Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Can a 1960:s cinema speaker still sound ok?

This is topic Can a 1960:s cinema speaker still sound ok? in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=007883

Posted by Jerry Axelsson (Member # 3175) on 03-25-2006, 04:44 PM:

I think we all have heard that the oppinion that some things was better in the past. I am curious to test this theory on an older speaker.

I was recently given an old mono sound system from a local cinema. The sound system is likely from the late 60:S with a tube amp. The system was used for 12-15 years (max 2 shows a day) . And it has then been in storage since the early 80:S.

I am interested to hear what the speaker sounds like with a modern amp. (I am aware of the impedance issues if I hook up a modern amp) I have not had a chance to inspect the speaker in detail, but it has 15" woofer and a separate treble horn.

My question is simply if aging kills the speakers even though they might not have been used very much?

From what I have understood it was a quite good system in its day and it would be interesting to hear what a vintage speaker sounds like?

Do you think that it is possible to still hear what the speaker should sound like, providing that it has not been damaged?
Or has it lost it's dynamics due to aging?

I mostly like films with an older mono track so the source is a natural limitation.

Any thoughts around this subject?

Jerry

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-25-2006, 05:57 PM:

I believe that some cone speakers will be very good; while others deteriorate. Altec & JBL seem to be OK. Horns, of course, are probably good almost forever. Crossovers may have value changes on the capacitors. Louis

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-25-2006, 07:40 PM:

More info as to the type of speaker would be a good idea in all fairness. I have seen many Altec woofers surrounds deteriorate over the years but these can normally be re-coned. Some older HF drivers were awful... some, mainly RCA had phenolic hf diaphragms and those are the worst sounding IMHO. They tend to sound harsh and they also have a more limited hf frequency response than comparative Altec drivers. Most older 50's and 60's hf drivers do have a more limited response as compared to todays drivers, just a part of the designs back them. A more up to date system would surprise you by extracting every little nuance back out. Older systems couldn't do this. So one thing to consider is the combination of a red reverse scam reader and a newer B-Chain. You'd be surprised at how good somem of those old mono tracks sound when distortion is lowered by a factor of 10.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-25-2006, 08:25 PM:

An Altec A7, A5 or A4 family of speaker can almost always perform quite well by today's standards...in fact, modern 3-way speakers try to mimick their designs. My least favorite piece of the Altec line of the older speakers are the multi-cell horns. I generally replace them with Mantarays or even substitute JBL 2360 horns with a throat adapter (Selineum).

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-26-2006, 10:17 AM:

Steve,

I disagree very much. Take an original 288 driver and compare it to the last and latest version. The laters will have almost double the hf bandwidth. Thats an important difference in and of itself and a huge audible difference too.

Mark

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-26-2006, 11:05 AM:

The 288L (last in the line) did NOT have double the bandwidth of the 288...though it did have more. the 288G, I believe, started the Tangerine Radial phase plug which is where the improved response came from. The 288B - 288L had essentially identical motors though and it is also carried into the current 399 series. The 288B did have a shorting ring that required that the voice coil former not extend beyond the voice coil itself...

All that being said...given the frequency response of any speaker through a movie screen is compromised above 9KHz...the fact that early drivers did not get much above 16KHz is of no consequence...in fact, most of the 3-way systems currently on the market (and that includes the high dollar ones) tend to tank above 12KHz.

A 288B onwards can use current aluminum or Pascalite diaphragms and have very good frequency response as compared to today's speakers. The 288B will need its shorting ring removed though.

Posted by Richard May (Member # 2627) on 03-26-2006, 12:54 PM:

I have to agree with Steve on this one. Most of the altec drivers I have used today give better response and sound better than a lot of the newer speakers. I usually just replace the woofer on the older altecs and they are fine.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-26-2006, 01:26 PM:

Of the older drivers from Altec...the original 515 and the 803 (predicessor to the 416) did have limited LF response. Their suspensions are much tighter than the 515B and later and are clearly optimized for the Horns of their day with some disregard to real bottom end response (which was not needed in their day). The 515 can be reconed as can the remaining 515B-H series. When one makes the transistion from the 515E and before to the 515G and beyond, the A-4 cabinet (210) should be retuned for the new driver. The 515-515E was used in cabinents designed before Thiele and Small did their ground breaking research into tuned box designs. The 515G and the 210A is a better tuning (likewise with the 515G and the 828 cabinet).

The 515B in an original 210 cabinet does quite well though some will find it a bit tubby. Lining the 210 cabinet with fiberglass will mitigate that.

Also, never use the A-4 without its bass-wings...the difference in LF response is remarkable. Likewise, an A5 (or A7) with bass-wings (never orginal) or sunk in a THX like wall will yield substantially superior LF response.

Most everything of the Altec Voice of the Theatre line can be brought back to original specs, if not improved. Anyone feeling the desire to have their drivers reconed (we use genuine Altec parts or parts made from genuine Altec machines), or new diaphragms may contact me via email. We generally have it all in stock. The only thing that has become a thing of the past are the "Symbiotik" diaphragms (808, 908, 291 series). We have a couple of them left, I think but they are most definately out of production. The Pascalite series yeilds superior frequency response with the same power handling.

Steve

Posted by Louis Bornwasser (Member # 3063) on 03-26-2006, 06:17 PM:

Opinions about speakers are about as loaded as opinions about women. I agree with Steve that very high quality speakers can still be very good, even by today's standards. That is not to say that there have been NO improvements.

So I guess it matters most if the speaker in question was EVER any good. If so, it is likely to still retain substantial quality. Louis

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-26-2006, 06:51 PM:

quote: Louis Bornwasser
So I guess it matters most if the speaker in question was EVER any good

That was part of my point and I asked him to post what it was he was getting. Old RCA speakers aren't worth a hoot except to collectors.

Comparing Three way systems to old two way systems is like comparing a New York Steak to Apples! In all fairness Steve lets compare the 2446H on a 2360A to the Altec 288 on a large multicell. There is very little out there that can beat that particular JBL combo.

Your statements only partially agree with the curves that are stored in my R-2 program. The un-eq'd response curves on these old systems is horrible to say the least. Most of the old Cinemascope day Altec and Simplex speakers just don't cut it without many expensive updates. The other problem with older Altec hf drivers is the lack of power handling... they just can't deal with the amount of screen loss eq they need. But yes, with alot of upgrades an old Altec can sound darn good but a complete upgrade on an A-4 costs more than a new 4675 does. The A-4's have their place... and they work very well on large staged theatres. Other than that situation I'll stick with using the later stuff like 4675's. Most of the existing systems I tend to that are Altec based would be far better if they were replaced by 4675's since none of these are huge rooms.

Mark

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 03-26-2006, 08:49 PM:

Actually, I not only compare the old Altec stuff to the modern 3-ways but favorably. A 288 with a MR94 Mantaray will outperform a 2446/2360...and I mean every time.

As for power handling...the A-4 does just fine, it is a 108dB LF cabinet. As to R2 response curves...My A-4s seem to do just fine down to 40Hz and just fine up to 16KHz. My A-5s do tend to drop off below 50Hz but then again, with the subwoofers rolling in at 50Hz...things work pretty well there too.

There just aren't any real "expensive upgrades" to do with the Altec stuff...change the horn, perhaps replace an aging diaphragm. If the drivers are worn/dried out, recone them...all a lot cheaper than new speakers.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 03-27-2006, 08:44 AM:

Hmm another red letter day I agree with steve [Smile]

Almost all the A4 installations I service sound good properly maintained and installed there is no reason not to use them

Posted by Richard May (Member # 2627) on 03-27-2006, 09:04 AM:

It's funny that just about all of us agree with Steve about the Altec speakers even though Jerry has still not told us what speaker he actually has.

Posted by Jerry Axelsson (Member # 3175) on 03-27-2006, 05:02 PM:

I will post the speaker info as soon as I can...
This is fun to read!

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-27-2006, 07:11 PM:

quote: Gordon McLeod
Almost all the A4 installations I service sound good properly maintained and installed there is no reason not to use them

Funny, I don't see that I said A-4's sounded bad anywhere above..... Here in SLC there was just one system with A-4's that were of the later variety that I would consider sounded really good. I had quoted a customer in Wyoming a couple of years back to upgrade his A-4's and the parts were far more expensive than simply replacing the speakers complete. One problem with his A-4's stemmed from was the fact that just two of the original woofers were still in place. The other 4 were junk woofers installed by another person at some point. At any rate they still sit to this day running just as I found them and they sound like crap.

Really old A-7's and especially A-7-800 systems I would rather take to the junk yard, they just can't re-produce the dynamics in todays tracks. Even the A-4 systems that were in use at the big Todd-AO stage in Hollywood used to bottom out as did the A-4's that were at Saul Zaentz, I heard both systems woofers bottom out myself. We've had way too many hf diaphram failures in kiddie operated boots. With customers as far as we sometimes go reliability is a much larger issue.

I certainly agree with Louis that "Opinions about speakers are about as loaded as opinions about women".

Mark

Posted by Joshua Waaland (Member # 287) on 03-28-2006, 07:27 PM:

I don't think I have ever seen Mark and Steve agree on anything. [Big Grin]

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 03-28-2006, 07:39 PM:

There are actually quite a few things we agree on, Panastereo being one of them.... and some of those have been covered many times years ago. Steve is set up to make the Altecs do a good job and we are not because there are simply not enough of them left in this area to justify the hassle, 2 systems using A-4s that I can think of. And I can only think of a few situations that a very up to date A-4 system might out perform a new 4675 anyway and I have yet to run into those situations. And since both situations are VERY far removed from our shop I would tend to go with what has been in my experience the more reliable piece....

Mark