Altec, horns, drivers and crossovers 1970's model 9849 - eBay (item 170585640188 end time Jan-08-11 20:17:40 PST)
Mebbe a bargain? Aluminum not plastic horns.
Printable View
Altec, horns, drivers and crossovers 1970's model 9849 - eBay (item 170585640188 end time Jan-08-11 20:17:40 PST)
Mebbe a bargain? Aluminum not plastic horns.
Could be a bargain at a reasonable price .
Pretty sure that the 23746 moniker belongs to the ( rarified ) 806-8B as seen in this page from the 1975 catalogue .
http://www.hostboard.com/forums/hbmc.../2011/01/9.jpg
<> cheers
May or may not be tangerine equipped, mine were not but do have very low mileage 23744 phragms in them. For an 806 the HF extension seems substantial, but those 32343 crossovers have some equalization in them and are more likely the reason for the more pleasing HF IMO.Quote:
Pretty sure that the 23746 moniker belongs to the ( rarified ) 806-8B as seen in this page from the 1975 catalogue .
I think RonSSS has some of these with the tangerines.
Appreciate the corrections guys.
Anyway, seems like 400 there , so may go at a good price...
I'm curious why someone so knowledgeable about the crossovers would not have popped the backs off the drivers to see what they were and do an ohm test. Seems suspiciously strange.
Ohm tests are way over rated IMHO. It's become fashionable to show a digital meter across a speaker when advertised.
They do show continuity I suppose.
Actually to check phase plugs a flashlight down the driver throat works.
I would like to see pics of the frams, agreed.
To ensure they're genuine, a serious value factor IMO.Quote:
I would like to see pics of the frams, agreed.
[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Earl K
Actually they are the 806-8A and fairly common. I have a very early mint pair, and if the frams are original they are the "Lites" 23744 as mine are.
Here's another pair on eBay.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...EsX6lwfY-bnNCw
http://www.hostboard.com/forums/hbmc...2011/01/15.jpg
John , your photo is quite interesting .
Clearly from all the great information presented in this thread so far, the usage of the 23746 ( oem stamp ) wasn't limited to only one back-cap style neither was it used exclusively with the two phase plug types ( which negates claims for it being either a 806-8A or 806-8B / my bad ! sorry ! ) .
Therefore , I need to ask; what was the actual determining factor ( commonality ) for inking that 23746 stamp onto a driver ?
- ( So far it looks like any 806-8x body type loaded with a 23744 diaphragm covered with any back-cap style, was all that was required )
<> cheers
I think that's a safe conclusion. The "logic" we derive from progressive changes to the loose drivers with model numbers doesn't seem to apply equally to part-numbered OEM drivers Altec installed in factory made systems. From the references, it appears the only common denominator was the intended use (system to be installed in).Quote:
Originally Posted by Earl K
That said, the type of rear cover on a HF driver meant little or nothing on any model, I don't think any numbers were changed just because of the cover used (or even lack of one entirely when loading caps were employed). To add to the confusion when looking at the drivers left today, many that Altec re-diaphramed (after the new-style rear caps were in use) came back with a new-style rear cap as part of the terminal conversion kit.
The last 3 entries below show the only 23746 uses prior to the creation of the '75 reference/ What came after may be lost to history.
(of interest to note in the '75 reference is that some OEM drivers listed their model-number counterpart, but others didn't. I believe there was a reason for that.)
http://www.hostboard.com/forums/hbmc...2011/01/16.jpg
Thanks for that Brad !Quote:
Originally Posted by bfish
Do you have any idea what changes were made to the original models that would define the 806-8B and/or the 802-8E ??? ( in 10 years of eBay viewing, I've never seen either offered up for auction ) .
cheers <> Earl
You're welcome Earl. Since I've seen no positive reference (or even either of those drivers) I can only guess. In the case of the 806-8A/B, I'd consider a parallel to the 808-8A/B, circumferential plugs/Tangerines. For the 802-8E, no idea, since the literature suggests Tangerines were "new" to the 802-8G.
FWIW, I don't put a lot of stock in the drivers I see today being a fault-free reference to historical production. Seems everyone wants to believe their drivers are exactly as they were new. but time, memory, and provenance being what they are, much of that is wishful thinking. ;)
Given the components listed (and those that weren't) I wonder if the seller was EWaving his Altecs? If so, the $360 sale left him with some extra spend-togs (and likely a better system).
FWIW, I thought that whole lot went for a pretty cheap price ( eWaveable or not ) .Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad
eWaving ; ( have you ) ???
Generally, when using larger woofers, I prefer lower crossover points than what eWave embraces . Also, I prefer the sound of aluminum diaphragms over titanium or mylar ( though these stated preferences are restricted to the "near-field") .
Professionally, I do use JBLs waveguides driven by JBLs' minuscule Vertec drivers ( similar to a 291 in the top-end response ) . None of this stuff classifies as "eWave" from the affordability POV .
An Altec 288-8K is my reference standard for how this mid-size format should sound . That's why it's here at home .:)
I think the round caps are just an earlier version and have more to do with when they were manufactured and was just a change in a style of production when they went to the flat back.When Altec went to the flat back caps,late in the seventies or early eighties it was when they switched to the Tangerines as well.Now I have seen 806-8A's with the round cap that have metal phase plugs that I have, and I've seen the flat back 806-8A's with Tangerines.I'm pretty sure it was just a change in style and to announce or differentiate the tangerines with the flat back from the metal phase plugs w/round caps,around the same time the 802-8G's came out.
Now an interesting thing with my 19's is they have original 802G's/23744's with the round back cap,that just say Altec on the back 33952.Soon after they changed the caps.Here is a picture.The build date on mine are 2/77
http://www.hostboard.com/forums/hbmc...2011/01/17.jpg
YesQuote:
Originally Posted by Earl K
Yes
& Yes I agree with you on all points Earl, much prefer the aluminum over any titanium they just sound better IMHO.
I don't see what is so interesting about all these Ewaves. :confused: I mean what is so unique about it.It has all been done before hasn't it?? And as far as being economy they all have to look like well let's just say not good, because to make them have any kind of good looking aesthetics you have to put money into a finish albeit veneer,etc... And that kind of takes the economy right out of it.Most of the Ewaves I have seen are of the shoe box size variety.I just don't like the sound of small speakers they just don't fill a room with sound well enough IMO.They don't fool your ears well at all.Unless room is extremely small (closet). :D A $20 speaker just isn't that appealing, to much emphasis on economy,the priority should be on sound quality regardless of price, now that's a more appealing speaker to me.One that you can't improve upon.Tough Task but worth the effort. ;)
Thanks for posting the Literature Brad ! :2thumbsup:
Addendum: I think the waveguides themselves work well. I just don't like the small bookshelf speakers was the point I was getting at, not enough room filling sound IMHO.
Technically, no, at least not by the "model". I've played with some B&C ME90s on my 299s...Quote:
Originally Posted by Earl K
B&C SPEAKERS
...with promising results, but like you, I want to go much lower than the 1050/4th order I was able to do stock. There was enough promise though that when space permits, I intend to try a simple conical extension (pseudo PV quadratic throat) to get a lower cutoff.
Here's an oddity...serials are 12 apart...check the frams...
Of course one could have been changed....
http://cgi.ebay.com/Altec-802-8D-Hig...item35af0ce62e
That'd be my guess since one phragm has the new style(post 1983) push connectors and lead in conductors.Quote:
Of course one could have been changed....
Hey Earl, I think the commonality of the inking is,if they were mounted inside a cabinet they got ink stamps if they were visible like on top of an A-7 they got stickers/labelsQuote:
Originally Posted by Earl K
I would hazard to guess "Not Much" difference could have been diaphragms,or something minimal.. I have seen both on eBay.But like you had said they are quite rare.Not many produced.Quote:
Originally Posted by Earl K
AFAIK they were only in production for a very short time,only months I think.They were both discontinued at or around the same time as the launch of the new Tangerine 802-8G's
The mounting ring even looks odd. smaller or something :(Quote:
Originally Posted by bowtie427ss
Now, having looked at the enlarged pics i see that the "new" style phragm(actually the hub) has a larger outside diameter.Quote:
The mounting ring even looks odd. smaller or something
It is also evident from the larger pics that the actual diaphragm itself has much more pronounced grain in the "aluminum".
I just assumed when i saw the + and - that it was a genuine GPA/Altec phragm, the cheapo imports usually have a red dot denoting the positive terminal. Now i question the origin of that phragm.
What does anybody know about the rubber gaskets between the loading cap and mounting hub, when, why, what difference?
I see what you mean about the fram, I just don't know on that one. Could Altec's QC have slipped THAT much? I know many 604's were being rejected.