Tannoy Monitor Gold LSU/HF/III.L.Z/8 question

[trane]

... or, more precisely, a quite naive but humble question it is that aims to know whether is a pair of these speakers are worth investing in? To note, I followed some threads with Tannoy speakers mentioned here at TAOS but now do not remember whether these exact models were recommended to be purchased or not. Especially, if I recall it correctly, hi-fi Dave was on pretty low opinion on some ol' Tannoys (spittin' highs) - and I would not like to be trapped... FYI I would use these in a moderate sized (3.5m x 5m) room, and a cabinet should be built for them - IF, of course... Thanks for your input

[hifi_dave]

I would say, with reservations, that they are worth investing in.

If you buy any vintage Tannoy, in good condition, you are unlikely to lose money. Whether you like them or not is for you to determine by auditioning before you purchase.

It is quite a few years since I have listened to vintage Tannoy DC's, that is except for the 111LZ and LGM that I have. Both of these I find are rather on the bright, thin side of neutral. Now, I haven't found time or inclination to determine whether a change of cabinets or crossovers will improve the results but I will get around to it, sometime. The larger vintage models have a far better balance, if my memory serves me right.

I do have experience of the latest Prestige series and these are far more mellow and pleasing than my vintage speakers.

[DSJR]

I can add that Tannoy had a MAJOR rethink of the DC concept in 1980 or thereabouts and the "tulip" waveguide as used on the smaller units was one result. The crossovers were totally re-imagined as well, the nasty and lossy rotary switches being replaced by the gold-plated screws as used on the modern ones. I understand the tweeter integration was totally re-done as well in the 80's and the results of this work is beneficial to older drivers (ask Lockwoods as they can re-build and service both crossovers and drivers).

Until recently, the HPD drivers with foam surrounds were shunned by the cognoscenti in favour of the corrugated surrounded drivers from the previous Monitor Gold era. Now the prices are going through the roof, the HPD series are rapidly climbing in value and this is even working down through the plastic coned versions (I LOVE DC2000 and DC3000 models, so big hearted and involving and LOUD!!!).

Do what Dave has said. I'd try for some Monitor Golds and expect to spend money on the crossovers. Lockwoods can completely re-cone the HPD's and these drivers are taken further than when new. The HPD's have slightly less sensitivity (not really an issue) and higher power handling. Someone said that Tannoy will fit the previous cones/coils with corrugated surrounds too, so best to ask them I reckon..

P.S. I think their add-on Super tweeters are there to smooth out the pepperpot tweeters as much as anything else, but you've got to get the standard speakers sorted first and it won't be cheap.....

[Marco]

I'll comment on this later, chaps... In the meantime, I'd appreciate your views on my post #8 here:

http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=7022

There are a few questions I've asked which require (hi-fi dave's) attention. Cheers!

Marco.

[John]

I heard Marco Monitor Golds and really liked them and would have no hesiation in recommending them I think Marco has a pretty similar room to you and they work in his space. I think you need to think about the whole costs as to get the best out of them you will have to update the crossovers
What the monitor golds will give you is lots of scale just cannot beat big drivers for scale a wonderful mid and plenty of top end sparkle. But also think you should here some first before deciding on this path. If this path is to expensive thier other options that would give you the same sense of scales but would have slightly different strengths
Just to reassure you Marco speakers had no issues with spitten highs Lots of sparkle but very clean and musical

[hifi_dave]

I'll comment on this later, chaps... In the meantime, I'd appreciate your views on my post #8 here:

http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=7022

There are a few questions I've asked which require (hi-fi dave's) attention. Cheers!

Marco.

Not certain I can give a suitable answer here as I've used and sold so many FR-64S arms on various turntables with a myriad cartridges. I can safely say that it has mainly been used on solid turntables with low compliance MC's and the occasional Decca/London.

I have never sold one on an LP12, though I did use one such back in the 80's and wasn't overwhelmed as I recall but back then I was more interested in the Oracle, re-conditioned Garrard's and Tom Fletcher's designs.

I've got no problems with the FR-64S as I believe a good arm design like this, is just as viable today. IMO there are now a few better designs but I can still enjoy the FR-64S and especially so as it permits rapid changing of cartridges.

[Marco]

Hi Dave,

We should avoid thread drift here....

All I was really looking for is you guys to consider that the reason why you heard what you did with the SPU/FR64S combo could've been because of a sonic mismatch with the Spacedeck - that's all.

I guarantee that if you were to try that combination again on high-mass string drive T/T (for example a Platine Verdier), or a quality D/D or idler deck in the right system, you'd get rather different results - it's all about synergy!

Returning to the thread topic:

The larger vintage models have a far better balance, if my memory serves me right...

Indeed it does, Dave. Tannoy 15" Monitor Golds, for example, do not sound bright or thin in any way, either with their standard crossovers or when those are modified - quite the opposite in fact!

In my experience, with their original crossovers, they tend to sound rather 'cuddly' and somewhat shut-in and bass-heavy, although much depends on the cabinets used. Upgrading the original crossovers opens them up considerably in the mid and top-end, giving the high-frequency sparkle and glorious midrange which John describes with mine, with no 'spit' or treble nastiness whatsoever.

Bass is also tightened and the whole sound moves from being rather old-fashioned and 'romantic' to much more modern and incisive, but still retaining that lovely rich tone that, IME, only the best vintage drive units possess, and also to a degree, those in the likes of Ian Walker's mid-90s Canterburys. Current production Tannoys, although very good in their own right, do not sound anything like those using the best vintage drive units. It's a different sound altogether.

For those of you who tube-roll, it's rather like the way that the best NOS tubes reproduce music, as opposed to current production varieties: the latter, IME, simply lack the 'magic' way of music-making and beguiling sonic characteristics of the former. Or another way to describe it, is that it's a bit like what the best SE tube amps do with music compared to their less capable (in that area) push-pull counterparts.

That's the essential difference in the sonic signature between vintage and current production Tannoys. Those of you who've done the above comparisons will know exactly what I mean.

Hi Trane,

... or, more precisely, a quite naive but humble question it is that aims to know whether is a pair of these speakers are worth investing in?

The short answer is yes. As Dave correctly says, you're unlikely to lose money, as there is always a demand for vintage Tannoys on Ebay, and such like.

To note, I followed some threads with Tannoy speakers mentioned here at TAOS but now do not remember whether these exact models were recommended to be purchased or not.

I can only comment on Monitor Reds and Golds, some HPDs, and some of the current Prestige range. Hopefully, my comments above on Monitor Golds will have been helpful

Especially, if I recall it correctly, hi-fi Dave was on pretty low opinion on some ol' Tannoys (spittin' highs) - and I would not like to be trapped...

I can guarantee you will NOT get any of that with the larger Monitor Reds or Golds. I have no experience of the other models of drive units you mentioned.

FYI I would use these in a moderate sized (3.5m x 5m) room, and a cabinet should be built for them - IF, of course... Thanks for your input

That’s an excellent idea to have cabinets made for them. If you're going for 15" varieties, you'll need a minimal internal volume of 300 litres. Also a suitably wide front baffle area is essential. Speedy Steve here makes some excellent and affordable custom-made cabinets. Check out his threads in the D.I.Y room.

The room size you've quoted is fine. Large Tannoy DCs do not require a huge room to work well in.

Marco.

[hifi_dave]

After 40 years in the Hi-Fi business as a journalist, manufacturer and a dealer selling some of the best Hi-Fi on the Planet, I have a pretty good idea of when there is a system mismatch and/or how to extract the best from the various components.

As it is now a vintage item, I don't use the FR-64S as an everyday item for my business, so no, I didn't use it on a Platine Verdier but having used their TT's for some time I know that the sound is very similar to a Notts Hyperspace but for me, the Notts has a bit more drive. I have used an FR-64S on a Hyperspace and quite regularly now on the Dais which is a whole heap better again. There is no mismatching with that combo. The TT allows the arm to do what it does.

As for the SPU, I have no grumbles with it at all, it's just not my favourite whether it's on the FR-64S, TW Jelco or 12 inch SME. I've also used it/them mounted naked on fixed headshell arms with good results.

[Marco]

Hi Dave,

That's fine, mate. You're misunderstanding me, though. I'm not talking about a mismatch between the FR64S and the Spacedeck, per se, but rather when an SPU is included in the equation.

It's that which was causing the mismatch, IMO, as I'm quite sure that another cartridge on the FR64S, with a Spacedeck, would be absolutely fine. An FR64S and SPU can be 'too much of a good thing' (if you like their effect) on the wrong T/T or in the wrong system. This is where synergy comes in.

Dave R said the following about the SPU, apparently after a sesh you guys had with it, along with an FR64S and Spacedeck:

The classic SPU's DON'T have modern sonics, but the Royal N that Speedy-Steve had may well have by comparison. HiFi dave had a new SPU in shell last year and fitted it to an FR64, one of the massiest arms of recent decades. It sounded just as I know old SPU's to sound - plump and with a generous dose of golden syrup elsewhere.

It doesn't sound ANYTHING like that in my system or in other people's (almost the polar opposite, in fact), so there has to be a valid explanation for this.

In my view, it's what I've referred to at the beginning of my post. Either that or the system you used, overall, already had a 'full bodied' balance, and the SPU just took it over the edge

Marco.

[DSJR]

Circular argument time again.

If you like the SPU, then fine. Just make sure there is no mistracking as, if there is, groove damage will almost certainly result.

Nicked from HDD...