|
|
Post by dsjr on Nov 29, 2015 11:19:15 GMT
The first pair of 'proper' speakers I sold was a pair of Spendor BC2's to a school-friend's Dad back in 1974. A living room sort out some months later meant that these were passed to my friend (his Dad bought some IMF Super Compacts to replace them) and many of my favourite mid 70's LP's were first heard on these. Time moves on and the BC2 bass units start to object to high cone excursion, breaking their braided cone-terminal connectors a few times (early BC1 and 2's also suffer the white surround flattening out issue) and after twenty years, they were replaced by some TDL Studio 1M's which, despite the metal cones and domes, sound rich toned and smooth.
Come forward to 2008. My mate's dad had just passed away (anti-rejection drugs prescribed since a kidney transplant in the late 80's eventually killed him) and I inherited a set of early 70's Crown amps, which are still amazingly good and also the non-running BC2's. A pair of SA2 drivers from Spendor's current designer and a replacement pair of Coles tweeters from the BC1's I once owned (another story and the reason why I so deeply respect Spencer Hughes for his humour and open minded kindness) got them going again and currently I'm using them in the main system.
The story doesn't end there though. My old mate replaced the TDL's a few years ago with a pair of Spendor S8's, which I really rate when used correctly and a move back to the UK from Jersey now means the TDL's are waiting for me to collect. I have no idea how they're going to work at home, but they'll look a hell of a lot better in our little sitting room. In the meantime, my piece-work for NVA has meant I now have a serious little system in the workroom. I started with some late 60's Wharfedale Dentons, which are very good, but ultimately a bit too cloudy. A pair of Diamond IV's followed (they annihilated two pairs of AVI babies, N5's and Pro 9's, but lack an octave and a half of bass) and I've been using some ex editing-suite Rogers 'BBC' LS5/9's in a compromised siting position for a few years, which have sounded a bit too full of themselves in the mid bass (another long story as to why they were balanced this way).
Earlier this year, an AOS and Yahoo Spendor group member with whom I'm in email contact was selling some non running IMF Compacts. Similar box size to the Super Compact, but with smaller Elac 6" bass unit (instead of the KEF B200 of the later model) and fitted with a cone tweeter which may be of EMI origin. Very fond memories of IMF's of old meant that they came my way. Wembley Loudspeakers did a grand re-foam job on the bass units and some 'exercise' on the mid drivers freed them off and 'cleaned' the voice-coil gaps. I think they sound marvellous despite their age and the fact that Macca on AOS has now a pair of TLS50's which are closely related to the Super Compact. This has re-awakened my interest and love of old IMF's driven by high damping-factor amps like the aforementioned Crown D series amps (I think Jerry has now sold his DC300A, which I think he liked).
Very long post - sorry chaps...
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Nov 30, 2015 18:09:51 GMT
Quick continuation... When I started out at KJ Watford over forty years ago, it was one of only two or three so-called Top End dealers outside of London. Our bigger dem room was filled with now classic and revered speakers, such as big Tannoys, all the IMF's, Monitor Audio MA1 and MA3, Spendors and Rogers BC1/LS3/6, KEF104ab's and of course the 'shelf-mounted' AR3a, Gale 401, JBL L100, l200, L65 Jubal and 'Decade' siblings at various times. A huge spectacular palette of different sounds. I supposed I became deeply immersed in the 'bextrene' way of reproducing music, although many IMF's used a crinkly-doped midrange driver on all but the top models (TLS80 upwards) and I did feel that the US models were a bit coloured (The short-lived AR3a Improved was much better as I recall and the AR10 Pi's were amazing). One day, I and a client wanted to hear the AR LST's, a large, multi-faced speaker of great charm and real ability I discovered. To the managers extreme annoyance, I got them out of boxed stock and set them up to listen to. Bloody hell they were good and the ultimate statement back then of what AR could do. I was young, totally naïve and just acted on impulse a lot, but I leaned so much and have many very happy memories of this time. Please remember that back then, we could sell 12 PL12-D turntables on ONE Saturday in this shop alone, the warehouse (Harrow Audio in its very original guise) selling as many or more - we tended to fit the cartridges for the clients rather than sell sealed boxes. there were two or three other Pioneer outlets in Watford too and Gawd knows how many Pl12-D's they sold. For a year or two, Hifi was really where it was at, right up until VAT went up to 25% and it all came crashing down shortly after  Happy days though... My nickname then was 'Ferret,' because I was always in the workshop ferreting around the boxes of junk for bits and bobs. |
|
|
|
Post by jandl100 on Nov 30, 2015 18:14:20 GMT
Ah, the PL-12D - my very first tt, fitted with an Ortofon VMS20E2 cartridge, iirc.  |
|
|
|
Post by pre65 on Nov 30, 2015 18:48:59 GMT
I upgrades to a PL12D from a Garrard 86SB.
My Dad had a PL12D and I think Mums still got it somewhere, although the drive belt had perished.
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Nov 30, 2015 19:10:20 GMT
PL12-D motors dry out as they run very warm like Garrard's motors do and for some reason, I couldn't get a better sound from it, although later experiences with a Technics SL1500 leads me to suspect the tonearm exit cables, which looked better than they were in practise. I have an 86SB and blow hot and cold over it. It's NOT a pile of junk at all, even if it does feel flimsy. The mech on mine had been serviced before I got it, so no gummed up trip pawls etc. and the arm tracks an ADC XLM III at 1.3g approx. with absolutely no issues at all. The exit cable to amp is now Van Damme Pro-Patch.
The trouble with ALL these decks using high-speed four or eight pole induction or semi-synchronous motors (Garrard, Dual and a host of 1970's Jap belt drives) is the motor vibration, which gets into the stylus as a high pitched 'hum' in the background. The 86SB does it, although partly collapsed motor grommets (two of the three are softer compound) makes it far worse than when new. The otherwise superb Dual 601 is disappointing in this regard as well and it varies with the cartridge too, currently an 'as new' B&O MMC20CL I found and it's a real shame as the main bearings are all of good quality and very low noise. Garrard did work very hard on the synchro-lab motor to minimise vibration, but sadly, the rotor parts can come unstuck and even if they're glued back as carefully as possible, you never quite get the balance perfect as when they were first made.
Among my motley turntable collection is a Garrard AP76. My first one in 1972 was a horrid thing, with sticky trip pawls and iffy finish - platter went up and down and wobbled at the edge and the arm screws were knurdled way before I got at them.. This one's much better, with tighter main bearing sleeves, proper run-out on the platter edge and a very low friction arm right to side end - took some cleaning out though as old grease turns to snot and then glue... The sound of this deck is frankly surprising. The headshell is plastic and flexes, unlike the identical looking one on the SP25 III, the horizontal arm bearings have slop and Garrard plinths by then were made of very thin ply before the fancy 'Module' plinths came along. The bloody thing is quieter regarding motor transmission to the stylus too and of course the idler drive gives instant starts. I've a Zero 100 as well and that one works well too, despite itself...
|
|
|
|
Post by pre65 on Nov 30, 2015 19:15:19 GMT
My mistake, the old turntable was an AP76.
Must get the brain serviced. 
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Nov 30, 2015 19:49:51 GMT
Worth digging it out and de-greasing the trip pawls, start-stop lever under the platter and speed/size selector, which were all jammed solid on mine. Loads of threads on Vinyl Engine regarding servicing this generation of mechs - SL72/75/95, AP75/76 and Zero models, as well as the later belt driven versions. despite not being like a Swiss watch like equivalent Duals can appear, the engineering in these is very impressive and I was really surprised at how good this little deck can be. I've used an AT120E to great effect, G800E (many came with this one), Shure V15 IV-HE and ADC's... It's worth far more than an AT95E or Shure 75-6S!
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Jan 16, 2016 0:05:11 GMT
I am curious to try Naim in case the impression I formed 20 years ago was wrong. A horrible synthetic, shrieky noise that bore little relationship to music. Perhaps it will be different in the Bentley I doubt it but read on...
Naim HAVE changed their sound over the decades. Favourite in early days was the bolt-up NAP120 (dear little thing but really ugly) and first generation bolt-up NAP250.
The CB era gave Naims the speedy but harsh as nails reputation we all know. Loads of crossover and odd-order distortion, coupled with the severe band limiting and CD player intolerance in the early days of the medium. The Nait mk1 and well sorted 135's avoided the worst excesses of the period, but after a few years' use, the 135's become as harsh, thermally unstable and expensive to service as the others - avoid 42/110 at ALL costs!
Olive (drab) Naims were slightly better when brand new, but aged and drifted like all the others. The 180 was the nicest out of the box, but apparently they age just the same, going harsh and nasty until internal voltages are re-set and caps re-capped. Nait 3 and ALL versions of the NAP90 gutless and non-competitive in the wider market imo.
Latest case models had a number of revisions, some amps even having Zobel networks on the speaker outputs - EEK!!!!!!!!! on-board amp electrolytic coupling caps still the wrong way round (according to an experienced, non-confrontational and highly qualified amp designer I trust implicitly) in earlier ones, but more recent models seem to have fitted bi-directional film caps instead, but I cannot be sure. All the nasty distortions have been tamed a little, but low order distortion has been added it seems. Nice now in the midrange, but punchy 'rhythmic' bass is wrong compared to peers and hf still has a little grain imo. lower models hard-clip as well, but that adds to youthful 'excitement.'
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2016 11:19:52 GMT
Dave: maybe you can answer something that's always puzzled me. Do you know how a pair of chrome bumper 135s differs from a 250 of the same era? My experience of 135s is that they are dull as ditchwater, yet I like the 250 in the right circumstances. I know we differ on tastes (42/110 is one of the most musical pairings out there IMO) but here we do agree that the 250 and 135s are different. I'd always just expected the 135s to be a mono version of the 250. My ears tell me otherwise.
I should add that ive tried un-serviced and Naim serviced 135s in my time, so it wasn't a case of the amps being out of sorts. Both were equally dull IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Jan 16, 2016 15:21:41 GMT
Mods, if Singularity doesn't mind, could this discussion about Naims be moved into my 'gear-memories blog' to clean up this thread from my ramblings?
Hmm, I always felt the opposite, but here goes and hope it makes sense... I'm dealing with then brand new amps here and fully accept that today, it really depends on how well they've been serviced in the past, if serviced at all...
In basic terms, the 135's used the same supply and amp boards as in the 250, the major difference being individual transformers and fan cooled heat-sinks on the 135's. having said this, on a trip to Naim in the early 80's, we were shown how the input transistors on 135 boards were individually matched to reduce distortion at the output, which was largely even order I understand. Crossover artifacts were still there though, but it was gratifying to see how the distortion waveform on test improved in the five minutes or so allowed for testing, the 'notches' caused by the crossover artefacts all but disappearing as the new amp bedded in.
A dear old friend of mine replaced his sweet toned bolt-up 250 with 135's in 1982 or thereabouts (I bought the 250 and should never have sold it on when Linn brought out the Lk1 and 2 as it was a good one). I heard how these amps changed over many years, being used all weekend from Friday evening to Sunday night but off during the week. Harsh for a couple of weeks, they lost the harshness after a couple of months and sounded lovely to me after six months or so. At five years old, one case was running warmer than the other all the time and by six years, both the fans were coming on when idling and sonics had gone hard and a bit scratchy.
We never had a demo 250 for longer than a few months and used to encourage clients to buy the demo one as it was fully run in. My own take on CB250's was that the sound was hard, forward projected and dry in acoustic reproduction, although the 32.5 and 72 contributed hugely to this - the 52 was a revelation to Naim owners IMO, as it 'did' air and space the earlier and lower caste later models didn't at all... When the 180 was first launched, our demo 250 was around five months old and had been powered 24/7. The 180 came straight out of the rep's car on a freezing cold day (sleet and hail I remember) and blew our 250 away in terms of musicality, atmosphere and tonality as well. Needless to say, our 250 went back to be checked, was re-aligned internally, and was much sweeter on return. Other 180's were like the reps sample and I loved this amp (when new anyway) in the same way I did the bolt-up 250's I owned and sold.
Just my memories of course...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2016 15:42:48 GMT
Interesting stuff. Maybe the even order harmonics gave the 250 the character I like. I actually do like the old bolt-together 250 and the 180, so we do have some likes in common after all I re-capped a couple of bolt-down 250s and was really pleased with the results. They genuinely are very sweet amps indeed. Whilst I do like the CB 250 with SBLs and Kans, I can imagine the bolt-down version winning in many other systems. Neither of my bolt-downs ever disappointed me in any way. |
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Jan 16, 2016 19:16:18 GMT
I know we currently differ on the 42/110, I have Stan (The Man) Curtis on my side from his Hifi For PLeasure reviews We always found the 42/110 when new, a bit like untrained yappy puppy dogs, bright, coarse and unrefined (the crossover and odd-order distortion Stan measured sort of confirming it). I didn't like the replacement 62/140 either, although the years working in Northampton geve this pairing a far easier and much better sonic. We've said before I think - I wonder if mains has a lot to do with it. London West End mains quality used to be truly awful and Luton & Harpenden mains wasn't much better, but previously (to me) edgy toned amps and systems were treated far better at Listen Inn I found - Klouts, Karik/Numerik III's and Majik amps with Mimik CD players, as well as the 140 and so on... Meridian and Linn's stuff was changed a lot in the years it was in production and nobody knew except a very few of us who looked inside every few months to see what revision/layout the board was on this batch.... The NAP 250 has, I think, changed in sound the most of all the Naims, probably because it was around in one form or another the longest. Olive amps benefitted by better output transistors I think and as power transistors have improved hugely in consistency over the decades, distortion of the odd-order audible variety has, I believe, been reduced as a matter of course. I think they did the wrong thing with the 500 though, as bridging two 300's together (or so it seems) doesn't double the current output and may be the reason why earlier ones fell over into B&W Nautilus speakers... |
|
