Kan-alike poll

I probably have this wrong, but didn't the IBL have such a device? The little whoziwhatsit on the bass driver? Does anyone make such a driver today?

Joe

quote:

---

Why don't you go into business? OEM the mid/bass from Naim, the treble from Scanspeak and the cabs from Castle? Bob, could indeed be your uncle.

---

Unfortunately I don't have the necessary skills in either woodwork or electronics, nor the finance. Would probably be fun though were someone to possess all the three requirements.

Nigel said:

quote:

---

...why not get a small ported speaker and bung up the port?

---

Because it sounds crap. Speaker design is a little more complex than that, this is why so many people stuff it up.

quote:

---

I know that Kans get mentioned more than mana these days but it is the same people day after day. For all you say Tony, there is no significant demand on this forum let alone any other evidence that anyone else wants the speaker you describe.

---

There are probably about 150 relatively regular posters on this forum, at least 20 of us use Kans. This is a very high percentage considering the age of the speaker, or to put it another way the vast majority of the people who are using an old speaker are using Kans. This is probably because there is no competition to them currently available.

I know that this "market research" is just a bit of fun, but the largely positive response to this thread and the figures are actually very interesting. If just five percent of people wanted a little high quality IB speaker, that would be quite a large market.

The vast majority of the people who responded to my poll seem interested in seeing that a speaker of this kind exists. Why they are interested in them is up for grabs, they may want a main speaker for a small room, a pair of rears, or a pair for the kitchen - this does not matter, it’s the fact that people are genuinely interested that any manufacturers out there should note.

Tony.

quote:

---

...noone's mentioned Briks. Cheap, allegedly one of the great bargains in hifi, and they go up against a wall.

---

There's a pair of DMS on loot for £225, that's bugger all money for such a big box - they'd never fit in my living room though.

Do they stand the test of time against a modern speaker (stupid question I suppose at this money, but the NBL's in a different league entirely)?

quote:

---

Wouldn't the pressure inside a small infinite baffle speaker rise as the voice coil warmed up? If the speaker is completely sealed, it stands to reason that as the air inside the enclosure heats up, the pressure would rise, restricting the motion of the woofer -- unless a "pressure-valve" was worked into the design.

---

Kans do the same. Close examination of the bass unit reveals vent holes near the voice coil. I guess they serve two purposes, pressure equalization (due to heat and local air pressure changes) and voice coil cooling.

Andy.

Andrew L. Weekes
alweekes@audiophile.com

2. They don't have to be standmounts either. Take any standmounted speaker. Measure the size of its base and you'll probably find it's the same size as that of any floorstander or thereabouts. There are very few applications where a wall bracket is genuinely space saving over a stand. Not only that but given that the speakers are usually at 24" off the ground (or thereabouts), you're just asking for cracked heads if you've got young kids around.

As to other solutions, the AVI Biggatron RedSpots are brilliant speakers. They're a freestanding, sealed largish standmount for £600 (+£160-odd stands). They have great pace and timing and lots of presence and show speakers up to £2000 a trick or two, but they're not to everyone's taste and don't sell in big numbers.

The Dynaudio Confidence 3 is a large (2.5 - 3 times a Kan) standmounter, sealed again, needs free space and retails for around £4500 including stands. I guess it competes with the Mini Utopia. The downside is it needs serious power so the 135 is a minimum (ridiculous isn't it?) though you really need a 500!

Omer, sorry but I was paying attention. Tony said:

The second would be a much larger three way infinite baffle stand mount. Effectively this would be a modern Gale 401, which is another speaker that has absolutely zero competition at the moment in today’s market this side of an NBL or Mini-Utopia. The size and driver layout would be similar to the 401 – i.e. two 8” bass drivers, a mid and a tweeter. I would want it to move far more air than an SBL (like the Gales), and have a real tight weighty and punchy sound. The only thing I would change from the Gale concept is that I would make it a wall proximity job. I would be surprised if a speaker like this done well could be priced much under 3000.

Funny - that's the quote you used.:) Elsewhere he mentioned he would like it to sit between SBLs and DBLs. Now the Dyns are £6k, bang in between the cost of SBLs and DBLs.

As to your request, although I haven't seen the VIVOs up close, I thought they were sealed? I could be wrong of course. They're meant to be in the price range you mentioned.

Martin, the reason I mentioned the Dynaudios and not the NBLs is that Tony was asking for a specific configuration of sealed unit, two bass drivers, a mid-range and a tweeter, which the Confidence fitted perfectly. Of course, you're right that the NBL is sealed too. My comment about the Confidence being a competitor to the NBL in a passive system was meant to imply that the NBLs can be taken further through active operation, which the Dyns can't I believe. But yes, you're correct in that NBLs are the sealed competitor to the Confidence 5.

In the main, speaker technology is much like car engine technology. It hasn't changed much since its inception. Yes, things are made better, but we're not getting much more efficient or really significant (i.e. orders of magnitude) better results out of them. There is some variation to the theme, such as panels and electrostatics, but these are few and far between. There has been some innovation in the past (ionophane, plasma tweeters, etc) but barring NXT, there hasn't really been any major advances in the old pump-the-air technology as such.

NXT isn't even a significant advance yet - it's more a method of producing a more acceptable sound in applications where drivers would normally be truly mediocre (e.g. cars, planes, trains and laptops). Although discussing between sealed units and ported ones is an interesting point, what I want to see is a transducer that is more than approximately 5% efficient. Yes, folks, the average sensitivity speaker will give you approximately 3 watts of sound for every 60 watts you chuck into it, and then your amp will be screaming!

Even super efficient horn loaded speakers with unfeasibly large enclosures at (say) 106db/w/m are only 12% efficient (or so). The effect this has is that instead of pumping 60 watts to achieve the 3 watts of sound, you only need to pump about 8 watts into the speaker. The probelm then would be that it would probably blow a speaker like that since they're quite delicate.

The rest of the power is lost in heat (hence the problems of designing crossovers) and mechanical losses in the drivers. What a waste, eh? Makes the four-stroke engine look positively efficient at 25%...

Regards,
Frank.

Cheers

Keith.

Kytes? great speakers. They are ported though, and do not live up to Kans. In certain systems (and rooms), though, the Kytes might be a better choice, as a more forgiving speaker. They certainly play music, it's just that the window isn't that big.

Rico - all your base are belong to us.

quote:

---

Of course, you're right that the NBL is sealed too

---

...and has two 8" bass units.

cheers, Martin

i hear that linn stopped making kans because this became uneconomic -- is this because not many people were buying kans then, or it this because the manufacturing process was just too expensive? i ask simply because to make a speaker like (or better...) requires one to start with linn's design brief and specs for the kan. naive question: is this available anyway?? naive comment again: my kan "looks" so simple, i find it hard to believe there is anything special in there there. so perhaps, as mentioned by others, its a "sum of parts" type scenario -- the particular combination of drives, the cabinet, etc... (were kans internally braced??) is responsible for the magic... i mean, where does that speed come from...?

i too love my pair of (very old) kan I's. over the years i have blamed the kans for this and that, but each and every time, its been something else. recently, when i drove them with 52/supercap/250, they produced absolutely awesome and tuneful bass. and they didn't drill my ears out.

i suspect manufacturers know that the is a market for such a speaker, (i.e its non-zero) BUT that the market is probably NOT BIG enough. sad.

enjoy...

ken

• The current Kef B110B drivers, whilst slightly different from the original are pretty much a direct drop in replacement. They are slightly more efficient as impedance has changed from 7 to 5Ohms, and the design of the woofer surround is a little visibly different.

• The Scanspeak D2008 tweeter used in early Kans is still available. The current Hiquphon OW-1 is a direct descendent of the tweeter used in the later Mk I and all Mk II, so this might actually be a better unit. He prefers the Hiquphon unit to the Scanspeak.

It would still be great to attempt to design a truly over engineered “super Kan” at some point in the future:

The Kef B110B is still essentially a very old driver design, I wonder if there is a better 110mm unit out there that will stand up to being in a small IB speaker? As Joe P points out it probably gets pretty damn hot in there. Same with the tweeter, are the newer metal or ceramic domes better? I am not convinced as Naim still choose to use modifications of existing soft dome units. Maybe even a ribbon tweeter similar to the Petite. It would be great if the efficiency could end up at about 88db (a Kan II is 86db I think), and if the power handling could get up to a more reasonable 100 watt (50 on the Kan).

I would probably attempt to make the cabinet at least twice as thick as a standard Kan. I really fancy 1.5 inch beautifully finished and stained plywood to give a sort of 50s Eames / Shahinian look, it would be expensive, and end up a few inches bigger to give the same internal cabinet volume, but that is not necessarily a problem. Probably internally brace it too as I would accept absolutely no cabinet honk or boom, its just the drivers that move in this box. It would have a flat (and very thick) front baffle and no grill, so none of the diffraction problems of the Mk I, and it wouldn’t need the stepped baffle of the Mk II.

Next to rip off the external crossover idea from Naim, Arc, or whoever came up with it in the first place. Make it out of extremely high quality components, and make it the right size to clip in the base of a Kan II stand. This would make going active a breeze, and prevent much of the unwanted microphonic effects of having the crossover in the cabinet.

Sorted. Now wouldn’t we prefer that to yet another bloody ported floorstander?

Tony.

quote:

---

There are probably about 150 relatively regular posters on this forum, at least 20 of us use Kans. This is a very high percentage considering the age of the speaker, or to put it another way the vast majority of the people who are using an old speaker are using Kans. This is probably because there is no competition to them currently available.

---

Tony,

I think it's worth pointing out that these are also a true bargain - real HiFi for a couple of hundred quid.

I'm using Kans at the moment (sorting the system before the Isobariks go back), but I wouldn't even own this pair unless I'd been offered them for a reasonable price.

I bought them as rears for a future surround setup, and I didn't even fire them up until six months after I'd bought them (I hate to fiddle with my setup unless I have to).

I paid £1,000 for my Isobariks. For all their strengths I don't know if I'd pay that much for something that doesn't go loud enough or deep enough for me.

cheers, Martin

How about experimenting with different cabinet materials, such as Corain (the stuff used in Wilson loudspeakers).

Would be nice to use the new Kef B110Bs you mention and do a bit of a tweeter survey.

I too like the idea of an external cross-over, but actually in a separate box kept away from the 'speaker.

I'm also wondering if the framed front (where the baffle is recessed) of the Kan has any benefits over flat fronted 'speakers (PRaT?). Certainly a classy style anyway.

Andrew

Andrew Randle
2B || !2B;
4 ^ = ?;

quote:

---

As Joe P points out it probably gets pretty damn hot in there.

---

It gets really, really hot when you blow the drivers up (as I did yesterday). Kans are Krap - at least SBL's don't blow up.

Dev (now using SBL's again)

quote:

---

It gets really, really hot when you blow the drivers up (as I did yesterday). Kans are Krap - at least SBL's don't blow up.

---

Which drivers did you blow out? Funny how I have never fried any, even after using three pairs for a period of over ten years… Oh, SBLs do blow up, just ask Jawed!

If you can’t be arsed fixing them, I would be prepared to offer peanuts and use them for a rebuild project.

Tony.

quote:

---

Funny how I have never fried any,

---

Tony, you obviously listen to civilised music, quietly.

I don't.

Dev

quote:

---

Tony, you obviously listen to civilised music, quietly.

---

I actually listen to bloody obnoxious music quietly!

Tony.

quote:

---

The Kef B110B is still essentially a very old driver design, I wonder if there is a better 110mm unit out there that will stand up to being in a small IB speaker?

---

What driver does Royd use in the Sorcerer? A superficial glance suggests it's an over-engineered B110-type driver -- a big, honkin' magnet, dampening goop everywhere, and a phase plug thingy in the centre.

quote:

---

...it probably gets pretty damn hot in there.

---

Given its efficiency, probably about 98-99% of the amp's output goes to heating the B110's voicecoil and the air inside the cabinet. Andy W. says the B110 allows the pressure to escape but I wonder if it does so quickly enough.

What do you hard-core Kanheads hear? Does the Kan sound bass-shy or compressed after a good workout, while the pressure is possibly trying to equalize? At least this isn't an issue for Dev, who probably incinerated the woofers.

quote:

---

I would probably attempt to make the cabinet at least twice as thick as a standard Kan. ... Probably internally brace it too as I would accept absolutely no cabinet honk or boom, its just the drivers that move in this box.

---

Royd went a different route with the Sorcerer. The MDF cabinet is braced with thick (stainless?) steel plates. When you pick the speaker up, it's obvious that there's more to the Sorcerer than just MDF and drivers. Each one weighs about 11 kg. If you rap your knuckles on the cabinet, it's the most dead sounding 'clunk' you've probably ever heard, so maybe there's some mileage to be had in this approach.

The other benefit is that the cabinet has so much mass relative to that of the drivers that Newton's third law can be ignored.

I think we're almost there. It just needs a good name -- the Lonorkan.

Joe

Does this have posabilities as a replacement?

mykel

I don't normally get involved in the discussions in this forum but I thought that it was quite interesting the number of people still talking about Kans.

I have a pair of Kan II speakers, nicely finished in walnut. They have the re-enforced black rear pannel that was introduced right at the end just before they were discontinued. I'm not sure what difference this feature makes though.

I've been through good and bad times with these speakers. I think it is quite well known that the Kan is a revealing speaker and needs a high quality signal and amplification in order for them to sing. I was never really happy with the sound from my Kans when I used a Klyde in an Ekos on a full spec LP12. Once I'd migrated to an Arkiv I the harshness and confusion at the top end was gone--I'm on my third Arkiv now.

I've also bi-amped Kans. I've found that you really need a good power amp to get the Kans to excite the listener--speed and rhythm are not the same thing and the Kans seem to demonstrate the former in most systems. I have also found that Kans can bottom out with an underpowered amp. Ok, so this was at high volume levels but the problem went away with the upgrade of the base/mid power amp.

I'm currently using active Isobariks. My system is now even more challenging to get working properly--positioning of equipment, routing of cables and, of course with the Isobariks, speaker positioning. When the sytem is working properly, the Active Isobariks build on what the Kans do. In my opinion, nothing important is lost going from Kan to active Isobarik. In addition, the system makes real noises, is more informative and significantly more involving.

That said, I could loose the Isobariks tomorrow and live happly ever after with those other little speakers standing in the corner with coffee mats on.

Chris.

My contention is, however, that the market is not ready. "Why?" you might ask. Simple answer - no-one's purchased mine yet!

Rico - all your base are belong to us.

John

quote:

---

Buying and Selling on the Forum?

---

Thanks for the enquiries guys, I'll e-mail you rather than discuss this directly on our host's forum.

quote:

---

You boys need a spanking!

---

Rico - all your base are belong to us.