Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,430
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 14, 2018 7:25:50 GMT
I recently heard a mate's Tannoy Cheviots and they surprised me like almost nothing in hifi ever has. Before I come to that, the purpose of my post is to ask are they typical of old Tanny Dual Concentrics? Would a different Tannoy model sound "night and day" different? Or is this actually what those advocating big Tannoys are enjoying?
I've taken a while to process the sound because, to be frank, it was utterly terrible and I'm struggling to find words to describe it. I can understand there are some things we like and don't like, but there is a base level below which I thought it was difficult to sink. Even then I expected something small and cheaply made to be testing those boundaries.
What was so wrong with them? Well it's hard to describe when somethig falls so far out of your frame of reference, but let's start with the soundstage. There wasn't one. All I could hear were the four pretty foul and uncouth drivers screeching at me. Even though the tweeters are "integrated" into the bass units, there was a clear separation between what the bass units were doing and what the squawkers were sending my way. Left and right speakers didn't seem to produce anything collective in terms of sound either. Sound was clearly coming from two separate areas.
My mate knows his way around electronics so I seriously doubt they have an issue. Besides, he seemed oblivious to their shortcomings.
If I had turned up to a pub gig and the PA had churned out that noise, I'd have left as quickly as possible. I've heard the "PA" criticism of Tannoys before and I didn't really know what that meant. I didn't expect that it was being used literally. If I had DIYed somethig with that sound I would've been horrified, it was that bad.
People like all kinds of things in life and that's fine by me. I guess this one has made me struggle greatly with what anyone would actually choose to listen to. It's not Hifi as I thought I knew it. I don't want to close my eyes to anything in future, hence my asking. By the same token, I don't want to spend any time looking in an area that holds nothing for me.
Anyone else able to shed any light on the Tannoy sound?
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on May 14, 2018 8:08:43 GMT
I have a wonderful review of Cheviots by Angus McKenzie "Pink noise sounded like a steam engine blowing a gasket!"
In the store, the mids were coloured, cabinet seemed resonant and the tweeter needed rolling off and level turned down. Even so, in client's homes and fairly flat to the wall and Quad driven, they sounded quite pleasant.
The pepperpot tweeter casting moulds were getting tired too and I've seen pics of dire looking things that actually went into production, hidden by the 'dust caps.'
Old Cheviots will have knackered crossovers too unless they've been rebuilt.
I used to use them with both rolloff and hf level controls backed off a notch I remember...
The last Tannoys I heard was some years ago - Turnberry SE's. Hollow boxes but a different better sound altogether. Stupid high price to sell to price/status-led far eastern customers. You couldn't give them away in the UK unless heavily discounted.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,430
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 14, 2018 9:42:58 GMT
I see the prices these go for and then I think of the sound I heard. Honestly, give me £10 and send me to my old local boot sale on a Sunday morning and I would find something better.
This pair had a new crossover fitted and the level controls removed. Maybe the latter is part of the issue, but I had expected a dual concentric to integrate the bass and treble, not separate them so obviously. I also hadn't expected the sound to come from 2 separate boxes unless turned up loud. I think I will conclude that I needn't look any further when it comes to old Tannoys, although bigger speakers will still interest me.
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on May 14, 2018 10:37:14 GMT
A problem with third party crossover bodges is that it's all probably been done by ear with no objective checking to see if ears are being fooled. Hell, even Linn measured all the Kans and Sara's I saw being made and I had the pen plots of the Kans I made up there which went with them to their new owners!!!
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,430
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 14, 2018 13:38:13 GMT
Haha I never knew that about measuring Kans. Did they just like making wavy lines! As much fun as they can be, they must be one of the most "flavoured" speakers in existence,
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on May 14, 2018 13:46:46 GMT
Linn's measurements were identical to the more 'controlled' tests in the old HiFi Choice books I have scans I sent to someone once, but not sure if I can post directly here without having a third party image hosting service (I'm fuming over Photobucket still). I have pics as proof too in an old album from a notable visit in 1983.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,430
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 14, 2018 14:44:47 GMT
Ive never seen a measurement of Kans, but surely they must have measured terribly, especially the early ones?
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on May 14, 2018 16:19:21 GMT
Send me an email address by PM and I'll forward the review scans. Linn's plots were identical - 10db rise in a straight line from 100 to 1khz, peaking at 1,5khz (this peak causes all the trouble with these, 'Briks and the LS3/5A's as KEF progressively made it worse it seemed). Dive in response at the crossover followed by the tweeter set to roughly the middle of the midrange level. The B110 has a hidden second resonance at 5khz too which the crossover can't really clear. In Kans and 'briks, all you hear is the 1.5kHz peak usually.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2018 17:48:34 GMT
Just out of curiosity. What amps was he using, Andrew?
S.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,430
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 14, 2018 18:10:17 GMT
Well he was using EAR 834 but has now changed to Naim 102/180. That ought to sort out the sound!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2018 18:15:49 GMT
God have mercy on his soul.
s.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,430
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 14, 2018 18:21:51 GMT
I'll tell him to pick up a CDX. That' should put the icing on the cake!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2018 18:27:45 GMT
Don't be surprised, if you hear death news on ITV next week!
S.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,430
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 14, 2018 18:33:10 GMT
I wonder if anyone else out there is running Naim and Tannoys together,
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on May 14, 2018 19:42:29 GMT
Well he was using EAR 834 but has now changed to Naim 102/180. That ought to sort out the sound! He's done WHAT?  ? Who the hell gave him the idea that Naim of this era, especially the 102, could even begin to reproduce music properly into any speakers. EAR's have their faults, but they're like silk in comparison... |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,430
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 14, 2018 19:49:52 GMT
Apparently he said somethig like "it wasn't his kind of sound" when he got rid of the EAR. I always try to take the view that we all hear differently, but the Tannoy experience has led me to wonder how anyone could like that sound. And then they are paired with Naims. I really don't know what to think because I thought there was nowhere worse to go.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2018 8:59:14 GMT
Some people just do not get on with Tannoys. Having said that, I find some of them quite remarkable and have used Tannoys fairly, but not entirely exclusively for generations. Can't say I'm a big fan of the 12" HPD, as used in the regular Cheviot and Devon models. There are better.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,430
|
Post by Bigman80 on Jul 2, 2018 9:06:16 GMT
My mate uses these pretty much “near field” and quite close together. Probably no more than 8 feet back with the speakers 5 feet apart. I’m increasingly aware of how much positioning and especially listening distance can affect speakers. To me, being sat practically down the throat of these speakers may have been the biggest factor, just an instinct though, amd I have no evidence to support it. The odd thing is that the tweeter and bass unit sounded more “separate” than they do in a conventional speaker. I guess I’m wondering if you need to be further away to let them integrate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 2, 2018 9:19:20 GMT
My mate uses these pretty much “near field” and quite close together. Probably no more than 8 feet back with the speakers 5 feet apart. I’m increasingly aware of how much positioning and especially listening distance can affect speakers. To me, being sat practically down the throat of these speakers may have been the biggest factor, just an instinct though, amd I have no evidence to support it. The odd thing is that the tweeter and bass unit sounded more “separate” than they do in a conventional speaker. I guess I’m wondering if you need to be further away to let them integrate. Strange. One of the 'standout' characteristics of decent Tannoys is the seamless integration of the bass to treble. Maybe the crossovers are non-original, or a bit tired? Mine certainly do not have that problem and I'm very sensitive to driver/crossover integration issues. One of the reasons I just don't seem to get on with multi-driver speakers. I sit fairly close to mine too. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,430
|
Post by Bigman80 on Jul 2, 2018 9:25:58 GMT
The crossovers are non-original but they were apparently made by someone who is experienced with Tannoys. It was this aspect that surprised me most, because I have never heard a dual concentric before and I had high expectations of integration, only to hear the opposite
I may as well write that pair off and seek to hear a pair that can be vouched for. I really don’t like near field listening and I’m an omni/semi omni fan so I think I need a more appropriate room to hear them in too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2018 17:42:26 GMT
"I've taken a while to process the sound because, to be frank, it was utterly terrible"
🤣🤣🤣
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Jul 3, 2018 17:57:19 GMT
My own slightly conflicting experiences... The early 70's ones were quite good as I remember apart from a once audible slight 'whistle' from the tweeters. I never liked the IIILZ then or now and put it down to the rattle/buzz box the drivers were put in. i went to work in a then Top End dealer, fell in love with the big IMF's, Spendors and so on and then we got the HPD Tannoys in. In direct comparison, the HPD's were coloured (again possibly box issues) and all of them sounded better with the level and slope controls backed off a bit, but then I heard some Cheviots in a customer's house, Quad 44/405 driven and against the wall, they sounded great and never got in the way. We always had a laugh about the 'Ard-Ons,' big, LOUD and funky in the extreme...
Edit - Our master tapes of Tubular Bells and Ommadawn sounded incredible into Devons.......
Tannoy lost interest in the UK market and all they wanted to sell a few years later were the small Mercury, which didn't like a Linn source but could be really good with digital I remember. When a customer/friend of mine wanted to look at LOUD speakers of high quality in the early 90's, big Tannoy's and JBL, who'd also got their sh*t together as regards colouration and so on just couldn't be easily heard anywhere, but ATC welcomed us with open arms with some damned good products, Ashley James, who brought awareness of the brand to domestic users too and for me, the rest is history until I took my ATC 20ASL Pro's to pal HiFi Dave's to be sold (he sold regularly on eBay and I've still never sold there) and heard a pair of Turnberry SE's, which I really liked, but which were difficult to sell in the UK and now sell used for around a grand if ever they come up. Sorry chaps, verbal diarrhoea again... I want to hear the DMT models as they looked quite good I thought and aren't too 'odd' looking. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 3, 2018 18:11:33 GMT
Lots of times I have heard a brand and liked or disliked them instantly. It's not always reliable, especially with something pretty ancient. If they were all that bad nobody would have them.
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Jul 3, 2018 20:57:10 GMT
Tannoy have had many models of all sizes and price levels and the tonal balance has changed much accordingly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2019 18:22:39 GMT
That's an interesting take. I have Cheviot IIs (Geoff Walpurgis corrected me elsewhere  ) so not HPDs. Mine have had the x-over rebuilt as per factory, the autoformer controls left in place, an extra brace installed, new batting and the drivers rebuilt. They've generally been well received by visitors. But more importantly, they are on small (8" or so) stands that raise the driver centre to ear level. I have them about 10' apart and toes in slightly and sit about 10' away. The stands made the biggest difference to the sound by miles (compared with being on the floor) but the positioning and toe-in also has a very large effect. You are more than welcome to visit if you are ever near Preston (that applies to anyone on here btw) |
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on Feb 26, 2019 18:29:56 GMT
The Turnberry SE's I heard some years back sounded just like a slightly 'raw' Harbeth SHL5 and with very similar balance with the crossovers set as supplied - so take that as good or bad depending on taste. No way would any mid 70's HPD Tannoy sound as good as this - and integration was awful as supplied I remember, the tweeter being too hot (measurably so as well I remember). Somewhere around 1980, Tannoy did substantial research on the crossovers and drivers and the results were a huge step forward I gather, although I only got fleeting listens to one or two DC models. the two-way conventional mercury was a big step up for them although I reckon they'd prefer a CD source to the Linn & Rega we tried to use them with back then - and failed...
|
|
|
|
Post by macca on Feb 26, 2019 19:07:47 GMT
Tannoys - I've heard them sound exactly how Andrew describes and I've heard them sound exceptionally good in every respect with very good imaging and soundstage.
Drivers can be knackered, xover can be knackered, cabs can be sub-standard and since they are a high quality drive unit they'll really show up what the tat being used to drive them (or a poor record deck set up) is doing wrong.
There's so many people out there who have been in the hobby 30 or 40 years and who could have pretty much any speaker (in reason) but they settled on Tannoys. If Tannoys were all that bad that would never have happened.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,430
|
Post by Bigman80 on Feb 26, 2019 19:27:56 GMT
Tannoys - I've heard them sound exactly how Andrew describes and I've heard them sound exceptionally good in every respect with very good imaging and soundstage. Drivers can be knackered, xover can be knackered, cabs can be sub-standard and since they are a high quality drive unit they'll really show up what the tat being used to drive them (or a poor record deck set up) is doing wrong. There's so many people out there who have been in the hobby 30 or 40 years and who could have pretty much any speaker (in reason) but they settled on Tannoys. If Tannoys were all that bad that would never have happened. Very good point and my single experience is far too limited to judge anything by, other than knowing I wouldn’t want that particular pair in the condition I heard them. I seem to recall Marco having big reservations about his before having them rebuilt. |
|
|
|
Post by sq225917 on Feb 26, 2019 20:05:37 GMT
I've heard Yorks sound amazing and crap same for Westminster's and cheviots.
Some people like their sound, some don't, just like any kit they have fans and haters. A mate had a set of recabbed cheviots in bigger cabs with full dsp crossover, they sound good, but still sound like tannoys. The treble is a little ragged to my ears, but they drive a room really well.
|
|
|
|
Post by macca on Feb 26, 2019 20:14:32 GMT
I think all Marco did was had the xovers rebuilt with boutique stuff and swapped out the Monitor Red drivers for Monitor Gold. His Lockwood's are bloody good, as are Paul Coupe's (RFC) Canterbury 2. Quicker to list the bad ones I've heard really. Wasn't so keen on the Turnberry 2 though. I think once you go below the 12'' driver and the cabs start getting smaller you sort of lose part of the thing that makes them special and are left with just the drawbacks. (A bit coloured and slightly veiled). Geoff will probably disagree |
|
? Who the hell gave him the idea that Naim of this era, especially the 102, could even begin to reproduce music properly into any speakers. EAR's have their faults, but they're like silk in comparison...
) so not HPDs. Mine have had the x-over rebuilt as per factory, the autoformer controls left in place, an extra brace installed, new batting and the drivers rebuilt. They've generally been well received by visitors.
