Snell,Jpw, Audio note

[Marco]

Hear, hear to both your post and Andrew's!

And, yup, the Snells I heard at Scalford unquestionably produced one of the best sounds of the show. As I commented at the time, they actually looked like a (smaller) version of my Lockwoods - and sounded in some ways rather like them, too!

Here's what I wrote about them at the time (unfortunately when clearing out my Imageshack account some of the pics have been deleted): http://theartofsound.net/forum/showt...401#post419401

...and those Snells are probably one of the best speakers I've heard. They're quite vintage Tannoy DC-like in their musical presentation, which of course is a sound I can relate to, and they did genuine scale, vocal and instrumental texture with aplomb and had a lovely 'big-boned', effortlessly musical presentation that really made me smile!

At a push, I'd probably nominate it for the best sound I heard at the show. It really did highlight again for me that there has been little real progress made in loudspeaker technology, since the days when the truly great, genuinely innovative speakers were born, and here I include the Snells, along with Tannoys, Altecs, JBLs, Klipschs, Quads, IMFs, etc. Every time I hear speakers of that ilk, it becomes quite obvious what is wrong with 95% of modern speakers!!

Marco.

[istari_knight]

You can't automatically assume though that one crossover will work for another design. If they're the same cabinet (ie size and cabinet "Q") and the same drivers, fair enough, but even then, you have the commonest uses of 1st order or 2nd order (and sometimes 3rd order) for a 2-way; then you can choose between Bessel, Butterwoth, Chebyshev or Linkwitz-Riley depending on the type of crossover characteristics you want, and the chosen crossover point, so one manufacturer may well use very different crossover design for their similar speakers than another.

Some manufacturers won't even share the information on crossover design with their customers.

Thats why I wanted to know 'cos they are the same drivers & cabinet size... Only the crossovers are different. The JPW's although gaining popularity now seem to have flopped over all whereas I'm yet to hear a negative comment about the AN's... My thinking is that the AN's crossover is better implemented. I am familiar with different crossover design/s you neednt be so condescending

Really no big deal, I was just curious.

[Reffc]

No offence intended James and I certainly wasn't intending on being condescending. If it came across that way, then happy for mods to delete the post and I'll bow out. Sometimes it's better not to get involved at all.

[Marco]

No need to delete anything here. It's often the case on forums that the written word is misinterpreted

Marco.

[DSJR]

I'm still waiting to hear those shortcomings. As for Snells being outdated by the 1980s, why would that be? They use the same drivers as a number of contemporaries, the crossovers are well built and superbly matched. Cabinets are well made and a good design is a good design: Period.

I hate this whole notion of "progress" in hifi. I regard it as nothing more than marketing bull, spouted by dealers and reviewers to try and persuade people to spend money chasing a notion of "keeping up with the pace". That Emperor lost his clothes many years ago and thankfully most of us now choose our kit on the basis of how good it is, not how old it is.

I must disagree in part here...


The pair of E's I owned, coupled with the more popular J's (IIRC) had massive harsh nasties at the crossover point when used outside the 'recommended system,' caused by the driver being overused in a resonant box, matched with a rather old spitty tweeter design, masked/tamed by the amps they were usually sold with - and no, I was well away from CB Naim and Linn by this point! The bloody things boomed too, but using them well out from a rear wall sort-of held them in check. Epos ES14's bloody p*ssed all over them in every way in my room! If you think I'm wrong Andrew then TELL ME HERE, rather than wanking over on the other site in agreement with your new best friend!!!!! Box speakers especially have improved almost out of all recognition in recent years, especially with what can be done at modest cost. At t'other end, Tannoy prestige models sounding far more integrated than the stock items from the 70's for example (Marco's are hardly representative of the era they were first manufactured IMO, as the cabs have been re-worked and the crossovers are different in the extreme). The rise and rise of top quality miniatures from China must be testemant to that, these offering a high standard of music making way above most of the lower cost boxes we flogged in the 80's. I'm out of touch at the other end, but there are so many expensive bling boxes (Usher for example?) which offer a big and clear sound with modern materials. I doubt there'd be many speakers from the 70's and 80's that would offer high power handling, high output AND the delicacy too.

The only Snells I liked were the models that looked like big SBL's and again, in the proper matched AI system, they sang nicely in a largish room and far better than the E's did in the same room and system (Voyd/AI but I forget cabling as it was a long time ago).

Yes, Harbeths are on a totally different plane, using a far more modern and highly researched material for the main drivers they make. I can listen to these for hours on a fair range of amps and they totally lack the harshness, grit and grain that pervades so many 'HiFi' speakers these days. Since I'm laying myself open to another attack where I can't reply (reverse ad hominem), I'm mentally referring to a good pair of Quad 57's, which most regard as a damned good speaker.

Just my thoughts of course

[Andrew B]

Dave, I think I did tell you here. Presumably you wouldn't be quoting my reply in your post if I hadn't.

I have used Snells and Audio Notes with all manner of kit over the years. I recall a pair of Ks wiping the floor with my ES14s coupled to Exposure 3/8/Dual 4 so my experience clearly differs from yours. I don't think they are limited to certain kit.

If I feel you are wrong, I will say so, here and anywhere else I frequent. You are free to do likewise. My issue was more with this notion of progress that's touted than it was with Snells in particular. There, we disagree too. Frankly, I think calling Snells dated today is loblocks, let alone thirty years ago and I think most people will agree. I'm not forcing you to listen to them though, so chill out!

[DSJR]

There's a pair of AR2ax's on fleabay right now for £150 or near offer. I honestly think I'd rather have these in all honesty. I was also very fond of the AR3a, especially in its last 'Improved' version and absolutely lusted after the huge LST's, which are like hens teeth in the UK. Sadly, these AR models have a lasting and endearing worldwide reputation and I don't think are cheap anywhere now.

Glad you got on with the Snells. I didn't, but my room was smaller than many/most and close proximity to the drivers showed significant problems for me, especially when compared with their BBC-derived peers (nobody could ever call the early Harbeth HL III's slow and sluggish). The wider baffles messed up imagery too if listened to too closely.

Anyway, I'm not up there with you guys on this stuff now, finding great musical enjoyment from very cheap stuff you lot would normally overlook. Maybe my journey is ended, so best shut up now...

[Andrew B]

Very cheap stuff is always the best IMO. It's like free food. Tastes all the better for it

That's the thing with JPWs. Daft money for something that can bring so much pleasure.

[Marco]

...(Marco's are hardly representative of the era they were first manufactured IMO, as the cabs have been re-worked and the crossovers are different in the extreme).

Where did you get the idea that the cabs have been reworked, Dave? They're totally stock Lockwood Major cabinets. The crossovers on the Tannoy 15" MGs inside them are of course a different matter!

I can't comment on Snells in general, as I have little experience of them, but what I can assure you is the big ones I heard at Scalford (which could well have been modified) sounded utterly sublime - indeed so much so that I could've easily lived with them.

The point about this is that it is undoubtedly the case that the best vintage speaker designs can easily hold their own, and in some areas outperform, many modern loudspeakers, particularly if they have been judiciously modified with the best modern crossover components.

Combining the best of old and new technologies in audio can produce some of the best sounds you will ever hear. My whole system is testament to the validity of that philosophy!

Marco.

[Macca]

Is it really that surprising that someone who likes Harbeths and Spendors dislikes the Snell A J & K? They are pretty far apart in design philosophy and therefore presentation I would have thought. I recall Snell had some far more conventional designs in the nineties that were well rated.