THOMO

I make one off fine furniture for a living. Veneering is not really for punters.As a minimum you need a veneering vacuum bag and a fair bit of experience. The best advice is to use veneered ply and glue it a section at a time. Use a straight cut router bit with a bottom bearing to trim the oversized ply back to fit the box. The best glue is Urea Formaldahide for this although PVA will work OK. Once finished,the next thing NOT to do is sand through the veneer-which is very easy to do on the edges if you do not keep the sander perfectly flat.

Over the years I have tried all sorts of cables. I have no doubt that cables can sound different. The differences seem to be more obvious in interconnect cables than speaker cables. Many expensive cables are clearly made to sound deliberately different and many gullible people convince themselves that this difference is better.In the right system and circumstances this difference probably is better, but this is a completely serendipitous outcome and not likely to be easily or consistently replicated. You can use differences in the sound of cables to fine tune your system.You can do it with different sounding cheap cables or different sounding expensive ones.So why would anyone do it with expensive ones?

Using a sub combined with speakers that don't go much below 70 hz makes a lot of sense. The main problem with modern speakers is that they have long excursion drivers with heavy rubber cone surrounds.This is to facilitate bass extension and power handling.It also produces a slow and smeared overall sound. A better way to go is to use a driver that does not attempt to do the bottom octave and use a sub instead to do 70 to 35 hz. Some of the 1960s bookshelf type speakers ,with better modern tweeters and a 15 inch short excursion sub can sound fantastic and provide an insight into the compromises made in modern drivers trying to achieve too much bass.

Preamps are ,in many ways, more important than power amps.A good preamp gives focus.Many don't though. Some of the old NAD preamps like the 1240 are surprisingly good.[better than their power amps]Even the phono inputs are OK.You should be able to get one for around $300 on ebay or second hand elsewhere.At least they image well and have good timing-unlike a lot of other far more expensive ones.

The Proac 2.5 does do low bass -but it is horribly slow and smeared.Which is what you get from small cones with big rubber surrounds with long excursions. If you want low bass with transient response you need a short excursion 15 inch.

The ER Audio kit stats are very good.I have two friends with them.They are very difficult loads however and you need an amp with plenty of current and that can handle a low impedence load[1ohm].Some of the digital type amps are suitable. They also need a 15 inch active sub.I have made an excellent sub which uses an RCF L15/554k woofer in a 100 litre box.This is the only sub I have heard which integrates properly with stats.You need a high sensitivity short excursion driver whereas most are low sensitivity long excursion and lack transient response[sound very slow].One friend with the ERs uses this sub.Without it they sound very unbalanced. Also look out for some old Crown ES212 hybrid stats that are superb but rare.Or some B&W DM70 hybrid stats that you can install an ER Audio reconditioning kit in.[only $180]These sound very good once this is done.Better than the QUAD EL57s I reckon.As are the Crowns.Both do not need a sub. West Coast Hi Fi in Mandurah WA had a pair of B&W DM70s in good working condition.The owner was reluctant to sell them but you could try.

My advice is never buy anything new-other than things which wear out like CD players and Stylus. I have a friend that regularly buys quite new components-things like Copland amplifiers ,Pass Labs amps and Proac speakers for around a third of the new price.Of course what this means is that if you buy something new and decide you don't like it you will often lose 2 thirds of what you paid.Just not worth the risk. Don't let retailers and the hi fi press fool you into thinking that what is new is better.For some things like CD and DACs this is probably true but for amps and speakers it certainly isn't. Most people,for example,much prefer the older Rotel amps to the new, and many modern speakers are designed to impress in the showroom but they also induce listener fatigue once you get them home. If you buy second hand you can afford to buy a range of components and try them.And in Hi Fi this is normally the only sure way of finding something which suits your home acoustics and long term tastes.

I am proud to say my first system bought in 1978 was a Dynaco Pat 4 preamp,Dynaco Stereo 120 power amp and an AR turntable to which I fitted an SME tonearm and Stanton 681EEE stylus.The speakers were Tangent RS4s-classic BBC type bextrene coned speakers-better than BC1s I thought. I think even by todays standards this would be a great sounding system.I still have the Stereo 120.A bit coarse sounding but really punchy and a great match for the very polite Tangents-which I still wish I had. Another great speaker I owned was the Klipsch KG4-this lead me to discover the magic of valve amps and efficient speakers.

I have used some class A amps.One was even single ended-more like a room heater.Quit good but not in the class of the chip amp.The clarity of these things is pretty special.Maybe because like SETS they are very simple with a very low component count .Also the shortest signal paths in audio.

Has anyone built the 3876T chip amp sold by Jaycar? Catalogue number KC5150-page 19 in the current catalogue.Silicon Chip March 1994. I have a Sonic Art amp which appears to be built using this chip and components. This amp is a seriously seriously good-better than any transistor amp I have heard and right up with very good valve amps and digital types I have heard.It sounds remarkably clear,dynamic,fast and open and images as well as anything i have used. I have been using it with a Supratek Cabernet 300B valve preamp and it does this expensive and highly regarded preamp real justice.Which of course something you can put together for about $300 shouldn't!

Harrod, I would avise direct glue hardwood flooring using polyuerathane glue.This glue is very rubbery to allow for natural timber movement.This gives a very well damped floor.I have this over concrete and the acoustics are a lot better than tiles.

if you are using solid timber it is important you allow for the natural timber movement.One way is to use furniture bolts to fasten solid timber to a ply or MDF frame work.You can simply tap a thread into this with the bolts that will hold very firm.The holes through the solid timber must be oversise or oval shaped to allow for O.5% seasonal contraction/ expansion and both inside and outside surfaces should be sealed to minimise cupping. Front and back baffles should be MDF,ply or another stable material [corian would work well] I have made a couple of the Ed Frias designed AR.com kits for friends[available from Madisound] using solid jarrah side cheeks/leather over MDF baffles and top /bottoms in the Sonus Faber style. These are superb sounding kit speakers-very refined and coherent in a Spendor like way.

Tigi, The 47 Labs did much to bring to peoples attention the potential of chip amps.Their pricing however was a bit outrageuos considering the content of these amps.Still the Hi Fi world is full of things like that-Wilson and Avalon speakers for example. I see Jaycar electronics sells a 3876T chip amp kit for $27Aus per mono module-56 watts RMS.Plus you need to make up a power supply including transformer.Even if you paid a tech to put this together and put it in a nice box you would probably still end up with a giantkiller of an amp for around $400.One of my amps uses 3876T chips and sounds superb. Maybe you could even battery power it. Catalogue number is KC 5150 The open baffles have a lot of appeal.I used one with an RCF 10 inch full range plus ribbon semi super tweeter for some time.They do need to be very big to get any real bass though. The Prometheus open baffle loooks very interesting.

Tigi, Interesting amp.I have an Audio Artistry battery powered chip preamp that is pretty good.They certainly are very silent devices.[Not a patch on my Supratek Cabernet 300b preamp though] I also use a couple of Gainclone type chip amps which I have found work well with high efficiency speakers-the only non valve amps I really like.More dynamic,vibrant and clear than the digital/Class T amps I have tried. I have noted that a lot of people who have not liked transistor amps are finding the digital and chip amps more acceptable.

They double as a cat scratching pole too but they are also prone to flea infestations.Thats the halo effect you get when you play them on your digital amplifier-not the box resonating madly.

Guy Clark -Keepers[Live] The best live recording I have heard-superb poetic songs and a voice that is a mix of Laphroaig and gravel.

jacko, The spacer suggestion is interesting.I use an 18mm spacer on the D76.Never thought to try it on the D54. I have managed to track down a pair of used Lorantz slot tweeters.These should fit the bill nicely-although a friend is using a Raven R2 ribbon above his Audax bullet tweeter which sounds good too.I will try a Fountek as the Raven is serious money. The two 10" woofers makes sense.I have used a 12 and an 8" like that to good effect. Some of the RCF 15" woofers also work well although they need bass EQ or a subwoofer.

The Aslan Man, It sounds like you have managed to resolve the problems I have encountered with dome mids being used much lower down.A 1500 hz crossover is almost getting into tweeter territory and I can imagine this would work well.Also overlap would help. I have used a combination of dome and ribbon tweeters in this way and the result seems to be much better than using one or the other-you seem to get the best aspects of both. Good luck with your speakers. They look great.I would like to hear them sometime.Are there any in WA?

Michael, ATC speakers do use horn like surrounds around the midrange domes.Look at pictures of the SCM 40 for example. I recently heard a pair of Sonique speakers that use dome mids-their top model I believe[$10000].These were quite nice sounding speakers[although I thought the bass was very slow and poorly integrated].Their imaging was reosonable but certainly not as precise or layered as you can get from a relatively cheap but well designed stand mount.This may not be the result of the use of dome mids but it had that same presentation that I have heard in every dome mid speaker-like the speakers are too wide apart or not directed the right way.In other words a bit out of focus.Or to use another analogy a bit like sitting too close to the screen in a cinema.There is plenty of detail but you are constantly shifting your head from side to side trying to make sense of it.[A phasing issue?] Just my take on it and an obvious generalisation but I have friends that have been down the dome midrange road and we have all come to the same conclusion.We have also owned/own electrostats and point source systems though which do tend to set standards in this area-and everything is relative. And of course different people hear[or at least listen] differently.

Michael, The problem I have encountered could be the result of the frequency range that the domes operate in. Some of the smaller mid domes might be less prone to this because they are operating,say,above 1000 hz and a cone speaker is handling the lower midrange. Also the ATC speakers use a horn ,albeit a quite small one.Clearly a horn is going to alter dispersion patterns. Dome mids have much wider dispersion patterns and this might be the reason they do not image precisely in many domestic environments[due to room reflections].They probably would in an anechoeic chamber.Baffle reflections might also come into play here. You are probably right about two domes not helping-although I did have a friend who stacked two pairs of Yamaha NS1200s [thats $18000 worth],and reckoned the imaging improved-although he could never get it up to decent cone speaker quality and ended up selling them out of frustration.In all other areas these are fantastic if power hungry speakers.

The use of dome midranges is an interesting one.I have always loved the sound of them.I use a Dynaudio in my Edgar midrange horn and have used Cabasse in other speakers. I have found however,that whilst they are excellent in many areas,they are not capable of producing pinpoint imaging in they way that cones can.Voices,for example always sound very wide.I have heard this in many speakers-Yamaha NS1200,Yamaha NS1000s,Celestion 551s as well as ones I have built myself.You are always aware that the sound is coming from two boxs.This is apparently a function of their dispersion pattern because if you mount the same driver in a horn and use the same crossover you get a more focussed soundstage,The Edgar horns image quite precisely. It seems ,however,that not everyone hears it this way.Once you get used to very pinpoint imaging from things like point source drivers,however,this sort of presentation can sound quite strange.It is argueably even more natural-after all if you shut your eyes and listen to someone singing,their voice does sound quite large due to reflections.But many of us have become hooked on the very precise location of voice and instruments you get in studio recordings. The use of two dome midranges might be a way of getting a more tightly focussed soundstage-an interesting development.

If you really want value you might want to consider kits. The Audio Review .com kit speaker designed by Ed Frias and sold by Madisound is a fantastic stand mount speaker.Check out the reviews on Audio Review.These sound very sophisticated -like a Spendor or Proac but 25% of the price.I have built two pairs of these for friends. The other thing to consider is a Gainclone type Chip amp kit.There are many of these available now.The ones I have heard sound superb.No budget Transistor amp comes even close.Even if you had to pay a tech to do the assembly it would still work out a bargain.

Thanks for the link.I am actually using D76s[larger] in the Edgar.They seem to go a bit lower than the D54 which makes integrating with woofers easier and their lower sensitivity also helps with integration.[90db compared to 96db]. It's nice to hear the Audax also work.I have tried all sorts of things and most sound terrible compared to the Dynaudio domes.[even other domes]. What are you using for bass?

The proper way to compare cables is to have someone change them while you are blindfolded so you do not know what you are listening too. You should probably also include some cheap solid core copper lighting cable and some cheap stranded copper cable in the comparison. I believe cables do sound different but if you do it this way you will probably find that cheap cable can sound just as good.This will not apply in all systems however because the more expensive cables are often configured to sound coloured or different and may well suit your system better.

Owen, Thanks for the Edgar contact.He must be getting quite old now. The recommended tweeter was an Audax bullet.These were OK but they are no longer available and the slot tweeters were much better. As regards tweeters for Lowther types I have used a Fountek JP2 ribbon as a semi super tweeter with some wizzer cone types[Coral,RCF]and a friend uses one with Goodmans Axiom 80s.They are vey good and close to the Ravens for about 25% of the price.These are available from Solen in Canada. I use a 0.5 mF cap on mine although a second order crossover is suggested I find they do not sound as good as the first order ,and crossing over so high I have had no trouble with damage.