No bark, no bite. Just some good ol tubes in place of nasty transistors... Don't think I'm condemning ALL transistors. Not ALL transistors are created equally but that is as far as I'll go on that topic.
Tannoy FSM
- Thread starter strummer
- Start date
I've followed this thread with interest. I'd appreciate any other comments comparing the FSM to the System 215 DMT II.
I have an opportunity to purchase either a well-cared-for pair of FSM or an NOS sealed-in-the-boxes pair of DMT 215 II. Both would cost me about the same: between US$5500-6000, including shipping, taxes, etc. Either way, this would be my "last speaker purchase."
The question is: which to go for? Can't do both.
Descriptions in this thread suggest that the FSMs are perhaps more Altec-like than the DMT 215s; that is, more dynamic and "horn-like" but with less extended bottom end, while the DMTs are overall smoother and deeper in the bass, but less "exciting."
Have I got that about right? Can anyone add anything else that might help me tilt irrevocably in one direction or the other? I don't have the opportunity to audition either speaker, but I've owned a pair of System 15 DMT II for several years, so I'm very familiar with the "DMT sound"--which I like very much.
But I also have, and like very much, a pair of Altec 604-8K in custom cabinets (heavily braced with 1.5-inch mdf/birch plywood panels all round).
I liken the sound of the Altecs to an early twenties young woman: a foxy chick, slim, sexy, a bit wild and crazy, a bit unrefined, but very exciting. I liken the System 15 DMT II to a mid-thirties women, witty and refined, sexy but in a fuller, more curvaceous way than the younger one. The former I see more as a companion on a great holiday or for occasional wild nights; the latter I see as someone I could happily wake up beside for many years to come.
Any comments or suggestions appreciated.
Grand merci.
Joel.
I have an opportunity to purchase either a well-cared-for pair of FSM or an NOS sealed-in-the-boxes pair of DMT 215 II. Both would cost me about the same: between US$5500-6000, including shipping, taxes, etc. Either way, this would be my "last speaker purchase."
The question is: which to go for? Can't do both.
Descriptions in this thread suggest that the FSMs are perhaps more Altec-like than the DMT 215s; that is, more dynamic and "horn-like" but with less extended bottom end, while the DMTs are overall smoother and deeper in the bass, but less "exciting."
Have I got that about right? Can anyone add anything else that might help me tilt irrevocably in one direction or the other? I don't have the opportunity to audition either speaker, but I've owned a pair of System 15 DMT II for several years, so I'm very familiar with the "DMT sound"--which I like very much.
But I also have, and like very much, a pair of Altec 604-8K in custom cabinets (heavily braced with 1.5-inch mdf/birch plywood panels all round).
I liken the sound of the Altecs to an early twenties young woman: a foxy chick, slim, sexy, a bit wild and crazy, a bit unrefined, but very exciting. I liken the System 15 DMT II to a mid-thirties women, witty and refined, sexy but in a fuller, more curvaceous way than the younger one. The former I see more as a companion on a great holiday or for occasional wild nights; the latter I see as someone I could happily wake up beside for many years to come.
Any comments or suggestions appreciated.
Grand merci.
Joel.
Hi Joel, Thanks for the input. I'd say you have a clear grasp of what words can convey about my experience with the 2 different systems. I was fortunate enough to be able to have them side-by-each before choosing which would go. I kept the FSM's for many reason's, the most obvious of which is their stunning beauty. Looks aside, the FSM's have that magic that can make me cry. The DMT's were near perfect in every way but they just didn't give me what I needed. I could very happily live with the DMT's but I would still drool everytime one of those foxy blonde FSM's would strut on by. I get off on the FSM's without even powering up!!! Your mileage may vary...
Either ones are extraordinary speakers with no disappointments for me.
Either ones are extraordinary speakers with no disappointments for me.
Kat,
Thanks very much for your thoughts. I already knew that both the FSM and the DMT 215 II would be good choices. I suppose the one fact that may tilt me in the direction of the DMTs is that they'd be new and the FSMs are circa 20+ years old. Now if they are in good shape, as my dealer tells me, that shouldn't matter, but I can't help factoring that in...
It'll probably come down price and hassle-factor. The DMT have to be imported from the U.S. (I'm in Canada), but they'll be in the original factory packaging. The FSMs are already in Canada, but will have to be crated. Will let y'all know which way I go..
Regards,
Joel.
Thanks very much for your thoughts. I already knew that both the FSM and the DMT 215 II would be good choices. I suppose the one fact that may tilt me in the direction of the DMTs is that they'd be new and the FSMs are circa 20+ years old. Now if they are in good shape, as my dealer tells me, that shouldn't matter, but I can't help factoring that in...
It'll probably come down price and hassle-factor. The DMT have to be imported from the U.S. (I'm in Canada), but they'll be in the original factory packaging. The FSMs are already in Canada, but will have to be crated. Will let y'all know which way I go..
Regards,
Joel.
After a couple of almost-successful attempts to acquire either a pair of FSM or a pair of System 215 DMT II, my long-time dealer suggested a novel solution: have Tannoy North America's custom shop (2 hours' drive from my house) build me a pair of DMT 215 II.
Since I've brought a lot of business his way over the years, he offered to make the arrangements for his cost price plus 5 percent. At that, I couldn't resist.
Then I had a discussion with the Tannoy engineer who was put in charge of the project. We decided on some departures from, and improvements to, the stock DMT 215 II design:
1. Adopt the cabinet style of the FSM (approx. 42" H x 28" W x 22" D), but slightly slimmer and taller (approx. 46" x 26" x 20"): this has virtually the same volume as the 215 (310 vs. 300 litres), but offers a more suitable footprint for a domestic listening environment.
2. Adopt the FSM's division of the cabinet volume (210 L for the bass, 100 L for the DC) as opposed to the 215's (150 L + 150 L).
3. On the DC, use the 1.1 kHz crossover point of the System 15 DMT II instead of the 1.5 kHz crossover point of the 215 II.
4. Unlike the FSM or the 215, use a sealed (no ports) sub-chamber for the DC--a modification the engineer applied to his own 215s. This, he says, reduces the overall system sensitivity to that of the System 15 DMT II, but significantly improves the performance of the DC.
5. Hardwire the crossover to the "flat" position (I never use the crossover adjustments on my System 15s, and the fewer variable contacts in the crossover, the better). Maintain biwire/passive biamp capability. Fix the crossover point of the DC at 250 Hz, without the possibility (as in the DMT 215 II) of running it in parallel with the woofer. Use quality WBT, Cardas or Vampire binding posts, spaced 2 inches apart without a cut-out on the back panel.
My only disappointment is that the original "metallic speckled" and "shadow velti gray" finish of the DMT 215 II is not available. I'll have to settle for "studio flat black." If I like them as much as I think I will, I may have them veneered at some point in the future. I'll also need to construct plinths or low stands to bring the centre of the DC up to optimum height (37-39 inches).
Tannoy promises they'll be ready either just before they close for the holidays or immediately after. Will let y'all know how they sound...
Regards,
Joel.
Since I've brought a lot of business his way over the years, he offered to make the arrangements for his cost price plus 5 percent. At that, I couldn't resist.
Then I had a discussion with the Tannoy engineer who was put in charge of the project. We decided on some departures from, and improvements to, the stock DMT 215 II design:
1. Adopt the cabinet style of the FSM (approx. 42" H x 28" W x 22" D), but slightly slimmer and taller (approx. 46" x 26" x 20"): this has virtually the same volume as the 215 (310 vs. 300 litres), but offers a more suitable footprint for a domestic listening environment.
2. Adopt the FSM's division of the cabinet volume (210 L for the bass, 100 L for the DC) as opposed to the 215's (150 L + 150 L).
3. On the DC, use the 1.1 kHz crossover point of the System 15 DMT II instead of the 1.5 kHz crossover point of the 215 II.
4. Unlike the FSM or the 215, use a sealed (no ports) sub-chamber for the DC--a modification the engineer applied to his own 215s. This, he says, reduces the overall system sensitivity to that of the System 15 DMT II, but significantly improves the performance of the DC.
5. Hardwire the crossover to the "flat" position (I never use the crossover adjustments on my System 15s, and the fewer variable contacts in the crossover, the better). Maintain biwire/passive biamp capability. Fix the crossover point of the DC at 250 Hz, without the possibility (as in the DMT 215 II) of running it in parallel with the woofer. Use quality WBT, Cardas or Vampire binding posts, spaced 2 inches apart without a cut-out on the back panel.
My only disappointment is that the original "metallic speckled" and "shadow velti gray" finish of the DMT 215 II is not available. I'll have to settle for "studio flat black." If I like them as much as I think I will, I may have them veneered at some point in the future. I'll also need to construct plinths or low stands to bring the centre of the DC up to optimum height (37-39 inches).
Tannoy promises they'll be ready either just before they close for the holidays or immediately after. Will let y'all know how they sound...
Regards,
Joel.
anubisgrau
pfm Member
it's pretty known that a stock x-over limits the 215 performance pretty much, maybe you should visit a tannoy yahoo group and hear what some of the members did
also, a cab volume - if you have enough room space, make it bigger. it's hard to believe 300 liters cab is enough for 2 proper 15" drivers. i guess the above group is a good place to get some ideas.
also, a cab volume - if you have enough room space, make it bigger. it's hard to believe 300 liters cab is enough for 2 proper 15" drivers. i guess the above group is a good place to get some ideas.
John
Rack’em Up!
Joel,
Welcome to the forum. I've read some of your posts on the Tannoy Yahoo user group. I assume your using DMT15's right now, what are you using for stands? How far do you have them from the walls? Mine sounded much better when I got them 15 inches off the floor. Good luck with your custom Tannoy's, sounds very interesting. I look forward to your comments.
Regards,
John
Welcome to the forum. I've read some of your posts on the Tannoy Yahoo user group. I assume your using DMT15's right now, what are you using for stands? How far do you have them from the walls? Mine sounded much better when I got them 15 inches off the floor. Good luck with your custom Tannoy's, sounds very interesting. I look forward to your comments.
Regards,
John
John,
Yes, I've been using the DMT 15 II for about 5 years.
I agree that if you're not soffit mounting them, good stands are a must for these speakers. I've got them on 17-inch stands that a local woodworker made up for me: 1 1/2-inch birch plywood-MDF-birch plywood top plate, 3-inch bottom plate of the same type on locking castors with an 11" x 18" x 13" sand-filled MDF central pillar connecting the two).
Each one is far heavier than the speaker it supports (hence the castors). Not the same elegance of the Sound Anchor stands, but does the job very well.
After the New Year, when I've taken delivery and have had a chance to sit down for some extended listening sessions, I'll post more about the "DMT-FSM" project.
Cheers,
Joel.
cooky1257
pfm Member
The xover has just a 4.5uF(or 3.9uF) cap on the HF and a couple of resistors, swapping the stock for a Mundorf Supreme gives a slightly cleaner smoother treble.That's about it really. The stock xover being a weak point is a myth-it's a simple as a simple thing already, the stock components are good and any 'improvements' are subjective and to taste TBH(I switched from Hovlands to Mundorfs).
Cab Volume; well it's 2x150L and you obviously haven't seen the T&S.
The 15 DMT/215 are tuned to maximally flat response .
FSM/DMT; Most 215 owners I know run them on their sides (me included).
So you will be running 3 way, will the cab be constructed using DMT techniques?.
Good luck with them and please post some pics when you're done.
Cooky
John
Rack’em Up!
Well, it's been ages since I said I'd report on how I liked my new Tannoy "DMT-FSM" monitors.
I've had them for several months now and am pleased to report that they do just what I was hoping: give me what I already like about the DMT 15 II, but with greater bass extension. It's not obvious to me that placing the DC in a sealed 100L sub-chamber improves performance over the ported DMT 15s, but then I've never attempted to "A-B" the two speakers.
However, the obsessive-compulsive disorder continues: just acquired, from Valley Sound in Los Angeles, a pair of Tannoy FSM. Delivery should take a couple of weeks, since they've got to come by truck. They're not the lovely veneered domestic version, but the flat-black studio version that uses the same cabinet size as the DMT 215 (35.5 x 31 x 22 inches). A major consideration was that all four 15-inch drivers are fresh recones. Looking forward to comparing this classic monitor--which I gather was designed to compete with the then-ubiquitous and now-still-common Urei 813 series--with the DMT series models.
Now the only thing left to do is to liquidate the huge Augsberger TADs to help pay for all this self-indulgence!
Happy listening all!
I've had them for several months now and am pleased to report that they do just what I was hoping: give me what I already like about the DMT 15 II, but with greater bass extension. It's not obvious to me that placing the DC in a sealed 100L sub-chamber improves performance over the ported DMT 15s, but then I've never attempted to "A-B" the two speakers.
However, the obsessive-compulsive disorder continues: just acquired, from Valley Sound in Los Angeles, a pair of Tannoy FSM. Delivery should take a couple of weeks, since they've got to come by truck. They're not the lovely veneered domestic version, but the flat-black studio version that uses the same cabinet size as the DMT 215 (35.5 x 31 x 22 inches). A major consideration was that all four 15-inch drivers are fresh recones. Looking forward to comparing this classic monitor--which I gather was designed to compete with the then-ubiquitous and now-still-common Urei 813 series--with the DMT series models.
Now the only thing left to do is to liquidate the huge Augsberger TADs to help pay for all this self-indulgence!
Happy listening all!
Congrats Dubkarma! I too have the FSM's and although quite different than the 215DMTII, they are equally engaging. I will be pulling mine out this winter and upgrading the crossover to Clarity Red's and foil inductors as I have done with the CPA components I am currently using. The changes are astounding. Please keep us posted with your progress...Dave
Joe P
Memory Alpha incarnate | mod; Shatner number = 2
Joel,
Have you tried a pair of big ye olde Tannoys like the Autographs? Despite the size of the enclosure I suspect they're less bassy than your DMT-FSMs, as trouser-flapping is not what they're about, but they do some things you may enjoy.
Joe
Have you tried a pair of big ye olde Tannoys like the Autographs? Despite the size of the enclosure I suspect they're less bassy than your DMT-FSMs, as trouser-flapping is not what they're about, but they do some things you may enjoy.
Joe
Joe,
I've never had a chance to audition Autographs. However, a few months ago a pair of Westminster Royal HE came up for sale only a few miles from my house. And the Westminster is from what I've heard a "modern" version of the Autograph. I had long assumed that this would be the ultimate Tannoy--even, for my tastes, the ultimate speaker.
The owner was very accommodating, allowing me to bring my own preamp, amp and CD player. I played a couple of tracks from each of several very familiar discs, but I was, in a word, disappointed. I can't explain it in technical terms but it seemed as if the bass overwhelmed the mids and highs. Whatever the reason, these speakers were very dull-sounding to my ears--and they had the ST-200 super-tweeters to boot.
Overall, I find both my stock DMT 15 II and my custom "DMT-FSMs" to be for more balanced over the frequency spectrum, more dynamic and, well, just more engaging to listen to.
I'm still puzzled about this--so convinced was I that full horn loading was the way to go--but I wasn't about to spend the equivalent of US$14K on the assumption that when I got the Westminsters home, they--or my ears-- would transform themselves.
So back to those nasty, trouser-flapping, toe-tapping, ass-shaking studio monitors!
Cheers,
Joel.
I've never had a chance to audition Autographs. However, a few months ago a pair of Westminster Royal HE came up for sale only a few miles from my house. And the Westminster is from what I've heard a "modern" version of the Autograph. I had long assumed that this would be the ultimate Tannoy--even, for my tastes, the ultimate speaker.
The owner was very accommodating, allowing me to bring my own preamp, amp and CD player. I played a couple of tracks from each of several very familiar discs, but I was, in a word, disappointed. I can't explain it in technical terms but it seemed as if the bass overwhelmed the mids and highs. Whatever the reason, these speakers were very dull-sounding to my ears--and they had the ST-200 super-tweeters to boot.
Overall, I find both my stock DMT 15 II and my custom "DMT-FSMs" to be for more balanced over the frequency spectrum, more dynamic and, well, just more engaging to listen to.
I'm still puzzled about this--so convinced was I that full horn loading was the way to go--but I wasn't about to spend the equivalent of US$14K on the assumption that when I got the Westminsters home, they--or my ears-- would transform themselves.
So back to those nasty, trouser-flapping, toe-tapping, ass-shaking studio monitors!
Cheers,
Joel.
I noticed in some older postings on this thread that some of you FSM owners have electronic copies of the FSM user's manual.
If that's the case, I'd very much appreciate receiving a copy.
(I tried sending a message to "Strummer", but his inbox is full.)
Thanks in advance,
Joel.
If that's the case, I'd very much appreciate receiving a copy.
(I tried sending a message to "Strummer", but his inbox is full.)
Thanks in advance,
Joel.