• Please note that Audiokarma will be offline briefly for updates early on Monday morning, September 28th.

My Anglo-American Frankenspeaker

audiomagnate

audiomagnate

Addicted Member
A friend gave me the AMT-1s with non original woofers to play with because he knew I had a pair of the Heils used in the AMT-6. I hooked them up and let's just say the mids were not what I had hoped for, but pretty much what I expected. Then I remembered I had some B&W 802 parts laying around, and voila, there you have it, the ESS/B&W AMT1-802! It's hooked up with a 3 way electronic crossover and three amps, and sounds pretty damn good. Crossover is 12 dB/8ve @ 360 and 4k. The tweeter is now at ear level, which also helps. I know the tweeter is mounted "backwards", but I like it better that way.
 

Attachments

  • SNV10249.jpg
    SNV10249.jpg
    53.4 KB · Views: 204
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
audiomagnate said:
A friend gave me the AMT-1s with non original woofers to play with because he new I had a pair of those Heils. I hooked them up and let's just say the mids were not what I had hoped for, but pretty much what I expected. Then I remembered I had some B&W 802 parts laying around, and voila, there you have it, the ESS/B&W AMT1-802! It's hooked up with a 3 way electronic crossover and three amps, and sounds pretty damn good. Crossover is 12 dB/8ve @ 360 and 4k. The tweeter is now at ear level, which also helps. I know the tweeter is mounted "backwards", but I like it better that way.
Click to expand...
Definitely has that "robot" look going on there. Very cool.
 
That is the right way to go with the ESS AMTs. I think ESS actually made a version with a mid driver to fill in.

I use the big a$$ Heils for duty above 5khz. Below that and they sound thin.
 
The tweeter is not "The Great Heil" a name which I find funny and pretentious BTW. It is the tweeter from the AMT-4 and AMT-6, which some people, including me, prefer to the Great Heil. It is a much simpler design and has some advantages, like lack of horn effects when used backwards. The woofers are cheap Chinese Goldwoods but sound OK. Sound absorbing foam on the top of the woofer cab helps, and i'm going to build a mini cabinet for the tweeter and compare it to the dipole setup. I need a second mid driver and a Heil diaphragm repaired or replaced to complete a pair. It's starting to sound very good.
 
Last edited:
djnagle said:
That is the right way to go with the ESS AMTs. I think ESS actually made a version with a mid driver to fill in.

I use the big a$$ Heils for duty above 5khz. Below that and they sound thin.
Click to expand...

AMT 3 used a midwoofer in a 3-way design.
Very nice speaker!:thmbsp: Looks great.
The smaller Heils are nice, but alos have some clear disadvantages over the Great Heils (am I being pretentious?:scratch2:) in terms of imaging.
If properly positioned in the listening area, you still get the "airiness", but with more precise imaging.
Blocking the sides of the Heil helps reduce midbass cancellation in the crossover region, and improves the imaging as wellas mid bass and lower midrange response, and helps broaden with sweet spot to some degree.
Gentle crossover slopes seem to work best with the Heil @ 3 way setup-efficient, low distortion midwoofers with smooth responses and drop offs work the best in my experience.
 
Last edited:
I have both versions and prefer the one from the 6. I guess ESS felt the same way, as they used it in their flagship.
Anyway, these are tweeters, pure and simple, and ESS's insistence on marketing and employing them as a mid/tweeter, along with crappy resonant cabinets and cheap associated drivers, is the reason, IMO of course, they were never taken seriously by the high end community. The stock AMT-1 is a seriously flawed speaker that I find unlistenable. The B&W Kevlar mid from the early 801/802 series, along with the beautifully designed and constructed mid cabinet is of so much higher quality than anything ESS ever used that it really lets you hear what the Heils are good at; the range above 4k. My next step is to add some bracing and dampening to the bass cabinet, which vibrates like crazy even at moderate levels.
 
Last edited:
audiomagnate said:
I have both versions and prefer the one from the 6. I guess ESS felt the same way, as they used it in their flagship.
Anyway, these are tweeters, pure and simple, and ESS's insistence on marketing and employing them as a mid/tweeter, along with crappy resonant cabinets and cheap associated drivers, is the reason, IMO of course, they were never taken seriously by the high end community. The stock AMT-1 is a seriously flawed speaker that I find unlistenable. The B&W Kevlar mid from the early 801/802 series, along with the beautifully designed and constructed mid cabinet is of so much higher quality than anything ESS ever used that it really lets you hear what the Heils are good at; the range above 4k. My next step is to add some bracing and dampening to the bass cabinet, which vibrates like crazy even at moderate levels.
Click to expand...

Obviously you haven't heard a AMT3....pretty good in stock form:
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showpost.php?p=4594064&postcount=1

but of course can be improved like most almost 40 year old designs.
The main weak point in the ESS AMT3 cabinet was the relatively thin front baffle, the rest of the speaker is a box "within" a box and is very solid. This can be easily dealt with a simple brace.
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showpost.php?p=5235789&postcount=15


Its nothing like the AMT1 you speak and basically used the same 3 way design you came up with here to ease the transition between the Heil and woofer-no mid range hole with the AMT3. Clearly the best of the lot.
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showpost.php?p=126283&postcount=8
As I recall the Transars where considered the ESS "flagship", they were the most expensive models anyway, and used the larger Heil....
http://www.ebay.com/itm/ESS-Transar...pt=Vintage_Electronics_R2&hash=item3ccb384ac7
(no affiliation here)..
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2766762&postcount=14

Cleaning up the bass is a good objective. Some of the later versions used internal bracing to minimize cabinet colorations.
The AMT1 lacked any passive or port-so the stock 10" woofer has a hard time keeping up with the Heil.
IMHO the later AMT1x... passive versions that also used a modified crossover, along with a 'whizzer' cone under the woofers dustcap to ease Heil/woofer transition seemed to have the best overall performance of that model.
Refurbed, recapped and sealing the cabinets, and driven by the right complimentary equipment (pretty important in my experience with any vintage ESS/Heil speaker) they IMHO can sound very good.
Lots of people enjoy ESS/Heil speakers of all types-and probably don't give a hoot what the so called "High End" community thinks.
Amazes me how some people (still) put a lot of stock in this, seems a bit passe....IMHO of course.
 
Last edited:
Yes, the Transars. A creaking, clattering, ill-conceived design. Too complex to be reliable, too costly, too little bass. They look cool, though. Give me the "Rock Monitor" any day.
 
sealy said:
Yes, the Transars. A creaking, clattering, ill-conceived design. Too complex to be reliable, too costly, too little bass. They look cool, though. Give me the "Rock Monitor" any day.
Click to expand...

I have to agree...
IMHO the 3 way AMT3 Rock Monitor was the flagship.
It also exclusively used a 17 pleat diaphragm.
That's why I always recommend fusing them, as the new replacements have fewer pleats and would probably require buying two diaphragms to have the correct output from both speakers.
 
automojo said:
Obviously you haven't heard a AMT3....pretty good in stock form:
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showpost.php?p=4594064&postcount=1

but of course can be improved like most almost 40 year old designs.
The main weak point in the ESS AMT3 cabinet was the relatively thin front baffle, the rest of the speaker is a box "within" a box and is very solid. This can be easily dealt with a simple brace.
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showpost.php?p=5235789&postcount=15


Its nothing like the AMT1 you speak and basically used the same 3 way design you came up with here to ease the transition between the Heil and woofer-no mid range hole with the AMT3. Clearly the best of the lot.
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showpost.php?p=126283&postcount=8
As I recall the Transars where considered the ESS "flagship", they were the most expensive models anyway, and used the larger Heil....
http://www.ebay.com/itm/ESS-Transar...pt=Vintage_Electronics_R2&hash=item3ccb384ac7
(no affiliation here)..
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showpost.php?p=2766762&postcount=14

Cleaning up the bass is a good objective. Some of the later versions used internal bracing to minimize cabinet colorations.
The AMT1 lacked any passive or port-so the stock 10" woofer has a hard time keeping up with the Heil.
IMHO the later AMT1x... passive versions that also used a modified crossover, along with a 'whizzer' cone under the woofers dustcap to ease Heil/woofer transition seemed to have the best overall performance of that model.
Refurbed, recapped and sealing the cabinets, and driven by the right complimentary equipment (pretty important in my experience with any vintage ESS/Heil speaker) they IMHO can sound very good.
Lots of people enjoy ESS/Heil speakers of all types-and probably don't give a hoot what the so called "High End" community thinks.
Amazes me how some people (still) put a lot of stock in this, seems a bit passe....IMHO of course.
Click to expand...

Dude, they're junk. I've been tearing apart speakers for decades. Oscar Heil had a great idea, the crap ESS put out (I sold lots of them) are as close to white van as I've seen in a vintage speaker. Get over it. At least your beloved 3 has a higher crossover point, but it's still crap, made with the cheapest oem drivers available at the time and cheesy cabs and crossovers. I have to admit, they spared nothing in the marketing department. I drooled over a pair of AMT-1 towers I saw in every audio mag when I was in my teens, until I got a job in a stereo store that sold them and realized how incredibly bad they sounded. I ended up with a pair of salesman priced (about 20% below dealer cost) IMF Studios. Now that's a speaker! I would love to have a pair today.
 
Last edited:
audiomagnate said:
Dude, they're junk. I've been tearing apart speakers for decades. Oscar Heil had a great idea, the crap ESS put out (I sold lots of them) are as close to white van as I've seen in a vintage speaker. Get over it. At least your beloved 3 has a higher crossover point, but it's still crap, made with the cheapest oem drivers available at the time and cheesy cabs and crossovers. I have to admit, they spared nothing in the marketing department. I drooled over a pair of AMT-1 towers I saw in every audio mag when I was in my teens, until I got a job in a stereo store that sold them and realized how incredibly bad they sounded. I ended up with a pair of salesman priced (about 20% below dealer cost) IMF Studios. Now that's a speaker! I would love to have a pair today.
Click to expand...

I too have been tearing into speakers for "decades", for what that's worth.
You are entitled to your opinion, which obviously that's all it is, and which I disagree with 100%.
I'm always skeptical of those who's opinions so easily categorize things they don't like as junk, or crap, while just as swiftly lauding those things they prefer.
Lot's of threads @ AK on those who appreciate ESS speakers-I'm not the only one obviously.
But perhaps we should all throw in the towel on ESS, and pick up a pair of IMF Studio or the like, according to your expert opinion (sales pitch?:scratch2:).
I'll keep it in mind...
As far as my opinion, go with what you like, (again very nice speaker you created) and spare me the "Dude" reference...and would recommend "Getting Over" using that term in the future.
 
Last edited:
reading this thread. Conjures CV speakers. They had solid drivers. Mine dont even sound half bad. Their tweeters are just a bit slower then Emit's. Not as sharp either.
My vegas are MX 400 aND MX 250.
I was surprised when i did an a/b with a buyer of one of my infinities. Yes job loss has its disadvantages. And selling the infinities was one of them.

Neither sounded bad. Just the vegas were quite a bit louder. But the tweeter didnt keep up with the emits.
 
Obviously, I can't use vintage B&W 802 mids and their incredibly well designed heads for this project, but it really does reproduce a human voice properly. I have scoured Parts Express and Madisound for an affordable 4 inch or so mid that works well at 90 dB sensitivity from 200 or so to 7 k. Anybody know of something under $30 or so?
 
This is a excellent mid woofer that works great with the AMT3 style crossover points (in practice) of 500 hz to the mid-the mid covering the 500-2500 range-the Heil covering the rest.
Excellent midbass, and lower midrange response, and very low distortion.
http://www.madisound.com/loudspeaker_specifications/ns6-255-8a.pdf.
I wouldn't let the relatively low power rating scare you (or low price)- they can handle some power with out distress.
I have also had excellent results with the Eminence Alpha 6A. Excellent midrange response.
A poor man's Audax PRM170MO, with a lower frequency response.
I have used both in my hot rodded AMT3's-and prefer the Aurasound, mainly because it's excellent midbass seems to complement the Dayton ST255-'s very well, and shares it's excellent transient response. The excellent transient response, and low distortion makes both a excellent match to the Heil in my experience.
With a properly designed crossover they blend more or less seamlessly.
Both have excellent clean, clear and tonally accurate vocal response.
Depending on the makeup of your crossover, you may want to use a l-pad.
The Audax certainly would need one.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom