advertisement


Epos ES14's and the search for the Holy Grail

Yanntoe

Yanntoe

pfm Member
I am now officially insane as I seem to have 3 pairs of ES14's in the 2nd system!

Having owned a pair of ES25's from new in 1995, I thought I'd try some 14's in an effort to combat excessive bass in my current listening room. (System is SBT -MDAC-Avondaled Phase III 135's).

So I bought a pair of black MK1's - which sound very nice, and the soundstage -(or is it imaging?) is a revelation. They're a little too bass light in the offending room so have ended up in my second system (SB+ directly into a Croft OTL3) where they work really well.

But the 2nd system is in a room full of oak and brick, so when I saw a pair of Walnut 14's I bought them too. However, these are MKII's, and are tighter in the bass and generally less mellow compared to the MKI's but are VERY coherent, probably better than the MK I's in this regard.

And then I saw a pair of Cherry ES14's, so I bought those too!
However, these sounded a little flabby in the bass and have a slightly sibilant top end. So I opened them up only to find that I'm not the first person to do so. The gaskets are a little ropey and have been "repaired" with silicone, the wiring seems to have been changed along with the capacitor. They have a glued in port (looks like a piece of drain pipe) with shorter, yellow, removable bungs, have a less well finished cabinet internally, have card gaskets and the cap is buried in the internal foam someway away from the Tweeter assembly.

I carefully opened the black ones as a reference and these are like new, inside - the drivers look as though they were made yesterday, the wiring looks pristine and the cap is neatly siliconed to the tweeter magnet. The gaskets are all neoprene and the ports have glued in bungs but the whole port assembly can be removed. They are REALLY nice apart from being black ash.

So, the MKI has at least 2 versions with the later one being better constructed as far as I can see.

I have replaced the Cap in the Cherry MKI's, made some new neoprene gaskets, cleaned up the baffle as far as I can and reassembled. The result? The bass is now tighter and they sound very good - lots of the emotional stuff that means they make music rather than just sounds. However, the treble is still somewhat sibilant - certainly more so than the other 2 pairs, and I wondered whether anyone can advise if there is anything that can be done about this.

I've decided to keep the older cherry MKI's, sell the black ones, (which are now on e-bay). I may further "restore"/upgrade these with new wiring and try to resolve the sibilance. I'll also upgrade the cap in the MKII's and have a listen before deciding what to do next.

I may take some photo's if anyone's interested to show the differences between the versions.

Can anyone point me to a thread where this has all been done before or offer advice on the sibilance front?

Happy Easter

Ian
 
I had two pairs at one point :)

I'd love to see the difference between a cherry pair and the walnut ones, I've long suspected mine might be cherry and not walnut.
 
They might both be Cherry ..... or Walnut ...... although the Walnut looks a bit darker (although sounds a bit lighter!) that the Cherry.
If someone can tell me how to post photo's I'll do a rogues gallery of the different incarnations - just need some sun and competence!

Cheers

Ian
 
You should be able to upload here: http://imgur.com/

Just click the computer button and then select your images to upload.

Then to change sizes click large thumbnail and then clicked the linked bbcode button - it will copy everything you need so just paste that into the text box here.

(You don't need to signup for an account but do keep a note of the url it will provide if you want to delete the images later)
 
OK - here goes ES14 piccies

The one on the right is Walnut, the one in the middle is Cherry and the one on the left is ,, er, Black!
BAdOel.jpg


Does it work?

Ian
 
Yipee - thanks Deltaunit I've learned how to do something on the PC thingy and the interweb.

Can you see the difference between the different veneers?

Cheers

Ian
 
I put some rather expensive Mundorf suPreme silver/gold oil in mine. The difference was slight at best not worth the £70 each they cost these days.
 
I can! From the literature I've seen though the early versions were walnut or black but perhaps they also offered cherry too. I thought they might have changed to cherry later on in the production run but that doesn't seem to make sense now.

Mine have a bit lustre like your Cherry ones so guess that's what they are. Although I have walnut Kans which are light in colour and also some Royd Edens which are quite dark so who knows, I'd sure like an experts opinion!

Lots of people seem to prefer the Mk1 'chipboard' ones so it's interesting to read your comparison, perhaps you could expand on it? Kans also suffer from being lumped into Mk1 and Mk2 when there is at least a third middle version as well if not more.

How did you make the new gaskets?

Can you see any difference between the tweeters, is the latest version slightly different?
 
I'll have a look at the tweeters when I next open the speakers up - certainly the capacitor values are different being 3.3microfarads in the earlier version and 2.2micro farads in the MKII's. I have replaced the original 3.3mF cap with a 3mF with +/_ 1% tolerance Clarity Cap in the MK1's, but this hasn't cured the sibilance.

I have ordered a couple of 200 x 200 x 1.5mm sheets of neoprene from e-bay and once they arrive I will replace all the gaskets. As a stop gap, I have made gaskets for the bass units from some unused pond liner I happened to have. I achieved this by using a Stanley knife and a saucepan lid of the same diameter as the old gaskets - bit odd I know, but it works a treat - fits perfectly and certainly appears to seal the units in place well without resorting to "gunk".

In terms of sound quality, I'd say that the bass on the MK11 is tighter and punchier, but probably less pronounced than the MK1, in terms of the treble register there appears to be slightly more detail with the MK11. The soundstage/imaging is marginally better on the MK11 which can sound a little exagerated or unnatural in the MK1. The MK11's also sound very coherent, i.e. the sound seems to be more focussed as though it was all put together on the same day in the same place and in the same room in contrast the MK1's seem a little less consistent with different instruments standing variably. Could it be to do with timing - I don't know. Overall though, the MK11's sound more "HiFi", technically better (maybe) but somehow missing something. And I know that some people will say "poppeycock", but the MK1's seem to have a more "emotional" presentation which I prefer - even with the sibilance which is there but somehow quite benign.

So - any further advice on sibilance welcome - could a change of speaker cable help, or those felt rings sold by Russ Andrews? Or is this just the way they are? Interestingly, there is no sibilance with the black pair which are a later version of the MK1 (concave dust cap, single wired, predominantly chipboard (except the baffle which seems to be a finer MDF type of material). As you might see from the pictures, the wall thickness of the cabinets are all different (see picture of the backs).

Cheers

Ian
 
I'll shed some light on the wood, Cherry is much lighter when freshly cut, and mellows to a darker colour, Walnut goes the other way, very dark freshly cut but gets lighter with age, one more photo of the bottom of the speakers should show this to be correct (my fingers crossed:)

I've recently polished some SL6's thinking they were teak, but underneath they're much darker with pronounced grain.

I've taken a punt on a pair of black ES14, should get them Thursday .

Mark
 
divedeepdog said:
I'll shed some light on the wood, Cherry is much lighter when freshly cut, and mellows to a darker colour, Walnut goes the other way, very dark freshly cut but gets lighter with age, one more photo of the bottom of the speakers should show this to be correct (my fingers crossed:)

I've recently polished some SL6's thinking they were teak, but underneath they're much darker with pronounced grain.

I've taken a punt on a pair of black ES14, should get them Thursday .

Mark
Click to expand...

MK1's or II's?
Enjoy
 
Ian drop me a pm I have a set of Jim goulding heavy felt pads that you can try if you like. They do remove bit of sizzle and add focus to the treble. I had him make me a custom set that do the tweeter and the midbass unit, when you fit them all the added defect is quite profound. Drop me a pm and I'll post them off to you I'm not using them currently as I'm without a current pair of ES14's
 
Been there myself and yes, the MK2 had a design changes to the bass & hf unit to make them more straightforward to mass manufacture. The MDF cabinetry was also introduced after manufacturing in chipboard was complicated by legislation re. Glues etc I'm guessing.

Mine are MK1 around serial 2700 and so nearly amongst the last to be hand built in Chesham. They sound more refined and musically coherent compared to the MK2 which was thinner, edgy and 'messier' by comparison. The latter probably due to increased cabinet resonances.

All imho of course. G
 
Some of this thread is very interesting.....

I'm currently using what I thought were MkIIs. However these are biwireable and interstingly i found them to be much better than a pair of what I thought were Mk Is. I thought the MkIs were really thin and bass light. Never listened to the two side by side and amplification has changed a bit, but the MkIs just seemed to have no bass in comparison.

These MkIIs have new tweeters and upgraded caps apparently, but I wouldn't know how to recognise them.

What's the general view of the bi wire versions ie do I see if I can try a pair of Mk Is or should I get myself some neoprene and start tinkering?

Mr Ellwood the ES14s replaced Shahinian Obs, so maybe the 14s are a decent pair of speakers after all!;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top