22 replies to this topic

[Phil]

I'm new here seeking advice on my old ESS AMT 1A speakers. I bought them new in 1975 and have installed new components from ESS in the early 90s. I'm hoping to find advice in repairing them or junking them and finding something new.

The foam surround has rotted off both the 12" driver and the passive radiators

I've always liked their sound and hate to just junk them. I see repair kits on Ebay for the passive radiators and re-foam kits for the 12" woofers. The diaphragms are available also.

Are these repair kits any good? Difficult to apply?

I wonder, have the cross-overs deteriorated over time, rendering them so far out of spec to be useless??

Any comments will be appreciated.

Phil

[Deephaven]

Is it just the surrounds that are rotten? That isn't a hard fix if so.

[nem]

If you like them don't junk them. If you are uncertain of reconditioning them yourself contact Daber Audio.

[turdburst]

Refoaming woofers is easy, not sure about Passive radiators though. My only concern would be keeping everything aligned right with radiators since you can't shim a coil in the gap.

[Phil]

I think I could do the work. My concern is the crossovers. Electronic devices degenerate with age and these are almost 35 years old.

[alan monro]

Phil, on 23 August 2010 - 12:59 PM, said:

I'm new here seeking advice on my old ESS AMT 1A speakers. I bought them new in 1975 and have installed new components from ESS in the early 90s. I'm hoping to find advice in repairing them or junking them and finding something new.

The foam surround has rotted off both the 12" driver and the passive radiators

I've always liked their sound and hate to just junk them. I see repair kits on Ebay for the passive radiators and re-foam kits for the 12" woofers. The diaphragms are available also.

Are these repair kits any good? Difficult to apply?

I wonder, have the cross-overs deteriorated over time, rendering them so far out of spec to be useless??

Any comments will be appreciated.

Phil

Gooday Phil ,and welcome .
New speakers kill the old ones so junk them ..................................Alan

[Deephaven]

sparkamp, on 24 August 2010 - 01:28 AM, said:

Phil, on 23 August 2010 - 12:59 PM, said:

I'm new here seeking advice on my old ESS AMT 1A speakers. I bought them new in 1975 and have installed new components from ESS in the early 90s. I'm hoping to find advice in repairing them or junking them and finding something new.

The foam surround has rotted off both the 12" driver and the passive radiators

I've always liked their sound and hate to just junk them. I see repair kits on Ebay for the passive radiators and re-foam kits for the 12" woofers. The diaphragms are available also.

Are these repair kits any good? Difficult to apply?

I wonder, have the cross-overs deteriorated over time, rendering them so far out of spec to be useless??

Any comments will be appreciated.

Phil

Gooday Phil ,and welcome .
New speakers kill the old ones so junk them ..................................Alan

Alan, you should really clarify. In particular since many would disagree. What technological advance has really occurred in speakers in the past years?

[Deephaven]

Phil, on 23 August 2010 - 10:01 PM, said:

I think I could do the work. My concern is the crossovers. Electronic devices degenerate with age and these are almost 35 years old.

Not all the components will degenerate and replacing the ones that are is not difficult. Do you have pictures of these crossovers?

[Phil]

Deephaven, on 24 August 2010 - 07:24 AM, said:

Phil, on 23 August 2010 - 10:01 PM, said:

I think I could do the work. My concern is the crossovers. Electronic devices degenerate with age and these are almost 35 years old.

Not all the components will degenerate and replacing the ones that are is not difficult. Do you have pictures of these crossovers?

Yes, I have included pictures of the 12" driver and the passive radiator along with the cross-over, see attached pictures.

Attached File(s)

•  ESSxover.jpg (90.76K)
  Number of downloads: 18
•  ESSrad.jpg (89.01K)
  Number of downloads: 12
•  ESS12.jpg (67.21K)
  Number of downloads: 6

[Deephaven]

The crossovers aren't a problem as they look rather simple and a couple caps later and they'd be new.

[alan monro]

Deephaven, on 24 August 2010 - 07:23 AM, said:

sparkamp, on 24 August 2010 - 01:28 AM, said:

Phil, on 23 August 2010 - 12:59 PM, said:

I'm new here seeking advice on my old ESS AMT 1A speakers. I bought them new in 1975 and have installed new components from ESS in the early 90s. I'm hoping to find advice in repairing them or junking them and finding something new.

The foam surround has rotted off both the 12" driver and the passive radiators

I've always liked their sound and hate to just junk them. I see repair kits on Ebay for the passive radiators and re-foam kits for the 12" woofers. The diaphragms are available also.

Are these repair kits any good? Difficult to apply?

I wonder, have the cross-overs deteriorated over time, rendering them so far out of spec to be useless??

Any comments will be appreciated.

Phil

Gooday Phil ,and welcome .
New speakers kill the old ones so junk them ..................................Alan

Alan, you should really clarify. In particular since many would disagree. What technological advance has really occurred in speakers in the past years?

Sean , many knowledgeable people would agree with my statement . If you really don't know why speaker manufactures have spend millions $$$$$$$ on research and development to make better speakers during the last 5 years,Ask the speaker manufactures .You will be amazed and then better informed.........Alan

[turdburst]

Focal Grande Utopia EM speakers use a Electro Magnet Speaker which I thought was pretty original and revolutionary ( http://www.avguide.c...-em-loudspeaker ), however that has been around since the early days of loudspeakers ( http://www.silbatone...collection.html ).

A $180K speaker system that uses ancient technology in the loudspeaker world makes me think differently.

[Deephaven]

sparkamp, on 24 August 2010 - 10:57 PM, said:

Deephaven, on 24 August 2010 - 07:23 AM, said:

sparkamp, on 24 August 2010 - 01:28 AM, said:

Phil, on 23 August 2010 - 12:59 PM, said:

I'm new here seeking advice on my old ESS AMT 1A speakers. I bought them new in 1975 and have installed new components from ESS in the early 90s. I'm hoping to find advice in repairing them or junking them and finding something new.

The foam surround has rotted off both the 12" driver and the passive radiators

I've always liked their sound and hate to just junk them. I see repair kits on Ebay for the passive radiators and re-foam kits for the 12" woofers. The diaphragms are available also.

Are these repair kits any good? Difficult to apply?

I wonder, have the cross-overs deteriorated over time, rendering them so far out of spec to be useless??

Any comments will be appreciated.

Phil

Gooday Phil ,and welcome .
New speakers kill the old ones so junk them ..................................Alan

Alan, you should really clarify. In particular since many would disagree. What technological advance has really occurred in speakers in the past years?

Sean , many knowledgeable people would agree with my statement . If you really don't know why speaker manufactures have spend millions $$$$$$$ on research and development to make better speakers during the last 5 years,Ask the speaker manufactures .You will be amazed and then better informed.........Alan

Alan, I do consulting work with all of them. Technologically speaking there have been no major advancements. The "knowledgeable" people you speak of are drinking marketing koolaid and are claiming to be knowledgeable. I am not saying that drivers haven't gotten better, I am not saying that the understanding of box building techniques haven't become better with computer modelling, but this doesn't automatically net a gain. Again if you read my comment there is no major technological advancement that makes them any better. If you feel differently then it would be rather easy for you to tell us what that major advancement is.

[Deephaven]

todd.brust, on 25 August 2010 - 01:02 AM, said:

A $180K speaker system that uses ancient technology in the loudspeaker world makes me think differently.

And in the OP's case he isn't looking at speakers that cost anywhere near that even making this more obvious.

I say if you love them, fix them. If you aren't sure then weigh the price to fix versus replace.

[alan monro]

Deephaven, on 25 August 2010 - 08:03 AM, said:

sparkamp, on 24 August 2010 - 10:57 PM, said:

Deephaven, on 24 August 2010 - 07:23 AM, said:

sparkamp, on 24 August 2010 - 01:28 AM, said:

Phil, on 23 August 2010 - 12:59 PM, said:

I'm new here seeking advice on my old ESS AMT 1A speakers. I bought them new in 1975 and have installed new components from ESS in the early 90s. I'm hoping to find advice in repairing them or junking them and finding something new.

The foam surround has rotted off both the 12" driver and the passive radiators

I've always liked their sound and hate to just junk them. I see repair kits on Ebay for the passive radiators and re-foam kits for the 12" woofers. The diaphragms are available also.

Are these repair kits any good? Difficult to apply?

I wonder, have the cross-overs deteriorated over time, rendering them so far out of spec to be useless??

Any comments will be appreciated.

Phil

Gooday Phil ,and welcome .
New speakers kill the old ones so junk them ..................................Alan

Alan, you should really clarify. In particular since many would disagree. What technological advance has really occurred in speakers in the past years?

Sean , many knowledgeable people would agree with my statement . If you really don't know why speaker manufactures have spend millions $$$$ on research and development to make better speakers during the last 5 years,Ask the speaker manufactures .You will be amazed and then better informed.........Alan

Alan, I do consulting work with all of them. Technologically speaking there have been no major advancements. The "knowledgeable" people you speak of are drinking marketing koolaid and are claiming to be knowledgeable. I am not saying that drivers haven't gotten better, I am not saying that the understanding of box building techniques haven't become better with computer modelling, but this doesn't automatically net a gain. Again if you read my comment there is no major technological advancement that makes them any better. If you feel differently then it would be rather easy for you to tell us what that major advancement is.

Sean I fully understand what you say and i agree to the point that :- A small improvement every year over 5 years adds to an audable differance in total . over 20 years one large differance ..........how I know that I have been building Xovers and boxes and auditioning drivers for 50 years now as I am a hifi nut ..............Alan

[Deephaven]

sparkamp, on 27 August 2010 - 01:34 AM, said:

Deephaven, on 25 August 2010 - 08:03 AM, said:

sparkamp, on 24 August 2010 - 10:57 PM, said:

Deephaven, on 24 August 2010 - 07:23 AM, said:

sparkamp, on 24 August 2010 - 01:28 AM, said:

Phil, on 23 August 2010 - 12:59 PM, said:

I'm new here seeking advice on my old ESS AMT 1A speakers. I bought them new in 1975 and have installed new components from ESS in the early 90s. I'm hoping to find advice in repairing them or junking them and finding something new.

The foam surround has rotted off both the 12" driver and the passive radiators

I've always liked their sound and hate to just junk them. I see repair kits on Ebay for the passive radiators and re-foam kits for the 12" woofers. The diaphragms are available also.

Are these repair kits any good? Difficult to apply?

I wonder, have the cross-overs deteriorated over time, rendering them so far out of spec to be useless??

Any comments will be appreciated.

Phil

Gooday Phil ,and welcome .
New speakers kill the old ones so junk them ..................................Alan

Alan, you should really clarify. In particular since many would disagree. What technological advance has really occurred in speakers in the past years?

Sean , many knowledgeable people would agree with my statement . If you really don't know why speaker manufactures have spend millions $$$$ on research and development to make better speakers during the last 5 years,Ask the speaker manufactures .You will be amazed and then better informed.........Alan

Alan, I do consulting work with all of them. Technologically speaking there have been no major advancements. The "knowledgeable" people you speak of are drinking marketing koolaid and are claiming to be knowledgeable. I am not saying that drivers haven't gotten better, I am not saying that the understanding of box building techniques haven't become better with computer modelling, but this doesn't automatically net a gain. Again if you read my comment there is no major technological advancement that makes them any better. If you feel differently then it would be rather easy for you to tell us what that major advancement is.

Sean I fully understand what you say and i agree to the point that :- A small improvement every year over 5 years adds to an audable differance in total . over 20 years one large differance ..........how I know that I have been building Xovers and boxes and auditioning drivers for 50 years now as I am a hifi nut ..............Alan

Then what small improvements happened 4x that make you so confident this is the case at any budget? On top of that, you really think if you take an excellent set of speakers (albeit I am not familiar with the OP's) from 20 years ago and compare them with an excellent set from today in the same price category that you would actually find the newer ones better? Again if this is truly the case it should be VERY easy for you to explain why instead of just citing this is the case.

[alan monro]

Deephaven, on 27 August 2010 - 07:55 AM, said:

sparkamp, on 27 August 2010 - 01:34 AM, said:

Deephaven, on 25 August 2010 - 08:03 AM, said:

sparkamp, on 24 August 2010 - 10:57 PM, said:

Deephaven, on 24 August 2010 - 07:23 AM, said:

sparkamp, on 24 August 2010 - 01:28 AM, said:

Phil, on 23 August 2010 - 12:59 PM, said:

I'm new here seeking advice on my old ESS AMT 1A speakers. I bought them new in 1975 and have installed new components from ESS in the early 90s. I'm hoping to find advice in repairing them or junking them and finding something new.

The foam surround has rotted off both the 12" driver and the passive radiators

I've always liked their sound and hate to just junk them. I see repair kits on Ebay for the passive radiators and re-foam kits for the 12" woofers. The diaphragms are available also.

Are these repair kits any good? Difficult to apply?

I wonder, have the cross-overs deteriorated over time, rendering them so far out of spec to be useless??

Any comments will be appreciated.

Phil

Gooday Phil ,and welcome .
New speakers kill the old ones so junk them ..................................Alan

Alan, you should really clarify. In particular since many would disagree. What technological advance has really occurred in speakers in the past years?

Sean , many knowledgeable people would agree with my statement . If you really don't know why speaker manufactures have spend millions $$ on research and development to make better speakers during the last 5 years,Ask the speaker manufactures .You will be amazed and then better informed.........Alan

Alan, I do consulting work with all of them. Technologically speaking there have been no major advancements. The "knowledgeable" people you speak of are drinking marketing koolaid and are claiming to be knowledgeable. I am not saying that drivers haven't gotten better, I am not saying that the understanding of box building techniques haven't become better with computer modelling, but this doesn't automatically net a gain. Again if you read my comment there is no major technological advancement that makes them any better. If you feel differently then it would be rather easy for you to tell us what that major advancement is.

Sean I fully understand what you say and i agree to the point that :- A small improvement every year over 5 years adds to an audable differance in total . over 20 years one large differance ..........how I know that I have been building Xovers and boxes and auditioning drivers for 50 years now as I am a hifi nut ..............Alan

Then what small improvements happened 4x that make you so confident this is the case at any budget? On top of that, you really think if you take an excellent set of speakers (albeit I am not familiar with the OP's) from 20 years ago and compare them with an excellent set from today in the same price category that you would actually find the newer ones better? Again if this is truly the case it should be VERY easy for you to explain why instead of just citing this is the case.

Sean , I think you are in for an argument , you know what I said is true .
I do not wish to offend or argue or waste my time explaining superior modern speaker building technology to a person that already knows , or strongly states that they know . The purpose of the forum.is not for moderators to try to intimidate members . I take offence at your attitude and attack, ................Alan
Subject closed

[Deephaven]

sparkamp, on 29 August 2010 - 01:43 AM, said:

Sean , I think you are in for an argument , you know what I said is true .
I do not wish to offend or argue or waste my time explaining superior modern speaker building technology to a person that already knows , or strongly states that they know . The purpose of the forum.is not for moderators to try to intimidate members . I take offence at your attitude and attack, ................Alan
Subject closed

Alan, in this case I am not moderating anything but participating in a forum discussion. You stated something I strongly disagree with in the thread that is 100% subjective so I asked for details. I am not attacking you, but asking for clarification. I find this amusing since you attacked my stance by calling me uninformed. I will take your "subject closed" comment as a statement that you agree and just don't want to admit differently.

And no, I know what you said is NOT true, in particular for the needs of the OP.

[alan monro]

Deephaven, on 30 August 2010 - 03:53 PM, said:

sparkamp, on 29 August 2010 - 01:43 AM, said:

Sean , I think you are in for an argument , you know what I said is true .
I do not wish to offend or argue or waste my time explaining superior modern speaker building technology to a person that already knows , or strongly states that they know . The purpose of the forum.is not for moderators to try to intimidate members . I take offence at your attitude and attack, ................Alan
Subject closed

Alan, in this case I am not moderating anything but participating in a forum discussion. You stated something I strongly disagree with in the thread that is 100% subjective so I asked for details. I am not attacking you, but asking for clarification. I find this amusing since you attacked my stance by calling me uninformed. I will take your "subject closed" comment as a statement that you agree and just don't want to admit differently.

And no, I know what you said is NOT true, in particular for the needs of the OP.

S

Sean this little fish in not going to bite your bait ..............................Alan

[Deephaven]

sparkamp, on 30 August 2010 - 11:45 PM, said:

Deephaven, on 30 August 2010 - 03:53 PM, said:

sparkamp, on 29 August 2010 - 01:43 AM, said:

Sean , I think you are in for an argument , you know what I said is true .
I do not wish to offend or argue or waste my time explaining superior modern speaker building technology to a person that already knows , or strongly states that they know . The purpose of the forum.is not for moderators to try to intimidate members . I take offence at your attitude and attack, ................Alan
Subject closed

Alan, in this case I am not moderating anything but participating in a forum discussion. You stated something I strongly disagree with in the thread that is 100% subjective so I asked for details. I am not attacking you, but asking for clarification. I find this amusing since you attacked my stance by calling me uninformed. I will take your "subject closed" comment as a statement that you agree and just don't want to admit differently.

And no, I know what you said is NOT true, in particular for the needs of the OP.

S

Sean this little fish in not going to bite your bait ..............................Alan

I could care less, I just won't let you misdirect the OP.