hurdy_gurdyman

---------------- On 1/17/2004 6:57:33 AM krustyoldsarge wrote: If you decide to go solid-state I suggest pre-1980 Marantz equipment. Well built and reasonably priced these days. Vintage Marantz receivers are noted for their musicality, warm sound and conservative power rating. The last three numbers of a Marantz indicate the rated watts per channel. 2220=20 watts, 2270=70 watts, 2385=185 watts, etc. Quad receivers were also made such as the 4420, 4440, etc. Auditioning various models with your speakers would be best, but my guess that something close to a 2270 would work well with Cornwalls or Heresies. Someone else on the forum with a Marantz/Klipsch setup might have better educated suggestions. I'm driving my KG4's with a 2385 and it's a very musical combination. ---------------- I agree with old Marantz receivers. I had a 2275 for a couple of years, and my son is still using it. I never tried it with Klipsch speakers, but it sounded very nice with an Electro-Voice speaker system with mid-horns (1824M/8HD) very similar to Heresy horns, and T-35 tweeters. Not quite as musical as better tube amps, but close. Didn't have much of the "grit" that many ss recievers seem to have in the mid to upper frequencies. Dave

If you were to go with a Decware amp, I'd go with the integrated, as it has more power and likes 8 ohm loads. I heard both the zen c and the integrated with my Heresy's. I'm not saying these are the perfect amps for your speakers, only that they sounded very good with my Heresy 1's when I listened to them. I wouldn't want you to buy an amp only on my recomendation. Check out the Decware Forum for more info. There are a couple of folks there that use Klipsch speakers. Dave

---------------- On 1/14/2004 4:54:28 PM JohnWhite wrote: I knew I wanted my main speakers to be Cornwall's, I got those off ebay from someone fairly local. Im also looking at a pair of Heresy's. Now I need help with the receiver, amp, CC speaker. A couple years ago I had been looking into the Decware tube amp, but havent read up on it lately. I am looking for a nice receiver for both AV and Stereo. Of the searches it seems Denon and Harman/Kardon are popular. Any suggestions ---------------- Thought I'd mention that I had the opportunity to hear my Heresy's and a Fostex single driver speaker (96dB) with a Decware SET back in October. The sound was very fast and clean! It played plenty loud in a garage-turned-into-listening room enviroment, at least loud enough for all but levels that might be damaging to your ears with extended listening. I was really amazed at just how good a couple of high quality watts could sound. Still listening to PP tube amp at home, but someday I may just have to try a SET like Decware at home. Dave

I've seen these go on ebay for more then this without the rebuild, and not even sure if it's working or not. Wish I needeed one right now. I have a 500C and can verify that these are nice sounding units, a little on the warm side of neutral, but very non-fatiguing to listen to, with a tuneful, bouncing bass. Nice! Dave

BTW, I tried laying my Heresy's on their side with the tweeters on the inside. If I sit with my head straight forward, they did image noticably better. However, when I turned my head from side to side, they did a very noticable venitian blind effect. I ended up putting them back in the upright position, because it was less distubing to me. YMMV. Dave

I solved my to bright tweeter in my Heresy 1's simply by replacing the 2 uF cap with a better quality 1.5 uF cap. This keeps the first order crossover and avoids any potential phase problems. I also have the P-trap on the squawker. On my Heresy's, I improved the quality of bass by putting a layer of wool felt batting around the inner walls, then loosly stuffing the enclosure with polyfill. I also covered the woofer basket and squawker with plumbers putty. These mods transformed the bass. I do use a sub below 60 Hz. Dave

---------------- On 12/23/2003 1:33:32 PM Georg Friedrich Handel wrote: Well, i was bidding on the Scott 299-C and it ended at $559 and then factor in $125 labor and shipping and then another $150 in parts and its not worth spending $800 on a old amp like that, so i decided against it. If I can find a fully rebuilt Scott 299-C for around $550 or so i would jump on it. That Fisher 400 that Josh is selling looks like a nice unit and its been rebuilt, what is the phono section like on the Fisher 400 compared to the Scott 299-C? And would the Fisher be self biasing or would i have to adjust it? ---------------- I own a Fisher 500C, and I believe the circuit is similar but lower powered. It is a fixed bias design, not self biased. The phono preamp uses only 1 section of a 12AX7 per channel, so you need a very high output cartridge or you will get excessive hum. Even with high output cartridge, some hum is present. The Scott integrateds use both sections of the tube, thus having more gain, much less hum. The amplifier section of the fisher receivers is nice and simple. They tend to have a somewhat warm, romantic sound that is very addictive, with a thumping bass, but not a lot of real low end power. I prefer Scott and several old Heathkits, but I think a lot depends on what speakers you have and personal taste. The Fisher receivers are well built. Dave

I picked up my Heresy 1's for $5.00 and have read of a few others who have paid less the $100 for a pair. Guess you have to look a bit. I built my own subs which are very flat and clean down to 30 Hz (-8 dB at 25 Hz). This combo would be a good system even if you paid $700 for it. I'm not saying the other Klipsch's aren't a good deal used, only that the Heresy's with a sub are a good deal. Go outside of the Klipsch brand and try to get this good of sound for the same amount of dollars and I think you'll find it will be hard to do. Dave

---------------- On 12/21/2003 6:31:02 PM Georg Friedrich Handel wrote: Dave, Ok so your supposed to replace the needles after every playback because the steel needle gets worn out by the Shellac and ruins the record? ---------------- The steel needle will get a flat spot on it where it contacts the record. This has sharp edges that will cut into the shellac and cause groove damage. A careful person can turn the needle around and play it on the side opposite of the flat spot and get another play, but if you didn't line it up just right it would cut the record anyway. Back in the good old days it was common to play several records with one needle and rotate the needle to minimize wear. However, all those records slowly developed very noisy surfaces which usually wasn't noticed until it was way to late. When played on modern equipment you can really hear the damage. Preamps with scratch filters were developed to handle this on electronic gear, and it does help. After all, those records had almost no information above 5 kHz, so might as well build a high cut filter into the preamp to get rid of what noise developed there. By replacing the steel needle with a cactus needle, wear will be cut back a lot. However, volume is reduced and the sound gets much softer, mellower. You may like this effect, or you may not. BTW, there is a sapphire replacement needle that works like a steel needle but lasts a lot longer. The problem with it is you need a microscope to examine it regularly to determine when it first starts to develop the flat spot so you will know when to replace it. There is a tendency to forget that they wear out, too, andf it doesn't take a lot of plays to do it. My memory is hazy on this, but I think about 30-50 plays. Dave

Concerning steel needles vs cactus needles. Catus needles were used for two reasons. One was economy. They were cheap back in depression era. The other reason was that many people liked the softer sound they had. Many of the old "glory horn" designs, combined with the midrange heavy recordings of the time, tended to sound very shrill with steel needles. Cactus thorns had a much softer sound that many prefered, but opinion was divided (much like todays digital vs analog, ss vs tube, horn vs direct radiator, etc).Steel was considered more "accurate", while cactus was "euphonic". Also, a steel needle does have the potential to wear records much faster then cactus. Most people tried to skimp on needles and used the steel for more then one play. Cactus was literally worn out on one play, but was way cheaper, so it was popular with some. Dave

---------------- On 12/21/2003 3:22:27 PM Georg Friedrich Handel wrote: Thank you Dave, Im a mental midget when it comes to old record players and such, I appreciate you taking the time to explain it to me. I actually recieved my Gramaphone in the mail last night and set it up and awaiting my 78 records that i ordered off Ebay. I bought a Octagonal gramaphone with big brass horn , it came with 10 extra steel needles in a can. I really like it, cant wait to get my records in. I want to be able to play my 33's and 78's on my home stereo through my Klipsch, hence why i am looking for a more modern electric turn table as well. Cant wait to see how it sounds when i hook it into a rebuilt Scott 299-C integrated ---------------- It'll sound a lot better then the Gramaphone, and your records will last a lot longer! I have an old Pathe crank type record player with a stack of 78's. I use it mostly to show to guests. Even with cactus needles, it wears records much faster then a modern turntable, and don't sound nearly as good. They are cool to have sitting in the living room, though. Looks good with my old upright Zenith radio. BTW, here in Michigan it's easier to find crabapple thorns then cactus needles, and they work almost as well. Dave

I believe that with the addition of a good subwoofer to add the deeper bass that a pair of Heresy's may be the best bargin sound you can get, unless you get real lucky. Dave

---------------- On 12/21/2003 12:54:06 PM Georg Friedrich Handel wrote: ---------------- On 12/21/2003 12:51:18 PM Allan Songer wrote: ---------------- On 12/21/2003 12:33:42 PM Georg Friedrich Handel wrote: I dont want anything with a diamond tip since it eats up the Shellac on the 78 records. ---------------- Cactus needles work real good . . . . ---------------- That is what i have been reading, im wondering though how do you integrate a cactus needle into a stylus? Do you remove the existing diamond tip and put it in? ---------------- I'm going to give you the benefit of doubt here and assume you really don't know what's what. Cactus needles were used in the old crank type record players from the early 20th century, the ones that had a two pound tonearm. They did cause less record wear then steel needles, or modern replacements with diamond or sapphire tips. All modern type turntables with low mass arms use a cartridge that has a diamond stylus (needle). This won't hurt your old shellac records. They will last longer with this then anything else you can buy. Modern tonarms are set to track at just a couple of grams instead of a couple of pounds, and diamonds don't wear very fast, so it's the only realistic way to go. Putting a diamond needle in an old crank record player did cause more wear compared to cactus, but that was over 70 years ago. Things have changed a lot since then. BTW, the advice about needing two cartridges, one with a standard stylus (needle) and one with a stylus made just for 78's, is accurate. The two types of records require different shapes of stylus (needle). Dave

The least expensive way to get decent sound I know of is to find an old receiver from the 70's to use. Any of the ones from the big names of that time should work as good as todays much more expensive receivers (unless you are going into multi-channel). Any 20-80 watt 1970's receiver from names like Pioneer, Marantz, Kenwood, Sansui, harman-kardon, Fisher, Scott and Technics should work good. Some are silver colored, some are gold and some are black. Most were built to a higher standard then what you'll typically find today at Circuit City, Best Buy, ABC Warehouse, etc. You can find these receivers (and integrateds) on on-line auctions like audiogon and ebay, or look in thrift shops, Goodwill stores, Salvation Army stores, and lots of garage sales. I have picked up killer receivers for $20 or less. As for tubes, unless you can afford a rebuild and occasional tube replacement, better to wait. Tubes do have a certain "magic" with good horn speakers, but do require upkeep. Maybe later, when finances are better. Dave

I've been using a vintage Scott integrated (LK-48- with my Heresy's. It seems a match made in Heaven. The sound coming out of the horns, especially toward the higher mid and treble, has a less "etched" sound then ss does. It's hard to explaine the difference between listening to tubes on a horn and ss on a horn. Tubes have far less listener fatigue with more of a "you are listening to real music" feel. The Scott I have has a light champagne gold faceplate with no chassis cover. One could be fashioned out of wood or expanded metal and made to look nice, although I like the open chassie look, as it is a nice clean plain steel chassis. I have a pic on my site. http://www.geocities.com/the_hurdy_gurdyman/ Dave

---------------- On 12/8/2003 6:00:32 PM DrWho wrote: ok, so where might one find warble tones to use then? keep in mind that i'm looking for a free aproach here (so far, the only audio purchase i've ever made was the center channel and reciever and speaker repair kit...$500 total i think). btw, what is wrong with tweaking the room so that even test tones lay out a flat response! cuz if that's the worse it could be, then i might be able to settle for that I do know that I have an RTS laying around somewhere, but i misplaced the silly thing! it was a real nice one with a mic and everything all integrated into one box. at the time i got it (yes, for free) i had no idea what it did or how to use it so i stuffed it away somewhere! also, i would still like to see other response graphs for those that have them, just for a reference. i look at my reponse and can't help but think there is a very simple pattern behind the peaks and dips that perhaps a simple solution might be in order. each speaker is a 4-way which causes me to wonder if there's not phase issues happening and for dave...which response graph is your final "good" one? I was looking at them and was under the impression that the first graph was better? maybe i just read them wrong, i dunno. ---------------- I had a friend copy the warble tones for me from a Stereophile Test Disc. You could say that was free. I don't know of any free downloads of warble tones. As for my graphs, the first one was the stock Heresy. It was sitting on the floor and had a nasty dip at 400Hz because of floor cancelation. Also, I have changed the way I measure since the first graph comparison, so it isn't really a valid comparison. I used to have the meter firmly mounted on a tripod pointing between the two speakers. Now I rotate the meter and take the highest readings. Before the final speaker tweeking, using the new measuring technique, the peak at 63 kHz was up around 4 dB higher then it was after the tweeking. I built a notch filter and brought the peak down to acceptable range. This helped a lot in getting rid of a nasty sibilent sound that was annoying me. For some reason the P-trap didn't make any real difference, so I came up with my own solution by trying a few different things. I think I'll remove the first Heresy graph, as well as do an update on the EV graph in the near future so it's not so misleading. I've just been lazy lately. Dave

The hurdy-gurdy man is my professional name, so it was only natural that I use it. http://www.geocities.com/the_hurdy_gurdyman/ The picture on my home page was taken on the H.M.S. Tecumseth during the 2000 Tall Ships Festival in Muskegan, Michigan. I was invited to play on board during the Bay City and Muskegan event. Best pic of me I ever had! Dave

In regards to warble tones and sine waves. In real music you almost never get a continous tone for any duration. Music is constantly changing in frequency and intensity. It's difficult for standing waves to build up this way. A standing wave is a continous tone and, like feedback, can build when left un-checked. This doesn't happen with music. So, if you use sine waves to measure your room response, you are exiting the standing waves to the maximum in ways that music never would. Thus, your measurments show an absolute worse case that your speakers can sound instead of what they would normally sound with music. Warble tones flunctuate up and down on a centered tone. There is not enough time for any frquency to build up. This gives a response much more like real music would. The resulting response graph you make will much closer relate to what you are actually hearing. All in all, with warble tones, you get a much more accurate look at what your speakers are really doing in your room with actuall music instead of artificial test tones. It works! The only thing better would be to invest in a real time frquency spectrum analyzer set up using pink noise (or is it white noise?). That's out of my price reach. Dave

If you are using sine waves like the NCH generator, you will get false readings because of standing waves building up. You need warble tones, which are too short in duration to build up standing waves. The Stereophile test disc two has a nice set of warble tones. The dips and peaks you are now getting will be a lot smaller with the warble tones, and will give you a more accurate idea of what your speakers are doing. Dave

Here's graphs of my Heresy's in room response before and after tweeking, and my EV open baffles. http://www.geocities.com/the_hurdy_gurdyman/Moreupdates.html I have a program that makes the proper graph for speaker response, but I have to draw the response the hard way. I'd be interested in having a copy of yours. Thanks. the_hurdy_gurdyman@yahoo.com Now, if someone could just explain to me how to post pictures directly in the posts it would make things a lot easier. Dave

The hurdy-gurdy man is my professional name, so it was only natural that I use it. http://www.geocities.com/the_hurdy_gurdyman/ The picture on my home page was taken on the H.M.S. Tecumseth during the 2000 Tall Ships Festival in Muskegan, Michigan. I was invited to play on board during the Bay City and Muskegan event. Best pic of me I ever had! Dave

I have a Tascam 133 three channel cassette deck I use for live/studio recordings. It sounds great! On another note, an organization I belonged to purchased a Pioneer tape deck (don't remember the model) that had the digital noise reduction. It sounded great on most music, but on real simple music, like solo guitar and vocalist, you could clearly hear something funky going on. It was like the ambiance in the background was covered in a wool blanket and disappeared completely. I hope their more expensive units fixed the problem. Dave

---------------- On 12/4/2003 11:42:53 PM kuisis wrote: Does anybody know how the old a/b inputs to the amp correspond to the L/R of the new equipment. I think I have them right, but I just want to be sure! ---------------- Most equipment has the left channel A and right channel B. Dave

Here is the link for Tube-Savers. http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=users.netonecom.net/~swordman/Radio/TS_Inside_1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://users.netonecom.net/~swordman/Radio/TubeSaver.htm&h=480&w=640&prev=/images%3Fq%3D%2BTube-Saver%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8 I still think this is the best solution. The amp is turned on at a low voltage for a minute or so, then full voltage comes on. My tubes seem to last a long time. Also, I can use a fast blow fuse since the turn on surge is so much less. Dave

I only leave mine on when I'm home and awake. I have seen several examples through the years of tube and/or capacitor failure. I've lost both power trannies and output trannies, and had lots of smoke and confetti pumped into the room. Nasty stuff! There is a vintage product called Wuerth Tube Saver. This is a small bakelite box with a power cord and an electrical socket on the back, and a small red light on the front. Inside is a pair of contact points, a fuse, a heavy wire wound resistor, and a small light bulb. This device, when your tube electronics is pluged into it, will sloooowly start up your equipment. It takes my Scott amp well over a minute to reach full power. This takes the shock of cold turn-on from happening to your tubes. Tubes last a lot longer this way. I've had one of these for about 15 years now and it's worked flawlessly. There is a site I found doing a google search that shows how to build one of these, but I don't have the address handy. I'll try and find it later. I think building one would be easy and well worth while. Dave