Jump to content

Speaker Surround Dope For KLH and AR speakers


Recommended Posts

I have been working on my own compound for re-doping my KLH and AR Speakers. Here is what I have made. It is a rubber based compound that never hardens at all. This stuff has been sitting out in the open air for over 2 months and still has the consistency of snot lol. I don't see any reason it will not work great on our speakers. Look at my video of it. The still pic of it shows how it settles back to level after being touched. Oh and it is REAL cheap to make. I can make enough to do 100 speakers for the price of the stuff on ebay.

 

 

 

 

 https://youtu.be/EtasqoUBFVM

IMG_1802.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why reinvent the wheel? Roy’s goo is essentially identical to the original and has a proven track record. And in the overall cost of restoring these old and loved speakers its a pittance.

sorry—you did ask for a response 😉

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DonT said:

Because when I am done testing it you will be able to buy the ingredients and have enough on hand to do 100 speakers for slightly more than Roy charges for one.

Roy's goo is not expensive. Most of the cost is for packaging and shipping. And as JKent points out, it is a pittance considering the other costs and labor involved in restoring great vintage speakers.

Also, without documented test results over time, I would not trust anything other than Roy's goo. For your goop to be accepted by those of us that know about Roy's goo, you have a lot of hurdles to overcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, RTally said:

 

Also, without documented test results over time, I would not trust anything other than Roy's goo. For your goop to be accepted by those of us that know about Roy's goo, you have a lot of hurdles to overcome.

I totally agree with testing. This is going to be a LONG process. It will be at least a year if not 2 before I will say it is ready. I am just having fun doing it. I have a pair of KLH 24's that need sealed real bad. I only paid $5.00 for them so they are the first test dummy. Then I will see how they work over time.

CIMG4296.JPG

Edited by DonT
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DonT said:

Because when I am done testing it you will be able to buy the ingredients and have enough on hand to do 100 speakers for slightly more than Roy charges for one.

Since you are looking for a more substantial response.

1) What type of rubber is it? Is it butyl rubber, like the original?

2)What solvent do you use to thin your material? Is it toluene, like the original?

3)Is the material applied as a liquid? Your material appears to be quite viscous and stringy.

4)What procedure are you using to "test" it? Testing data (Fs and Fc) for specific woofers will be essential for proper evaluation.

For the record, my formula is sold by Larry Lagace/"Vintage_AR" on Ebay, and he is a businessman. I sometimes have leftover material, which can be purchased by forum members upon request for less than the Ebay price (though I don't ship it internationally). It is made in very small batches and is difficult and noxious to make. I first made it a bunch of years ago in consultation with two of my fellow authors of this forum's AR-3a restoration guide, Tom Tyson and John O'Hanlon. It was supposed to be a one time endeavor, until Larry, for whom I do some repair work, decided to sell it. Rtally is also correct about the cost of packaging, bottle, brush, and in Larry's case, instructions and Ebay fees.

Why not share the "ingredients" now, so we can all test it?

Roy

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, RoyC said:

Since you are looking for a more substantial response.

1) What type of rubber is it? Is it butyl rubber, like the original?

2)What solvent do you use to thin your material? Is it toluene, like the original?

3)Is the material applied as a liquid? Your material appears to be quite viscous and stringy.

4)What procedure are you using to "test" it? Testing data (Fs and Fc) for specific woofers will be essential for proper evaluation.

For the record, my formula is sold by Larry Lagace/"Vintage_AR" on Ebay, and he is a businessman. I sometimes have leftover material, which can be purchased by forum members upon request for less than the Ebay price (though I don't ship it internationally). It is made in very small batches and is difficult and noxious to make. I first made it a bunch of years ago in consultation with two of my fellow authors of this forum's AR-3a restoration guide, Tom Tyson and John O'Hanlon. It was supposed to be a one time endeavor, until Larry, for whom I do some repair work, decided to sell it. Rtally is also correct about the cost of packaging, bottle, brush, and in Larry's case, instructions and Ebay fees.

Why not share the "ingredients" now, so we can all test it?

Roy

 

1) What type of rubber is it? Is it butyl rubber, like the original?      Yes

2)What solvent do you use to thin your material? Is it toluene, like the original?      Yes

3)Is the material applied as a liquid? Your material appears to be quite viscous and stringy.    Yes   (The video is without the toluene) Also your stuff is just as viscous and stringy. I can do a side by side video if you like?

As for testing I have not got that far. I have been working on making it.

As for what it is, I asked here a few years ago and was told that they didn't want to say because they put years into developing it. I could do the same or just buy the stuff on ebay.  Not the exact words said to me but that was the jest of it.

So at this point I will ask, What is your formula?  That would save me a lot of time and testing?

As for it being noxious to make. That is true to a point. The only thing that is noxious is the Toluene. But you have to deal with that no matter what because it comes in the finished product. So if it is safe to use with the proper procedure you can take the exact same precautions to make your own.

And expense of it. The bottle and brush are under $1.00 for both and the customer pays the shipping. Not a huge amount, but yes you do get a nice product. And 1 quart of Toluene is $27.00 (Shipping included) but it will do about 62 jars the size being sold on ebay so that is under $0.50 per jar, The Butyl is about 25 cents per jar. So just a quick guess each jar sold on ebay costs under $2.00 to make and the cheapest one sold is $14.95 plus $5.00 shipping.

So if you make it your self you don't need the price of the jar. Brushes are dirt cheap. You can make a nice LARGE jar of it for lets say $10.00

Link to post
Share on other sites

"As for what it is, I asked here a few years ago and was told that they didn't want to say because they put years into developing it. I could do the same or just buy the stuff on ebay.  Not the exact words said to me but that was the jest of it.

So at this point I will ask, What is your formula?  That would save me a lot of time and testing?"

Let's see...It took me a bit less than two years, $500+/-, many hours of testing and measurements, a number of ruined woofer surrounds, professional feedback, and some hazardous waste disposal to come up with something viable. I have publicly stated it is based on the original combination of butyl rubber and toluene, yet I'm currently providing it to a person who sells it as part of an agreement not to divulge the precise way to make it. You play around with a plate of goo and start a thread demanding I divulge the formula to "save you a lot of time and testing".  The short answer is obviously no.

If you have no ulterior motive just provide the source of the goo in your plate, so anybody can experiment with it. (Btw, be very careful with that toluene).

Roy

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminder: no personal criticisms about or to other participants in this or any other CSP discussion. If this starts going down the same path that the speaker doping discussion on Audiokarma went, it'll end up locked down and thrown into the Kitchen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RoyC said:

"As for what it is, I asked here a few years ago and was told that they didn't want to say because they put years into developing it. I could do the same or just buy the stuff on ebay.  Not the exact words said to me but that was the jest of it.

So at this point I will ask, What is your formula?  That would save me a lot of time and testing?"

Let's see...It took me a bit less than two years, $500+/-, many hours of testing and measurements, a number of ruined woofer surrounds, professional feedback, and some hazardous waste disposal to come up with something viable. I have publicly stated it is based on the original combination of butyl rubber and toluene, yet I'm currently providing it to a person who sells it as part of an agreement not to divulge the precise way to make it. You play around with a plate of goo and start a thread demanding I divulge the formula to "save you a lot of time and testing".  The short answer is obviously no.

If you have no ulterior motive just provide the source of the goo in your plate, so anybody can experiment with it. (Btw, be very careful with that toluene).

Roy

 

 

I have spent several years as suggested to me to come up with my own formula but unlike your self I am just supposed to "Give it up" ??? I guess your time is more valuable than mine??? You do see the hypocrisy correct???  I have publicly stated it is based on the original combination of butyl rubber and toluene, Just as you have.

So why is it that I do basically the same thing you did but because it's me and not you I am "playing around with a plate of goo" and "demanding you divulge the formula" I didn't demand anything. I asked for you to tell, The same as you "asked" me.

Yes I have several years and money tied up in this also!

But some how me doing this isn't the same??

I will ask this, Why should I do the very thing you have a huge problem doing!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...