Will be putting in the new crossover on the RM 40's

ctviggen · « **Reply #20 on:** 27 Jan 2004, 09:48 pm »

Talk about sexy -- Jeff Rowland stuff is, to me, the sexiest audio gear available (although some Mark Levinson gear is nice, too). However, I'd rather have a plain black box and pay half the cost. (Especially since I plan to put my JR amp in a closet where no one will see it anyway.)

ekovalsky · « **Reply #21 on:** 27 Jan 2004, 09:59 pm »

Quote from: Brian Cheney

Cellulose is very frequency selective, foam not reactive enough for LF damping. Cross them off your list.

Shows what I know about building speakers. Guess I'll stick with my day job

ekovalsky · « **Reply #22 on:** 27 Jan 2004, 10:06 pm »

Quote from: ctviggen

Talk about sexy -- Jeff Rowland stuff is, to me, the sexiest audio gear available (although some Mark Levinson gear is nice, too). However, I'd rather have a plain black box and pay half the cost. (Especially since I plan to put my JR amp in a closet where no one will see it anyway.)

My long time favorites too, although after seeing the mBL equipment at CES everything else seems quite plain. Sounded fantastic too, although I'd want it even if it sounded like Bose

Unfortunately Mark Levinson is basically history and if your product breaks, expect to wait 4-6 months before getting it back. If you get it back at all... they may stiff you and resell your product as new to some unsuspecting fool

Audiogon prices for used ML and Proceed will taking a nosedive if they haven't already. Very glad I sent with dCs instead of the ML 390S which I was considering too.

Rowland is better built and sounds better too. And Jeff's service is first class. He fixed a bad ICEpower module in my amp while at CES so I didn't have to wait!!!

Q · « **Reply #23 on:** 28 Jan 2004, 01:01 pm »

Quote from: Brian Cheney

Before someone gets all incensed, I will point out the following:
I choose all parts based on sound quality. The solid iron core and laminate coils we use sound much, much better than their aircore equivalents due to lower DCR. They have much, much lower stray field that aircores. As for foil coils, they sound awful, with high capacitance causing ringing I don't like.

Point to point hard wiring may look messy but sounds much, much better than a PC board. That's silverplate teflon wire on the mids a ...

Wow...thanks, Brian...
I guess there IS a method to all the madness! Here I thot iron core inductors had way too much saturation potential to sound smooth, and that foil inductors were the choice among all top speakerbuilders. Sorry I questioned it.

As for soldering point-to point, It is definitley the best method in my book. Compare that to some other manufacturers who use bolt and nut with crimpon connections. It may look better, but it adds connection resistance, and "fretting" corrosion over time. Its the same reason that audiophiles should pull all their connections and reseat periodically. Recently, the use of Polyphenyl Ether dielectric grease has become common practice among electronics and automotive electronics manufacturers. This may be a good idea for low level and speaker signals. You can find it at www.techni-tool.com
It helps connections maintain a low DCR over time.

Curious too, if you use any special solder for these connections?

Thanks
Q

ctviggen · « **Reply #24 on:** 28 Jan 2004, 02:50 pm »

I'm bummed about ML and, in particular, Proceed. I always liked Proceed gear, even my AVP. I may buy a used PMDT, as it supposedly has a great picture and great sound. Used, they're coming down in price. Unfortunately, I'd be buying a device I might not be able to get repaired once the warranty expires, but my current DVD player isn't great (a Pioneer Elite, but it has the chroma bug), and the PMDT is a nice transport. That and a Lexicon MC-12 would be the ticket (and my current DVD player supports DVD-A, so I'd be set with everything I need for a while).

doug s. · « **Reply #25 on:** 28 Jan 2004, 04:33 pm »

for diy speakers, or upgrading mfr'd speakers, i'd suggest investigating blackhole 5...

http://www.gr-research.com/blackhole_5.htm

lotsa other vendors carry this as well...

doug s.

zybar · « **Reply #26 on:** 28 Jan 2004, 04:36 pm »

Doug,

Is that just for the bass or any frequency?

I was going to try lamb's wool in place of the fiberglass behind the midrange and tweeter (order it yesterday from Madisound).

Have you personally built or upgraded speakers and used the blackhole product?

What impact did it have?

Thanks,

GW

doug s. · « **Reply #27 on:** 28 Jan 2004, 04:50 pm »

gw,

i tink it's for *all* frequencies, but i'd ask danny richie, or one of its other vendors, to be sure. i am presently auditioning a pair of gr-research diluceo's that have it; it's a recommend upgrade for the gr-research alpha-ls's & newform research r645's; and, iirc, brian cheney *did* mention to me that it would be a nice addition to his speakers...

in larger speakers, ya likely don't wanna remove the stuffing, tho, even after the b-h 5 is added. again, ask a vendor for specifics...

doug s.

Quote from: zybar

Doug,

Is that just for the bass or any frequency?

I was going to try lamb's wool in place of the fiberglass behind the midrange and tweeter (order it yesterday from Madisound).

Have you personally built or upgraded speakers and used the blackhole product?

What impact did it have?

Thanks,

GW

warnerwh · « **Reply #28 on:** 28 Jan 2004, 06:21 pm »

Seems to me that Blackhole 5 would change the internal volume of the speaker. I could easily be wrong though. This stuff is like 1.375" thick. I think wool or acousta stuf would be better. I've done some research and fiberglass is actually very good for stuffing speakers. Then I'm curious that if you use something that is better at absorbing the backwaves if the sensitivity would be less. Remember that the entire enclosure radiates sound. Also the frequency response would change depending on the different strengths and weakness of the stuffing as I suspect they don't damp all frequencies equally. Any experts on the subject are more than welcome help us out here, Brian?

Q · « **Reply #29 on:** 28 Jan 2004, 09:04 pm »

Quote from: warnerwh

Seems to me that Blackhole 5 would change the internal volume of the speaker. I could easily be wrong though. This stuff is like 1.375" thick. I think wool or acousta stuf would be better. I've done some research and fiberglass is actually very good for stuffing speakers. Then I'm curious that if you use something that is better at absorbing the backwaves if the sensitivity would be less. Remember that the entire enclosure radiates sound. Also the frequency response would change depending on the differen ...

If I remember correctly, the Black Hole people acually say that it effectively INCREASES the internal volume. Who knows?.

Wouldnt worry much about affecting internal absorption...that's gotta be negligible. Anything you do to reduce the cabinet radiation, the better. I imagine that the Soundcoat has the same effect as the BH5....so adding BH5 may not help much.

Q · « **Reply #30 on:** 28 Jan 2004, 09:16 pm »

Quote from: warnerwh

Seems to me that Blackhole 5 would change the internal volume of the speaker. I could easily be wrong though. This stuff is like 1.375" thick. I think wool or acousta stuf would be better. I've done some research and fiberglass is actually very good for stuffing speakers. Then I'm curious that if you use something that is better at absorbing the backwaves if the sensitivity would be less. Remember that the entire enclosure radiates sound. Also the frequency response would change depending on the differen ...

Remember that you are not really absorbing any energy in any significant quantity, you are simply damping the pressure. Think of it as your muffler in your car. Its function is to dampen the higher freqencies of air pulses, and allow a more steady flow of air out the pipe. Similarly, the pressure pulses out of your woofers are damped...effectively keeping the pressure pulses inside the cabinet at lower levels than without it. If you can keep the pressure pulses down, you have less cabinet resonance, obviously.

doug s. · « **Reply #31 on:** 29 Jan 2004, 12:42 pm »

Quote from: Q

If I remember correctly, the Black Hole people acually say that it effectively INCREASES the internal volume. Who knows?.

Wouldnt worry much about affecting internal absorption...that's gotta be negligible. Anything you do to reduce the cabinet radiation, the better. I imagine that the Soundcoat has the same effect as the BH5....so adding BH5 may not help much.

yes, the blackhole folk say it makes the speaker wolume appear larger, to the drivers. re: soundcoat, this is a vibration damping substance, not really like bh5. it was initially designed for industrial applications, like engine rooms in ships, mech'l rooms, etc - put on covers of noisy, vibration-prone equipment, etc... it's a sandy, pasty cementitious-type material...

doug s.

ekovalsky · « **Reply #32 on:** 30 Jan 2004, 03:11 am »

Added some pictures of the RM/X crossover to my gallery.

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?action=gallery;area=browse;album=249

Marbles · « **Reply #33 on:** 30 Jan 2004, 03:33 am »

Nice hemostats! In the day they made bitchin' roach clips

lkosova · « **Reply #34 on:** 30 Jan 2004, 04:34 am »

Carefully removing the 12\" woofer with hemostats pilfered from the hospital! Only the best surgical tools for my babies!

Looks like german stainless steel.

Larry

errivera · « **Reply #35 on:** 30 Jan 2004, 01:47 pm »

Although it doesn't make any difference in sound quality, using hotmelt glue on all of those crossover components must make it pretty difficult to perform any upgrade or replacement of any caps or chokes.

zybar · « **Reply #36 on:** 30 Jan 2004, 02:16 pm »

Actually the pieces came off pretty easily with a little prying.

The nice thing about using the hotmelt glue is that the pieces are secure to the cabinet when you are trying to solder and attach. If they were loose, it would have been difficult or impossible to work on them.

GW