advertisement


wharfedale diamonds

I have a pair of Mk I Active Diamonds... If anyone is interested I can take some photos and post them up here?
 
I have a pair of Mk I Active Diamonds... If anyone is interested I can take some photos and post them up here?

Do they have plastic woofers ? If you want to email them to me then with permission I'll add them to the webpage describing my speakers to show some comparison.
 
Pretty sure they have paper woofers... I'll get some photo's done tonight after work (Yup. Working on a Sunday. 12hr shift. At least I have Pink Fish to keep me happy!).
 
Anyone got the legendary Cornflake shop Diamond stands?

One of those magic hifi moments for me was walking into the Cornflake Shop room at a show where they were demoing the original Xerxes/Mission (or AR ?) arm, Nait 1 plus Diamond 1's in those brilliant stands. Santan's Abraxas sounded superb. Why has no one continued with that design of stand?
A mate of mine used to run stacked Kan's mounted in another version of those stands.

Mike
 
Am still listening to mine (mark 2s I think) in the office powered by a Sony receiver.

However, used to use these on 52/Supercap/135s (as Bulliporker), on lead-filled Target stands (which I still have). Like the little JPWs, they sound well above their station, and fill a large, high-ceilinged room as well.

The boy done good. Not at all sure about sticking them on a computer, though!
 
One of those magic hifi moments for me was walking into the Cornflake Shop room at a show where they were demoing the original Xerxes/Mission (or AR ?) arm, Nait 1 plus Diamond 1's in those brilliant stands. Santan's Abraxas sounded superb. Why has no one continued with that design of stand?
A mate of mine used to run stacked Kan's mounted in another version of those stands.

Mike
They did. The designer used them on the first version of his own speakers...
 
I have a pair of the original Diamonds bought for £15.00.
The original owner had fitted 4mm sockets under the bare wire connectors.
An excellent idea.

Those original models were ( are ) superb little speakers.
The better the front end/amp. the better they sounded.

I had a pair in my University Lab. for about 20 years.
I wonder where they are now...
 
Seriously I wouldnt have bothered.

Ive owned the Mk1 (on Kan 1 stands :)) and Mk 3 were in the family. They dont stand up today and you can get much later models like the 9 which are better. I heard the mini 9s in a shop system and they sounded fairly good.

The originals were cleverly marketed for the time and suited a budget..........time moves on

I tried IVs (£4.99) with the metal tweeter. They are ok for what they are but you can do much better. There is no need to be searching for early diamonds while the later ones (say series 9 onwards) are on the used market
 
Seriously I wouldnt have bothered.

I've owned the Mk1 (on Kan 1 stands :)) and Mk 3 were in the family. They don't stand up today and you can get much later models like the 9 which are better. I heard the mini 9s in a shop system and they sounded fairly good.

The originals were cleverly marketed for the time and suited a budget..........time moves on

I tried IVs (£4.99) with the metal tweeter. They are ok for what they are but you can do much better. There is no need to be searching for early diamonds while the later ones (say series 9 onwards) are on the used market

I would agree the later Diamonds offer more, but the originals are a little like the original Naim Nait amplifier.
They have a 'certain something', in that they connect you to the music.
It's not a 'magic quality', but something certain components have.

A case in point are Stirling MS88 speakers.
60th Anniversay LS3/5as under another name.
Detailed, good imaging, smooth, but didn't connect me with my music.
An original 15 ohm pair I refurbished do the above.

The years I spent with my Lab. pair always connected me...
 
I have a pair of beat up III non-active (passive?) in the garage/shop, powered by a late 70s Onkyo TX-4500 receiver - one of my "pet systems" I like to have sprinkled around. I am regularly surprised by how much I like the combo. The Onkyo has decent oomph and that doesn't seem to faze the Wharfedales.

For really cheap 80s era small speakers, these are close to the top of the heap - compared to the Missions, Celestions, etc. I've heard, these are maybe my faves.
 
They bop along very nicely and the colouration can be forgiven for the price.

The original Mission 70 is a slightly better take on the small box, direct coupled woofer idea. Very engaging indeed though don't expect refinement. Mission's AR18.

The 70 has the cloth wrap around grille cover.

The identical looking Mk2 has a more traditional crossover, is smoother as a result but sound a bit meh...
 
I have a pair of Diamond IIIs which I rescued from my parents (along with a NAD amp and Dual TT) just before they were destined for the tip!:eek:

I've got them hooked up to an old JVC receiver in my office and they always bring a smile to my face, and certainly don't disgrace themselves when compared with my - much more expensive - Harbeths and Rogers.

I always thought the law of diminishing returns sets in very early on with speakers.
 
Expensive speakers are often very coloured, have crazy impedance curves, look like modern art or other quirks.
Some relatively inexpensive brands like Wharfedale, Q Acoustics, Monitor Audio and PSB manage excellent performance
 
I would agree the later Diamonds offer more, but the originals are a little like the original Naim Nait amplifier.
They have a 'certain something', in that they connect you to the music.
It's not a 'magic quality', but something certain components have.

A case in point are Stirling MS88 speakers.
60th Anniversay LS3/5as under another name.
Detailed, good imaging, smooth, but didn't connect me with my music.
An original 15 ohm pair I refurbished do the above.

The years I spent with my Lab. pair always connected me...

Yes I know what you are getting at and why not if the price is very cheap.

The nostalgia market is a funny thing. I moved away from early diamonds as soon as I naturally found other speakers which did things better.

I wonder what the diamonds did actually have beyond a clever name, a cute pint size and an ideal price point.

A few designers rated that Audax budget tweeter. The diamonds did what they needed to do well enough for the price. However they were certainly coloured like any budget speaker, far from the last word in detail and over bass weighted to prove they could get some bass out of the small box. To be fair most small houses only need speakers up to 7L

Im just saying that if you can get 9s for £30 (for example) its starts to make the Wharfedale Diamond nostalgia market look more than a bit rose tinted
 
I chopped a brand new pair (Lasky's service dept got free spares :)) into Diy wooden boxes on the rear parcel shelf of my Escort MKii Ghia back in the late 80s...sounded good once I upped amplification to suit :)

I always preferred Missions of same era in a Hifi back then.

Richard
 
I heard a pair of the originals circa 1985 at a dealer in Florida using some prototype stands that clamped all four side cheeks with spikes in an Iron Maiden fashion, with welded post uprights and spiked bottoms, allowing it to be absolutely fixed in space. Sounded very good when driven with an Audio Research SP10/D250. The stands would have cost many times the price of the speakers.

The guy that built those stands eventually branched off to found Sound Anchors, which is still going strong 30 years later.
 
Expensive speakers are often very coloured, have crazy impedance curves, look like modern art or other quirks.
Some relatively inexpensive brands like Wharfedale, Q Acoustics, Monitor Audio and PSB manage excellent performance

I totally agree. I have found one of the magic pursuits of Hi Fi is owning a varied collection of speakers from all sorts of price ranges. Then comparing each of these model's strengths & weaknesses. If one has enough amps to swap, change and couple up a few different speaker /amp combinations for comparison ......it can create excellent musicality - synergy results that are surprising.
Sweeping aside the notion - that Hi Fi has to ALWAYS cost big money.
 
Guys,
I have a pair of what were active diamonds. Audax tweet (as on Mki and Mkii) but paper mid-bass (1109A instead of the plastic coned 1103A). Unfortunately after using these at uni in the '80s the boxes were a bit knackered so with my Dad we built some block-board boxes for them and put the drivers and cross-over components in the new boxes at the end of the '80's. Don't know what happened to the originals as they were at my Mum's house for years but never found them again. Mine have a 3R9 resistor in series with a 2u2 cap and air-core inductor (tweet across inductor) that measures to cross over at about 8kHz. Have put 2" of fibreglass in the back with 20mm acrylic wadding around the sides and top / bottom to dampen out some of the standing waves. Always thought the cross-over was too high:

HiFi Choice, issue 41 - Speakers.

Diamond 2 was recommended at £80pr. Response shape like Sara's on acid - eeek!!!!! No bass, severely humped up mid, trough at crossover then peaking up in the tweeter region. perfect for FE LP systems with an LP12 on the front ;)

Well below the test average on sound quality, boxy with thinned mid, it fleshed out a little when close to a wall and once got used to, you either loved or hated it.

I only new the powered "active" version and with a portable CD player feeding them, they sounded great.

Currently working on trying to get the sound right with a 5kHz cross-over (which is what was actually stated on the back of the early ones) by upping the 2u2 to 4u7 and dumping some parallel resistance on the tweeter to adjust the Q.
 


advertisement


Back
Top