Have upgraded my audio system speakers after 27 years ?

[Athana]

Speakers from 1967 oh man..Im glad these things have a long life.

I thought I would be selling our 1987.. B & W 801F SP to help with the costs of having bought these, but from reading reviews, it seems these things are best bi amp'ed..which I know little about..
but am guessing it means one amp to power tweeter/midrange and another for the base.
Oh brother..
Also from reviews they sound best with lots of power..hopefully the 270 per channel we have is not anemic. : (

[Glennwillow]

270w/channel, if it's rms power, should be plenty unless you are trying to peel pain or wallpaper off the walls. I'm sure you will be fine. Most speakers, even inefficient ones, don't need all that much power unless you are driving them hard and loud.

If you find you need to bi-amp these speakers, you can get 300-500 w rms amplifiers these days for fairly reasonable cost.

I think you will be really happy with these new B&O speakers.

- Glenn

[Athana]

Originally Posted by Glennwillow

LOL!

John (jseth) is exactly right. There is not a thing wrong with my old Rectilinear III speakers; they still work perfectly and still sound great. I just wanted another pair.

I built a music studio above our garage and up in that lovely room I have the original pair set up with the TV. We ended up getting another TV for the house and I wanted another pair of Rectilinear III speakers for that setup.

They just arrived yesterday. They need a little cleanup, but then I will re-oil the walnut enclosures and they will look like new. All individual speakers are in great shape.

And as Dru noted from that old Stereo Review article, which I remember reading way back in time, they are very clear, very accurate, very neutral sounding speakers. They are kind of like my old 1967 Martin D-35, kind of my standard for judging others. There are certainly better speakers than the old Rectilinear III -- the Ohm F comes to mind as well as the B&O speakers being discussed above. But for a few hundred dollars, I think I got a good deal.

- Glenn

You mean B&W..not B&O...
By the way..I listened to a pair of the flagship $20K B&O (Bang & Olfsen) some months ago and I really can swear in all honesty that they are really a total con.
I can only compare those all style no substance creations of con artistry to what my 27 year old 801F's as I havent auditioned any others in a decade but they are horrible in comparison.

[Glennwillow]

Originally Posted by Athana

You mean B&W..not B&O...
By the way..I listened to a pair of the flagship $20K B&O (Bang & Olfsen) some months ago and I really can swear in all honesty that they are really a total con.
I can only compare those all style no substance creations of con artistry to what my 27 year old 801F's as I havent auditioned any others in a decade but they are horrible in comparison.

Hi Athana,

Yes B&W... sorry. I got them mixed up with the railroad... Too much time spent playing Monopoly...

- Glenn

[Athana]

Originally Posted by Glennwillow

270w/channel, if it's rms power, should be plenty unless you are trying to peel pain or wallpaper off the walls. I'm sure you will be fine. Most speakers, even inefficient ones, don't need all that much power unless you are driving them hard and loud.

If you find you need to bi-amp these speakers, you can get 300-500 w rms amplifiers these days for fairly reasonable cost.

I think you will be really happy with these new B&O speakers.

- Glenn

Some of the reviewers were saying these need really high power not for volume but for sound quality. They are rated 50-1000 Watts, hopefully what I have is enough at least for low end.Now Im considering using sale of our older speakers to get maybe a 30-40 watt per channel used tube amp but I have to learn more about what bi-amping means.

[Herb Hunter]

Originally Posted by Athana

Some of the reviewers were saying these need really high power not for volume but for sound quality. They are rated 50-1000 Watts, hopefully what I have is enough at least for low end.Now Im considering using sale of our older speakers to get maybe a 30-40 watt per channel used tube amp but I have to learn more about what bi-amping means.

The Nautilus 801 speaker is more efficient than the 801 F version (91 dB sensitivity versus 85 dB) and, therefore, needs considerably less power to produce the same volume. If you have enough power for your old speakers, that power will be enough for the new ones.

I'll be interested in hearing your impression of the difference in performance between both versions.

[Glennwillow]

Originally Posted by Herb Hunter

The Nautilus 801 speaker is more efficient than the 801 F version (91 dB sensitivity versus 85 dB) and, therefore, needs considerably less power to produce the same volume. If you have enough power for your old speakers, that power will be enough for the new ones.

I'll be interested in hearing your impression of the difference in performance between both versions.

Herb makes a very good point. To me, 91 db sensitivity (meaning 91 db output with 1 watt speaker input from your amp) means these newer speakers are not all that inefficient. 91 db in a living room is VERY LOUD.

For reference:
A sensitivity rating tells you how effectively a speaker converts power (watts) into volume (decibels). The higher the rating, the louder your speakers will play with a given amount of amplifier power. Sensitivity is often measured by driving a speaker with one watt and measuring the loudness in decibels at one meter.

Car Speakers Glossary - Crutchfield

[Chicago Sandy]

Have yet to replace my B&W DM 110s, circa 1983. I use my stereo components so seldom these days anyway: the room in which I watch most of my TV is small enough that the set’s built-in speakers are fine; when I listen to recorded music at home now, it’s usually digital files from my iTunes library via a dock or Bluetooth speaker. This is even though I still have a turntable and cassette deck. Our main A/V system is upstairs in the master BR--a Klipsch 5-speaker and KLH powered sub hooked up to a Sony receiver, Panasonic TV and Blu-Ray. Sad, but true.

[dhalbert]

I had some Advent 2 speakers (white cabinets) from 1974, which I supplanted with used ADS 710's in 1988. The Advent cone surrounds rotted out after about 20 years. Surprisingly, they still had some resale value. The ADS's are still going strong though are rarely used.

[Athana]

Originally Posted by Herb Hunter

The Nautilus 801 speaker is more efficient than the 801 F version (91 dB sensitivity versus 85 dB) and, therefore, needs considerably less power to produce the same volume. If you have enough power for your old speakers, that power will be enough for the new ones.

I'll be interested in hearing your impression of the difference in performance between both versions.

Thanks..that is good news.
So the Mc7270 Amp should be ok..but I cant help to think the idea of Bi-Amping
a good one as it would liberate the tweeter & midrange from the demands of the considerable lows these 15" speakers can do.

Herb..for a year and a half for some reason the Power guard of the amp has shut down the left channel.
McIntosh gave me a list of trouble shoots to try but its such a chore to pull this 90 lbs amp out of that pain of a cabinet & all the interlinks are short..so Ill have to repair what ever is faulty to a/b them..and that means almost certainly a 175 mile drive to Binghamton..twice.
The older 801F SP from the first time I heard them sounded like the perfect speaker..reproducing piano & classical music (which I was not really into then) astoundingly realistic.That Chopin/Telarc we heard is like one of those moments frozen in to our past. I can almost hear it now when I think back.
I used to play a cd to friends for them to hear the lowness of the booms that made the floor shake..and at a volume that never really felt like it strained the ear.
The one thing I am expecting is the bass to be even more extensive as the other speaker was 12" & this is 15"..and as they are now 50% bigger and 220 lbs each instead of 100 lbs each,even more like the real thing.
Too bad I have to squeeze them into the corner.Ill review them when all repaired & in : )

[Athana]

Originally Posted by Chicago Sandy

Have yet to replace my B&W DM 110s, circa 1983. I use my stereo components so seldom these days anyway: the room in which I watch most of my TV is small enough that the set’s built-in speakers are fine; when I listen to recorded music at home now, it’s usually digital files from my iTunes library via a dock or Bluetooth speaker. This is even though I still have a turntable and cassette deck. Our main A/V system is upstairs in the master BR--a Klipsch 5-speaker and KLH powered sub hooked up to a Sony receiver, Panasonic TV and Blu-Ray. Sad, but true.

The speakers I had before the 801 was the DM..they were tall ones Im not sure of model now..and before them 901 Series IV. Once I got to these 801F I stopped looking..gave my wife a break for 27 years.

[Athana]

Originally Posted by dhalbert

I had some Advent 2 speakers (white cabinets) from 1974, which I supplanted with used ADS 710's in 1988. The Advent cone surrounds rotted out after about 20 years. Surprisingly, they still had some resale value. The ADS's are still going strong though are rarely used.

I have a pair of small bookshelf ADS Speakers from the 1989/90..very good little speakers.I think they are the 470.

[jpd]

[Chicago Sandy]

Always wanted a set of those 6’ tall Magnepans, but I have kitties....

[Steve DeRosa]

Still using the Polk RTA-12B's I bought in 1982 - 27-22K +/-3dB, usable down to 16Hz, and sound great with anything you can throw at them. Looking to retire and move in a couple years - first unspoken requirement is a living room/rec room/basement that'll accommodate a set of Klipschorns...