atmasphere EVs, Klipsch, Altec and JBL all are not 1930s. The Altec A7 you use as a example of poor bass its again not a 1930s design but is a affordable down sized design so expecting that to have deep bass and to be a example of design faults from the 1930s is very off. And you say this- Most older speakers simply can’t reproduce it right- certainly nothing from the 30s can- again since you admit no experience with 1930s how can you say such a all encompassing thing. Your argument about old wiring well I see cloths back in and costly as all heck and noted more than a few modern builders that are using screw type connections and bakelite. And you mention a 98db loudspeaker that good to 20hz I would like to see that since Hoffmans iron law it would have to be giant. So thanks for replying etc but you haven't changed my mind.
Loudspeakers have we really made that much progress since the 1930s?
Since I have a slight grasp on the history or loudspeaker design. And what is possible with modern. I do wonder if we have really made that much progress. I have access to some of the most modern transducers and design equipment. I also have large collection of vintage. I tend to spend the most time listening to my 1930 Shearer horns. For they do most things a good bit better than even the most advanced loudspeakers available. And I am not the only one to think so I have had a good num of designers retailers etc give them a listen. Sure weak points of the past are audible. These designs were meant to cover frequency ranges at the time. So adding a tweeter moves them up to modern performance. To me the tweeter has shown the most advancement in transducers but not so much the rest. Sure things are smaller but they really do not sound close to the Shearer. http://www.audioheritage.org/html/profiles/lmco/shearer.htm
283 responses Add your response
Certainly gains have been made in speaker design equipment and the parts used to implement ever more refined designs. However, as the owner of a horn hybrid system, I have to agree that the fundamentals of design have not experienced a paradigm shift at all. Listen to Atmasphere. Ralph has devoted his life to these matters and has a well-deserved reputation as a straight shooter. |
"The plasma driver can be traced to 1900 and William Duddles singing arc" Hi John, this is the quote from Wikipedia that you supplied when I commented about Plasma drivers... As I had said, I've heard the Plasmatronics, but didn't know when they originated... I looked up your William Duddles singing arc.... The singing Arc was a short created between two carbon filaments, this arc was used as lighting and was poorly done. It did have an effect of a tone output and was named the singing arc....its frequency was controlled by voltage. Duddles added an LC network trying to filter out the noise so that it would be accepted as a Lamp. With the LC networkvOn this Lamp Duddles found that he could somewhat control frequency. It did not produce plasma in any way. As far as they could get with this is that it could re produce the frequency matching of a keyboard and it was done by modulating the voltage of an Electronic arc supply... Fascinating read, but It had nothing to do with how Plasma has been used in a speaker in anyway and certainly did not require a Helium tank to operate. The Hill Plasmatronics actually used a Helium tank to produce Plasma to play music.... When ever this was first produced, I do consider this a "Break Through" Of course, you may still show that it happened in 1906 or something. I have no idea there. Tim |
Larry, Yes, there is something about the old school paper cone woofers. The Jensens may not go as deep as modern woofers or have the same impact, at least in my bass reflex cabinets, but they somehow are able to blend seamlessly with the 32 horn and compression driver to create a coherent sound source. Coherency is one of my top criteria for judging speakers. I want a speaker to sound like a single full-range speaker, not a 2-way or 3-way. If this means giving up some extension in the bass or the highs, that's an acceptable tradeoff for me. |
The 802 driver is a very nice compression driver. I too like the old school paper cone woofers with alnico magnets and pleated surrounds. To me, these low compliance woofers deliver better "tone" for bass, even though they cannot go quite as low and deliver the same kind of punch as modern woofers. My speaker utilizes a modern version of old school woofers; it has two 12" pape- coned, alnico magnet drivers and has a pleated fabric surround. |
Whart, I use an Altec 802-8G compression driver on the 32A horn. Woofer is a Jensen P15LL which is a 15" with paper cone. Both drivers have Alnico magnets. The drivers and horn date from the 1970s, I believe, but are still available on Ebay at reasonable prices. The drivers and horns are just the raw materials, however; the trick to getting them to sound so good is the crossover. I have spent way too much time getting the crossover just the way I like it, but I am happy to provide details to anyone who is interested. Just send me a message through the Agon email system. |
Sal, Your experience is very much like mine. I did not like the sound of Klipshorns and most of the Altec systems I heard. I got interested in horns after hearing a pretty decent sounding Edgarhorn system. I am now a fan, and owner of a system that mixes modern (but old school) drivers with Western Electric compression midrange and horn. There are many other examples of vintage horn and non-horn gear that are also VERY good, such as Jensen fieldcoil direct radiators, IPC compression drivers, RCA compression drivers, Japanese Western Electric replica drivers, and a lot of other similar gear, that would surely surprise a lot of people if only they had a chance to hear the stuff. I sort of agree with you on the Classic Audio fieldcoil speakers. I think they are interesting, but, they are not quite my taste. The Avant Garde systems I heard were also nice, but, not quite what I wanted either. I heard a nice Goto system, but it cost more than a nice house. |
The diversity of opinions in this thread demonstrates once again the diversity of viewpoints in audio, which is a good thing in my opinion. We approach the listening experience with different attitudes, priorities, life experiences, etc. which gives rise to different views on whether a particular speaker (or amplifier or whatever) sounds "good" or not. I am always surprised by the posted reactions to a different rooms at a hifi show I attended. Some rooms that I considered very poor are praised by others. It reminds me of how people can view a work of art and come away with such different reactions to it. In the case of vintage speakers, the picture is especially cloudy because so few people have actually heard the great sounding speakers from the 1930s and 1940s. Especially in carefully set up systems. Too many are making judgments based on what they think old speakers should sound like or what they recall from hearing Altecs or Klipschorns years ago, rather than actual experience. For myself I came to the vintage world and to horns in particular quite reluctantly. For whatever reason I am very sensitive to the "honk" or "shriek" produced by many horns. For decades each time I heard a horn speaker, I had the same negative reactions and wondered how anyone could tolerate such a colored sound. Then I had a chance to hear some speakers using Western Electric horns and drivers and discovered how good they could sound. As noted by several posters in this thread, a really good vintage speaker has a special musicality that modern speakers just don't provide, at least in my opinion. And certain horns do NOT have the honk or shriek that drives me the wall. One of those horns is the Western Electric 32A which can blend seamlessly with a large paper cone woofer, and fortunately the Altec version of the 32A is still readily available. My own speakers use the Altec 32A with compression drivers and woofers that qualify as vintage but not from as far back as the 1930s. I won't say my speakers can compete with the Shearer speakers described by the OP but they do things for me that are musically satisfying in ways that modern speakers do not. And that includes modern horn speakers such as the Classic Audio Loudspeakers (heard half a dozen times but only at shows) and Avant Gardes. Other folks might not react the same, but that just goes back to the diversity in this hobby. To each his own. |
Music instruments are pretty much what they have always been. And there’s the Stradivarius (and many other) fetishes for vintage stuff that supposedly was never bested. In audio, and particularly speakers, many fundamentals are extremely similar since the 70s. Which is not a bad thing at all. It means a technology has reached a level where you may consider yourself served for the longer term. I do think there is genuine innovation, but on the other hand the improvements come down to the diminishing results we’re long used to in audio. My dad had phenomenally sounding speakers in the 70s. It was only in the early 90s that I was able to get -for myself, after I moved out- speakers that sounded equal in quality. And when my Dad died, I would have gladly taken those speakers, only they had been destroyed in a fire a few years before he died. I think what has *really* changed is the quality of sound in the lower end. You were always able to get great sounding sound if you spent enough. But now you can build a system with a very few $500 components that gives anything a run for its money, and definitely puts still pricey vintage stuff in its place. |
All one has to do is look at the work of Andrew Jones. On the high end vapor deposted beryllium drivers (which to me sound like the quad 63’s I used to own but better in every way). On the low end his latest elac $500 speakers should perform at an unprecedented level. A friend just ordered them and I can’t wait to hear them with my excellent electronics that while out of balance price wise will show what they are capable of. |
Atmasphere cant do bass right! Maybe wee ones dont but full sized sure do. Less detailed maybe if you dont add a tweeter keep in mind these designs were only good to 8khz. Dont handle power well! What the heck dude that one boggles my mind its so so wrong come visit so I can prove you wrong on all accounts lol. I often show with Classic Audio Loudspeakers at shows. In that regard I suppose I am 'involved' although John Wolff seems to do pretty well on his own. I show with him because his speakers work, and don't have the faults I previously described. Johnk, I've had EVs, Klipsch, Altec and JBL. None of them are free of breakups in their drivers (in particular, the midrange drivers) and so they sound harsher and less detailed. I'm used to hearing drivers with no breakups, so I am used to them being smooth. A person might not know what I am talking about if they are not used to such drivers! Under those circumstances, older vintage stuff sounds just fine, but I would not call it state of the art! Reliability- I've seen plenty of vintage drivers fail for the simple reason that they are old. glue failing, paper rotting, need I go on?? Setting the age aside, how about limited power handling? Or inability to handle excursion? Breakups (those are sought after in guitar speakers but cause harshness and distortion in hifi speakers; breakups in the Altec compression drivers can cause the diaphragm to crack; I've changed a lot of those in my time)? Reduction of cabinet resonance? Cheesy speaker terminals and wiring? These are problems that are solved or reduced in newer designs. Now there is a reason why vintage stuff is valuable and expensive. Its not always due to performance though. It might simply be because lots of older stuff is cool and there isn't that much of it. I just sold a 1941 Indian motorbike and one would be hard pressed to say that it had anything over modern bikes except style points and it went for a lot more dough than most modern bikes do! And heck, you can still make music with older speakers but you have to deal with their limitations. In particular I like to play music a bit on the loud side and I like electronic music with lots of bass impact.... What does it even mean to "play bass right"? That's easy! In addition to making amps, I run a recording studio and have done a number of recordings. One of them has the largest bass drum that was in the state of Minnesota at the time of the recording- it was 6 feet in diameter and was something you felt rather than heard, especially when played softly. Most older speakers simply can't reproduce it right- certainly nothing from the 30s can. Now I was there at the recording session since I recorded it... and I have the master tapes and the test pressings of the LP. I **know** what this recording sounds like and its a simple fact that all vintage high efficiency speakers can't play the bass right. Some lower efficiency speakers can, I had Fultons back in the 80s when I did this recording and the Fulton Premieres could do it. But they were not particularly efficient. Today I have speakers in my living room that do the job just fine and they are 98 db. When you have a recording that you know because you were there when it was made then you have a reference. I do recommend that any audiophile do field recordings when they can and get some idea of how to place microphones and otherwise sort out what the recording process is all about. Its an eye opener. If you can further get that recording onto a format that is easily played (CD or LP for example) then you have a tool for understanding how any system actually sounds. So to play bass right, the system has to be able to simultaneously have the extension into the low 20s, the ability to play it with impact and the nuance to do the subtle passages without loosing information. The Theile/Small parameters (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiele/Small) were not worked out until sometime in the early 1960s and 70s; what this means is that not many speakers before that time could have had the bass sections of their cabinets properly designed. Its pretty well known for example that the Altec A7 'Voice of the Theater' didn't have the port set up right. Being that's the case, the argument that bass is somehow 'right' in the prior art falls apart pretty quick. |
I agree, Inna. I solve that by replacing the nickel and dime components in the crossovers. A single electrolytic cap in the signal path creates an unpleasant haze of high frequency distortion, which one identifies with digital. Red Book CD digital absolutely requires a 22 KHz brick wall filter, because otherwise truly horrific distortions arise (i.e. aliasing). Who among the digitizers would bother with $50 capacitors? Hence distortion for the multitudes. I can make Magnepans or Quads absolutely sing, simply by replacing or bypassing distortion-producing cheap components. With an analogue source, of course. |
Atmasphere keeps stating debatable or simply wrong things in a categorical manner. I think, what John is talking about is music lover's speakers versus hi-fi speakers. I am not familiar with high end vintage speakers, so won't comment, but there is something artificial in many modern speakers, they are sort of 'digital'. |
To me, a lot of audiophile quality double bass is too closely miked- you hear things that even the player probably doesn’t hear. I think that is intended to create an immediacy, but real bass doesn’t sound like that in a club. Piano, to me, is also a tough instrument. Sometimes, very simple recordings are best- but many lack the weight and heft of a real piano in the lower registers and sound two dimensional; to compensate, sometimes the instrument is very closely miked in the same way I described the bass, above. When recorded with other instruments, it sounds out of proportion. The more modern, big heavy weight bass sound is great for "thwack" but there’s also stuff going on above- the "air," the skin sound, the tonality of a drum beyond the explosive movement of air. I think it is hard to get it all. I’ve always suffered a bit of a trade-off b/c to me, it starts (and often ends) in the midrange- bandwidth, imaging, soundstage, whatever audiophile attributes you ascribe to as important are pretty irrelevant if the thing sounds reproduced. |
(johnk) I believe johnk (in the top paragraph) addresses what he feels is sonically missing with most of todays modern speakers (or the present state of reproduced sound in general), and whether his point of reference in stating this is vintage speakers or not is irrelevant; it's still what he finds is missing. What does it even mean to "play bass right"? There seems to me to be something fundamentally different in the way these [vintage] speakers play bass compared to modern speakers with their super dead cabinets and incredible fast, tight and really deep bass. While these speakers sound very impressive their bass just doesn’t flow within the performance like these older-design speakers. The bass on these newer speakers is definitely deeper, faster and has more slam, but they just don’t have the life in the bass that the more vintage designs do. All of the speakers above have incredible air and harmonics in the bass. You feel the bass. Yes, you feel the bass with the modern speaker as well, but differently. The bass from modern speakers with extremely dead cabinets has a very pistonic sound. To me, real music seldom sounds this way, occasionally rock music does, but it also often sounds purposefully distorted. http://www.dagogo.com/beatnik-pet-peeve-3-way-modern-speakers-play-bass |
The epiphany for me, as regards "bandwidth" was hearing the original transcriptions of Benny Goodman's 1938 Concert at Carnegie Hall, in the process of being restored by an archivist. I listened to the flat transfer and to his cleaned up version of Sing, Sing, Sing. The bandwidth, running through a phone line to a cutter some blocks away from the Hall, was around 8Khz. The cleaned up version had dynamics and air on the drums, propulsive and alive sounding. It made me reconsider the value of digital for historic recordings- if done well, in addition to appreciating how much could be extracted from such an old recording. Last night, I heard Los Straightjackets do a cover of Sing, Sing, Sing at a small club nearby- in their inimitable surf-pysch rock style. That was great too. :) |
Vintage designs have proven there reliability modern has not. Functioning after near 80 years to atmasphere doesn’t show reliability? Then I dont know what standards hes using. Also arent you involved with marketing Classic Audio Reproductions? So maybe as Upton Sinclair said it {
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”} |
Atmasphere cant do bass right! Maybe wee ones dont but full sized sure do. Less detailed maybe if you dont add a tweeter keep in mind these designs were only good to 8khz. Dont handle power well! What the heck dude that one boggles my mind its so so wrong come visit so I can prove you wrong on all accounts lol. |
A member I consider to be very knowledgeable with speakers often said something to the effect of "there have been no major advancements in loudspeaker design since the 1930s, other than making bad speakers sound better (i.e., direct radiators)." In other words, the best designs of that era would still sound as good as the best designs of today. The statement sounds pretty far-fetched at first glance, but I think I tend to agree with him. Take for example, the Klipschorn that was introduced in the 1940s. That speaker with the same basic design is still made and sold today. Match up a Klipschorn with the right upstream components and a good room, and the sound you get will be about as good as available at any price. I have experienced this myself. |
Mapman whats missing- realistic sound quality, the ability to allow listener to feel the emotion of the music. The ability to easily hear the mix ie pick out the individual instruments and vocals along with the added studio work. Realistic image size and dynamic range.The at ease at any SPL the ability to sound wonderful out of sweet spot and through out home. Extreme lack of listening fatigue. A clear real sounding vocal ability the ability to do this all on massively low power. Extreme reliability and ease of service in field by owner. Today most all of this is missing and if present only a small part of it.I also disagree. Vintage speakers of high efficiency really don't play bass right, they are less detailed and harsher due to breakups in the various drivers and they don't handle power well (are less reliable). So the statement above seems false on all counts. |
I have to agree with Mapman ,having owned lots of vintage gear including speakers ( still own for investment only),,Altec/JBL/Jensen/Tannoy/Stephens and a couple pieces of Western Electric they are never my go to speakers.Id say most will never own highend vintage speakers and most I bet wouldn't want to if having the choice between that and say Magico,Kharma,Wilson,Raidho etc etc...I have no idea whats behind the technology and dont really care,they just sound better to me. |
Innovation in any field addresses the changing needs or wants of the times. Any "good reasons" may not be at service in search of the very best in audio reproduction, but seems more a consequence of how to work around obstacles that are also associated with convenience, size constraints, consumption issues, design demands, etc; oftentimes status quo is the desired goal, if it even is. I’m not saying there isn’t innovation at play here (no pun intended), on the contrary, but to simply bow to this kind of innovation as "the good reason" is to potentially shortchange the goal into audio reproduction and its further developement, as I see it. I can’t speak for johnk, but perhaps part of what he finds "has been forgotten" may be addressed in Robert Harley’s review of Magico’s statement product, "Ultimate" (the only horn speakers in their product range): Clearly, loudspeakers are a major source of detail erasure. It’s easy to imagine how large and complex power amplifiers, which must convert a low-level incoming signal to huge voltage swings backed by hefty current delivery, scrub off a bit of the signal’s finest information. It’s even easier to imagine how the conversion of electron flow in the voice coil into magnetism, the conversion of that magnetism to the large motion of a relatively massive diaphragm, and the motion of the diaphragm itself cause the smallest and most fragile components of the signal to disappear or become attenuated, while the more robust signal components pass through relatively unscathed. But it is precisely these micro-aspects of the signal that contain that last bit of information we need to identify the sound as being live rather than a reproduction. A musical signal reproduced through a horn-loaded system undergoes an identical process, but on a much smaller scale. The compression drivers’ extremely powerful magnets require only a tiny fraction of the current of direct-radiating drivers to produce their miniscule diaphragm excursions. It seems intuitive that this roughly ten-fold reduction in electrical and dynamic forces allows the process to be performed with higher precision. http://www.magico.net/images/Reviews/Ultimate/MAGICO_Ultimate.pdf It’s worth noting (through the remaining review) Mr. Harley’s impressions of the Ultimate system to "trespass" the line from reproduction into a live event. This may not be an exclusive claim, nor is named million dollar speaker system representative of all horn speakers, but you nonetheless feel his admiration of something that pushes the boundaries of audio reproduction. This mayn’t be innovation either, but it’s a refinement/evolvement of horn principles founded many years ago, and ones you would wish explored more widely as well as economically accessible (certainly compared to the Ultimate system). |
Johnk gave a good description of the sonic advantages of good vintage speakers, one borne out in my experience as well. I would just emphasize the realistic dynamic swings that a good vintage speaker can provide, both low-level, subtle shifts in dynamics, and loud-level dynamic peaks. All without sounding stressed or compressed. |
john, We’ll have to agree to disagree on that, much of which is very subjective. I experience all those things regularly on both my own and other systems I hear with modern speaker technology. Doing it with low power these days is perhaps the biggest challenge because most people do not want or have room for very large highly efficient full range speakers. But still I have heard some like that at shows. Again changing times and different needs. But I understand and share the nostalgia for quality innovative products of the past. A Victrola is one of the things on my bucket list and I do have a soft spot for tube gear still and an interest at least in high efficiency speakers. |
Mapman whats missing- realistic sound quality, the ability to allow listener to feel the emotion of the music. The ability to easily hear the mix ie pick out the individual instruments and vocals along with the added studio work. Realistic image size and dynamic range.The at ease at any SPL the ability to sound wonderful out of sweet spot and through out home. Extreme lack of listening fatigue. A clear real sounding vocal ability the ability to do this all on massively low power. Extreme reliability and ease of service in field by owner. Today most all of this is missing and if present only a small part of it. |
I don't think we have lost the ability to innovate- the goals and priorities are different. When those magnificent early theatre sound systems were designed, they were addressing the needs of an entire industry transitioning to the "talkies" and trying to accommodate the space limitations of existing theaters. But, the resources were there and the top companies were competing to develop product. Today, look at big data- the ability to collect and analyze massive amounts of data and apply it- to everything from serving targeted advertising to national security- is where the action is, and there are no doubt innovations in that field. The trickle down to consumer level products- in the form of "smart" phones and appliances, as well as interfaces that are guided by past user selections is what we get, not necessarily better audio. (Though things like DSP have made woofer set up for modest home theatres pretty easy). Materials science and acoustic models (aided by computers) may have improved, but some of the materials- copper in field coil speakers- mercury vapor tubes, or even the materials and tooling for most vacuum tubes are expensive or hazardous or obsolete. (Look at what happened during the "vinyl boom"- suddenly there was a need for record presses-and none had been made for years; now, those presses have been salvaged, rehab'd and new ones are being built simply because there is demand). I'm fascinated by the early days of audio. I'd love to see and hear your private museum at some point John. One book worth reading although it isn't strictly technical, and has some gaps- is Cowboys and Indies. Dumb title, but it is essentially the history of reproduced sound and the emergence of the industries and businesses that depended on it (music publishing, record companies and trends in listening behaviors from the 19th century to date). In the process, there is some discussion of the changes in audio technology and how that related to cultural changes at the time. |
I started with modern dabbled in vintage. I wanted to understand the past and learn more about loudspeaker design by exploring the past. I never went into collecting vintage with the mindset that it was better only that it was interesting. I would use my audiophile systems as mains and mostly ended up listening alone. The Shearers my Lansings and WE 13As even my Racon in mono make people dance sound more like real music. I have loudspeakers about from much of the history of cinema and many other famous home designs. I also have some of the most modern. My personal hands on experience with designing manufacturing, collecting, restoring, studying loudspeakers and loudspeaker design made me ponder the ? And I honestly still think we have lost much of the ability to innovate and are more just evolving loudspeaker tech. And much of what the past did so so well has been forgotten.. |
My personal experience with the evolution of loudspeakers don’t extend for longer than back to the late 70’s, and though this mayn’t warrant calling these earlier encounters vintage speakers per se, there’s definitely been a tendency of speakers being progressively smaller (and then perhaps bigger again). As an example back in the late 80’s a pair of JBL 250Ti’s could be had for roughly $3,500 (following a decline in the exchange rate of the Dollar), and though you could arguably have a different, more "hifi-ish" sound for that amount of money (or even less), what you got was a big, versatile, high quality visceral sound, and two lovely pieces of furniture to boot. The JBL 250TI Jubilee’s could be had for about a $1,000 more a pair a little over a decade later, a fine value as well (as I see it). I like seeing JBL go back to the use of compression drivers in tandem with bigger 15" bass/mid drives for the last decade or so with their "commercial" and monitor series (except of course the Everest’s/K2, which have been more or less less true to their heritage line), but the price for these, even where no real veneer was used, was/is steep, and a reflection of something other than inflation alone; the market sees a progressive use of smaller speakers that are refined into being quite expensive, and their bigger iterations are of course priced accordingly (i.e.: very expensive). Big, visceral sound is a quality in itself, I find, and a very important parameter in making you give-in to the music as something other than reproduced. It’s a shame then that where this is to be attained the price may be out of reach or requiring extra monetary priorities, if the desired size of the speakers is even to be had. The main problem, to my ears, is the almost exclusive reliance on the direct radiating principle, as this generally shortchanges size (i.e.: radiation area) and not least sensitivity (the latter of which excludes the use of smaller-watts amps). I’ve no doubt that speaker technology has advanced significantly over the years, but its application into actual designs is hampered by before mentioned. Perhaps an analogy to imagery is in place: seeing 2K or 4K films (or most any viable resolution, for that matter) on screens below 50-60" seems not to immerge you in the visuals as effectively as could. It is said that for the eyes and mind to properly exclude visual information not created by the screen itself, a particular minimum ratio of the distance to the screen in relation to its size is required (which generally equates to some +80-90" for home use). This way your eyes (and mind) can relax more effectively in the imagery, and hereby exclude the surrounding "noise" that is the environment of the room. Not only that; the effective resolution, certainly with 2K and not least 4K, cannot be taken advantage of unless the screen extends or certain size (again, in relation to the distance to the screen). In a sense this extends to speakers as well: smaller speakers, highly refined and resolving, can’t seem to "unfold" the proper image in all its glory, but remains instead a minimized presentation of an event, and hereby too obviously reproduced. To me, one major parameter in sound reproduction is size, and I’d rather have that poorly resolved than a smaller ditto highly resolved. Combine the two, size and resolution, and we’re talking. Added to that is the by-product of high sensitivity, which is not so much about max SPL per se (more like headroom), but the difficult-to-articulated sense of ease. It usually also incorporates the quality of low level resolution, which is an added (and very important) bonus to the ability to play insanely loud (not that that’s needed, but it’s an integral part of named "ease" and versatility). Modern speakers are no doubt more refined, resolved, airy, and in a sense less colored, but it comes at the expense of a generally minimized presentation, and one that also plays too thinly or even malnourished (both of which could be called coloration as well, by virtue of absence). If the advance in technology were to be applicated with older designs of bigger size and higher sensitivity, I’d feel we could be talking about overall advancement. Thankfully there’s a wide range of speakers to choose among, and so the advancement may be had "locally." |
I think the bottom line is loudspeaker technology has improved considerably over the years as is the case with most any active technology over time and that there is more possible today than ever before and many more choices for top notch performance case by case than ever before as well. Has the best possible end result sound in most home audio cases improved? Probably somewhat but the technology to solve the problem effectively has been around for many years in one form or another. I am convinced also that source gear and amplifier technology has improved vastly in all regards over the same timeframe meaning the speaker technology applied, old or new, sounds better than ever. |
The Theil-Small parameters is something that has changed! It makes predicting the performance of a driver in a box possible. Prior to these specs, sorting out the right size for a port opening in a box was experience and guesswork. This has lead to wider range loudspeakers with less coloration. Another thing that has improved is horn design. Its now possible to optimize in a way that was not 50 or 80 years ago. There are also improved materials for compression drivers, so its possible to build smoother sounding more detailed horns. My speakers at home benefit from this- the first breakup in the midrange horn is at about 35KHz. So it has the speed and detail of an ESL. It led me to information I didn't know about the Hartsfield, probably the third super speaker system I encountered as a kid after the Electro Voice Patrician and Bozak Concert Grand in the early 50's. Classic Audio Loudspeakers has been making a Harsfield reproduction since the mid-1980s. The proprietor, John Wolff, has improved the detail and bandwidth by using materials and drivers that did not exist in the 1950s. They play bass much better than the originals! They are smoother and more detailed as well as being more efficient (I'm sure the field coil drivers he uses are part of that). Its a simple fact that loudspeaker technology is significantly advanced over what was around even 30 years ago. Materials and modeling have gotten better and I expect that will continue. |
Sal, Yes, Larryi comments are consistently insightful and well-thought-out. Larryi in general I agree with you preference for the lower power amplifiers in regard to superior sound quality. This point is driven home often when I hear the mega power amplifiers driving difficult load/inefficient speakers. Charles, |
As usual LarryI has a balanced and measured post which means I agree with him. There is no question that modern speaker design software and measurement tools have contributed to an overall improvement in speaker sound quality. For those of us who were kicking tires in hifi stores in the 1960s and each decade since, I can say that there are fewer poor sounding speakers today than in years past. This is especially true with lower price speakers and smaller speakers. But if we ignore price and size considerations, the very best vintage drivers and horns have some special musical qualities that are not equaled by today's speakers at any price. I have only limited experience with the big Western Electric horns (and no experience at all with the Shearer horns mentioned by the OP) but each time I have heard them left no doubt they are capable of excellent sound quality. On a much more accessible level, I find that my own speakers using a vintage 15" Jensen paper cone woofer and Altec 32A horn with 802-8G compression driver (dating probably from the 1970s) are very satisfying musically. |
Yes and no. It would be very difficult to find whole speaker systems, and even modern speakers using vintage drivers, that would make compact monitors that sound as good as modern monitor speakers. The same probably holds true for thin column-type floorstanding speakers. But, for systems where one is not constrained by practical considerations, such as size and ugliness, I would go with a modern system built with vintage or replica vintage drivers over anything I've heard from modern speakers. If size and cost is not an issue, something with Jensen M-18 fieldcoil woofers and Western Electric 555 drivers and 15A horn and 597 tweeter would be nice to have (and a room big enough for such a system would be really nice). For a "compact" system, something with the Jensen/ERPI M-13 fieldcoil and a 597 tweeter would also be a nice choice. I also happen to like my system which is built around the Western Electric 713b midrange compression driver (made sometime around 1939). At the Capital Audiofest, held this past weekend, Deja Vu Audio was showing a recently-built speaker featuring vintage drivers. The speakers had 15" Jensen woofers and midrange compression drivers from Yoshimura Labs (a 1960-70's Japanese company that made theater/public address systems that emulated Western Electric drivers) in an open baffle configuration (it looked like a box with a closed back, but the back allowed sound to pass through). It is hard to beat this type of system for delivering harmonic "denseness" (rich, saturated sound) and a relaxed (not edgy) and natural presentation while also delivering terrific dynamics, speed and clarity. The BIG plus with many vintage systems is that they can be run with a wide array of low-powered amps. To me, the best sound is delivered by lower powered amps, regardless of whether one goes with tubes or solid state. |
In terms of new physics or fundamental technologies (as someone pointed out, planar was also from the 1930's), there is nothing new since then for loudspeakers. We are still pushing air to make soundwaves and the method of generating air motion is down to moving diaphragms/membranes/cones. Where there has been new technology advances is in electronics i.e. amplification via solid state devices and digital technology (both for amplification and source recording/playback). The advances in electronics allow for much greater power to be send to speakers which have allowed for smaller speakers that can more readily fit into modern living space and even automobiles to generate the same or greater SPL (sound pressure level) as large horn speakers of 1930's. Solid state and digital technologies have allowed for miniaturization of components and also reduce costs and ease of mass production to enable the mass public to enjoy high fidelity music. This is where there has been advances. In the 1930's, high fidelity music was limited to the wealthy and the few. I myself enjoy low powered SET amps and single driver high efficiency loudspeakers and I do enjoy a good horn speaker and generally prefer them to modern speakers. And in this regard, I don't feel that modern, contemporary loudspeaker systems sound better than the vintage ones that have been setup appropriately ... at least to my ears. FWIW and IMHO. |
I can't resist tossing my 2 sense into the fray...*G* Theory and the math behind remains the same; we measure them better and more precisely now... Materials and means have improved; 'mass market' offerings have improved, but are subject to 'cost analysis' and ROI, yielding 'meh'. 'High end' has become a garden or a wasteland (depending on your POV) of what's selected and applied and how, yielding endless posts on 'X does what and how better than Y or Z' here @ AG and anywhere else you bide your time. I'd rather waste my time DIY'ing my Walsh's. More bang for my buck, IMHO, since I'm faced with either vintage of unknown use/abuse, HHR, or German Physiks. And I can fix them myself. ;) Anything really new? DML's...although I suspect if one digs long enough you'd find something somewhere that would (at least) allude to the concept. The "we set a loudspeaker face down on this suspended panel and it sounded funny" sort of thing. Nobody made any $ on it, so they walked away....*L* Now 'they' are exciting plywood, glass, and composites, tinkering with it. I'm intrigued...watching for now... Vintage....hmm, I'm sitting on some '80's JBL 3 ways looking for a box to inhabit. Cabs were trashed by mindless geeks, reconed the woofers, ready for their 2nd life. A reconed EV 15" dying to be a New Age sub. A pair of horn/woofer Utah 2way wanting a home that looks 'cool' (I want the horn visible...so few people have actually heard a horn these days... What boats my float of late is the 'what if' of combining an array of Walsh, DML, and a distributed bass (DEBRA, if you're inclined to find) and taking over the space with active EQ on all of it. Purpose build a 'puter to push it all around. See if imaging can be taken to another level... *G* Y'all have your 'quests'. I have mine. |
