Printable View
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">AS A SPEAKER STAND ALONE . WITH 2 DriversQuote:
So what is so significant about a standard, ordinary 1505 horn?
The quality of speech intelligibility is out of this world.
There are 2 in a Cathedral . The whole choir is miked into 2 of those . You can hear each vowel.
And the place is all masonnary.
Imagine with a woofer.What it can do.
.......................................
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">AS A SPEAKER STAND ALONE . WITH 2 DriversQuote:
Originally posted by CONVERGENCE:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> So what is so significant about a standard, ordinary 1505 horn?
The quality of speech intelligibility is out of this world.
There are 2 in a Cathedral . The whole choir is miked into 2 of those . You can hear each vowel.
And the place is all masonnary.
Imagine with a woofer.What it can do.
.......................................</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">"Oh I see said the blind man." Wow, that is amazing in an all masonary building.
I have READ that many multi-celled horns were not all that good, but appearently there are vast differnces of opinions. It is really difficult to identify the company of a large PA system because most of them are either well hidden or too far away. Like most of us we only hear the 511/811 horns.
The muticell is the BEST midrange horn. It has some pattern control issues at high frequencies.
The 1505 is the rarest of the muticells- it's not unusual to see them go for $1000 the pair.
Frankly, most of the anti-multicell propaganda is from companies whose multicells could not compete with Altec's. Consider the source.
Altec outsold JBL muticells by probably 100 to 1 for instance.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">"Holy smokes Batman, that is a lot of money!" I had no idea. So the previous mentioned bid in the above post of $1,850 for the cabinets with the 1505s is not so outrageous and would have been worthwhile had it included the 1505s.Quote:
Originally posted by Old Guy:
The muticell is the BEST midrange horn. It has some pattern control issues at high frequencies.
The 1505 is the rarest of the muticells- it's not unusual to see them go for $1000 the pair.
Frankly, most of the anti-multicell propaganda is from companies whose multicells could not compete with Altec's. Consider the source.
Altec outsold JBL muticells by probably 100 to 1 for instance.
I'd gladly pay $1000 for a pair of Altec dual throat, tar filled 1505's. Anyone have a pair they are willing to sell at that price?
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">$1,000 would be a pretty darn good deal, even in light of 1975 prices.Quote:
Originally posted by Jammin Jungle Jim:
I'd gladly pay $1000 for a pair of Altec dual throat, tar filled 1505's. Anyone have a pair they are willing to sell at that price?
If you had bought the 1505 new in 1975 it would've costed you $402, double driver throats were $36, and 288-8G drivers were $222 each; for a grand total of 882 each, for 2 it would run $1,764. When I bought my 414s, and 811s & 806s back then, that is what I roughtly paid from a dealer, those prices are straight from Altec.
1975 Altec Pro catalogue page 26
Aw C'mon- I said 1505's for a grand. Tar filleds in any format bring their own price.
Wouldn't be surprised to see clean tar filleds with dual brass throats close to the 1800 by themselves. Would love to hear what my 4 288 G's would sound like on that.
Steve Schell: Thanks for the explantion, that was WAY before my time. My time frame for audio starts roughly around late 1960s and ends in the late-1970s. Another little nuance of the Altec audio trivia that I learned today. What model numbers were the tar-filled horns? And how can I identify them by sight alone? My guess probably can't visually because the tar was filled internally in the horn. Like you say, if I can pick them up, it would be appearent that they were full of tar.
The different models (803, 805, 1005, etc.) were tar f i l l e d before Altec moved to Anaheim, and non f i l l e d after that. Easiest way to identify a tar horn visually is to look for the outer casing, missing in the later horns. Another way is to pick it up; the tar horns are much heavier. Also, the tar horns had solid brass throat adapters, the later ones were aluminum.
The numbering system identified a horn's number of cells as well as its designed low frequency cutoff. An 803 for example is an eight cell horn with a 300Hz. low frequency limit.
Here is a page from the 1943 Altec Lansing catalog. A horn is shown before and after the outer casing is installed. The upper "partially assembled" horn actually looks a lot like the later Anaheim horns. Note also the shipping weights of the larger horns.
http://www.lansingheritage.org/image...943/page08.jpg
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That would explain Old Guy's following statement:Quote:
Originally posted by Steve Schell:
.
.
Also, the tar horns had solid brass throat adapters, the later ones were aluminum.
.
.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I guess the brass throats and tar-filled horns are quite desireable. Wow, I am really surprise at the interest in these old audio relics.Quote:
.
.
Wouldn't be surprised to see clean tar filleds with dual brass throats close to the 1800 by themselves.
.
.