Epos ES14's and the search for the Holy Grail
- Thread starter Yanntoe
- Start date
MVV
pfm Member
I have had a pair of 11s and two pairs of 14s as my main speakers over the years. I just found them very hard to move on from so kept going back to them. The first thing I’d say is you must have the dedicated stands. I never heard them side by side but from memory the reason I stuck on the 14s is they are more open, I don’t think the treble is quite as good on the 14s. In fact in the end despite the fact I really liked everything else about the 14 my attention was often drawn to the slightly splashy treble. Otherwise I would still have them now. They were finally replaced by Neat Vito SEs which were about three times the price. Even now I occasionally consider buying them again. That open mid band is addictive.
PS the best pair I had was MK 1 chipboard single wired convex with glued in bung and that is what I would buy again if I could find it; I believe the treble can be improved with some electrical resister thing which I can’t do.
PS the best pair I had was MK 1 chipboard single wired convex with glued in bung and that is what I would buy again if I could find it; I believe the treble can be improved with some electrical resister thing which I can’t do.
toecutter
pfm Member
Did MKI also have convex bass drivers besides the concave bass drivers without center phase plug?
Makes it difficult for people who doesn't know what to look for to spot series 1 or 2 or 3?
From series MKII and MKIII ES14 had MDF board which was inferior material for cabinets?
Maybe this is the reason why M5 had age related veneer cracks?
Last edited:
toecutter
pfm Member
Epos M5 but could have also been the BMW M5 which is not.
https://www.epos-loudspeakers.com/archive-download/Epos-M5.pdf
It’s been a bit since the last post, but I have some possible light to shed on the third party replacement rubber surrounds which are available in FleaBay. I bought a pair of late model (biwireable) 14s that had been repaired with foam surrounds by a professional outfit here in Auckland. The surrounds had been trimmed and joined very subtly to deal with the non-standard circumference. Looked perfect but unfortunately I think that the elasticity must have been different to the originals because with bass-heavy tracks at highish (but not ear splitting) volumes the cone excursion was such that they would strike the back of the assembly creating an unbearable cracking sound.
After much deliberation I decided to replace the foam surrounds with the aftermarket rubber ones as I figured their greater firmness might mitigate the uncontrolled cone excursion. To my surprise - and delight - it has worked. They can now go up to such volumes that general distortion sets in (beyond which point of course I won’t push them) but no cracking sound is to be heard. I realise rubber has a potentially different sound signature to foam - possible constriction to midrange openness and airiness, but this is more than compensated for by the restoration of the bass and ability to crank up the volume a bit. In fact, I think the midrange and overall sound presentation is better, perhaps due to improved intermodulations between the tightened and extended bass and rest of the frequency range. Overall the dynamics are better than ever.
Granted this was a fix born of necessity, but if the choice was between junking a pair of these drivers or installing the third party rubber surrounds I’d certainly recommend the latter.
The EPOS are not my main speakers - I have large Proac floorstanders for that - but it’s lovely to have them back again, and my elder son has just graduated so perhaps they might find a home with in his flat...
After much deliberation I decided to replace the foam surrounds with the aftermarket rubber ones as I figured their greater firmness might mitigate the uncontrolled cone excursion. To my surprise - and delight - it has worked. They can now go up to such volumes that general distortion sets in (beyond which point of course I won’t push them) but no cracking sound is to be heard. I realise rubber has a potentially different sound signature to foam - possible constriction to midrange openness and airiness, but this is more than compensated for by the restoration of the bass and ability to crank up the volume a bit. In fact, I think the midrange and overall sound presentation is better, perhaps due to improved intermodulations between the tightened and extended bass and rest of the frequency range. Overall the dynamics are better than ever.
Granted this was a fix born of necessity, but if the choice was between junking a pair of these drivers or installing the third party rubber surrounds I’d certainly recommend the latter.
The EPOS are not my main speakers - I have large Proac floorstanders for that - but it’s lovely to have them back again, and my elder son has just graduated so perhaps they might find a home with in his flat...
I have serial # 13,xxx, purchased used in Seattle, Amurica from a hifi shop back in 1999. Best-sounding in the shop I could afford. Bi-wire connection, rubber (butyl?) surrounds, phase cone on mid bass drivers, silver coned/black mesh covered tweeters.
After purchase I moved across the country the next day, where the speakers sat in storage for many years. The walnut veneer was in "fair" shape, not horrible but also not nice. I never could find anyone brave enough to apply new veneer. They sat longer. I removed the drivers and foam stuffing and had them professionally painted a matte white, electing to allow the back to be included and the front emblem hole to be filled in.
In the last year I've begun to occasionally use them. One of them has a tweeter noticeably down in output. At first I thought it was blown, but no when you walk up to it and put your ear near it, it's just soft. I have no practical way to measure frequency output.
Would an aged capacitor cause this symptom? Each speaker has the same (original) cap glued to the tweeter. I have no worries about ordering a pair and replacing them both "just in case" but thought I'd ask the collective here just the same. Thanks.
After purchase I moved across the country the next day, where the speakers sat in storage for many years. The walnut veneer was in "fair" shape, not horrible but also not nice. I never could find anyone brave enough to apply new veneer. They sat longer. I removed the drivers and foam stuffing and had them professionally painted a matte white, electing to allow the back to be included and the front emblem hole to be filled in.
In the last year I've begun to occasionally use them. One of them has a tweeter noticeably down in output. At first I thought it was blown, but no when you walk up to it and put your ear near it, it's just soft. I have no practical way to measure frequency output.
Would an aged capacitor cause this symptom? Each speaker has the same (original) cap glued to the tweeter. I have no worries about ordering a pair and replacing them both "just in case" but thought I'd ask the collective here just the same. Thanks.
I have read elsewhere that for speakers employing traditional crossover networks, a resistor is used to lower the tweeter's output. So it would appear I've answered my own question, that the capacitor value doesn't inherently alter the tweeter's overall output ... unless it's become so defective as to turn itself into a resistor.
I have a new cap coming later today and will find out for myself. Or I suppose I could have just swapped the caps, etc.
But if this doesn't do the trick my ES14 are probably toast unless I can find a replacement tweeter.
Thanks for sharing, you have saved me the hassle.
Had a Mk1 (single wired with those foam removable bungs) Walnut pair of 14's from new, with the dedicated stands, used them very happily for many years. Moved to SBL's but always felt something was missing after those 14's, really miss them. Funny story was that I cherished those speakers for several years, when I sold them they didn't have a mark on them, then this geezer turned up in a new TVR Tuscan, squeezed them into his boot, with the dismantled stands, no boxes used or padding at all, gutted!
Weren't they designed to be a great partner the NAP250?
Weren't they designed to be a great partner the NAP250?
DuncanF
pfm Member
This made me jump. Many moons ago I collected a pair of ES14s plus stands, but managed to fit them, boxes and all, in the boot of my Tuscan. I've just done a nose count on ES14s in the house (4), and ES14 boxes (3 - 1 pair + 1 double). So ... not guilty.
JezmondTutu
pfm Member
I’m moving to active ATC SCM40A’s this week. Will be very interesting to see how they compare as my ES14’s are sounding unbelievably good. They definitely respond to better amplification and sources
sonddek
Trade: SUPATRAC
After two years I'm still interested in the result of this comparison. How did it go?
JezmondTutu
pfm Member
i love the ES14’s, but the ATC’s are a step up. They are both highly musical and engaging speakers, the 40A’s are just effortless though. They are more refined, the bass hits much harder than the Epos’s and it’s better too, probably because it’s a sealed cabinet . Midrange has always been the Epos’s party trick, but the mids are just wonderful on the ATC’s. Both speakers are capable of superb imaging and soundstage, The Epos’s remain one of hifi’s bargains given the right system.
I have my old power amp back upgraded with SE230 boards, so I need to give the Epos’s another run.
Oh, I’m still using your old Brinkmann Fein, bolted directly into the ATC’s with my Simplex and it sounds superb.