In Reply to: so whats wrong with wharfedale? posted by zman on March 22, 2005 at 18:53:10:
Just ran into this interesting series of posts on the Wharfedale Super 12 and thought I'd throw some interesting (I hope) statistics at you. In it's day the Super 12 and Hartley 10" were considered the finest of the full range speakers. The magnet structure weighs in at 15 lbs.,the aluminum VC combined with a very light partially bakelized single cone allowed on axis response to 18000cps. The voice coil had about 1/4" of overhang and you would not believe the clean organ pedals when you put this baby in a 9 cu. ft. sand filled reflex tuned to around 40 cps. The free air resonance was 35-38 cps on all Super 12's . Early versions had a grey wool outer suspension which was replaced around 1960 with foam which has disintegrated on every Wharfedale I've seen. If anyone knows a source on thin flat foam I would like to hear from them.
When you relace the foam , do not even consider replacing the cone, VC and bakelised spider assembly. If you do you will have destroyed everything which makes Super 12's great speakers. If you have the black muslin bags don't throw them away; they keep dirt out of the open VC arrangement and provide a certain amount of back loading on the cone.
G. A. Briggs was a strong advocate of reflex loading and he went to extremes like sand filling and building cabinets of brick, marble or concrete to eliminate resonance which is a great source of bass coloration. The early component Wharfedales , like Bozaks, are known for their superb transient response and Briggs did exhaustive research on panel resonance of different materials .He was the author of several books which occasionally are seen on Ebay. They are all excellent reading and becoming very pricey.
If you would like some specifics on cabinet design I have quite a bit of information. Super 12's sold for $78.50 each
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: so whats wrong with wharfedale? - tafpyper@hotmail.com 03/24/0515:58:30 03/24/05 (4)
- Re: so whats wrong with wharfedale? - cawson@onetel.com 14:16:47 03/27/05 (3)
- Re: so whats wrong with wharfedale? - tafpyper@hotmail.com 19:43:16 03/27/05 (2)
- Re: so whats wrong with wharfedale? - cawson@onetel.com 13:31:40 03/28/05 (1)
- Re: so whats wrong with wharfedale? - ned 00:28:39 04/8/05 (0)