I have built a pair of Model 19's. Then I bi-amped them. Is there a better altec arrangement for home use? Opera and classical for this listener.
thanks for any input.
Printable View
I have built a pair of Model 19's. Then I bi-amped them. Is there a better altec arrangement for home use? Opera and classical for this listener.
thanks for any input.
When you ask for a "better Altec arrangement for home use," are you referring to a different way to set up the Altec 19, or are you referring to another Altec speaker system altogether?
There are several ways to bring much better sound out of the Model 19. If that is what you are referring to, let us know.
GeeDeeEmm
Hi GD. I would certainly start with suggestions on improving the Model 19. Even a new enclosure would be interesting.
thanks.
Hi Les -
Well, there are two lines of thought regarding the Model 19/other Altec, the majority of it centering on equalizing the horn response via 1) active eq, or 2) passive crossover eq. Big changes. Rather than opine on a lot of stuff that is actually my casual hobby and not a specialty, let the guys who know what they are talking about do the work:
Look at my new babies...Altec 846Bs w/EV Tweeters!!
http://wajonaudio.webs.com/Voice%20o...%20theatre.pdf
These two articles will give you the basics of the whole horn eq process and the many directions that branch off from there. With these two as basic starting points, you will find literally tons of reference material, so get ready.
Hope this helps.
GeeDeeEmm
Les,
As I begin the Model 19 build journey, i also have questions.
When you say bi-amp , are you using a DSP based or other "electronic crossover"?
If so, I'm not sure you are hearing the smoothest response the 811b can provide. If I understand correctly, most loudspeakers need a bit of massaging to their mechanical response to sound their best. I'm not sure an electronic crossover will get us there 100%.
During a previous build (GR Research LS9), I spoke to Danny the designer about bi-amping using an electronic crossover. He said there was a couple of circuits in the standard passive crossover that could not be duplicated electronically. Then tons of engineering techno babble went over my head. I should have taken notes.
I have 19's, 8g's and H's, with some music they all out do each other. I would think the ultimate would be a modern build with altec components. I for one would love to hear dual 416's in a very large cabinet with 311's and some 288's...
Nick D: I'm using a minidsp that does the crossover and EQ. The system measures the room via microphone and equalizes the system. Pretty effective.
- - - Updated - - -
Juniper: you read my mind. I was wondering about dual 416's starting with the 811b and then who knows. Because I use a pair of subwoofers, the bass extension is not much of an issue for me. So I'm looking for what's best above 50-75Hz. 416's side by side or one above and one below the 811b? I'm hoping someone chimes in and says they have done similar.
Danny sounds like a great salesman.Quote:
I spoke to Danny the designer about bi-amping using an electronic crossover. He said there was a couple of circuits in the standard passive crossover that could not be duplicated electronically.
You do understand that a passive crossover network is 100% electronic, right?
Nah. Danny's just communicating in Electronics Jargon, Version "B." It's the version used when casually discussing blanket assertions rather than drawing a verbal circuit board. It's sort of akin to the different languages your surgeon uses with you, versus what he says to his transcriptionist. Version "A" is technically correct, but version "B" allows one to transfer basic information while still retaining the mantle of intellectual superiority. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by bowtie427ss
GeeDeeEmm
Bowtie,
:o Forgive the gaff, my post should have been worded better. If I remember correctly, Danny and I were talking about active electronic (before amp) crossovers like Bryston and Audio Research. His design needed some phase manipulation and a trap in the woofer circuit to really perform optimally.
Since then, I had a friend program a DSP based crossover built into a set Digamoda amps for a tri-amped set of Don Keele's CBT arrays. The software was amazing in its flexibility. Shelving circuits, phase manipulation, contours, etc.
The current rig I use now (Lyngdorf) offers selectable high and low pass and slopes, but does the DSP correction automatically ("Room Perfect" software). Not sure what results I would get if I bi-amp with that. :I don't know:
I guess the point I was trying to make is that the average enthusiast might not have the flexibility built into the crossover and the measuring equipment to really get things dialed in.
My Lyngdorf can do amazing things to remove bumps and dips, but I am going to use passive crossovers between the 416 & 802 at this point to make sure I get the sound that the Altec team thought was good. :)
I agree wholeheartedly.Quote:
I guess the point I was trying to make is that the average enthusiast might not have the flexibility built into the crossover and the measuring equipment to really get things dialed in.
This is also a big reason that so many designers go to great lengths to refine passive networks as far as they do, it assures the end user of a performance standard above which his speaker system will always perform.
For the majority of users it is not practical to own the necessary equipment and/or software, or to gain and possess the knowledge necessary to do critical loudspeaker analysis.
Thankfully, technology has advanced to the point where the more serious enthusiast can now get his feet wet in active bi-amplification for hifi at a relatively "hobby" entry fee.
If money is not a large obstacle, take a look at some of the processing offered by Xillica, particularly the XD series.
i still havent tried out my DCX2496 if it does what it's supposed to i may have a couple of cx2300's available cheap. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by bowtie427ss
"Juniper: you read my mind. I was wondering about dual 416's starting with the 811b and then who knows. Because I use a pair of subwoofers, the bass extension is not much of an issue for me. So I'm looking for what's best above 50-75Hz. 416's side by side or one above and one below the 811b? I'm hoping someone chimes in and says they have done similar."
Seems as if I'm the only one here to have taken the plunge. There are a few on this board who took notice some time (months & years ago) but many whether they don't want to make the cash outlay...I can't say.
I started this journey in 1968 and have been largely satisfied. Once you go here Flickr - Photo Sharing! you can poke around to see a couple more Altec photos.
I have been using a passive x-over from Auido magazine which some say won't work, but it apparently does. I also spent money on a Linkwitz(sp) Riley kit which remains untested. Same x-over, 500Hz, frequency.
More later.
that looks like a M19 on steroids! I'm a bit confused by the 500hz crossover however. I thought that 500hz was the 511 horn crossover spec. I didn't think the 811 is optimized for that range?
Can some one bring me up to speed?
Yes, the 511 horn was spec'd in the enclosure plans, so it was done accordingly.
I chose that along with the logical reason that according to Don Davis the 500 Hz crossover was ideal because the largest proportion of acoustic power in orchestral music was below 500 Hz.
Somewhere in my old posts, I think that chart is there.
gvasale, those speakers look impressive.
I was thinking of something similar the other day while listening to my 19's....
I have had my 19's for a year now, and have not been wowed by them like I was when I had my 604-8K's in 620 cabs with GPA XO's. I am not saying the 19's are a slouch, and I enjoy them quite a bit. I will add that my 19's are factory, and only the caps have been swapped. I know the person who did the work, but it seems like the caps ( all solens, if I recall when I pulled out the XO's last) would've broken in by now.
I'm going to take a look at the XO's again and resolder everything, and check the grounds. I remember recalling someone posting something about the grounds on the XO's and it helping with output. Then I 'll look into getting new diaphragms and recone/remagging and hope that brings them up to spec. Been thinking about using miniDSP as the XO, as I am curious about it and how it might/might not pair with the 19's
Looking for another pair of 604's and get them up in running and compare them directly with my 19's. I do not know what is, maybe it was the fact I pieced my 604 project piece by piece and sourced everything and it was a fun, hands on experience. But I find myself thinking how would my old 604's hold up to these 19's. SO , I am gonna find out.
Btw, my listening preferences are all over the map, and I use/used a variety of amp topologies......
I would go for analogue active XO.Quote:
Originally Posted by gdmoore28
There's been numerous threads on how to tweak a cab, 811 individually or as a speaker system on several forums, so to get you started: https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=modifying+altec+m-19+Quote:
Originally Posted by les winter
Personally, as well as a few others, prefer a bit bigger cab tuned lower for the [near] 'full-range' response required for symphonies with this one having the best documented build details IIRC:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/187508-altec-416b-mltl-design-gm.html
GM
Other than power handling, what's the benefit of two woofers side by side?
Two woofers in close proximity on the same baffle gives you 3-6 decibel increase in output. In effect it should mean a combined woofer efficiency somewhere around 102db at 1 watt @ 1 meter from around 50hz up to crossover point. Less resistance needed in the compression driver circuit so the crossover would have to be reworked I would think.
I can see how it means louder but how does it mean better?
There are some who think the 811b horn with a 802 or 902 driver is too efficient to mate with a single 416 woofer. For those folks I suppose louder is better meaning the balance of the speaker will be warmer and have more bass impact.
As I am undertaking my first Altec build, honestly I don't know. I am building as the designers originally intended and then I will go from there. I have had line source speakers in my room with 12ea 6" woofers per side. In that room, louder was not better. Bass at higher listening levels would overwhelm the room and muddy up the mix on a otherwise very good sounding system. I would think there is an unwritten "golden ratio" of bass output for room size.
For [most] HIFI/HT apps it's about a better controlled horizontal polar response, especially for mating to a radial horn with dual 12" for the 811 and dual 15" for the 511.Quote:
Originally Posted by les winter
GM
Thank you GM.
Will a 902 mate with a 500 horn?
+1 Particularly thru the crossover region, which for example is why the 9844 has such an audibly seamless transition at XO using such a basic network.Quote:
Originally Posted by GM
OK, so 2ea 12's (414's?) side by side mated to the 811 has a better horizontal polar response. does it sound better in a home application 12-14' away. looks like maybe the 9844-9845 are near field studio monitors (soffit mounted) then feet were added for home use?
My thoughts are the box looks too small and the horn height is too low. GM, have you modeled a pair of 414's in a taller box like the M19 platform for home use? and do you still use the 1200hz crossover with the 811?
I am shopping for drivers next week and need to make some decisions.:)
Yes, at least in the case of the 9844, the designers intended for them to be soffit mounted with the ceiling immediately adjacent to the woofers for 1/4 space loading. When i owned them i found that was the optimum positioning. But, it's not very attractive in a living room.
To digress, my best 9844 experience in the rooms available to me at the time were stacked pairs in corners with the horn in the bottom cabinets turned off.
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m...11-18-2008.jpg
Thanks bowtie,
I think sticking with the M19 is the way to go. Lots of choices, but in the end my wife has to live with and enjoy them too. The 19's are the look of an era. I think they will sound good enough to keep me happy, and look good enough that she is happy too.
You're welcome! Any 800-900 series driver will work on any of Altec's 1" throats, though of course the horn will dictate its overall performance, hence usable XO point/slope.Quote:
Originally Posted by les winter
GM
- - - Updated - - -
Right, what I was predominantly referring to and in retrospect should have spelled out.Quote:
Originally Posted by bowtie427ss
GM
- - - Updated - - -
Ditto the Laguna's dual 416/511 where I learned about such things: https://www.google.com/search?q=altec+laguna+830a&rlz=1C1AVNG_enUS675US67 5&espv=2&biw=1242&bih=585&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa= X&ved=0ahUKEwif8YXi4unMAhVlxYMKHQhWBr0Q_AUIBygCQuote:
Originally Posted by bowtie427ss
GM
- - - Updated - - -
Modelled, no; built, yes. Long before modelling software, I converted a then co-worker's pair of 9844s to a tower/column reflex [aka MLTL nowadays] with horn on top tuned to the driver's averaged Fs. They were very pleased with its lack of a typical reflex's 'boom'/'flabbiness' and added 'fullness' of its increased [mid] bass.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nickd
I've never used a 1200 Hz XO nor a fan of the M19............ the few 811s I've been involved with were either nominally 800 or 1000 Hz.
GM
So GM,
Knowing what you know now, what is your idea of the best ALtec can do for a standard size room (15'x 21')?
Seems like you guys that have been around the block a couple of times are into big multi sectional horns and really low crossover points.
I could build a DIY box with a big horn on top after chasing the parts I suppose, but I like full range highs and am sensitive to absolute phase between drivers. It seems like a tweeter would have to be added and a crossover devised to handle 3 dissimilar drivers. Not to mention where to mount the "tweeter" or uhf driver and baby size horn.
Your thoughts?
Depends on the room's acoustics, speaker, listening location[s], signal source[s], personal preference, any WAF/SO considerations, etc..
Regardless, there's no truly 'full-range', flat amplitude and phase coherent Altec system and hard to get one 'close enough' over just the ~80-5 kHz critical speech BW with a horn system in an acoustically small room simply because we can't sit far enough away for it to look small enough to appear as a small point source, though many are satisfied with a well engineered Duplex system.
If I were to build one without resorting to designing/building a large three-way horn system, then a traditional three-way with a 755 'wide range' [preferably an 'A'] in a small WG with a 3000 series HF horn and 416 woofer all mounted to a properly contoured baffle to optimize physical TD offset to round it out will do an a pretty good job, but an 8" mid is a bit large for this type of system.
In either case, if pipe organ symphonies or other ULF sources are included, then add a separate multiple sub system spread around the room to handle the lowest ~2-2.5 octaves.
For high efficiency, then there's no such thing as too large a [mid] horn [system], just a point of diminishing returns, so as big as one can 'afford' and why if I'm ever able to do another one it will be dominated by large three-way Synergy concept horns coupled to a much larger multiple [sub] bass horn system. Actual Altec components [if any] will be limited to the HF compression drivers.
GM