Dynaco classics anyone?

[dynaco_dan]

Hi there;

I know that there is at least one other member who is very interested in classic Dynaco.

If there is enough interest from the members, perhaps, Mark, may create a Dynaco discusion group.

Classic Dynaco was tube, solid state and speakers.

There has been a zillion mods, well ok, maybe hundreds perhaps of their electronics.

If anyone is interested, write on this topic your specific Dynaco interest, reading, writing, modifications or thoughts, please.

If there is enough interest, I will personally write to Edward T Dell, publisher of The Audio Amateur, now known as, Audio Electronics.

See if we can post some, or all of their past articles at no charge, but with due credit, here.

The Audio Amatuer magazine, was published from about 1970 up to the '90's.

It was merged with several other offerings, The Speaker Builder and Glass Audio, also from, The Audio Amatuer Corporation.

I was a subscribing member for several decades, I kept all of the back issues, well, I still can't find my last box of them though.

Now is your chance to start up a Dynaco discussion group.

There is a visually beautiful site at;

http://home.indy.net/~gregdunn/dynaco/history.html

This has pages just like the manufacturers spec sheets, some modifications and links.

There is no discussion group and it is not being up-dated as well.

Now is your chance.

[draftingmonkey]

Howdy Vern,

At work on my lunch break. A Dynaco group sounds like fun. I have a few pieces myself:

Amp ST-70 Upgraded caps and resistors

Amp ST-70 Stock (possible Curcio upgrades)

Amp ST-120 Stock

Pre-Amp Pas-3 Stock

Pre-Amp Pas-2x Stock (Possible Curcio upgrades)

Pre-Amp Pat-4 Stock

Tuner FM-3 Stock

Speakers A25WV

Quadaptor splitting the feed from the ST-120 to a pair of AR-3a's.

There is a Dynaco Speaker page (I have the link at home) that has a pretty good listing of their speaker line and the differences.

James

Geez, I didn't know I had this much Dynaco gear.

[draftingmonkey]

Dynaco speaker page

http://home.indy.net/~gregdunn/dynaco/components/speakers/

[dynaco_dan]

>Howdy Vern,

>

>At work on my lunch break. A Dynaco group sounds like fun. I

>have a few pieces myself:

>

>Amp ST-70 Upgraded caps and resistors

>Amp ST-70 Stock (possible Curcio upgrades)

>Amp ST-120 Stock

>Pre-Amp Pas-3 Stock

>Pre-Amp Pas-2x Stock (Possible Curcio upgrades)

>Pre-Amp Pat-4 Stock

>Tuner FM-3 Stock

>Speakers A25WV

>Quadaptor splitting the feed from the ST-120 to a pair of

>AR-3a's.

>

>There is a Dynaco Speaker page (I have the link at home) that

>has a pretty good listing of their speaker line and the

>differences.

>

>James

>

>Geez, I didn't know I had this much Dynaco gear.

>

Hi James;

A few pieces, yeah sure, your wife certainly should not let you out the door by the looks of it, and definitely not near garage sales. lol

James, you really have a really exceptionally nice and understanding wife.

She is a keeper for sure.

I think you need a computer database just to keep track of your various components and in which room. lol

You are the first responder I see to this topic, a great way to start the topic too.

If there is more of this type of response, everything is looking very positive.

Have a great day, James.

A few pieces. HEE HEE

[dynaco_dan]

Hi there;

There has been 24 lookers but only a small fraction seem to have any interest in Dynaco.

It sure would be nice to have some more support for the older classic Dynaco tube or solid state equipment.

The various Dynaco speakers can be modified as well.

I don't know how to attract more people to this site from a google search for this topic.

[Guest daveshel]

I'd love a Dynaco discussion! My dad built an SCA-35 and an FM3 when I was like 5 years old. I built an SCA-80 when I was a teenager. When I was in my 20s I built a PAT-5 Bi-FET and a Stereo 400 when Stereo Cost Cutters was selling kits. Since them I have amassed a bit of a collection:

Stereo 120 upgraded to 170EX by AVA

PAT-5 upgraded to OmegaStar PAT5 by AVA

Stereo 70 on the AVA bench as we speak to become Untimate 70

Stereo 70 stock refurb

PAS3 (next to be sent to AVA)

PAT-5 upgraded to FET3 by AVA

Stereo 120 stock

PAT-5 stock old version with 1/4" ins and outs

PAT-4 stock

PAT-4 stock (broken stop on volume control)

If anybody needs anything, I would entertain offers for sale/trade of the bottom half of the list.

[Pete B]

Hi Vern,

Yes I also like Dynaco equipment and agree that we should have a dedicated section here.

A few nice links:

http://home.indy.net/~gregdunn/dynaco/components/speakers/

Another, Note that the A-50 XO schematic seems to be incorrect:

http://www.t-linespeakers.org/classics/dynaco.html

I'm reverse engineering a pair of A-25s just because I always thought they had interesting qualities. I wrote this about them some time ago:

Compared one A-25 with the 25F-EW (claimed to be the modern replacement woofer) to another with the original 25TV-EW and they are significantly different. The 25F-EW is more efficient making the speaker sound shouty in the 1 kHz region, and less well integrated with the tweeter. The stronger magnet provides more damping and there is less deep bass output with the 25F-EW. Checked the efficiency difference with warble tones and the difference is right on 3dB at 250, 314, 400 Hz, then it varies between 1 to 3 dB for the rest of the bands up to 2 kHz.

I believe this makes the 25F-EW a replacement for the A25XL which was 3 dB more efficient and used a ceramic magnet woofer. See the A25XL reference here.

http://www.t-linespeakers.org/classics/dynaco.html

Pete B.

>Hi there;

>

>I know that there is at least one other member who is very

>interested in classic Dynaco.

>

>If there is enough interest from the members, perhaps, Mark,

>may create a Dynaco discusion group.

>

>Classic Dynaco was tube, solid state and speakers.

>

>There has been a zillion mods, well ok, maybe hundreds perhaps

>of their electronics.

>

>If anyone is interested, write on this topic your specific

>Dynaco interest, reading, writing, modifications or thoughts,

>please.

>

>If there is enough interest, I will personally write to Edward

>T Dell, publisher of The Audio Amateur, now known as, Audio

>Electronics.

>

>See if we can post some, or all of their past articles at no

>charge, but with due credit, here.

>

>The Audio Amatuer magazine, was published from about 1970 up

>to the '90's.

>

>It was merged with several other offerings, The Speaker

>Builder and Glass Audio, also from, The Audio Amatuer

>Corporation.

>

>I was a subscribing member for several decades, I kept all of

>the back issues, well, I still can't find my last box of them

>though.

>

>Now is your chance to start up a Dynaco discussion group.

>

>There is a visually beautiful site at;

>

>http://home.indy.net/~gregdunn/dynaco/history.html

>

>This has pages just like the manufacturers spec sheets, some

>modifications and links.

>

>There is no discussion group and it is not being up-dated as

>well.

>

>Now is your chance.

[Pete B]

I wrote this to another group:

I've been curious about compliance shift over time in rubber surrounds in the hope of finding trends in materials, manufacturers, or the environmental exposure.

Some surprising information. I have a pair of Dynaco A-25s that I bought recently purely for the purposes of reverse engineering. The woofer used in the early production model was a SEAS 25 TV-EW with an ALNICO magnet. SEAS has a suggested ceramic magnet replacement 25 F-EW which is what was used in one of the systems. It is interesting that both are well within specification going by the free air resonance one from 1971 and the other from 1990.

SEAS:

25 TV-EW date code 1971 measured Fs = 23.6 Spec = 20-25 Hz

25 F-EW date code 1990 measured Fs = 27.4 Spec = 26 Hz

I noticed in listening to these systems that the one with the ceramic magnet was significantly more efficient and measured it midband as 3dB more. The data below shows only 2dB but it is a theoretical midband value. I believe that the cone behavior is slightly different providing a bit more output midband. This is probably the driver used in the A-25XL model from Dynaco which is claimed to be 3dB more efficient than the original.

Measured T&S parameters:

SEAS 25 TV-EW UNIT SAMPLE: PLB#1 1/12/06

UNIT DATE: 25 week of 1971

Rubber surround part number: SR 231/1

Effective cone diameter = 21 cm measured

Effective cone area = 285 cm^2 old SEAS spec, 350 cm^2 new (25F-EW)

seems the old spec of 285 cm^2 was an error and might explain

the difference in moving mass below:

Measured SEAS

Delta M 15.75 Spec

Fshift -16%

Fs 23.6 20-25

Vas 205

Re 5.7

Qe .48

Qm 4.2

Mms 37.5 30

no .36

SPLref 87.6 88

Bl 6.6 .8

Qts .43

Cms .

====================================================================

SEAS 25F-EW(H250) UNIT SAMPLE: PLB#2 1/13/06

UNIT DATE: 48 week of 1990

Rubber surround part number: SR 231/1

Effective cone diameter = 21 cm measured

SEAS Spec effective cone area = 350 cm^2

Measured SEAS

Delta M 15.75 Spec

Fshift -15%

Fs 27.4 26

Vas 144 175

Re 5.5 5.8

Qe .49 .39

Qm 3.9 3.8

Mms 39.6 33

no .58

SPLref 89.6 89

Bl 8.8

Qts .44 .35

Cms .85

[dynaco_dan]

Hi Pete;

Great technical write-up of the two woofers.

It appears now, that anyone needing only one woofer, would need to replace each speaker system as a set now, to have matching sound.

If given a choice, which speaker system sounds better, or which do you prefer, Pete.

[Pete B]

Hi Vern,

The original woofer sounds much better, more low end extension (not that it has much to start with) and probably less top end on the woofer so that it transitions better to the tweeter. The ceramic woofer seems to be correct for the A-25XL which had a different tweeter, and perhaps crossover so it's just not right here. I might try a compensation network on the woofer to get a better match, but I'll probably look for the correct woofer on e-bay.

SEAS suggests the 27TFFC as a replacement tweeter acording to Madisound and I have a feeling it should work well given what I've seen from measurements.

Pete B.

[Pete B]

Hi Vern,

I was wondering if you have A-25s in your collection?

Have you noticed the large variation in sound or tonal balance

with changes in vertical position? I noticed this years ago and

again here listening to them again. Do you recall if there was

common talk of the best listening angle for the A-25s?

Anyone?

Pete B.

>Hi Pete;

>

>Great technical write-up of the two woofers.

>

>It appears now, that anyone needing only one woofer, would

>need to replace each speaker system as a set now, to have

>matching sound.

>

>If given a choice, which speaker system sounds better, or

>which do you prefer, Pete.

[Wally]

Hi Pete,

I have a pair of almost mint A25XL's. No model number on them but from descriptions on the Dynaco web site that's what I make them out to be because they are a bit different from the original A25's I had. Same(?) 10 " woofer. Same port. Little different tweeter and the HF contol is a pot, not a switch. Cab seems to be the same size as I remember the originals but I can measure to make sure.

Anyway, let me know how you want me to conduct your test and I will report my findings to this forum.

[Pete B]

Hi Wally,

I wondered if others found a preferred listening angle. I always noticed a change in midrange smoothness but never saw any discussion of it over the years. My question would be do you have a preferred listening height, and do you tilt them at all to alter the driver delay?

Thanks,

Pete B.

>Hi Pete,

>

>I have a pair of almost mint A25XL's. No model number on them

>but from descriptions on the Dynaco web site that's what I

>make them out to be because they are a bit different from the

>original A25's I had. Same(?) 10 " woofer. Same port.

>Little different tweeter and the HF contol is a pot, not a

>switch. Cab seems to be the same size as I remember the

>originals but I can measure to make sure.

>

>Anyway, let me know how you want me to conduct your test and I

>will report my findings to this forum.

[dynaco_dan]

>Hi Vern,

>

>I was wondering if you have A-25s in your collection?

>Have you noticed the large variation in sound or tonal

>balance

>with changes in vertical position? I noticed this years ago

>and

>again here listening to them again. Do you recall if there

>was

>common talk of the best listening angle for the A-25s?

>

>Anyone?

>

>Pete B.

>

>

>>Hi Pete;

>>

>>Great technical write-up of the two woofers.

>>

>>It appears now, that anyone needing only one woofer,

>would

>>need to replace each speaker system as a set now, to have

>>matching sound.

>>

>>If given a choice, which speaker system sounds better, or

>>which do you prefer, Pete.

Hi Pete;

Yes, I do have a few Dynaco speakers in my museum as well.

I set my AR-3A's aside for a Dynaco listening session.

I lived primarily with the A-25's for about 3 months, as a trial period.

Dry sounding as always, but very listenable over the long haul.

Perhaps a cap POOGE changeover, might bring the highs up, or at least make the highs slightly more transparent.

I have written elsewhere regarding AR, KLH, EPI, Advent and Dynaco, just to name a few speaker manufacturers, that made the classic speakers sound like brothers or cousins in sound quality.

I also gave the same listening time for A-35's and A-50's, with the results that, each, is ever so slightly different, but ever close sounding.

I only have the tweeter half of a Dynaco A-10, so that will not be to good a test. lol

From my experience working at the Dynaco warantee depot here, and just hifi experience.

I do believe, but I cannot prove, there may be more sound differences between the Scan and Seas drivers, than difference from the different models within each drivers brand.

I bought a pair of A-25's off ebay, from a regular seller I like doing business with, knowing that one was, Scan and the other a Seas versions.

I never read about or hear of, which Dynaco A-25 speaker, Seas or Scan version, J.Gordon Holt, listened to when he gave it the big thumbs up in Stereophile.

At that time, I don't think anyone, except Dynaco employees, would have known about the numerous variations, of the A-25 speakers system.

The Dynaco classic speakers are very thirsty for power, and they can handle a fair amount of power without distortion.

In the "other" forum, under, "Fast Blow Fuses", there is Dynaco speaker fusing information, if you follow the threads.

As always, we must remember that this fusing information was over 25 year ago, and perhaps a downward fusing direction might be in order.

I only listen, to all of my speakers, in the vertical position, facing straight forward, with no toe in, not critical of any clearance from the rear wall.

I have never read of any particular speaker placement for Dynaco speakers in particular.

Perhaps because of their age, back then, we didn't know as much about location, positioning and magic cables, as we do today.

Every person doesn't have the ideal listening room.

If the cabinets are vertical with the tweeters on top, at ear level, with them toed in or not, towards the listener, their dispersion is pretty darn good.

As with James and his growing museum of AR-4X's, I am always willing to make room for another hifi speaker sytem.

The A-25's give a pretty good run against the big bear, the AR-3A's, but only a pretty good run.

[Wally]

Hi Pete,

Because I have so darned many speakers, I haven't spent much time with the Dynacos. They are actually on a high shelf in my computer room for background music. The tweeters are above my head so the sound is somewhat woofy (FM is the source material). As I lowered the speakers to where my ears were about the level of the bottom of the tweeter the upper mid and treble end improved providing a better balanced sound. It was not so bass heavy. Laterally there is little change in apparent response with both speakers playing. This model has the woofer and the tweeter centered vertically on the baffle board. I'll play some of my 'test' cd's over the next few days and let you know what I find.

>Hi Wally,

>

>I wondered if others found a preferred listening angle. I

>always noticed a change in midrange smoothness but never saw

>any discussion of it over the years. My question would be do

>you have a preferred listening height, and do you tilt them at

>all to alter the driver delay?

>

>Thanks,

>Pete B.

[dynaco_dan]

>Hi Vern,

>

>Yes I also like Dynaco equipment and agree that we should have

>a dedicated section here.

>A few nice links:

> http://home.indy.net/~gregdunn/dynaco/components/speakers/

>Another, Note that the A-50 XO schematic seems to be

>incorrect:

> http://www.t-linespeakers.org/classics/dynaco.html

>

>I'm reverse engineering a pair of A-25s just because I always

>thought they had interesting qualities. I wrote this about

>them some time ago:

>Compared one A-25 with the 25F-EW (claimed to be the modern

>replacement woofer) to another with the original 25TV-EW and

>they are significantly different. The 25F-EW is more efficient

>making the speaker sound shouty in the 1 kHz region, and less

>well integrated with the tweeter. The stronger magnet provides

>more damping and there is less deep bass output with the

>25F-EW. Checked the efficiency difference with warble tones

>and the difference is right on 3dB at 250, 314, 400 Hz, then

>it varies between 1 to 3 dB for the rest of the bands up to 2

>kHz.

>I believe this makes the 25F-EW a replacement for the A25XL

>which was 3 dB more efficient and used a ceramic magnet

>woofer. See the A25XL reference here.

> http://www.t-linespeakers.org/classics/dynaco.html

>

>Pete B.

>

>

>>Hi there;

>>

>>I know that there is at least one other member who is

>very

>>interested in classic Dynaco.

>>

>>If there is enough interest from the members, perhaps,

>Mark,

>>may create a Dynaco discusion group.

>>

>>Classic Dynaco was tube, solid state and speakers.

>>

>>There has been a zillion mods, well ok, maybe hundreds

>perhaps

>>of their electronics.

>>

>>If anyone is interested, write on this topic your

>specific

>>Dynaco interest, reading, writing, modifications or

>thoughts,

>>please.

>>

>>If there is enough interest, I will personally write to

>Edward

>>T Dell, publisher of The Audio Amateur, now known as,

>Audio

>>Electronics.

>>

>>See if we can post some, or all of their past articles at

>no

>>charge, but with due credit, here.

>>

>>The Audio Amatuer magazine, was published from about 1970

>up

>>to the '90's.

>>

>>It was merged with several other offerings, The Speaker

>>Builder and Glass Audio, also from, The Audio Amatuer

>>Corporation.

>>

>>I was a subscribing member for several decades, I kept all

>of

>>the back issues, well, I still can't find my last box of

>them

>>though.

>>

>>Now is your chance to start up a Dynaco discussion group.

>>

>>There is a visually beautiful site at;

>>

>>http://home.indy.net/~gregdunn/dynaco/history.html

>>

>>This has pages just like the manufacturers spec sheets,

>some

>>modifications and links.

>>

>>There is no discussion group and it is not being up-dated

>as

>>well.

>>

>>Now is your chance.

>

Hi there;

Disappointedly there will not be a Dynaco forum here.

I went to two other websites, the first was visually very uninteresting, the second, Greg Dunn's, I've been there numerous times before.

Greg Dunn's is a visually very beautiful site, mostly a Dynaco catalogue, some information, contacts, links, no forum, and is not being up-dated.

Classicspeakerpages.net has by far the most visually well layed out and most brands on one website.

Where else can you find so many brands in one location.

Yes, maybe there could be some more brands added here in the future.

I do not know the start up cost, maintenance or operational on-going cost of a website to comment further.

I do believe this site has progessed far beyond what Mark had started.

[Pete B]

Hi Vern,

Yes, I also noticed the rolled of high and low end of the A-25 as most did years ago, and the laid back midrange. Complete opposite of the Large Advents. They're not my favorite, but I can enjoy them for what they are.

I don't think there were many made with the Scan drivers, or at least there were many more with the SEAS drivers.

I was referring to the common, SEAS based A-25 with the vent at the bottom.

I did replace the caps in these with Axons, and cleaned the switch with Deoxit spray.

Thanks for your input,

Pete B.

>Hi Pete;

>

>Yes, I do have a few Dynaco speakers in my museum as well.

>

>I set my AR-3A's aside for a Dynaco listening session.

>

>I lived primarily with the A-25's for about 3 months, as a

>trial period.

>

>Dry sounding as always, but very listenable over the long

>haul.

>

>Perhaps a cap POOGE changeover, might bring the highs up, or

>at least make the highs slightly more transparent.

>

>I have written elsewhere regarding AR, KLH, EPI, Advent and

>Dynaco, just to name a few speaker manufacturers, that made

>the classic speakers sound like brothers or cousins in sound

>quality.

>

>I also gave the same listening time for A-35's and A-50's,

>with the results that, each, is ever so slightly different,

>but ever close sounding.

>

>I only have the tweeter half of a Dynaco A-10, so that will

>not be to good a test. lol

>

>From my experience working at the Dynaco warantee depot here,

>and just hifi experience.

>

>I do believe, but I cannot prove, there may be more sound

>differences between the Scan and Seas drivers, than difference

>from the different models within each drivers brand.

>

>I bought a pair of A-25's off ebay, from a regular seller I

>like doing business with, knowing that one was, Scan and the

>other a Seas versions.

>

>I never read about or hear of, which Dynaco A-25 speaker, Seas

>or Scan version, J.Gordon Holt, listened to when he gave it

>the big thumbs up in Stereophile.

>

>At that time, I don't think anyone, except Dynaco employees,

>would have known about the numerous variations, of the A-25

>speakers system.

>

>The Dynaco classic speakers are very thirsty for power, and

>they can handle a fair amount of power without distortion.

>

>In the "other" forum, under, "Fast Blow

>Fuses", there is Dynaco speaker fusing information, if

>you follow the threads.

>

>As always, we must remember that this fusing information was

>over 25 year ago, and perhaps a downward fusing direction

>might be in order.

>

>I only listen, to all of my speakers, in the vertical

>position, facing straight forward, with no toe in, not

>critical of any clearance from the rear wall.

>

>I have never read of any particular speaker placement for

>Dynaco speakers in particular.

>

>Perhaps because of their age, back then, we didn't know as

>much about location, positioning and magic cables, as we do

>today.

>

>Every person doesn't have the ideal listening room.

>

>If the cabinets are vertical with the tweeters on top, at ear

>level, with them toed in or not, towards the listener, their

>dispersion is pretty darn good.

>

>As with James and his growing museum of AR-4X's, I am always

>willing to make room for another hifi speaker sytem.

>

>The A-25's give a pretty good run against the big bear, the

>AR-3A's, but only a pretty good run.

[Pete B]

Thanks for your input Wally,

I do believe that yours are not the original A-25s since the tweeter was off center. I'm curious, if you've brought them down for a listen, if you find any improvement with them at ear level but tilted to bring the woofer forward. I found some interesting characteristics when simulating them to determine the level control characteristics and required padding on the ceramic woofer.

Pete B.

>Hi Pete,

>

>Because I have so darned many speakers, I haven't spent much

>time with the Dynacos. They are actually on a high shelf in my

>computer room for background music. The tweeters are above my

>head so the sound is somewhat woofy (FM is the source

>material). As I lowered the speakers to where my ears were

>about the level of the bottom of the tweeter the upper mid and

>treble end improved providing a better balanced sound. It was

>not so bass heavy. Laterally there is little change in

>apparent response with both speakers playing. This model has

>the woofer and the tweeter centered vertically on the baffle

>board. I'll play some of my 'test' cd's over the next few days

>and let you know what I find.

>

>

>>Hi Wally,

>>

>>I wondered if others found a preferred listening angle. I

>>always noticed a change in midrange smoothness but never

>saw

>>any discussion of it over the years. My question would be

>do

>>you have a preferred listening height, and do you tilt

>them at

>>all to alter the driver delay?

>>

>>Thanks,

>>Pete B.

>

[Pete B]

Link to some comments on the PAT-4:

http://www.classicspeakerpages.net/dc/dcbo...ype=search#7863

I commented about adding a cap to the PAT-4 many years ago to kill and oscillation, see the follow up where I removed it and do not suggest using it:

http://www.classicspeakerpages.net/dc/dcboard.php#7915

Pete B.

[Guest daveshel]

>Yes, I also noticed the rolled of high and low end of the A-25

>as most did years ago, and the laid back midrange. Complete

>opposite of the Large Advents.

>

Pete, could you please spin this out a bit more? I have been keeping my eye out for a deal on some A-25s but have never heard them.

[Pete B]

Hi Dave,

Your asking about the sound character?

Their sound is laid back in a Quad, Vandersteen sort of way, they seem to get the midrange about right, on the correct listening angle, but they're limited in bass and high end extension. The tweeter is a 1.5" and is probably good out to 12 kHz or so limited by the moving mass. The bass is vented with a lossy "aperiodic" vent which acts as a leak and the bass below about 60 Hz seems to roll off fast. I notice a slight boxy and flat quality to the sound.

They can be musically convincing with material that is not demanding at the extremes of the frequency spectrum, however the laid back midrage offers a distant perspective on the performance.

The Advents are shouty in the midrange and the A-25s are the opposite.

I much prefer the Advents with BSC as a low cost system.

You can probably find much discussion on the web about them, however I've not been able to find any of the old reviews online.

Pete B.

>>Yes, I also noticed the rolled of high and low end of the

>A-25

>>as most did years ago, and the laid back midrange.

>Complete

>>opposite of the Large Advents.

>>

>

>Pete, could you please spin this out a bit more? I have been

>keeping my eye out for a deal on some A-25s but have never

>heard them.

[Guest daveshel]

Hmm. Thanks - you may have saved me some expense and effort, at least for the short term.

I used nothing but a pair of Advent larges for like 25 years. Early last year I got another pair and was amazed at the synergy of the double stack. Later I upgraded my electronics to AVA. The improved mids and highs of the AVA gear makes the Advents even more shouty, so I am considering alternatives for the first time in a long time. I tried an AR4x pair that I refurbished and was pleasantly surprised with the tonal balance, but they are just not enough for this system and room.

I might just have to get adventurous and try something new!

>Hi Dave,

>

>Your asking about the sound character?

>

>Their sound is laid back in a Quad, Vandersteen sort of way,

>they seem to get the midrange about right, on the correct

>listening angle, but they're limited in bass and high end

>extension. The tweeter is a 1.5" and is probably good

>out to 12 kHz or so limited by the moving mass. The bass is

>vented with a lossy "aperiodic" vent which acts as a

>leak and the bass below about 60 Hz seems to roll off fast. I

>notice a slight boxy and flat quality to the sound.

>They can be musically convincing with material that is not

>demanding at the extremes of the frequency spectrum, however

>the laid back midrage offers a distant perspective on the

>performance.

>

>The Advents are shouty in the midrange and the A-25s are the

>opposite.

>

>I much prefer the Advents with BSC as a low cost system.

>

>You can probably find much discussion on the web about them,

>however I've not been able to find any of the old reviews

>online.

>

>Pete B.

[dynaco_dan]

>Hi Pete,

>

>Because I have so darned many speakers, I haven't spent much

>time with the Dynacos. They are actually on a high shelf in my

>computer room for background music. The tweeters are above my

>head so the sound is somewhat woofy (FM is the source

>material). As I lowered the speakers to where my ears were

>about the level of the bottom of the tweeter the upper mid and

>treble end improved providing a better balanced sound. It was

>not so bass heavy. Laterally there is little change in

>apparent response with both speakers playing. This model has

>the woofer and the tweeter centered vertically on the baffle

>board. I'll play some of my 'test' cd's over the next few days

>and let you know what I find.

>

>

>>Hi Wally,

>>

>>I wondered if others found a preferred listening angle. I

>>always noticed a change in midrange smoothness but never

>saw

>>any discussion of it over the years. My question would be

>do

>>you have a preferred listening height, and do you tilt

>them at

>>all to alter the driver delay?

>>

>>Thanks,

>>Pete B.

>

Hi Wally;

The woofer and tweeter, both being centered, would indicate to me you have Dynaco A-10's, not A-25's.

These certainly have a good following now.

Has your nice wife let you slip out of the house, "again"? lol

[Pete B]

Yes, I don't think A-25s are going to do it for you. I commented here about your double Advents:

http://www.classicspeakerpages.net/dc/dcbo...mesg_id=910#910

[Guest denmarkdrivers]

thats very intresting reverse engineering the A-25's drivers, are doing this for an audio company ?

Seems the A 25 drivers from 68-69 show no wear at all time after time.

If i owned an audio company i would reverse engineer them as well, as close to the originals as possiable.

That may be impossiable because manufacturing methods have changed so much ?

How did they do it ? How did they seemlessly attach the rubber to the papper so well it looks like a newer driver after all theese years ?

seems noone has matched that driver in many respects, im sure if you spend enough you might come close but still it amazes me.