Jump to content
The Classic Speaker Pages Discussion Forums

ChrisM

Members
  • Content Count

    57
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About ChrisM

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 11/14/1951

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Puget Sound
  • Interests
    Classic Stereo, Britain

Recent Profile Visitors

393 profile views
  1. Sure go for it. As I said, I'm not a member of the "bypass" church but it won't hurt and it's sort of authentic. It looks like the originals were both polyester so either that or polypropylene for an upgrade.
  2. Since you're not doing a "purist" restoration, I'd say just use one high quality cap. Solen makes a 6.2uF for about $5. I forgot. In that previous post when we were discussing the crossover, I mentioned it was about 3KHz. I got that number from assuming an 8ohm tweeter and a 4ohm woofer system. The coil would have to be more like .4 something uF for 3KHZ with an 8ohm woofer system.
  3. Probably. two 8ohms in parallel. Back when, most of the drivers were 8ohms. I know Mr. Kloss made some 4ohm ones but the vast majority of commercially available ones were 8. In Paleolithic times, 16ohm drivers ruled the land. 16ohms makes tube amps happy.
  4. Good question. From photos floating around the interwebs it looks like it is a foam surround or half-roll cloth and it was a acoustic suspension system. If you look at the 1976 driver price list they show the same woofer for the III, the 5 and the 7 which doesn't seem right. The early III woofers were Jensen and then CTS. The mini III is a CTS and probably the other "little" Rectilinears.
  5. Well...... Your picture of the sad looking crossover is interesting because the larger(6uF) cap looks like an electrolytic. It looks like metal end caps which to me says electrolytic but it might be a paper in oil. The one in Kent's picture definitely looked like a Mylar or polypropylene. The simplest answer to the parallel cap question is that they wanted a 6.3uF cap. If these were really that fancy a speaker, they would have measured the caps for exact value. Having said that, it is also true that a 6db per octave series crossover isn't that critical of values. This isn't an LS3/5a crossover where values really are critical. Some people are also big believers in using super high quality small value caps to bypass larger caps. I am not one of them. So not only did they use different tweeters but different caps. We will need some pictures of your rebuild so we can learn more about these speakers and to cheer you on.
  6. The woofers being Peerless explains why I didn't recognise them (not British). I think a lot of people made their own versions of the KEF B110. It is also interesting that the ones you worked on had the big Audax tweeter and the 6moons review ones had the 1" dome Seas tweeter. The Seas units are very good tweeters and were used in a number of commercial speakers one example being the Boston Acoustics A200. Those tweeters do sound nice. I know because I have a pair. Mine are currently sitting on the shelf but I have plans for them.
  7. Kent, take a look at this: https://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/european-holophone-systems-soprano.915874/
  8. In actual use there isn't much if any difference between the black frame and the silver however I did measure a difference in resonant frequency between them. The black ones have a significantly lower Fs. Neither type has much of a peak at resonance and the crossover is so broad it just doesn't seem to make much difference. The black ones came in the earlier 17's. The change was I believe in late 1969.
  9. Having a quick look at the specs for the Ditton 44's, if you're happy with the Arcam's performance, you should be equally as happy when using it with the IMF's. I would normally say that something with more like 100W per channel would be appropriate but it totally depends on your listening levels and choice of program. It might behoove you to consider recapping both of them as they are older. Also trying to judge whether the Arcam is working well with the IMF's isn't valid if the capacitors in the IMF's are bad.
  10. Hi Larry, Rectilinear III's are very different from most speakers. The main driver is the midrange. The 4 tweeters and Flex-Air woofer just fill in the very top and bottom . This way of designing a system require a really good, really wide range mid-range so Jon Dahquist used a full range driver. No crossover, no phasing issues just a bit of help on the top and bottom. Spendor did the same thing in their classic series 3 ways.
  11. I just meant expensive in relation to an older Sansui driver. If IvanB loves them it's worth it. I've only ever heard good things about Millersound and the prices mentioned are very good.
  12. After the sorry state you got them in, I'm sure the owners will be very pleased. Good job!
  13. I second the Millersound suggestion but the cure may be expensive. If they are really stiff you have little to lose so you might try using a small paint brush to apply a bit of MEK to them. Instead of MEK there is Toluene or Xylol/Xylene. It is hard to say what Sansui used although any of them should work. These were commonly used as solvents to apply the sealant to the cloth which has obviously dried up. Reapplying some of the solvent might loosen it up. Be careful to just apply it to the curved area not the part on the cone or frame. Try a small area on the worst afflicted part and gently prod it to see if it is softening before continuing. Do not saturate it and don't do it indoors. Interestingly enough, I was going to try the same thing on a set of otherwise good woofers I salvaged. If you want to wait a bit, I can try it on mine first measuring them before and after to check how it works.
  14. Kent, what is the black stuff on the coil? Is it some kind of goop or is the coil insulation burned?
×
×
  • Create New...