Monolith refresh - Panels, woofers and rail stain updates

[JonFo]

Hi Jon,

The Rives reference system on Audiogon used to feature Monoliths powered with Krell and Levinson via a Bryston 10b. He had replaced the woofer with Focal Audiom drivers. I know Focal went through a phase of not supplying when they transitioned to JM Labs but I think this is no longer the case. It may be that he could point you to a path that has already been travelled.

Kevin

Thanks Kevin, but I've changed the requiremnts in my application, the driver only needs to cover 60 to 315 Hz.
Some of the Focal drivers (very nice BTW) in the 12" are more for lower end. But some actually have decent mid's. But cost is a challenge, at $800 the Audiom 13W is not cheap. For that money, I'm building arrays.

 

[JonFo]

Jon, don't knock yourself out trying to do the repair on short notice just for me. I'd be happy just to SEE your setup, even if I can't actually HEAR it!

Hi Alan, no worries, it's a hobby.

This will be the third woofer swap in these Monoliths, so I'm getting good at it

It actually does not sound bad now, as I never noticed the problem except with test tones. Goes to show ya how well we actually hear things.
But now that I know about it, I can tease it out of the wall of sound.

Maybe we'll burn out the new HiVi during your demo, that way I can just proceed to the line array for the September meet :devil:

 

[kwr]

Sorry Jon - I somehow missed the part of your post where you mentioned you had already sourced some drivers.

I knew the Focals were not cheap but I had no idea they were that expensive.

Kevin

 

[sleepysurf]

We have a new Swan's/HiVi store that opened a mile from me. They have some pretty compelling speaker designs (I have a pair of S200a's in a secondary system), and are also competing with Scanspeak and Seas in the driver market.

Looking forward to your demo!

 

[jedi35]

C. A. P.,

Were you looking at the HiVi M12 for mid and low bass, or were you just wanting mid bass for use with a sub? What did you wind up using finally? I'm curious, because I might want to do a woofer upgrade in my Quests.

Adrian

 

[JonFo]

Adrian, C.A.P, here's another 12" driver that would be a better replacement of the original if keeping original crossover points, the HiVi W12:
http://www.swanspeaker.com/product/htm/view.asp?id=111

The W12 is a Kevlar reinforced paper cone designed for lower extension and works better in a sealed box than the M12 (M12 in a sealed box has a very high F3). In a Quest box, it should go to about 48 or 50 Hz. Good enough to cross over to a sub.

The highs on the W12 are still quite good, definitely well past the 125Hz crossover point of a Quest or the 200Hz point of a reQuest; also, the x-over is only 12 dB / Octave, so the 'woofer' is still putting out substantial volume into the mid-bass.
You’ll need to add Dacron stuffing to the box to bring down effective volume closer to 75 liters for best results.

My experience leads me to recommend drivers that will better match the panel and play clean up to 500Hz than something that will be focused more on the <60Hz extension. The ‘integration’ one hears so much about is really governed by the behavior of the 80 – 400hz range in the woofer.

After all, in most rooms, a speaker sitting 3’ out from either wall, will just never produce decent low (sub 60Hz) bass, so use a sub if you want to shake the ground

 

[jedi35]

Thanks Jonathan,

That's great advice. I know it sounds strange, but I still have to wrap my brain around the fact that I might want to use a sub with my Quests. In my mind, I've heard what seems to be life-like bass coming out of the 12s in terms of low end extension. What probably needs to happens is I need to get myself to Atlanta and hear your system. Isn't the Quest woofer rated to go down to around 28 Hz +/- 2 or 3 db? Of course, with the original Xover points the midbass will suffer.

In the description of the W12, it states that it's optimized for medium to large size vented cabinets. However, in the specs it says that it is for sealed cabinets. What gives?

Adrian

 

[C.A.P]

After moving mine to a much bigger room my bass cleaned right up. Is it earth shattering bass ? No ! But its a solid bass. It seems to damn near pressurize the room at times with the right music. The room might really be helping as its a 3rd level in a quad house that is partially underground with cement footings. However there is a regular wall on one side to to help with the brightness.

I have tried (not very hard ) to integrate a sub(Sunfire True sub) but it seemed to muddle up things to much even with the x over at 40 hz. I guess some playing around with placement may help but I really like it with out. (right now, ) My Theta Miles may be playing hell to with the sub integration as its balanced to the amp and has RCA outs for its other which I have tried a sub on. It seems like they are subduing the signal or something. The simplicity of this system is its own demise in this instance, I think !

I do know that this sub is capable of good bas where it sits as it is used daily for my 5.1 TV system and with a few DTS discs can move your hair and push your guts in.


If a new driver would better the Quest in the bass area with out making it muddy I am all for it. However: I don't want to move laterally and then say well its mid bass is better but it needs a sub for low end. As of right now with the new room I think I have the best of both worlds ! (for now) :music:

 

[wallacefl]

speaking of a nice sub...strap the ACI SV-12's face to face in a 2 cu. ft. cabinet isobaric downfiring :music: ...cross it fast at 40 hz and place it in the corner...or you can sell them to me!

 

[jedi35]

C. A. P.,

Thanks for your response. So, it seems that your woofers are doing a good enough job for you without the use of a sub. That's great. It sounds like you are running full range, without bi-amping, right? I think that I should also be able to get along without a sub, although the system might not have all th power of the best systems in all ranges. I'm bi-amped(to a degree) and have been fairly happy with my low bass extension. I was able to boost the mid bass by crossing over at higher frequencies, and by using a variac to tame the panels down a bit. I have lost a bit on the low side in the process, and would be interested in finding a woofer that would let me stay crossed over where I am(around 315) and give me a little more on the low end than what I have now. Jonathan has helped me understand that great mid bass and great low bass are hard to get without using a sub, so there are some trade offs. Still, I'm enjoying the search or "quest" for better sound in my room. At this point, the next thing that I need to do is to totally disconnect the internal Xover boards in the speakers, and get the DBX DriveRack 260, along with whatever else I need to start analyzing the response in my room.

Adrian

 

[JonFo]

speaking of a nice sub...strap the ACI SV-12's face to face in a 2 cu. ft. cabinet isobaric downfiring :music: ...cross it fast at 40 hz and place it in the corner...or you can sell them to me!

Wallace, good idea, actually, I had a pair of ACI Saturn’s accompanying the Sequels back in ’93. So I know exactly what you are talking about.
--- for the rest: An ACI Saturn was a 2 cu ft. sub with an isobaric alignment featuring two 10” drivers. They produced great bass for the day. ---

However, my old ACI SV-12's went to retrofit GeorgeHiFi’s Monoliths in Australia.

 

[JonFo]

… Still, I'm enjoying the search or "quest" for better sound in my room. At this point, the next thing that I need to do is to totally disconnect the internal Xover boards in the speakers, and get the DBX DriveRack 260, along with whatever else I need to start analyzing the response in my room.

Adrian

Ah, I see the Jedi is becoming adept at sensing the force of the speaker processor, whose power is limited only by one’s ability to focus the force to one’s will

 

[jedi35]

Well spoken, my master....

The bass driver in the ReQuest is supposed to be a different driver than the one used in the QuestZ. The ReQuest, I hear, uses one that's stiffer, and has a heavier magnet. Yet, not only do the specs show that its rated response doesn't go quite as low, but I've read lots of comments that the bass is weak. In a good listening situation, is the bass weaker than the QuestZ, or does it just mean that no Quest or ReQuest will shake the foundations of the world? It's too early to tell, but I may have found a local buyer who might be interested in my QuestZs, having recently fallen in love with the sound of the Monolith prototypes. The owner convinced him that my Quests don't sound all that different, and would be a lot cheaper than finding Monoliths and transporting them here.

What do you think of my interest in moving from the QuestZ into the ReQuest? Would my internal Xover bypass be any more or less safe? I read a thread where one owner had both in his house, and thought that the bass was deeper and the panals has a rounder sound on the QuestZ. The Request, he found, sounded more strident. If I'll be bi-amping anyway with a speaker processor, will any of this matter with the amount of control I'll have?

Adrian

 

[C.A.P]

I was under the assumption that the Quest , Re Quest and the Monolith all used the same Eminence 12 inch driver . IIRC I have the specs from Jim Power in a file. It may have even been him that told me that information.

 

[JonFo]

Well, the master sucks at debugging his own system

I finally get the new drivers, so before I pop them in, I decide to run some measurements with the ETF measurement rig just to document before and after really carefully.

I test the left speaker, and sure enough, this nasty raspy sound at certain frequencies is evident.

Switch to test the right speaker. And I think I hear the same raspy sound (but shorter, softer) when testing it. :wtf:

So, I get close to the left speaker and re-run the test on the right (got to love laptops, WiFi and remote desktop, full control anywhere ), and sure enough, sound is emitting from the left speaker at certain points of the test. But most of the sound (and clean) is coming from the right. So I mute the left outputs (go to love speaker processors with fine detail control via software), and re-run test. Bam, there’s that sound from the left driver again.

Ok, this has to be something other than the speaker to do this kind of magic. Scratch head for three seconds, slap forehead, swear a bit and conclude it must be the amp that’s doing this. So switch the left woofer feed and speaker cable to unused channel on secondary Sunfire Cinema grand (got to love having spare channels).
Re-run test, and AH-HA! It was the frigging, blasted amp, not the driver.
One Sunfire stereo (which has been running smoothly for 13 years) goes off to service next week.

Silly me for not doing a basic test: Swapping the speaker cables and testing to see if it’s the speaker or something upstream.

Philosophical point: it’s easy to get overconfident in your knowledge and jump to the wrong conclusions.

Lesson learned (again): test at least two variations, isolate the problem and verify.

At least SleepySurf’s demo Sunday will proceed with no impediments. I’m sitting here enjoying some Genesis on SACD and loving the sound. :musicnote:

 

[JonFo]

Well spoken, my master....

The bass driver in the ReQuest is supposed to be a different driver than the one used in the QuestZ. The ReQuest, I hear, uses one that's stiffer, and has a heavier magnet. Yet, not only do the specs show that its rated response doesn't go quite as low, but I've read lots of comments that the bass is weak. In a good listening situation, is the bass weaker than the QuestZ, or does it just mean that no Quest or ReQuest will shake the foundations of the world? It's too early to tell, but I may have found a local buyer who might be interested in my QuestZs, having recently fallen in love with the sound of the Monolith prototypes. The owner convinced him that my Quests don't sound all that different, and would be a lot cheaper than finding Monoliths and transporting them here.

What do you think of my interest in moving from the QuestZ into the ReQuest? Would my internal Xover bypass be any more or less safe? I read a thread where one owner had both in his house, and thought that the bass was deeper and the panals has a rounder sound on the QuestZ. The Request, he found, sounded more strident. If I'll be bi-amping anyway with a speaker processor, will any of this matter with the amount of control I'll have?

Adrian

Adrian,

I would say that by the time you bypass the internal crossovers, and replace the woofer, there is no real advantage to a ReQuest. As by then all that’s really left is the ESL panel (which if updating, are the same for Quests and reQuests).
A speaker processor erases the final shreds of contrast between the two options. So I’d say stay with what you have.

Also, I’ll wager than once you get the bi-amping and speaker processor dialed in (and new woofer), you’ll probably like your rig better than the monoliths.

The crossover bypass is bit harder on the QuestZ, but a EE should be able to look at the boards and do it no problem. Maybe even take it to a service shop along with info from the threads on modding and see what they would quote you.

As for woofers, I’m with C.A.P, I thought all three used the same driver.
But it’s sort of academic if moving to bi-amping and a processor, because as long as the driver is a reasonable match for the enclosure, the rest can be tweaked to death and back with the processor.

Since I won’t be installing the HiVi’s this weekend, I can’t say if they are better than the Peerless. They sure are heavier and look one heck of a lot nicer. But that’s eye candy, it’s all in the measurements and the subjective sound evaluation as far as I’m concerned.
Maybe in a week or two…

 

[jedi35]

I guess I must be the victim of local salemanship, as I was told on first listening that the ReQuest had a heavier woofer magnet than the Quest. I'll go with what you guys are saying. I'm still confused over why the specs are different for the ReQuest bass response, and why so many here think that the bass is weak. If the woofers are the same, shouldn't I expect to be able to get a similar level of bass response from both? Is this weak bass compared to the Quests, or just weak bass in general, meaning all versions of Quests?

I think I'm convinced to stay with my QuestZ speakers. Bypassing the crossover is no easier on the ReQuest, right? It seems that the only version of the Quest that doing this should be easy with is the original version. Here's a question...what would happen if I hunted down this original version for bi-amping? With the internal Xover bypassed, using a speaker processor, wouldn't I get the same results that I'd get with the QuestZ? There is the issue of the QuestZ being easier to drive, because of its friendlier impedance, right?

Also, is it really important that I get an EE to look at my boards, since ML has sent me specific schematics on what I need to do? I was just going to follow what they sent me, and drive the transformer with the help of some protective resistors in place. I stand ready to try it, but what do you think?

As far as your system is concerned, Jonathan, atleast you eventually came up with the right diagnosis. Hey, we all can make mistakes.

Adrian

 

[JonFo]

I guess I must be the victim of local salemanship, as I was told on first listening that the ReQuest had a heavier woofer magnet than the Quest. I'll go with what you guys are saying. I'm still confused over why the specs are different for the ReQuest bass response, and why so many here think that the bass is weak. If the woofers are the same, shouldn't I expect to be able to get a similar level of bass response from both? Is this weak bass compared to the Quests, or just weak bass in general, meaning all versions of Quests?

If it is indeed the same driver, then variances in sound are largely due to the changes in crossovers between models. As for being weak, again, crossover efficiency differences could lead to gain balance favoring one version vs the other. Louder often sounding ‘better’.
My very individual opinion is that except for some very unique room configurations, that Monolith and (re)Quest bass is sub par with factory x-overs. And that after 8 years or so, the OEM woofer will be under-performing, especially if pushed to do low-bass at high-levels.

I think I'm convinced to stay with my QuestZ speakers. Bypassing the crossover is no easier on the ReQuest, right? It seems that the only version of the Quest that doing this should be easy with is the original version.

Yep, a bypass is work on these models regardless, except the originals.

Here's a question...what would happen if I hunted down this original version for bi-amping? With the internal Xover bypassed, using a speaker processor, wouldn't I get the same results that I'd get with the QuestZ? There is the issue of the QuestZ being easier to drive, because of its friendlier impedance, right?

Once the crossovers are bypassed, and woofers updated, there are negligible differences between these models. Impedance if a factor of the crossovers, so if they are removed, then no diff.

Also, is it really important that I get an EE to look at my boards, since ML has sent me specific schematics on what I need to do? I was just going to follow what they sent me, and drive the transformer with the help of some protective resistors in place. I stand ready to try it, but what do you think?

As far as your system is concerned, Jonathan, at least you eventually came up with the right diagnosis. Hey, we all can make mistakes.

Adrian

Not critical to have a Tech do it, if you feel up to it, it can be done. As long as the ESL drive board is functional, you’re going to be OK. A tech just removes any worries you’ve previously expressed.

My system worked fine during the demo today. So glad I didn’t need to mess with drivers this weekend.
Next week I’ll pop one of the HiVi’s in and run tests.

 

[jedi35]

Once again, thanks for all the info and opinions, Jonathan. I'm feeling more and more confident about what I need to do with my Quests. It would be excellent to update the woofers as well as the panels. I'm going to try a panel shower first. I do have small dust circles showing in each of the tiny stator holes.

Regards,
Adrian

 

[johnwa]

Sorry to do a semi hi-jack of the thread but it looks like you guys are close to alignment here and we all (those of us considering replacement kit) benefited from the exchange.

I wanted to bow to the Monolith master again to let him know I finally pulled the trigger on a sub (a REL sub with two sets of outputs and the ability to do some fine adjustments) and think I have successfully hooked everything into the active cross over as you suggested.

I still need to play around with placement and need to get the treatments stuff going but what a difference. If anything I have to find a way to adjust the bass down on so many recordings now.

The plending seems pretty tight but do you have suggestions on the active settings now? I have played with the front switches but not a great deal of audible difference so I think I need to dig into the back dip switches.

Having fun tweaking and literally having to determine what I can keep on the walls as I had things actually moving yesterday.