Zero Distortion: Altec Assault and the Magic of Misho (Audio Antiquary)

[Folsom]

Wow! What a fantastic explanation and description! I agree on all points!

Thank you very much, Lloyd, for this fantastic contribution to the thread!

And what you wrote in 4. is why I still slightly fantasize about grafting Wilson Audio Master Subsonics onto the Gryphon Pendragons.

Well, one thing to note is that all the stuff being named doesn't have floor bounce. IF the SPL requirements are met from driver size and Xmax, the other factor is cancellation from acoustic interaction. Floor bounce is a major one, it can really rob the the guts of a stereo by just being thin in that one select little region.

What I'm saying is the physical size of the speaker doesn't necessarily have to be really big if the SPL capability is there and there's no cancellation.

 

[bonzo75]

Lloyd, "I suspect the big horns can also do this...though I did not sense the same scale from the 2 mid-sized ones i heard which we were physically still quite large (7 feet tall?)...and so the problem I am afraid to find out is how big horns need to be in comparison to their cone and panel+cone counterparts to achieve this level of scale. "

The Cessaro Liszt and below does not do scale. Liszt has the height, but not the design. The Liszt midbass and below is highly compromised. So the only thing you will hear is violins or vocals come from height, but not scale. Ralph really starts opening that up at Beethoven and above. I woulld take a Devore Orangutan over the Liszt, as the transparency and uniformity would lead to a larger sound. Now, the trios plus bass horns can do scale, if they are to be faulted it is that their mids/highs are not the same quality drivers as the Cessaro's.

The dual woofer FLHs were made to address audiences of a 1000 in theatres at 3 watts (amplifiers available in those days). They can scale.

" the instrument POWER is closer and closer to live"
My previous reference for this were Henk's Grands, and yes, this was one of my main objections to the ridiculousness of running SETs on Apogees, there was no power to the note. And power is not volume, it is balls.

The stack of 6 REL subs you mentioned...you will also see that here http://zero-distortion.org/allnic-aesthetix-io-dartzeel-kodo-beat-vyger-indian-signature-kiseki/

That cannot scale like a the Grands or a good dual woofer FLH. Alternatively you could work really hard on the noise floor, large power, and great room, and maybe an extremely small handful might manage it after a multiyear journey.

 

[LL21]

Wow! What a fantastic explanation and description! I agree on all points!

Thank you very much, Lloyd, for this fantastic contribution to the thread!

And what you wrote in 4. is why I still slightly fantasize about grafting Wilson Audio Master Subsonics onto the Gryphon Pendragons.

Hey Ron, Hope all is safe and well with you and Tinka. I have to say, having read more and more about Sub Towers, the self-reinforcing power that co-locating subs adds...I also read that even when co-located, REL is suggesting that due to height differential in the stack, EACH cone has to be individually calibrated...and of course since RELs are individual units stacked, they can accommodate this.

Read the review on the REL 6-stack which there is a 2-line reference of comparison to the big Wilson Subs.

https://www.tonepublications.com/review/relno25sixpack/


This is the main quotation from Jeff Dorgay: "...while you might think $45,000 is just crazy for a set of six of these, ...Looking at this from a cost/benefit analysis, like the pair of REL 212SEs that used to be my reference, the amount of performance gained in relation to the rest of the system...[from the REL 6-Pack]...is off the chart good. As a comparison, I have heard the Wilson Audio Thor’s Hammer on numerous occasion (about $50k/pair, without crossover and amplifiers) and I feel a six pack of REL no. 25s exceed the ability of the Hammers in every possible parameter – which makes the REL stacks a stone cold bargain."

 

[LL21]

Lloyd, "I suspect the big horns can also do this...though I did not sense the same scale from the 2 mid-sized ones i heard which we were physically still quite large (7 feet tall?)...and so the problem I am afraid to find out is how big horns need to be in comparison to their cone and panel+cone counterparts to achieve this level of scale. "

The Cessaro Liszt and below does not do scale. Liszt has the height, but not the design. The Liszt midbass and below is highly compromised. So the only thing you will hear is violins or vocals come from height, but not scale. Ralph really starts opening that up at Beethoven and above. I woulld take a Devore Orangutan over the Liszt, as the transparency and uniformity would lead to a larger sound. Now, the trios plus bass horns can do scale, if they are to be faulted it is that their mids/highs are not the same quality drivers as the Cessaro's.

The dual woofer FLHs were made to address audiences of a 1000 in theatres at 3 watts (amplifiers available in those days). They can scale.

" the instrument POWER is closer and closer to live"
My previous reference for this were Henk's Grands, and yes, this was one of my main objections to the ridiculousness of running SETs on Apogees, there was no power to the note. And power is not volume, it is balls.

The stack of 6 REL subs you mentioned...you will also see that here http://zero-distortion.org/allnic-aesthetix-io-dartzeel-kodo-beat-vyger-indian-signature-kiseki/

That cannot scale like a the Grands or a good dual woofer FLH. Alternatively you could work really hard on the noise floor, large power, and great room, and maybe an extremely small handful might manage it after a multiyear journey.

Thanks...good to know as i have very little experience with horns. Helpful to know on Liszt in particular. Most intrigued to hear this dual-woofer FLH...audiences of 1000 in theaters with 3 watts...now that sounds like some serious scale!

 

[bonzo75]

A few more points:
1. The price of 4k euro for electronic components is direct, no distribution or marketing margins
2. The volume of the box is changeable. This is 260 litres. 500 or 1000 is possible. It will extend the bass I think
3. Drivers are liquid in the market. Cabinet is space dependent. So if one ends up with less space and budget, alternate set up with same driver, more compromised, with similar mids but cone box and one woofer is possible. TADs for example, have 2402, 2403, 2404 etc.

 

[bonzo75]

Regarding comparison to Tannoys, the above mentioned compromised 2-ways might be a more interesting comparison. The won't be coaxial but will be more SETs friendly. And with these there is more of a journey, as each component (driver, horn) can be rotated, while with Tannoy if you are into vintage you at most ave a choice between Gold, red, silver, black, of which black is almost never available.

And now have experience with good SS amps and good powerful push pull amps and mid-level amps, so generally sub-15w amp project sounds more fun. i.e. 45s, AD1, 2a3, PX4, PX25, VT25, VT52, Type 50, EL84 push pulls.

 

[Folsom]

Are some of these guys assembling the boxes on site? Doorways don’t look practical for the size of some of these horns that actually get well down into midbass.

Also Ked isn’t recommending them because they’re loud. The headroom is good but he wouldn’t be all about them if that was their defining feature.

 

[bonzo75]

Are some of these guys assembling the boxes on site? Doorways don’t look practical for the size of some of these horns that actually get well down into midbass.

Also Ked isn’t recommending them because they’re loud. The headroom is good but he wouldn’t be all about them if that was their defining feature.

No I am not defining coz they can go loud alone, but they have the dynamic range and detail to go from low to high and breathe with the rise and fall easily, without straining.

1m width by 1m depth can be done in many doorways, but yes if it cannot that is an issue. Markus Klug, for example, cannot get the featured Altec box up his vintage staircase which is too narrow, so he compromised with a shallower closed box.

 

[ScottB]

Ked,

I think I need a double dose of Dramamine after watching the video of the Beethoven. As you guys where discussing, a very good performance. Who was conducting? Can you comment on the drivers and cabinets of the speakers – they sounded great on the video.

Scott

 

[LL21]

Thanks for this video...which Beethoven 9th was that?

...That cannot scale like a the Grands or a good dual woofer FLH. Alternatively you could work really hard on the noise floor, large power, and great room, and maybe an extremely small handful might manage it after a multiyear journey.

 

[bonzo75]

Thanks for this video...which Beethoven 9th was that?

Solti, Decca

 

[LL21]

Solti, Decca

Thank you. Will look it up.

 

[ScottB]

The Solti was on the TAS super disk list if I remember correctly. it definitely sounded more energetic through the Altec's.

 

[leyenda]

@bonzo
Very informative review. How much would you attribute the sound you heard to the Altec 515s as drivers VS the FLH cabinet/arrangement? In other words, will other drivers in the same cabinet arrangement work as well or perhaps better?

 

[bonzo75]

The Solti was on the TAS super disk list if I remember correctly. it definitely sounded more energetic through the Altec's.

It was not played through the Altecs - are you referring to my video, the mids were the TADs - but yes it was a dual FLH. I did not play a video through the Altec system of the Solti Beethoven

 

[bonzo75]

@bonzo
Very informative review. How much would you attribute the sound you heard to the Altec 515s as drivers VS the FLH cabinet/arrangement? In other words, will other drivers in the same cabinet arrangement work as well or perhaps better?

Thanks. The dual FLH is the most important.

I don't like any horn that has a horn loading in the mids and then a closed box below, I would rather buy a traditional cone, or Tannoy. A Martin Logan hybrid is much superior to any horn hybrid I have heard.

For backloaded horns (BLH), they have to be really big, like Pnoe or Yamamura, and even then they sound good only if very specifically set up with the right electronic match. Deviating makes the midbass and highs sound totally out of sync. Maybe a good hedlund horn with good drivers well set up can be a good acceptable compromise in terms of cost and smaller rooms, and maybe if someone put an AER into the giant Pass Kleinhorn and played it at 3 watts or less, it might sound excellent

Downward firing horns (DFH) sound acceptable, like with Universum and Anima, but not as good as trios bass horns, or Apogees, when it comes to midbass thumps. I can quite see people being happy with them, they get by because of their mids and highs with the midbass and below well managed to not create a negative experience, rather than being a strength.

The FLH consistently over the last 4 years been the best solution I have heard, nothing comes close to create that integration, and the breathing and naturalness. Is dual required? Yes. One woofer, at least 15 inch, creates insufficient extension either up or down or both. Now, one of the solutions I had heard was a dual woofer JBL FLH modded by the DIYer to turn it into a one woofer 18 inch. And that sounded very good. I heard Marc Henry's one woofer solution with Altecs (he used to make a 2-woofer one 10 years ago, see here https://6moons.com/industryfeatures/grandecastine/1.html) and his solution for one woofer FLH is good but I prefer the two woofers. It is probably the increased sensitivity and larger coverage that breathes that ease.

The FLH strategies can vary. The Western Electric Mirrophonic bass was 4 18 inch woofers in FLH, which GIP/Silbatone adopted to 2 18 inch woofers, and which was what Silvercore replicated. I had no idea when I was bowled over by his sound that I was listening to WE mirrophonic replication, and I had no idea that the 304 TL I was listening into it then (first exposure) was such a renowned transmitter tube, and that was such an extreme set up. The Norwegians follow a slightly different dual FLH cabinet, and whether you want to close it at the back, leave it open, etc can be personal preference.

For me, all well done dual FLHs sound like a full range driver, they are that well integrated. Extremely coherent.

Regarding the 515, I haven't directly compared, but yes this what they are known for, being a fantastic midbass driver, and who knows something exotic like vintage Jensen or Wolf's field coil drivers could be better, but they would be much more expensive and you would need to find someone who knows how to build around them. If you can build, you can experiment with all, but then you will never know if you are listening to the reference sound for any.

 

[awsmone]

I

Thanks. The dual FLH is the most important.

I don't like any horn that has a horn loading in the mids and then a closed box below, I would rather buy a traditional cone, or Tannoy. A Martin Logan hybrid is much superior to any horn hybrid I have heard.

For backloaded horns (BLH), they have to be really big, like Pnoe or Yamamura, and even then they sound good only if very specifically set up with the right electronic match. Deviating makes the midbass and highs sound totally out of sync. Maybe a good hedlund horn with good drivers well set up can be a good acceptable compromise in terms of cost and smaller rooms, and maybe if someone put an AER into the giant Pass Kleinhorn and played it at 3 watts or less, it might sound excellent

Downward firing horns (DFH) sound acceptable, like with Universum and Anima, but not as good as trios bass horns, or Apogees, when it comes to midbass thumps. I can quite see people being happy with them, they get by because of their mids and highs with the midbass and below well managed to not create a negative experience, rather than being a strength.

The FLH consistently over the last 4 years been the best solution I have heard, nothing comes close to create that integration, and the breathing and naturalness. Is dual required? Yes. One woofer, at least 15 inch, creates insufficient extension either up or down or both. Now, one of the solutions I had heard was a dual woofer JBL FLH modded by the DIYer to turn it into a one woofer 18 inch. And that sounded very good. I heard Marc Henry's one woofer solution with Altecs (he used to make a 2-woofer one 10 years ago, see here https://6moons.com/industryfeatures/grandecastine/1.html) and his solution for one woofer FLH is good but I prefer the two woofers. It is probably the increased sensitivity and larger coverage that breathes that ease.

The FLH strategies can vary. The Western Electric Mirrophonic bass was 4 18 inch woofers in FLH, which GIP/Silbatone adopted to 2 18 inch woofers, and which was what Silvercore replicated. I had no idea when I was bowled over by his sound that I was listening to WE mirrophonic replication, and I had no idea that the 304 TL I was listening into it then (first exposure) was such a renowned transmitter tube, and that was such an extreme set up. The Norwegians follow a slightly different dual FLH cabinet, and whether you want to close it at the back, leave it open, etc can be personal preference.

For me, all well done dual FLHs sound like a full range driver, they are that well integrated. Extremely coherent.

Regarding the 515, I haven't directly compared, but yes this what they are known for, being a fantastic midbass driver, and who knows something exotic like vintage Jensen or Wolf's field coil drivers could be better, but they would be much more expensive and you would need to find someone who knows how to build around them. If you can build, you can experiment with all, but then you will never know if you are listening to the reference sound for any.

i have to agree with Ked
my experience is you need a FLH for the bass to make any sense
I started from position of mid horn up and bass cone driver, this is not a coherent answer

i have heard this arrangement in a variety of scenarios including the big cessaro systems

you must have a horn down to at least the fundamental of any instrument to sound like real instruments other than organ

so we are talking in the 30hz range

i would agree , that if you dont have this your better with a non horn system

from my point of view we are talking classical acoustic instruments, I cannot comment on other genre...

 

[LL21]

Great insights...thanks. Do you feel:

1. That your FLH preference relates to horn-based designs only or to ANY design (incl panels or cones)?
2. Does your FLH/horn preference still stand if you are also an electro-deep house fan? I note the other comment about classical music being Awesmone's' primary choice of music. I have read that some fans of the big WEs and even the mighty bionor did not love them on deep house/electronica tracks or tracks with modern-day deep bass.

Thanks. The dual FLH is the most important.

I don't like any horn that has a horn loading in the mids and then a closed box below, I would rather buy a traditional cone, or Tannoy. A Martin Logan hybrid is much superior to any horn hybrid I have heard.

For backloaded horns (BLH), they have to be really big, like Pnoe or Yamamura, and even then they sound good only if very specifically set up with the right electronic match. Deviating makes the midbass and highs sound totally out of sync. Maybe a good hedlund horn with good drivers well set up can be a good acceptable compromise in terms of cost and smaller rooms, and maybe if someone put an AER into the giant Pass Kleinhorn and played it at 3 watts or less, it might sound excellent

Downward firing horns (DFH) sound acceptable, like with Universum and Anima, but not as good as trios bass horns, or Apogees, when it comes to midbass thumps. I can quite see people being happy with them, they get by because of their mids and highs with the midbass and below well managed to not create a negative experience, rather than being a strength.

The FLH consistently over the last 4 years been the best solution I have heard, nothing comes close to create that integration, and the breathing and naturalness. Is dual required? Yes. One woofer, at least 15 inch, creates insufficient extension either up or down or both. Now, one of the solutions I had heard was a dual woofer JBL FLH modded by the DIYer to turn it into a one woofer 18 inch. And that sounded very good. I heard Marc Henry's one woofer solution with Altecs (he used to make a 2-woofer one 10 years ago, see here https://6moons.com/industryfeatures/grandecastine/1.html) and his solution for one woofer FLH is good but I prefer the two woofers. It is probably the increased sensitivity and larger coverage that breathes that ease.

The FLH strategies can vary. The Western Electric Mirrophonic bass was 4 18 inch woofers in FLH, which GIP/Silbatone adopted to 2 18 inch woofers, and which was what Silvercore replicated. I had no idea when I was bowled over by his sound that I was listening to WE mirrophonic replication, and I had no idea that the 304 TL I was listening into it then (first exposure) was such a renowned transmitter tube, and that was such an extreme set up. The Norwegians follow a slightly different dual FLH cabinet, and whether you want to close it at the back, leave it open, etc can be personal preference.

For me, all well done dual FLHs sound like a full range driver, they are that well integrated. Extremely coherent.

Regarding the 515, I haven't directly compared, but yes this what they are known for, being a fantastic midbass driver, and who knows something exotic like vintage Jensen or Wolf's field coil drivers could be better, but they would be much more expensive and you would need to find someone who knows how to build around them. If you can build, you can experiment with all, but then you will never know if you are listening to the reference sound for any.

 

[bonzo75]

Great insights...thanks. Do you feel:

1. That your FLH preference relates to horn-based designs only or to ANY design (incl panels or cones)?

Front loading horn will apply only to horns. Front firing can apply to horns, panels, and cones. All panels are mainly front firing by nature, of which I have heard similar style of midbass in Henk's Scintilla and Grands, in terms of coherence and breathing and moving large amounts of air quickly in a vertical plane, so your brain does not localise it a woofer section in a speaker. The FLHs just do it better as they have way more sensitivity, easy to drive, with very simple crossovers and amp circuits.

When it comes to cones, no, I don't have any particular affinity to front firing cones. My choices in cones of YG, Zellaton, Avalon, and at lower budgets a box in Tannoy do not have anything in common. Zellaton with FM had apogee ribbon type midrange, YG is more stats like. Coherence is important with cones as that is often their shortcoming. Also with cones having more disappearance, not having noticeable booms, ability to work on it to get acceptable tone, play a role. If I was to set up a cone system, ability to crossover seamless to woofers is very important.

Great insights...thanks. Do you feel:

2. Does your FLH/horn preference still stand if you are also an electro-deep house fan? I note the other comment about classical music being Awesmone's' primary choice of music. I have read that some fans of the big WEs and even the mighty bionor did not love them on deep house/electronica tracks or tracks with modern-day deep bass.

FLH is important for coherence through midbass. Nice upper mids and highs are available in many solutions. Deep bass is available in many. Integration, coherence, is almost non existent, and is the bane of cones and multiway horns. Panels do integration and coherence well but lose out on deep bass and sensitivity, and weight of midbass (Apogees aside). A FLH horn will stop anywhere from 80 to 40 and you will have to roll over to a deep bass solution.

So for electro-deep house, you are referring to below 40 hz. I think below 80 (or maybe 60), FLH might not have any advantage compared to other types of bass solutions that start there and go lower. The deeper bass, when present, adds to space, ambience, low level detail. Leif has implemented a active front firing horn loaded sub that takes over from the dual FLH and goes from 75Hz to 15 Hz. Is it required, and without the space would I add a sealed sub? Yes I would. Would I miss anything? I doubt. There are also tapped horn and open baffle solutions for deep bass.

 

[Folsom]

I

i have to agree with Ked
my experience is you need a FLH for the bass to make any sense
I started from position of mid horn up and bass cone driver, this is not a coherent answer

i have heard this arrangement in a variety of scenarios including the big cessaro systems

you must have a horn down to at least the fundamental of any instrument to sound like real instruments other than organ

so we are talking in the 30hz range

i would agree , that if you dont have this your better with a non horn system

from my point of view we are talking classical acoustic instruments, I cannot comment on other genre...

How many 9.5ft horns have you seen? I’m not sure if some of the pics I’ve seen are that big.