Modern speakers vs Vintage speakers
- Thread starter thomask
- Start date
@thomask - Do you happen to recall what slopes you used on the Lyngdorf and whether you implemented any delays on either of the outputs?
I set up the TDAi2170 yesterday and the results are positive, particularly after running room perfect. I have the speaker outputs going direct to the woofers set at low pass 800hz, which is the factory setting for this speaker, and the analog outputs to a First Watt J2 high pass 800hz. LW 4th order for both. I have not experimented with slopes yet. Nor delays. Everything is clearer, cleaner, more extended, better grip on the 15" woofer. But it has lost a little of the vintage charm, particularly around the midrange. The issue with lack of HF extension, which I thought was probably the horn driver, seems to have been entirely with the passive crossover. Driven actively with the Lyngdorf/First Watt, the highs are very open and extended.
I set up the TDAi2170 yesterday and the results are positive, particularly after running room perfect. I have the speaker outputs going direct to the woofers set at low pass 800hz, which is the factory setting for this speaker, and the analog outputs to a First Watt J2 high pass 800hz. LW 4th order for both. I have not experimented with slopes yet. Nor delays. Everything is clearer, cleaner, more extended, better grip on the 15" woofer. But it has lost a little of the vintage charm, particularly around the midrange. The issue with lack of HF extension, which I thought was probably the horn driver, seems to have been entirely with the passive crossover. Driven actively with the Lyngdorf/First Watt, the highs are very open and extended.
It has been a while.
Thus I do not remember specific parmeters that I used.
I seems to have used higher slope.
But you may want to test various paremters to adjust to your liking.
Good luck!
Last edited:
I bought used Scaena 3.2 on Jan 2000. But due to Covid break, i could not assemble main towers for 30 months.
I appreciate Erik's help in assembly of it last Friday.
During the time, I had been using two Scaena 18 inch subwoofers to augement either Lansche 4.1 or Altec A7.
Now i am doing some comparison between Altec A7 and Scaena 3.2.
Could you tell whether the folllowing musics are from Altec A7 or Scaena 3.2?
Last edited:
Haven’t had a chance to listen to the videos yet, however due to the nature of a Line Source, and the placement, (way out into your room) I would expect the three dimensional aspect of the “soundstage” to be dramatically different (better) than the Altec’s.
Cheers...
I was over last week to help @thomask with assembly of the Scaena so I heard both setups.
The ceiling height drops to a more 'normal' level behind the Altecs, however there is still a substantial open area behind them.
Stage is indeed very different between them.
I wondered if the Altecs might be a touch close together, but space constraints prohibit moving them apart more in the place they currently are. Also, despite horns being less sensitive to this impact than some other topologies, having the full gear stack between them might also affect their stage presentation?
As it was, the stage presentation of the Altecs was actually a bit more 'realistic' although a touch constrained / small. The Scaena throw a huge stage. Fun for sure but maybe a bit larger than life.
@thomask Also has setup the Scaena in a very interesting way. I will leave it to him to disclose
The ceiling height drops to a more 'normal' level behind the Altecs, however there is still a substantial open area behind them.
Stage is indeed very different between them.
I wondered if the Altecs might be a touch close together, but space constraints prohibit moving them apart more in the place they currently are. Also, despite horns being less sensitive to this impact than some other topologies, having the full gear stack between them might also affect their stage presentation?
As it was, the stage presentation of the Altecs was actually a bit more 'realistic' although a touch constrained / small. The Scaena throw a huge stage. Fun for sure but maybe a bit larger than life.
@thomask Also has setup the Scaena in a very interesting way. I will leave it to him to disclose
Please be entirely candid with us mere observers, and for some , long suffering voyeurs of Thomas’s Altec system videos, do you consider that his Altec A7 are placed in the optimal position within such a cavernous space or do you consider that they would benefit from placement closer to the end wall and corners that they currently face ?
Let me guess:@thomask Also has setup the Scaena in a very interesting way. I will leave it to him to disclose
He listens to the Scaneas "backwards", him sitting in the kitchen behind the Altecs
Or even outside in the hot tubLet me guess:
He listens to the Scaneas "backwards", him sitting in the kitchen behind the Altecs
We don't even know what drivers and crossovers are in his. Altec went through many versions of their drivers quality declining later add they approached bankruptcy. Some are also made for crown type amplifiers to pump loads of sound into clubs and outdoor rock concerts then to play music at home
Not really the point that I am eluding to … Would you say that the A7’s are placed optimally from a theoretical point of view.
It depends on my personal choice.
If you place it to close to the wall, you do not have deep soundstage behind speaker.
With two Scaena 18 inch subwoofers added below 56 hz, I get more than enough bass.
I had used Cayin 300b pp (20watts) to find out whether 300b SET can be used.
Cayin give more round sound with slightly less dynamics.
With Line Magnetic 508(48 watts), it sounds more dynamic aplomb.
i am going to disclose the secret behind it tomorrow.
But I agree with Erik(Solypsa)' s opinion in general.
Cayin give more round sound with slightly less dynamics.
With Line Magnetic 508(48 watts), it sounds more dynamic aplomb.
i am going to disclose the secret behind it tomorrow.
But I agree with Erik(Solypsa)' s opinion in general.
I have always preferred contemporary speakers, over vintage ones. I have always felt that vintage gear plays a sound that is too good to be true. But for a second system, I would like to get a nice pair of vintage Tannoys with a tube amp. Something like a 300B. something different for "those days"
Modern speakers are just more precise and have a lot less colouration. It really makes me sink into the music.
Modern speakers are just more precise and have a lot less colouration. It really makes me sink into the music.
This is an interesting thread. I go back and forth wondering if it is about the thread title or Thomask's system thread.
I was answering a local friend's question to me the other day in a group email exchange with a bunch of audiophiles. Here is my response to him and related to the thread title:
Alan,
It is not a question of vintage versus modern. It never was for me. It is about what speakers I like. They have to have certain qualities: efficient and easy to drive for low powered amps. Balanced sound, very dynamic, and low coloration. Also, very high in resolution. I won’t use the one comprehensive word that describes the combination of these qualities well. And I don’t even know what people call a “vintage” sound. It is used by some to denigrate, but I ignore it because it has little meaning to me. I have heard these qualities I value from both vintage and modern. Many horns are indeed colored, both modern and vintage, and I have no interest. Many modern speakers are highly colored too based on what I have heard, or they lack dynamics and resolution. This is not what I am interested in and never was. It is about the right speakers for me. Only a hand full of vintage speakers fit that bill, and some modern speakers. I have certainly not heard them all. I am talking only about what I aspire to own and would buy. I can indeed enjoy other stuff but not enough to buy. We are talking about my opinion of what is best for me.
I liked the huge Soundlab panels that Al and I heard in Harvard, MA. I liked my Magico Minis and Q3s, and like Ian’s M Pro. I never liked the other Magicos I heard. As I was exposed to more stuff, I heard the flaws of the Mini II, but the Q3 with those Lamm M1.1 were incredible. If I had not decided to try SETs with horns, I would have been very happy with the all Lamm/Q3 system. I loved Jeff Tyo’s PMB speakers and would likely love his new JBL Hartsfields, but I have not heard them. I hope to later this year. I love the big vintage Bionor, best I’ve ever heard, also the 90s JBL M9500 at DDK’s, but only the second time in his big room with TimA. I loved the Diatones and wrote about them in the Utah visit thread. Best all cone speakers I’ve ever heard. Truly alive sounding. DDK moved them and raised them on stands for our friend David, and apparently they sound even better than when I heard them, but they are not as extended as my Vitavox in the corners or the Bionors with his big subs. The Diatones are studio monitors. They are enough for David, and he is going all Lamm, SET ML2 amps. Perhaps subs in future.
What the best vintage speakers I have heard all share, and is not found in the modern speakers I have heard, is low coloration, high resolution, and ultra dynamics. All of our experiences are extremely limited and there is so much none of us has heard. If you qualify it further to listening in good conditions, then we are talking about only a handful of examples of excellence. The rest, if they is even out there, are left to be discovered. We all now seem happy and not really traveling to learn more. So, these comments are based on what I think from what I have heard only.
IMO, the biggest problem with modern speakers is the difficulty to drive them based in large part on form factor and driver technology. There are few full range modern speakers that can be driven with low powered amps. I do not consider 50 watts low power. The problem for me is that high powered amps are not as good as the best low powered amps that I have heard. We want those speakers, so we must live with big and expensive powerful amps to drive them properly. That is an issue for sound quality. They work and function, and they are often very “impressive”, but to me they lack magic and beauty, ease and nuance, and resolution. The value in the right vintage speakers is that they can be driven by low powered amps. I loved the Pass Labs stuff until I heard Lamm on the same power hungry Magicos. Then I heard the better sounding low powered SET Lamms and that drove the speaker decision to high efficiency corner horns. Everyone decides for himself what component type drives the rest of the system.
I was answering a local friend's question to me the other day in a group email exchange with a bunch of audiophiles. Here is my response to him and related to the thread title:
Alan,
It is not a question of vintage versus modern. It never was for me. It is about what speakers I like. They have to have certain qualities: efficient and easy to drive for low powered amps. Balanced sound, very dynamic, and low coloration. Also, very high in resolution. I won’t use the one comprehensive word that describes the combination of these qualities well. And I don’t even know what people call a “vintage” sound. It is used by some to denigrate, but I ignore it because it has little meaning to me. I have heard these qualities I value from both vintage and modern. Many horns are indeed colored, both modern and vintage, and I have no interest. Many modern speakers are highly colored too based on what I have heard, or they lack dynamics and resolution. This is not what I am interested in and never was. It is about the right speakers for me. Only a hand full of vintage speakers fit that bill, and some modern speakers. I have certainly not heard them all. I am talking only about what I aspire to own and would buy. I can indeed enjoy other stuff but not enough to buy. We are talking about my opinion of what is best for me.
I liked the huge Soundlab panels that Al and I heard in Harvard, MA. I liked my Magico Minis and Q3s, and like Ian’s M Pro. I never liked the other Magicos I heard. As I was exposed to more stuff, I heard the flaws of the Mini II, but the Q3 with those Lamm M1.1 were incredible. If I had not decided to try SETs with horns, I would have been very happy with the all Lamm/Q3 system. I loved Jeff Tyo’s PMB speakers and would likely love his new JBL Hartsfields, but I have not heard them. I hope to later this year. I love the big vintage Bionor, best I’ve ever heard, also the 90s JBL M9500 at DDK’s, but only the second time in his big room with TimA. I loved the Diatones and wrote about them in the Utah visit thread. Best all cone speakers I’ve ever heard. Truly alive sounding. DDK moved them and raised them on stands for our friend David, and apparently they sound even better than when I heard them, but they are not as extended as my Vitavox in the corners or the Bionors with his big subs. The Diatones are studio monitors. They are enough for David, and he is going all Lamm, SET ML2 amps. Perhaps subs in future.
What the best vintage speakers I have heard all share, and is not found in the modern speakers I have heard, is low coloration, high resolution, and ultra dynamics. All of our experiences are extremely limited and there is so much none of us has heard. If you qualify it further to listening in good conditions, then we are talking about only a handful of examples of excellence. The rest, if they is even out there, are left to be discovered. We all now seem happy and not really traveling to learn more. So, these comments are based on what I think from what I have heard only.
IMO, the biggest problem with modern speakers is the difficulty to drive them based in large part on form factor and driver technology. There are few full range modern speakers that can be driven with low powered amps. I do not consider 50 watts low power. The problem for me is that high powered amps are not as good as the best low powered amps that I have heard. We want those speakers, so we must live with big and expensive powerful amps to drive them properly. That is an issue for sound quality. They work and function, and they are often very “impressive”, but to me they lack magic and beauty, ease and nuance, and resolution. The value in the right vintage speakers is that they can be driven by low powered amps. I loved the Pass Labs stuff until I heard Lamm on the same power hungry Magicos. Then I heard the better sounding low powered SET Lamms and that drove the speaker decision to high efficiency corner horns. Everyone decides for himself what component type drives the rest of the system.
Scaena 3.2 has 12 4 inch midrange drivers which work like full range without any passive crossvoer.
9 ribbon drivers are added with simple capacitor (6k hz cutoff).
They use active crossover at 120 hz. Thus two 18 inch subwoofers covers bass while mail tower covers frequency abover.
I had used two Scaena 18 inch subwoofers to augment subbass of Lansche 4.1 or Altec A7 for 30 months before assemvly of main tower last week.
My impression of two 18 inch subwoofers is positive with fast and tight bass with deep extension.
But somehow, two 18 inch subwoofers doesn not sound very weighty compared with Altec A7 bass horn.
Altec A7 bass horn give authoritiva bass although it starts tapering off at 50 hz and no signal below 30 hz.
When I added two 18 inch subwoofers to Altec A7 at 56hz using crossover of Crwon XLS 2502, they worked very nice.
Thus I had connected main tower of Scaena 3.2 above 500hz to see what happen.
They worked pretty nice as witnessed by Erik (Solypsa).
It may sound crazy to mix and match 60 years old vintage driver with modern speaker.
I had also tried 290 hz using Pap C1 active crossover.
it also work very nice.
Scaena 3.2 is one of the best speaker available in giving widest and deepes soundstage but also with clean mid range and treble using multiple drivers.
With slim line source, soundstage extend beyond my window.
Also I can easily pinpoint different instruments back and forth.
I will be out of town for three weeks to spend time with my 30 months old grandchild.
I will report more on August.
9 ribbon drivers are added with simple capacitor (6k hz cutoff).
They use active crossover at 120 hz. Thus two 18 inch subwoofers covers bass while mail tower covers frequency abover.
I had used two Scaena 18 inch subwoofers to augment subbass of Lansche 4.1 or Altec A7 for 30 months before assemvly of main tower last week.
My impression of two 18 inch subwoofers is positive with fast and tight bass with deep extension.
But somehow, two 18 inch subwoofers doesn not sound very weighty compared with Altec A7 bass horn.
Altec A7 bass horn give authoritiva bass although it starts tapering off at 50 hz and no signal below 30 hz.
When I added two 18 inch subwoofers to Altec A7 at 56hz using crossover of Crwon XLS 2502, they worked very nice.
Thus I had connected main tower of Scaena 3.2 above 500hz to see what happen.
They worked pretty nice as witnessed by Erik (Solypsa).
It may sound crazy to mix and match 60 years old vintage driver with modern speaker.
I had also tried 290 hz using Pap C1 active crossover.
it also work very nice.
Scaena 3.2 is one of the best speaker available in giving widest and deepes soundstage but also with clean mid range and treble using multiple drivers.
With slim line source, soundstage extend beyond my window.
Also I can easily pinpoint different instruments back and forth.
I will be out of town for three weeks to spend time with my 30 months old grandchild.
I will report more on August.
Similar threads
