This time from Germany and this time the pattern is very much the similar to the patterns of any other company that sell electromagnet fro Hi-Fi: the semi-idiotic statements-claims meant to impress uninformed peoples and no credible claims about sonic characteristics, or no even implication that the people behind the company has any advanced demands in Sound. The company is Great Vintage Loudspeakers

http://greatvintageloudspeakers.com/

and it looks like they sell direct via Ebay, which is perfectly fine in my books. Still, if a company sells via dealers then it is assumed that all information is possible to get from a dealer. (I know that in reality dealers have no idea how to spell the product name but I said: “assumed”). In case of company deals direct I would like to have on the site more information, I hope the Great Vintage Loudspeakers will do it.

The Art Déco spacers of the company made by a carpenter I pretty much discard and the subject of my interest are only the electromagnet compression drivers or as they call it field-coil drivers

http://www.greatvintageloudspeakers.com/components/

The A594WVL looks like a MF driver. For whatever reason they claim that it is a replica of Western Electric WE594. That is foolish. First of all what is shown in the picture is an indication that it is not replica of WE594. Why they mention the Western Electric, to impress the Morons? That is sad and do not help with evaluation of the seriousness of the peoples who did it.  Also, the Western Electric designs were NOT the optimum designs and it they just “replicated” the WE then they have no idea what they do.

I am not pleased to see phenolic diaphragms in there: the electromagnet with phenolic cone? Come on! That is like a turtle with step-down transmission! The aluminum cone sound interning and their promise of Mylar suspension is VERY interesting. The fact that they have those options is a good sign.

http://www.greatvintageloudspeakers.com/components/a594wvl/a594wvl_ffff.html
The image is correctly to the manufacturer.

I still would like to see the layout of the cone vs. suspension, know the size of the cone, type of phase plug, loading methods and many other parameters to be able to see what they do.

I am glad that they stay with moderate flux density and do not write what other idiots claimed: “our filed coil drivers allow having flux density unreachable by perm magnates.”  Still I am not at ease with the comments like this: “ …  this driver induces 1.59 Tesla in his gigantic magnetic gap…” Where the gigantic magnetic gap comes from in compression drivers? All compression drivers are underhang by nature with no exertion and if the gap is “gigantic” then it is too wide.  The widening of gap is VERY controversial subject in compression drivers and I am not comfortable with it. Are they cooling the coil this way? Do they have problem with overly soft and “loose” suspension? Do they have some benefits with low level signals with extra wide gap?  The electromagnetic flax is not “scrappy” at low levels by nature with permeability look likes dropping faster then with perm magnet. The wide gap would be another “brick in the wall” of worsening the effect, not to mention the heat up the whole driver for unnecessary purpose.

The driver has throat diameter 49 mm, which is 1.929 inches…. Hm… are they kidding? Why not the 50.8mm that would make the standard 2”. That is a mystery to me.

Another comment that they made me do not feel good: “… the magnetic field can be adjusted to your needs respectively to match your woofer and crossover specifications exactly. “ OK, let me say 125 times and for good: the magnetic force of electromagnet driver might NOT be adjusted and particularly in respect to “match woofer and crossover”. Change current across electromagnet changes flux density that impact each and single T/S characteristic of the driver. I am not saying that it would be better of worse but I say he then whole idea of using the specific diaphragm, with specific suspension, with specific loading and with specific damping pattern has any sense ONLY at the very specific flux density. You wish to change the flux density – fine, then redesign the whole driver.  I have seen idiot, who BTW was very celebrated industry reviewer, who wrote that a system with field coil drivers might have a volume control by the mean of flux alternation. I think making public comments like this is a fireable offence but he is the “industry reviewer” – what can you get from him – his title is a diagnose itself… Anyhow, the electromagnet drivers must be sold with very specific very narrow gap of flux density (let say +/_ 0.2T) and the performance of the driver shall be quarantined ONLY at this default flux. I do not want to hear from a manufacture that I even can change flux. If the manufactures even open mouth abbot it then I do not want to hear from the manufacture and the driver they sell is not properly designed.

The Great Vintage Loudspeakers Company has also woofers, duplex drivers (something that I do not like at all). They have a tweeter:

http://www.greatvintageloudspeakers.com/components/a284wvl/

It is field-coil too, but since I do not like the notion of horn tweeters I would move over.

Anyhow, it looks like the Great Vintage Loudspeakers driver are a new player and who knows what they do. The MF driver looks interesting. I never heard them; if anyone did them share your thoughts. The drivers look like 1.8K, it is not clear if it is for a driver or for a pair…

Yes, Jonathan,

I have seen this resemblance with JBL in the shape of the back plate but it does not mean anything. The curved back magnetic path make a lot of sense, so he might adopt it from JBL. There is nothing wrong with it.

I do not know what this guy did in this driver. He sent me email stating that I have no knowledge about the field-coil drivers design. Good for me. I hope he does.  What distract me in all of this that all those people is their confidence in own supremacy but this confidence does not based upon any sonic or artistic claim but rather upon self -affiliation with some kind of pre-developed hype or hideous kitsch. I do not make this accusation about this German guy who make those compression drivers – I do not know what he does but the patters is sound too recognizable. I hope I am mistaken.

A few month ago the clown Joe Roberts popped up at this site and was selling an idea of a new Korean loudspeaker by affiliating what those Korean guy do with WE and Mirrophonic.

http://www.GoodSoundClub.com/TreeItem.aspx?PostID=9376

he was drooling with bitten up stupid audio metaphors but a single look at this WE installation from a perspective of a person who have more or less noble reference points would clearly indicate HOW this  installation sounds.

http://www.GoodSoundClub.com/TreeItem.aspx?PostID=10509

Another example is that retard from Pennsylvania from Oswald Mill. He piles up stories about RCA of 30s but the actual sound he is getting is sub acceptable and has so many very elemental mistakes that it kind of even shame to comment about it. It is not even about Sound they get and the sound they do not understand but the objectives of those people actions. The Oswald Mill guy is idiot in his audio objective, an idiot in his musical objective and all that he does is just mitigation of damage from people who know him and who have discovered that it is an empty place. Can you blame RCA installation that is does shit in Oswald Mill’s hands?

Well, as in anything else audio is very little about “iron” but more about people and I would very much be incline to pay attention to the statements of people values instead of the moronic the statements  that “we copy this technology from WE, from RCA, from Bell Labs, from Marconi, or from Klangfilm”. As I always say “any technology in the hands of barbarians will produce a barbarian results” and unfortunately too many of the cretins in “vintage audio” prove the point…

I do not know how it all applicable to that Christine Von Langa. It might be not and his driver might be interesting. However, then will be interesting NOT because or instead they are JBL or WE replica but because other reasons. I hope they shut a fuck up their endless drooling about replication of vitals technology. Not to mention that any single “replicator” that I have see NEVER made anything performing identically to vintage results. Different but not the same, if so then what is the difference what the design was taken from?

Romy the Cat wrote:

The drivers look like 1.8K, it is not clear if it is for a driver or for a pair…

Electronluv,

As I understand you were a few years out of audio business and it looks like you are back, nice to see.

I saw at your site just MF compression drivers not the bass drivers. Anyhow, I have a few questions to ask. You use beryllium diaphragms with Mylar suspension – is it your production or you use some kind off the shelf cones? Your drivers are with 3.25” exit - is any rational for this diameters beside to get more HF extension? And the last question: you say that you have perfected your diver, might I ask you what is in your view the key for this perfection? I do not ask details about your know-how but rather about your general perfection objectives and the general perfection methods?

I do not look for beryllium diaphragms, I just was wondering if someone has succeeded to manufacture them in “basement conditions”. As I understand it shall be VERY difficult.

Well, your driver might be interesting. If I was able to accommodate 3.25" hole than I would propose to exchange your driver and my S2 for a few weeks to see how they work but afraid that I will not be able to mount 3.25" properly. Also you have 3.25" exit and 3” diaphragm… you know what I mean…

This driver that you describe is what you call “wide bandwidth” driver. I am not a big fan of the wide bandwidth horn channels; in fact I believe the idea itself is faulty. Are you planning to make “narrow bandwidth” drivers? It might be interesting if you apply your know-how for dedicated MF and upperbass compression drivers. Also, are you just making them for yourself of you are planning to sell them? If the later then what is the target price for them?

Josh,

I see, for a time being you target your driver to use with your horns. That is fine. BTW, did you come across to an observation that you tend to load your anodes that drive the field-coil drivers idler than when the same anode drive perm magnet drivers? I mean do tend to use higher impedance lading with field-coils?

electronluv wrote:

are you asking if i like higher impedance tubes with my drivers  i  have always love the sound of imac tubes round plate triodes !!! i change amps alot right now i im running 75tl amp for highs and a 300B for bass drivers . i hope this answers your question. The josh

electronluv wrote:

I have not tried  different loads for the different driver magnets but i also have not played with fix magnets for a will. one thing is changing load to the tube really only makes a big difference in the bass regions on a mid driver the load may change distortion but when you are running a 108 DB driver the amp never really needs more then a watt, distortion is always so low at that point any way.

Romy the Cat wrote:

People frequently talk that a higher loading has lower distortions but I do not thing that is has anything to do with distortions. The key in here is that harmonics that are changed with lording – higher loading get “shorter” harmonics, and less idle load has more “fatter” harmonics.  My experiments with electromagnets suggested that they are a bit on the softer side then better perm magnets, therefore if I run electromagnets then I would most likely load the tube lighter with field-coils drivers. The caT

serenechaos wrote:

What is the difference between "distortion," and "harmonics?" --what I'm asking is what you are defining as "distortion" and as "harmonics" in this context.  Yes, I know as in how a sinewave of a note contains no harmonics, but when near saturation and clipped, harmonics are created.  And how these are related acoustically, as the harmonics of a vibrating string are musically related to the note's fundamental frequency- e.g. the second order harmonic = adds the octave; third order adds the fifth, etc, etc... is what is sometimes called harmonic distortion...  I don't understand what you're saying that you do not think tube loading has anything to do with distortions... ...but that harmonics get "shorter" Vs "fatter"...  I'm not sure where i'm getting lost Are you talking about being able to reproduce harmonics (from the original source)?  Or the harmonics produced by the amp, and/or driver?

An excellent question, Robert! I wish I know the true answer.

The higher amount of harmonics implies higher distortions. The higher amount of harmonics means more power the on own turn get transferred to higher distortions. However, I am not accustomed to operate by the means of distortions. There are many reasons why and one of the major one is because distortions viewed as a subtraction of output to input but I do not feel that it is useful for interpretation parameter. No the last factor is the fact the chance of logging impact the harmonics without any reference to what was at input. So, if with the change of loading the ratio between the second and third harmonics changed, the sound changed then does it mean that the distortions become less or more? Harmonics have reference to auditable, the distortions is not necessary have it at least I am not accustomed to handle it and therefore I dispose of their importance.