Tannoy Arden - well regarded for home listening?

[nickbaba]

Hi all - I have the chance to buy a pair of Tannoy Arden Mk1's in original cabs, pretty good condition, re-coned a few years ago by Lockwood in the UK.

They look quite monstrous - like the bottom half of a soundsystem you'd see at carnival time! Were these things designed for hi-fi home listening, back in the 70s...??

My listening room is about 6.5 x 4.5m, and I can drive them no problem with my McIntosh MA7000 at 250w p/c. I guess I'm asking, are they well regarded sound wise? They look as though they would be a bit heavy-handed - are they capable of reproducing with delicacy also, acoustic instruments and voices?

I have read (somewhere here I think) that they are less overwhelming than their size would suggest, in a smaller listening space.

I have heard that the HPD drivers in the Mk1s are well thought of, and closer to the revered Monitor Golds than the Mk2 drivers.

Does anyone here have a pair? What do you think of them?

[dantheman91]

Big Tannoys are well respected here your in the right place wait for "Walpurgis" he's your tannoy man along with a few others here also RFC rebuilds them to current spec....

My advice yes they are suitable for home listening and more then suitable to blow your ear drums...

[walpurgis]

They're very nice speakers Nick. At the right price well worth grabbing if you have room for them. I'd guess their value at maybe £800 to £1100 depending on condition. Those sound like decent examples.

Good that they have been re-coned. If not already looked at the cabinets can be upgraded a bit by adding internal bracing. RFC Paul's your man for info on the Arden boxes. The terminals, crossovers and internal wiring can usually be upgraded/modernised to advantage.

As for the sound. Unless the crossover components have aged (easily fixed), the Arden Mk.1 should sound pretty smooth and relaxed with very good midrange insight and top end detail.

The HPDs are a very close relative to the Golds, some parts being interchangeable. The later ceramic magnet drivers in the MK.II speakers are different, but can also sound excellent.

I use Tannoys Cheviot Mk.II speakers myself and love the way their transparency allows them to portray acoustic instruments and voices. They work beautifully in my small room.

[nickbaba]

Thank you - that's all really good to hear. Walpurgis yes you are bang on with price - these are in the mid-range of what you suggested.

It's weird - having listened to them, on some material they seemed quite balanced across the frequencies, on other stuff, mainly rock/guitar band/vocal music, I couldn't shake the feeling there was some subtle distortion in the mid-range... nothing glaring, but nonetheless they didn't sound what I would call "clear"... I dunno, its hard to describe. Almost like when there's just a tiny bit of fluff on the stylus, but before it gets so bad you get up and pick it off...

[walpurgis]

The Tannoys should sound clear and distinct. Assuming the treble adjusters had been set to suit the system and also assuming they are functioning correctly (they can occasionally develop dirty contacts). Your description fits the effects of ageing capacitors in the crossover. Not a big problem. I do my own, but it's not too expensive to have the crossovers rebuilt and it's worth very penny.

You could PM Paul at RFC (trade) and get an opinion. He's a helpful guy.

[nickbaba]

Thanks - I will definitely do that.

I'm feeling like I will go for it with the Ardens. Dunno when I might get a chance for a pair again at the price, and I think with a little love and attention they could sound absolutely amazing.

[walpurgis]

Dunno when I might get a chance for a pair again at the price

That of course is a good point.

Also, they are an investment, they will not depreciate. They have doubled in value over the last ten years. Prices are a bit static with used Hi-Fi at the moment, no doubt due to the political situation and it being summer, but I predict classic Tannoy values continuing to rise.

[danilo]

Arden boxes as well as HPD's (from the then recent takeover by the infamous Harman Corp) were genuinely quality reduced from previous productions)
Thin / flimsy wood used in the Arden enclosures, better materials apparently being beyond the mandated build budget.
Note the: Bio degradable foam surrounds on the Driver cones, Reduced cone mass (patched with folded paper bits of glued on as reinforcements)
Pepper pots drilled by co-ordination disadvantaged, low wage New Hires.. Hey At least iHPDs didn't have the Laughable 'computer designed' Wave guide abominations.
Fairly common for Swarf to be found in HPD motor and HF diaphragm areas.
Just saying, that despite the provenance there 'may' be problems hidden .

Arden Boxes can be stiffened... with ingenuity, bits of wood/glue and screws.. at which point they are quite good actually.
Drivers? Refoam the things this will need doing every 10/15 years. Thank you Very much.. Harman Corp.
Dissasembly (if ambitious) to check for swarf and alignments and to try and patch the pepper pot drilling bungles ...could be useful work.
Crossovers? Replace the Tired Electrolytic caps in the crossover.. and the others, with decent Film 'n foils ..Easy diy.
Cheapish too... Unless one buys into Audio Weenie Religion dogma.
OEM Coils and Resistors are 'fine' quality.. period!
Remember One notable twit who swore that his Several Hundred $$ of Duelund resistors in his HPD crossovers made massive improvement... As if
Short story: Don't be be buying 'replacement' or 'improved' crossovers'.
Last decade os seemingly hundreds of bastardised efforts are sold or touted. Boggles my imganiation.
Few if any live up to their claims.. caveat emptor.
And If you must go that route (as opposed to refurbishing the oem versions ) absolutely Not... before living with you OEM bits for a Year or so.

G luck and enjoy.. those are Exceptionally Good Speakers.. ONLY limited by the quality of the gear that feeds them.. That ! will be self evident/unmistakable first time you fit Genuinely Good gear.

[danilo]

Arden boxes as well as HPD's (from the then recent takeover by the infamous Harman Corp) were genuinely quality reduced from previous productions)
Thin / flimsy wood used in the Arden enclosures, better materials apparently being beyond the mandated build budget.
Note the: Bio degradable foam surrounds on the Driver cones, Reduced cone mass (patched with folded paper bits of glued on as reinforcements)
Pepper pots drilled by co-ordination disadvantaged, low wage New Hires.. Hey At least iHPDs didn't have the Laughable 'computer designed' Wave guide abominations.
Fairly common for Swarf to be found in HPD motor and HF diaphragm areas.
Just saying, that despite the provenance there 'may' be problems hidden .

Arden Boxes can be stiffened... with ingenuity, bits of wood/glue and screws.. at which point they are quite good actually.
Drivers? Refoam the things this will need doing every 10/15 years. Thank you Very much.. Harman Corp.
Dissasembly (if ambitious) to check for swarf and alignments and to try and patch the pepper pot drilling bungles ...could be useful work.
Crossovers? Replace the Tired Electrolytic caps in the crossover.. and the others, with decent Film 'n foils ..Easy diy.
Cheapish too... Unless one buys into Audio Weenie Religion dogma.
OEM Coils and Resistors are 'fine' quality.. period!
Remember One notable twit who swore that his Several Hundred $$ of Duelund resistors in his HPD crossovers made massive improvement... As if
Short story: Don't be be buying 'replacement' or 'improved' crossovers'.
Hundreds of bastardised efforts are sold or touted.
Few if any live up to their Brochure Babble claims
And If you must go that route (as opposed to refurbishing the oem versions ) absolutely Not... before living with you OEM bits for a Year or so.

G luck and enjoy.. those are Exceptionally Good Speakers.. ONLY limited by the quality of the gear that feeds them.. True!

No reason to dispute our Mods views on resale value... IMO audio is NO place for investment issues.

[Reffc]

I'm sorry Danilo, but so much of that is just plain wrong. Lets start with the HPDs:

Bio degradable foam surrounds on the Driver cones, Reduced cone mass (patched with folded paper bits of glued on as reinforcements)
Pepper pots drilled by co-ordination disadvantaged, low wage New Hires.

That is not correct. The foam surrounds are not designed with being "biodegradable" in mind, but like all other foam surrounds will degrade over 15 to 20 years in normal atmospheric conditions but are easily replaced.

The reduced cone mass was not done to save money or cut back, it was done in conjunction with the girdercoustic ribs to stiffen the cones and reduce break-up distortion which allowed them to be crossed over higher or at least run with lower crossover distortion, and it worked, and is measurable, period.

The foam surrounds, in conjunction with the improvements to the cone design increased compliance and allowed deeper bass, with a reduction in free air ratio. Allied to this was an increase in power handling within the voice coil design.

Far from being a down grading, it was a direct response to move the MG on in design and provide what many studios of the day wanted....increased bass slam, extension and power handling with a cleaner sound/lower distortion. Those are the facts.

Also, most HPDs DID NOT use electrolytics. They were found mainly in earlier crossovers of the two box variety using the octagonal case work. Ironically these were higher quality units than the later PCB based sandwich units.

You are also completely wrong in your assertion that the original crossovers are "where its at" because that, my friend, simply is untrue. However, you are correct in saying that their are many bastardised versions doing the rounds and most, if not all of these have the wrong values for fixed inductors and for some of the resistors, so buyer beware. Measurement of the acoustic response shows that whilst Tannoy utilised the same design across a wide range of units, they were far from optimal with raised HF response then cut short by roll off controls which were simply there to cut the peak in HF response created when raising energy levels!!! The "Q" of the HF can be superbly balanced with the LF without the need for an autoformer and actually result in a far more accurate and linear response than the original which created a step response with each energy hike. The reason they persisted was for studio use where detail retrieval at perhaps lower levels than "ear splitting" made it a sensible studio modification as it compensates for the F-M effect in the HF but is was never a good domestic trait for the crossover design imho. Again, you need to back your assertions up with facts before slinging mud around because I can assure you that there are one or two people out there, and especially in the UK, who know what they're doing and can vastly improve on the originals by good design and high quality that would not have been commercially viable for mass production. This is not the first time that you have tried to do those few professionals a great disservice and my guess is that it will not be the last time either.

There was a time-limited problem with early HPDs when Norwood was closed and the factory moved to Coatbridge. During this transition, partly due to staff shortages and insufficient training, there were some QC issues leading to poorly drilled pepper pots or mis-aligned HF diaphragms but this was quickly rectified and affected fewer pairs than commonly suggested. An easy way to discover if you have a "friday afternoon" pair is to shine a torch down into the horn and look for equally spaced neatly drilled pepper pots. If you have (and most will be) then you're laughing.

The cabinets actually improved as time marched on, and not the other way around. Initially, the domestic market was not the main target and many studios used Lockwood cabinets, so plans were made available for domestic speakers, then they went into production but more as an after-thought for sales, but finally Tannoy got their act together and produced better cabinets. Surprisingly though, quite a few of their designs, including those for the HPDs were not tuned optimally. The Cheviots are an example where the port tuning was far too low for efficiency and allowed too much cone movement. There were of course early examples which excelled including the corner Canterburys and Chatsworths, the latter amongst my favourite of the domestically acceptable size, and most of the stiffer corner designs along with later designs of the 1980s. Agreed though that the Ardens most certainly do benefit from stiffening and better damping. It was only really the advent of the K series that saw real strides forwards in cabinet quality if some of the more exclusive cabinet designs (Westminsters and GRF Autographs) are discounted.