ALTEC MATCHED PAIR 411-8A SPEAKERS FROM BARCELONA 873S - eBay (item 180585991132 end time Dec-10-10 17:00:35 PST)
Jeez, it would be something else to sit around till I never get to it...but for that price
Printable View
ALTEC MATCHED PAIR 411-8A SPEAKERS FROM BARCELONA 873S - eBay (item 180585991132 end time Dec-10-10 17:00:35 PST)
Jeez, it would be something else to sit around till I never get to it...but for that price
Yes they have been selling cheap another pair that ended Tuesday sold for $199
Altec 411-8A 15 inch Vintage Woofer Pair Original - eBay (item 110607656788 end time Nov-09-10 17:56:42 PST)
What would a fella do with the surrounds, leave em be, or replace them with the later foam style?
I'm of the "if it ain't broke..." school.
If I reconed one I'd do the other to match.
Pretty hard to come up with a good argument against that.Quote:
I'm of the "if it ain't broke..." school.
Seems anytime i encounter a pair with this type of surround, at least one has a significant wrinkle or other anomaly, those look pretty good.
FWIW, I don't consider a wrinkle in this type of surround a problem. Indeed, there's at least one excellent performing ultra-wide BW 'full-range' driver that are wrinkled by design.
GM
No argument here GM, i realize what the function of the suspension is, and that so long as it's function isn't affected, cosmetic issues are purely that. But, in at least some cases isn't this an indication of the cone likely sagging or warping?Quote:
FWIW, I don't consider a wrinkle in this type of surround a problem.
On at least one wrinkled 411 surround that i've visited in person, the wrinkle seems to have been the migratory destination of the surround sealant when it gave in to gravity's influence.
Regardless, i have a mental disorder that prevents me from accepting things that do not appear as the designers/engineers intended them to be(a smooth, uniform, half roll in this case).
Fortunately mine are of the later variety with foam. I've considered picking up another pair for a "sub" project, but would like foam surrounds. Out of sheer curiosity does anybody know if the surround was the only change between the two types?
If a chemical strong enough and/or exposed long enough to soften/degrade the chemical(s) impregnated under pressure into the paper, but normally it would be an indication of a damaged or torn loose spider.
Yeah, the pair we put in the A7s had to be rotated as often as the 515s and they looked well used after ~ 3.5 years of high power 'sub' duty before we moved away, but still performed up to par AFAIK, though without doing comparison distortion measurements there's no way to know for sure.
While I agree with you in principle, the reality with this driver's original surround is that it was so flimsy it didn't hold its form well, at least after being shipped cross country, whether in a box or mounted in a speaker. You can see in this picture that the surround's shadowing shows an anything but uniform contour once installed: http://www.lansingheritage.org/image...ome/page04.jpg
Never have heard why the swap to foam surrounds came about since they performed fine, but we assumed it was a cost reduction issue, though the distributor's in-house speaker designer commented that the foam surround version sounded a bit flat/dull to him, so may have also been to at pander to the then new shift to a more recessed mids/lower treble in HIFI/studio monitor design.
For sure, my first/only impressions of the foam surround 848 and 9846 left a lot to be desired, though at the time I wrote it off as being mostly due to its much lower efficiency/increased distortion at the ~live piano bar SPLs I normally listened at, so don't know if the foam affected this or not.
Never having any interest in the 411s for other than the one 'sub' duty app, I didn't bother with keeping current WRT any 'updates'/differences, but my limited experience with foam up to that point was to avoid it like the plague. Today's foam is fine and maintenance free, so would be my choice for a < 500 Hz XO app, though without auditioning a GPA re-cone in an 848 or similar, my 'knee-jerk' reaction is it still won't perform well enough for me with higher XO points.
GM
Sounds ideal in the terms of what a surround is and is NOT supposed to do with regard to compliance.Quote:
the reality with this driver's original surround is that it was so flimsy it didn't hold its form well
I've re-foamed a few woofers and in each case i'm always left thinking that those surrounds i handled added to the stiffness of the compliance. My basic understanding is that the surround is much akin to the hinge on a door and should neither resist movement or limit the range of movement. So, in order to sleep at night i've simply convinced myself that the designers/engineers must take the compliance of the foam into consideration in their design. I might be completely out to lunch with the notion, but i'm well rested nonetheless.:D
My only listening experience with 411's is with the foam versions in my 9846's. I have a hard time stepping away from the honesty and extension of the bass.
Recently i've been toying around using them as subwoofers in the 9846 boxes, actively crossed at 80hz. I like the results well enough that i'm considering a winter project around a pair of 411's as dedicated subwoofers in a box/alignment that might better suit the application than the 9846 cabinet.
It looks like for my intended use, either surround type will be fine and i should really discard my preconceived bias against the older surround type. Sometimes i get caught up in my American consumerism and value of appearances. There are times i'd probably buy a turd if somebody put the right polish on it.:doh:
These beauties in a box with an 811 horn could be super sweet with a SS amp. Good bass extension and great sound. Might even make a Model 19 blush. ;)
Different strokes........ ;) The early 878B I auditioned didn't impress beyond its relatively deep bass line. The 411 made a fine A7 bass extender though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Panomaniac
Then again, if it and the 846B had been designed with the 802 driver and an optimized XO like the M19 from the beginning, who knows? It's not like Altec didn't have the knowledge to do it as there was no remotely new technology in the M19, so would never have been needed as long as they kept up with the rapidly changing speaker styling occurring back then.
After auditioning the 9848 though, dual horizontally opposed 411s with a 311-90 or large WG were 'dancing' in my head until I got home and back under the 515B's 'spell' that lingers still. :D
GM
I have a pair of 411's that have been recently re-coned at GPA with the new foam surrounds.I haven't had a chance to use them yet though.
http://www.hostboard.com/forums/hbmc...2010/11/15.jpg
http://www.hostboard.com/forums/hbmc...2010/11/16.jpg
http://www.hostboard.com/forums/hbmc...2010/11/17.jpg
http://www.hostboard.com/forums/hbmc...2010/11/18.jpg
Maybe it just needed a better crossover?Quote:
Originally Posted by GM
The 515 is a lovely woofer, no argument from me. But not everyone wants 13ft boxes in the living room. ;) I think it could be interesting to try for a better Santiago. Tho it's no midget at about 8 feet.
Your right they want 20 Ft. :D as such in my case. :lollipop: That may change though once I bring them home.;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Panomaniac
He he.
Well at least 3 or 4 of us here DO, but we're just a bunch of speaker nuts.
After hearing A.A.'s big Simplex cabs, I have a hankering for BIGGER.
Bigtime speaker Nutz, It's called good vibrations. :2thumbsup: :cool: I think it's the dual woof's that really help.Quote:
Originally Posted by Panomaniac
if i had another pair of 411's i might try them in my 210 cabs, which are ofcourse, in the living room. but i would need matching 411's as mine are 411-16, with the pleated cloth surrounds
Well I was hoping the GM would drop back in to tell me what he didn't like about the 411-811 combo. The 416 and 515 are so well behaved at the top end that they blend well with the horns. Maybe not so for the 411?
I believe that the 411 in about 5 cubic feet sealed could be a winner. That's no small speaker, but not a mammoth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panomaniac
The 411 does not have as much mid bass, I think it would be happier with a 500 Hz xover, which an 811 can't do...
Well the 411 only goes to 1000 Hz were the 416 goes to 1600 Hz.So the 500 Hz X-over point with a 511 would make more sense correct ? The 411 has a huge (Ferrite) magnet on it,looks pretty beefy IMO.
on second thought..even though i need to rotate the woofers on my 500lb cabs..i still wiil stick with the 515b's. i have subs, and tho the thought of a horn loaded double 411 sub does appeal to me, there is still only so much room.unless..
Spot on, ideally, a surround should be seen and not heard and in the very best designs such as the late, great 2000B, no surround is the best 'surround'.Quote:
Originally Posted by bowtie427ss
Yeah, one quick listen to a Barcelona still attached to its shipping pallet told me that the 411 was a SOTA 'sub' woofer as there was nothing even close to compare it to and why I placed an order for two that day.
Altec was adamant that it shouldn't be vented, but just for giggles I dropped one into an empty ~30 ft^3 net 10 ga steel/angle iron braced electrical starter controller cab I had access to anyway and after fiddling with the (now MLTL configuration) vent tuning a bit concluded that if the cab was acoustically large enough and tuned low enough referenced to driver Fs, a very high perceived (as opposed to technical) SQ alignment could be realized, i.e. basically a ~IB except with more upper bass gain without the 'color' of typical Altec, JBL or even the reference AR 3 AS loading Altec recommends.
WRT my personal speaker design philosophy, it forever changed how I view what constitutes a high SQ vented alignment and only fairly recently has it finally been embraced by the DIY community.
You're not alone, a majority of the consumer audio crowd's buying habits prove they increasingly do just this which in turn forces the majority of the recording industry to market junk that AFAIK, no amount of digital EQ can completely overcome it enough to make it 'near live' for a 'you are there' presentation.
Speaking of which, anyone know how these new vinyl albums of old Beatles, et al are 'voiced'? Same as original or......? Digitally noise reduced, BW and/or dynamic headroom increased or.......?
GM
[quote]
:2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by GM
I don't know about the New Beatles stuff that just came out.But I have been collecting MFSL = Mobile fidelity sound labs recordings for a long time.I can tell you that the new ones don't sound as good IMHO. Example I just bought a few months back Roy Orbison's Greatest Hits,Rush Permanent Waves,Cars The Cars, LP's on their vinyl.And personally didn't think they sounded as good as the older first ones they did (MFSL) Like the Beatles Abbey Road,Rubber Soul,or Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon !!! They still sound great but you can notice a bit of difference.;)Quote:
Speaking of which, anyone know how these new vinyl albums of old Beatles, et al are 'voiced'? Same as original or......? Digitally noise reduced, BW and/or dynamic headroom increased or.......?
I haven't heard the just released stuff to be fair.:)
What can I say beyond what I've already said? I learned early on that WRT a speaker's ability to reproduce music, my 'knee-jerk' opinion typically was an 'honest' enough one to my ears based on having had an above average exposure to live un-amplified music in my youth, so already being disposed to not caring much for most of Altec's (or any others) consumer offerings combined with the 411 loaded speakers sounding quite a bit different yet to my ears, the Barcelona's bass line was pretty much its only redeeming quality performance wise. The cabs sure looked nice though and would have fit right in with our then living room's Mediterranean decor. The only thing missing would have been the Ga. slate top inlays of the coffee and end tables.Quote:
Originally Posted by Panomaniac
Later, I'd hoped the 9846, being designed for studio monitoring, would be much more in line with a 'best of both worlds' design, i.e. a 9845 with more/better bass extension, but alas, twas not to be. The 9848 was a 'mixed bag' at best, though closer in some ways, so as I previously noted, the lack of efficiency seems to be part of it and the lack of HF 'snap' (technically distortion) of the earlier Altec woofers to help blend them to a horn probably accounts for a lot of it too, hence my dual 411/311-90 'dream team' thoughts.
OK, that's what the 9846 is and already optimized for the 511/802D, so only in-room tweaking required. Art J. made some risers for his, but don't recall if he tweaked the horn or electronics any: http://www.lansingheritage.org/image...-8a/page02.jpg
GM
So you guys don't like th top end of the 411, is that it?
Would be very interested to see what could be done with it. I may try next year.
I spent a lot of time with the 9846 trying to optimize its performance but their
are certain default mechanical mismatches between the horn and woofer that cannot be overcome.
Matching a massive slow 411 woofer to a fast 511 horn will cause smear in the midrange.
no way around it that I can see. crossing at 500hz 2nd order is pushing it.
The difference in efficiency between the 2 will make your volume control non-linier.
I don't recall any discussions about this in the past.
I have charts here somewhere that show, SPL increase per Watt increase, based on efficiency.
They are rather impressive because it takes considerably more watts to get a given increase
in volume with low efficiency compared to high.
These observations come from the purist camp of hi-fi but can be easily forgiven in other
applications like home theater where the bass output of these will rule.........(with a low horn setting)
GM, the speaker stands and cabinet refinish were already done when I got them. (nice).
I spent my time re-foaming and converting to bi-amp which was the only hope for this combination.
:)
Art isn't this were the 30923/30904 Attenuator's come into play ? Or required when using this combo due to the difference in efficiencies ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Art J.
Yes, the 30904 was already in line at the time I made the observations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Altec Best
It may have helped to hide the situation.
My main take on the 30904 is to take the perceived shout out of the horn
due to the confined space in a home environment.
In your case you can add yours later in your speaker if you perceive that the
horn needs a bit taming down. It will depend on your room acoustics.
:)
OK Thanks Art, for the tip and explanation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Art J.
I've got two 411s,both in cabinets.One is(supposed to be)an Altec cabinet,the other a 'road case' stage type box with speakon connector.
They will be used below 70Hz via an active crossover.I read somewhere that the 411s require an amp with a high damping factor,so a pair of Kenwood L08Ms will be driving the 411s actively.I want the subs in the same listening plane as the mains will be on(about 6 feet from the rear boundary and 3 feet from the side walls).Room size 20 feet by 38.
I like what GM is saying about the 411s,as subs.If I was to have cabinets for these custom made,given my system and room,would there be a decent set of cabinet plans for these anywhere?Cabinet size is not a problem.I'm single and live alone.All interior design considerations are based upon the listening system,not vice versa.
IIRC Altec recommends a sealed 4.5-8 cu ft enclosure.But it has to be sealed !Quote:
Originally Posted by theophile
Absolutely airtight they will thrive as subs. They were designed for a sealed box.
http://www.hostboard.com/forums/hbmc...2010/11/33.jpg
Someone mentioned bass horns.What was that about?Quote:
Originally Posted by Altec Best
i have to admit that it would be interesting to hear them in a bass horn. some of the new dj stuff needs serious sound reinforcement down low
i have to admit that it would be interesting to hear them in a bass horn. some of the new dj stuff needs serious sound reinforcement down low. besides..the girls love big bass, dunno why..
Don't know why since the driver's Qts is low enough to handle some series resistance.Quote:
Originally Posted by theophile
No cab plans other than Altec's sealed cab which includes a horn, but for sub duty today, I'd vent them in ~32 ft^3 cabs based on your room's longest dimension to get them down to a Fs tuning or maybe even lower in an extended bass shelf (EBS) alignment to tune it at the room's ~15 Hz 1st axial mode, i.e. ~low Qt sealed response except with some extra gain BW down to the lowest pipe organ fundamental, yet with low group delay on a par with sealed above ~30 Hz where it counts.
As big as this is and considering the 70 Hz XO, turning it into a high gain (+6 dB or thereabouts) TL or even a tapped variant may be the 'hot ticket', but I'll have to sim it to be sure and for it to mean anything I'll need the driver's measured specs in case they are off much like some others have turned out.
GM
Wishful thinking since I doubt its surround is up for anything higher gain than a 1:1 CR BLH, i.e. monstrously large to go low.Quote:
Originally Posted by theophile
GM
Thanks GM. 32 feet cubed,that's the figure I'll go with.Sealed box.
I'll be using my active crossover.The 416A which will be handling from 70Hz to 500hz,will remain in the Valencia cabinet(why build another when one already exists?).The 416A will hand-over to a 288-8Kat 500Hz and I'll use a B&C DE 250 for higher frequencies.The horns have to be ordered but Azuras look likely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by valhallax
Yeah, the small gig DIYers are beginning to follow the prosound guys with 18" or even 21" tapped horns capable of up to 140+ dB/m. Not sure I want to party with these guys, the one time SPL record holder Deep Purple concert at the Fabulous Fox forced me out onto the concourse and even through mostly closed doors it was unpleasant.
My personal SPL 'high' though that I enjoyed was pegging a 126 dB peak SLM at ~1/4 mile away from an Atlanta Rhythm Section outdoor concert where the hill we were standing on put us ~on axis with all the horn arrays and the valley between us and the stage created a fabulously 'rich'/powerful bass line that even 20 kW worth of Crown power couldn't overwhelm. Folks literally as far away as the next county complained, so combined with the high number of drug induced injuries, there's been no more major R&R concerts at Road Atlanta AFAIK.
Yeah, get their reproductive system jiggling at the right frequency and they go nuts. Perch them atop a pea padded hard tail 74 or pound them with four low tuned corner loaded 15"s playing their fave R&R at near live levels and let the fun n' games begin! :D
GM
They love pistons.;)Quote:
Originally Posted by GM
You're welcome!Quote:
Originally Posted by theophile
Hmm, this is much too big for sealed and get much low distortion 'sub' woofer output. If sealed, there's no real advantage to going larger than Altec recommends and one can argue that it will be too over-damped if not driven with a high output impedance.
The 846A is structurally weak, plus IIRC it's not tuned low enough to blend well with a 'fast' 'sub' system without significant EQ, so at least long term I believe it wise to replace them with a higher SQ, lower tuned alignment.
GM