Jump to content
The Classic Speaker Pages Discussion Forums

KLHSvcMgr

Members
  • Content Count

    32
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About KLHSvcMgr

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1,348 profile views
  1. Hello all... Since there seems to be a great deal of discussion about what goes where, I can copy the Product Service Bulletin and mail it to someone who has the ability to scan it and post it. If you can do so, drop me an email and I will get it off to you. Mark wilsonm@absoundlabs.com
  2. Hi Vern... The Model 12 used a different woofer (C00132) than the Model's 5 and 23 (C00134). I am sorry but I do not remember the electrical difference between the two. The updated version of the 5 and 23 driver has the extension of the throat of the driver which can be seen as the "dimple" on the rear of the magnet assembly. The fire situation only occurred with the Model 23, the non-ported unit. However, both the 5 and the 23 started using the new driver although we didn't have any reported fire problems with the 5. Mark >Hi there; > >I have written about my ebay visits regarding KLH 10" >woofers over the past 6 or so months. > >Yes, I did buy a few, from KLH Five, KLH Twenty-Three and KLH >Twelve's. > >When I came to this site a few years ago, I did not know much >about KLH as it was poorly distributed here in Vancouver. > >I did buy a used pair of KLH Twelve's here about 10 or so >years ago. > >Maybe mid 2006 I remember a member writing that the KLH >Five's, Twelve's and Twenty-Three's used exactly the same >woofers. > >Their cone weight was given as a range of 23 - 25 +/- grams. > >KLH Six cones were given as 18 - 20 +/- grams. > >I bought several woofer's, round single magnet, dual round >magnet and square magnets. > >There was a writing of fires caused by woofers voice coils >bottoming out and causing fires in, KLH Twenty-Three's only, I >believe. > >There was also a follow-up, of the dimpled rear square >magnetic plate, that identifies, a factory correction. > >I have seen black felt figures written on the front and also >the rear of the cones. > >On occasion I have also seen the numbers 5, 12 and 23 written >instead of the previous weight. > >I do not forsee myself ever buying anymore, with USPS dropping >their economy surface fees, the price has at least doubled to >have them shipped here now. >
  3. KLHSvcMgr

    KLH 38 tweeter problem

    Hi Dave... Replace the cap. It is probably a Callins (One end is red), which were a real pain. The field replacement, Part#: 1350A was a 100v NP device. Mark >The tweeter output dropped all of a sudden in my KLH 38's. >Inside there looks like no problems. A coil and a 4uF >capacitor is all thats in there. Could the capacitor be the >problem ? There is output from the tweeter, but it is much >lower than the other one. > >I think these are great speakers, and are my favorite vintage >speakers, even with large Advents, AR4ax, EPI 100's, and JBL >L-40's so I want to get them back in the system. > >Any direction you can give me ? > >Thanks, >Dave
  4. Hi Andy... The serial number information pertained to only the Model 5 and Model 6 units. In the Model 5, the serial numbers prior to 93,000 used a custom built tweeter manufactured in our plant. Serial numbers above 93,000 used a driver made by Peerless, one of EAD's sister companies. The same situation holds true for the midrange. The low frequency driver was the same driver used in the Model 23, and was updated to eliminate the fire situation in both units, resulting in a recall for the original driver. We used seven different versions of tweeters and I don't remember which ones were which specification wise. I do recall that they were not all the same impedance. The serial number changes also applied to the Models 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26, to some degree. The mechanical differences you mention pertain to the original, in house, manufactured devices compared to the out sourced devices, from Peerless. Electrically they were designed to the same specifications. I wish my mind were better, but at 60, it gets a bit clouded. Mark >Hi - My first question concerns the impedance for the >tweeters used in KLH systems. A recent posting by KLH Service >Manager stated that below ser. # 93000 there were two types of >tweeters and above there was just the one type. > > Were any of those tweeters 8 ohm units or were they all 4 ohm >units? I read somewhere that some of the larger models used 8 >ohm tweeters while the smaller models used 4 ohm units. Did >they all change to 4 ohm after that serial #, or were there >never any 8 ohm units manufactured? > > Also, I have noticed in advertising that certain models have >different tweeter sizes even though the frame is the same >size. Was this something that was only done up to a certain >production number and then stopped? > > Thanks > Matt
  5. KLHSvcMgr

    Model Six questions

    Hi Everyone... Been away for awhile and so I am catching up. The tweeter used in the Model 6 loudspeaker was the same in the Model 4, 7, 9 and 10 up until serial number 93,000. Production after serial number 93,000 used a different tweeter (C00103) which was also used in the Model 17, 20 and 33. Mark
  6. Interesting concept. Back in the old days, latex wasn't ever considered, nor do I believe it was available in any form that we ever considered. I am not really a fan of the butyl/toluene combination, knowing what we know today about the chemical toluene. I am going to try the latex deal that you mention on a couple of old drivers that I have lying about and see how it compares. Thanks for the idea.
  7. The issue with the recall was primarily failures in the 23. The 5 and the initial runs of the Baron series both used the original C00134 ,in house manufactured, driver. The 5's and the Baron series were added to the list as a retrofit when any were received by our service stations. The normal run of the Baron series used a woofer with a blue, foam skiver, which was outsourced from Peerless, another Eastern Air Devices Company. The original C00134's were built, in house, using a wood fibre based material. The 8811's had a different composition cone. In the 23's, the initial problem was caused by the coil form bottoming out and deforming holding it in place. The wires from the outboard connector to the speaker coil wires were riveted to the cone and then crimped. When the coil froze, the connection at the riveted connections would overheat and cause the cone to ignite and then the grill cloth. As I recall, we had two cases of actual fire in the environment that the 23's were used in. In the 881, the distance of the throat was increased, thereby elimining the bottoming out issue. The replacement 8811 did not use rivets and could be identified by a bubble type addition to the backside of the magnet. I have a picture, someplace of the two showing the differences, which I will attempt to locate. Mark
  8. I found my service bulletin on the Butyl coating (SFM-60) and the information. The coating we used was based on a basic Butyl Rubber compound that was Butyl Rubber sealant used by Commercial Roofers. That compound was thinned using Toluol (Toluene) to a consistency which allowed it to be applied with a paint brush. The Toluol was used rather than other thinners because of its faster evaporation characteristics. I sourced some of the actual Butyl Rubber from my local Menards, in a caulk gun tube, and removed the contents. I mixed it with Toluol and obtained the necessary viscosity. I applied it to a couple of old drivers, from my junk supply, and it seems to work properly. I can't comment on the water soluble latex, but question whether it would have the sane effect on the skivers. Mark
  9. Sorry folks, the drawing didn't turn out, so I guess I can't really give a detailed diagram. Mark
  10. The identifying indicator is on the flat plate at the back of the magnet. The old version is flat while the newer version has a bump in the middle. Old Version: |---------------------------| | | |---------------------------| | | | Magnet | Speaker Front New Version: |---------| |---------| |---------| | | |-----------------------------| | | | Magnet | Speaker Front Sorry 'bout the crude drawing...I flunked art. Mark
  11. Hi Folks... I had a fellow write me in another group inquiring what he could do with dried out cloth surrounds on a pair of 703 speakers. Back in history, we used a butyl compound that we brushed onto the cloth skiver. The compound was black in color and went on like thick paint and then dried to a uniform rubbery surface. Since I know it isn't around any longer (Manufacturing concocted it in the back room) and I don't remember the compound, could anyone offer a suggestion for something similar that can be obtained in today's marketplace. Can anyone help this old guy? Mark
  12. Hi Kent... I can't comment on the driver with KLH on the dust cap. This is a replacement driver from a later KLH company and I have never actually seen one. The redesigned 8811 can be identified by a circular extrusion on the back of the magnet assembly. It was more or less over designed to insure that it would not have any possibility of failure caused in the original driver. If I were doing the job, I would locate a modified 8811 to insure the best possible match. Mark
  13. Hi Kent... The original 5 driver is the one on the right, in your picture. The original KLH replacement was part number 8811. It replaced the first replacement driver because of significant field failures. The newer 8811 had a longer throat with a better excursion. The 8811 also replaced the driver in the Model 23 as well. The original driver in the Model 23 was in-volved in a field rework procedure because several of the original 23 drivers caught fire when over driven. Mark
  14. KLHSvcMgr

    Rare KLH Electrostatic

    Tom... You are correct about being an electrostatic speaker. Apparently I didn't read close enuf to find out it was a plug-in unit. The DVR driver looked very similar when actually produced to the ones in the photo. The emit was not as tall. As far as the number was concerned, engineering marked the cones so when they were set up in the chamber, several at a time, they could be easily identified without moving them to see if anything was on the rear. I don't recall ever seeing the magnet weight written on the cones, at least not during my tenure there. In the early days, I suspect anything might have occurred and since I wasn't there, most of my comments are based on the period I was there. I did have some on-going contacts with earlier products however. I just finished cleaning my glasses so I will pay closer attention to the comments. Sometimes its hell getting old. Mark
  15. It is also the same woofer that is used in the 23. Mark
×
×
  • Create New...