can be EQ'd via some form of series R or using a current driven amp so that I can 'have my cake and eat it too', so to speak.

So for me, the 515 series is the 'no-brainer' choice in such a high XO point design as the M-19, then EQ it as required to get the proper in-room response. If my sims are reasonably accurate, ~1.5-3 ohms total series R depending on room gain would be good for wall or corner loading, while series R = Re would be best if well away from any boundaries. In this app, using a current controlled amp such as Nelson Pass's F1 would be the Hot Ticket.

As always though, YMMV.

GM

[Carl Bill]

Russellc and GM, Thanks for the insight. I may need some of the TLA's unencripted for the uninformed. like me. I am new here and ignorant of the abrevations. (but I do catch on quickly).

So I see from several resources that a 515 is superior in a VOTT - 828, to a 416. I see that there is some ageement here.

And it appears that GM is also agreeing that a 515 may be superior in a Model 19 to a 416.

If I am misinterpreting, please let me know.

I am wondering if the ferrite 416 is the same frame for reconing as the ferrite 515? If so, I could have my 416's reconed as 515 to use in my 828's and even potentially buy replacement 515's for my Model 19's.

I will be sure to ask Bill either on a trip to OKC or if he is in attendance at Great Palins Audiofest in Tulsa.

[dhook17322]

Question for GM:
While we're on it, which 515 do you prefer, B's or G's? I've heard the G's have better presence while the B's are better on the low end. Is this consistent with your experience?

[GM]

Greets!

Yes, and no. I prefer the 'B's mid-bass/lower mids sonics with the caveat that the 'G's are better for compression loaded mid-bass horn apps and/or need to be able to handle sustained high power since the 'B's have too low an Fs and their AlNiCo motors will 'lay down' (Qts rapidly goes up due to thermal power compression) on things like sustained organ notes or the low synth 'rumbles' in some movies such as 5th Element, the Alien series, etc..

Hook them both up to a MC 275 and sonically the choice is clear IMO. There is a certain synergy between a high SQ tube amp and AlNiCo. For 'mud' motors, it takes high SQ/power SS to make them 'sing' since they won't soft 'clip' like AlNiCo.

As always though, YMMV.

GM

PS: I haven't forgotten the decals. For a variety of unpleasant reasons I haven't gotten out n' about much in recent months.

[Russellc]

Question for GM:

Are you saying that the 515 is a better choice in a BR (like model 19) than the 416 even though as you state it was not designed a such? Or do you mean is it only so with the proper equalization? Or did I misunderstand? Of course, my cross over is at 500 hz, much lower than the 19. does this equalization make up for the low end? or does one still need a sub of some sort? I always thought the 416 was the speaker to use with BR (non horn loaded on front), but have never done any other Altec except A7s. Obviously with A7s I can live without subterranean
bass. Shrinking the port to about 3 inches tall helps, but I get lower bass and more transparency with my 416s. Any suggestions for equalization of my 515s in 828s? Now you have me wondering and changing those woofers is a work out!

Thanks,
Russellc

[Russellc]

GM, also Am I reading your reply that the 416 or 515 has the higher Q? The way its written, it seems you are saying the 416 has a higher Q? According to altec the 416 is lower both in Q and Fs. OK, I'm unpack the 515 and am going to rethink this... any input for my application would be appreciated, I want to hear the 515 (which I thought Altec used in the A-5) in their best possible light. sorry to be confused but if I have it right, I think we are in basic agreement but you own findings are that the 515 can be a good BR driver, but EQ must be applied for it to work properly? Any direction is appreciated.

Russellc