Painting the 2K array black + tuning the M109

Hardware and software, modifications and DIY

Moderator: Staff

Patrik
Member
Member
Posts: 17
Joined: 2008-01-31 16:31

Post by Patrik »

Efraim roots wrote:I finally took myself time to do this mod on my 109's.
Do you have an active set-up?. Perhaps that can account for our different opinions and also different rooms. For me the "sound" with the port closed was so strange that it was no question what I preferred. Tune-wise I can not say that it is clearly worse now. It's good anyhow.
Efraim roots
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 312
Joined: 2009-10-23 01:37
Location: Sweden

Post by Efraim roots »

I don't have a active setup, I also use Naim amp. I have so far only been doing these tests with quite low volumes as I did it last night. I will listen louder and under normal circumstances for some time and se how it feels.
the players of instruments shall be there..
Efraim roots
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 312
Joined: 2009-10-23 01:37
Location: Sweden

Post by Efraim roots »

After some casual listening today I wasn't so sure my M109 was better than before and I decided to try again. I put the foam away from the tube flare about 20mm. The result was pleasing. In comparison the M109 with foam placed against the tube sounds a little over damped. It sounds more clear and correct but I would say it is less natural feeling in the music.

I'm in progress experimenting so please exuse me for changing back and forward in opinions. But I must also say I feel more confident today about that this is better than I felt yesterday when I came to an other conclusion.

Please share your experiences.
the players of instruments shall be there..
Efraim roots
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 312
Joined: 2009-10-23 01:37
Location: Sweden

Post by Efraim roots »

Now I'm finished testing and I feel secure about my findings. I tried to go back with the foam up against the port as Lejonklou suggests early in this thread. I carefully retuned the speakers and lived with it for a couple of days.

Lejonklou wrote:
The effect is really pronounced: More clarity and articulation in the midrange, more tuneful and enjoyable.
I agree with this except on the part enjoyable. Today I put the foam about 30mm from the port end and retuned the speakers again. What a relief (like last time), I clearley prefer this setting! I can now say I fully agree with Patrik on this matter.

Everything sounds more tuneful and articulate with the foam up against the port end but I clearley enjoy the speaker more with the foam 30mm away from the port. They have a more natural feeling, more vibes from the muscians and some delightful vibrant air between notes. I would even claim this setting is better, because the musics emotion is communicated better.
the players of instruments shall be there..
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

Thanks!

I really need to try this soon. And if it's actually better, I'm also going to try it with an additional soft "pillow" padding in between the foam block and the rear end of the port. In an attempt to filter out midrange noise, which I found seriously leaking out through the port.

I note that you say the speakers needed retuning. When I experimented with this, they seemed to end up on the same optimal spot. Will have to check that out as well.
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

Brief update: I am now playing the 109's with the foam block positioned as the designer recommends. I agree that the tonal balance is better this way.

I don't really find the musical performance any better, though. This way it's a bit sloppy and laid back, while it used to be dry and over damped. I feel certain somewhere in the middle of these two would be better.

Sadly, I feel that these experiments have made me wish to replace these speakers with something else. I still think they're great value for money, but this issue with the port has made me realize just how compromised they are.

Wouldn't mind comparing Akurate 212 with ATC SCM40...
User avatar
ThomasOK
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4358
Joined: 2007-02-02 18:41
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by ThomasOK »

In light of the findings here I am surprised Linn don't just glue some thin fabric over the end of the port to filter out the mid frequencies that apparently muddy things up. They used to have this kind of material on the ports of the Espek and Ekwal if I remember correctly. Am I being too simplistic in thinking this idea would work well here too?
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

I did mention similar thoughts earlier in the thread, Thomas.

In Katan and Tukan, the port was placed inside a box. Some of the walls of that box were made of thick fabric. I'm pretty sure it was the same design in Ekwal and Espek, too.

The problem here is finding something suitable. There is no room for a box around the port. We probably don't want to restrict the airflow too much, but at the same time filter out the midrange frequencies as low as possible. Not easy!
Efraim roots
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 312
Joined: 2009-10-23 01:37
Location: Sweden

Post by Efraim roots »

Yes, somewhere in between would be great. Maybe it can be done just by experimenting with the foams distance to the port. I will try some more when I've got the time because I believe the Majik 109 could be really good if the balance is perfect (including tightening of screws).

Another thing I would like to investigate is the 2k array tightening. I think the treble can be ear numbing with some records on these speakers and treble sounds somewhat hard and stiff. I have reason to believe that maybe the 2k array is tightened too hard to the box, as I tried different electronics and speaker positions.

Has anyone tried to experiment with this. Was your array tightend too hard? How should it be done you think? It's problematic because it has to be done from the inside, can the tuning be done with the woofer taken out of the box?
the players of instruments shall be there..
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

Foam distance to the port did not work well when I tried it. It seemed to be either away from or tight against the port.

My thought is to add a different material in between the port and the block. Will try that when time permits.

You can certainly try different torques on the array with the woofer taken out. I suggest just listening to the array then, not the bass. It's usually quite easy to tune tightness of treble units, as they sound better and better and then out of tune when over tightened.

In this case, it's not just the treble units, however. It's the entire plastic cavity+pod+port. And from the inside, using a spanner. Probably a bit more difficult. And that single screw holding the pod against the plastic cavity+pod should be even more difficult.
Lemmy
Member
Member
Posts: 33
Joined: 2009-05-18 18:50

Post by Lemmy »

lejonklou wrote: Wouldn't mind comparing Akurate 212 with ATC SCM40...
Indeed!

Last week I compared my Katans to the SCM40.
We compared on ATC pre- and poweramps, don't even remember what CD-player we used (something generic japanese I think)... The Katans weren't set up properly, but I don't believe the ATC's were either.
However, the ATC's were noticeably better in all aspects, but the Katans didn't embarrass themselves. But the more we played, the bigger the difference got IMO.
I'm not much of a tune dem-er, but I certainly thought the tune was easier to follow on ATC.
Perhaps the differences will be even bigger on e.g. Linn electronics?
User avatar
Music Lover
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 1673
Joined: 2007-01-31 20:35
Location: In front of Lejonklou/JBL/Ofil

Post by Music Lover »

lejonklou wrote:Sadly, I feel that these experiments have made me wish to replace these speakers with something else. I still think they're great value for money, but this issue with the port has made me realize just how compromised they are.
Not sure I follow you Fredrik.
Compared with the more expensive Linn speakers, for sure 109 must be a compromise.
For me much worse are the compromises in their expensive products, speakers included.
Discussing ultimate performance and tweaks with Linn, you often get a reply "good enough". And even if I fully agree to focus on the important aspects, I would have preferred the klimax range to be no compromises "at all cost" products. Especially as the price indicate "at all cost" :wink: :mrgreen:

But on a entry level 109 speaker I can live with compromises. More important is to focus on value imho. I think Linn accomplished that mission perfectly.
It's all about musical understanding!
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

Music Lover wrote:Not sure I follow you Fredrik.
Well, it's more of a feeling than a rational decision.

Compare 109 with Tukan. 109 sure sounds a lot better, no doubt I'll choose them. But Tukan is so much better built: Kustone block, thick walls, massive sealed treble unit, direct soldered thick cabling, reflex port filtered with a surrounding box, etc.

The 109 does not impress at all when you take it apart. The side walls are thin and emit some nasty bursts when you listen to them with a stethoscope.

But I agree with you that compromises in the most expensive products is more annoying.
Patrik
Member
Member
Posts: 17
Joined: 2008-01-31 16:31

Post by Patrik »

lejonklou wrote: I don't really find the musical performance any better, though. This way it's a bit sloppy and laid back, while it used to be dry and over damped. I feel certain somewhere in the middle of these two would be better.
I've had the 109's with 6100 for more than six month and it has always been something that irritated a bit about their performance. I had active Kaber with Klouts before. I immediately noticed they present nuances in a way that Kaber just couldn't. But they never really sang fully without having sound problems like harshness or not so nice bass.

So I called Lejonklou for help and as reported the tune improved buy Fredriks installation but the sound felt not OK.

Now they really sing and there isn't enough sound issues to irritate me at all. The strange (the sound quite different now when the port is not closed) thing is that they seem to perform best where Fredrik put them.

Now that I have listened to them for quite some time and they are so fun now that I must conclude that indeed also the tune has improved a lot by letting the air flow freely through the port.
Charlie1
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4831
Joined: 2007-12-11 00:30
Location: UK

Post by Charlie1 »

Mmm. I've decided to hang onto my Ninkas after all - for a few reasons. I don't think any tweaking will change my mind but one of the factors was a certain loss of 'fun'. Thought maybe they needed to be aktiv on 6100 or more powerful amp, but maybe it was just this issue. Of course stands could have been the issue, so not very conclusive on my part really, but miss the bass too much so academic anyway.
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

My assumptions were right. A bit of damping to the port works wonders! No damping and it's sloppy. Too much and it becomes overdamped. Just right and it's great!

I have not yet figured out how to keep the damping securely in place.
Efraim roots
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 312
Joined: 2009-10-23 01:37
Location: Sweden

Post by Efraim roots »

Lejonklou,

Have you figured out how to damping of the port securely? Would be interesting to hear how you did it. What kind of damping did you use?
the players of instruments shall be there..
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

As I haven't really had time to experiment with an internal solution, I still have an ugly looking temporary fix: A piece of polyfill (the white fluffy stuff you can find inside loudspeakers) behind the pod, in front of the bass reflex port.

The thickness of the polyfill is easy to determine by ear. I've used a rather thin piece, in which case two sheets is needed.
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

I might add that when I play really loud, the polyfill pops out from behind the pod. Whenever it happens, I instantly feel there's something overblown and slightly wrong about the bass and when I walk over there, the polyfill is lying on the floor.

As I mentioned, it's a temporary fix...
Efraim roots
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 312
Joined: 2009-10-23 01:37
Location: Sweden

Post by Efraim roots »

Intersting, sounds easy to try. I will try for myself when time allows. Thanks.
the players of instruments shall be there..
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

lejonklou wrote:I still have an ugly looking temporary fix: A piece of polyfill (the white fluffy stuff you can find inside loudspeakers) behind the pod, in front of the bass reflex port.
Tonight I've made an interesting discovery: This slight mod of the 109 port has turned out to depend on the power amplifier being used!

With the Majik och Akurate power amps, it's clearly better with a slight damping of the port. Tried it many times and it's just more tuneful with the thin polyfill sheet in front of the port. But with my new prototype power amp (more info about that later) it's much better without! The polyfill has a slight dampening effect on the bass which is clearly not beneficial when the control of the bass driver is good enough.

Quite a surprise, I must add.
User avatar
ThomasOK
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 4358
Joined: 2007-02-02 18:41
Location: United States
Contact:

Post by ThomasOK »

lejonklou wrote:
lejonklou wrote:I still have an ugly looking temporary fix: A piece of polyfill (the white fluffy stuff you can find inside loudspeakers) behind the pod, in front of the bass reflex port.
Tonight I've made an interesting discovery: This slight mod of the 109 port has turned out to depend on the power amplifier being used!

With the Majik och Akurate power amps, it's clearly better with a slight damping of the port. Tried it many times and it's just more tuneful with the thin polyfill sheet in front of the port. But with my new prototype power amp (more info about that later) it's much better without! The polyfill has a slight dampening effect on the bass which is clearly not beneficial when the control of the bass driver is good enough.

Quite a surprise, I must add.
Makes you wonder if the Majik 109s were tuned with Solos?
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

ThomasOK wrote:Makes you wonder if the Majik 109s were tuned with Solos?
That wouldn't surprise me at all.

When developing a product, there are always a thousand choices to make; component A or B, value 47 or 50, layout 1 or 2, etc. I find that all of that becomes easier if the quality of the signal is really good. The choices become simple: Better or worse?

With a worse signal, comparisons are more difficult and time consuming. And there is always a risk of accidental compensation.

So if I was to develop a loudspeaker, I would definitely use the best power amp possible. Then later try the design with lesser amps, to see how they respond to that.
User avatar
rowlandhills
Very active member
Very active member
Posts: 582
Joined: 2008-01-27 19:25
Location: York, UK

Post by rowlandhills »

Philbo, over on the Linn forum, said:
For what it is worth the development for aktiv (and indeed the product sign-off) was done with a Majik 6100, and the system sounded fantastic. So if you can go aktiv with *200 the sound should be pretty special.
From: http://forums.linn.co.uk/bb/showthread. ... 9#pid24589
KRDSM, Tundra to 242s
Silvers, K400, Hutter rack
User avatar
lejonklou
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 6524
Joined: 2007-01-30 10:38
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by lejonklou »

So they are actually developing the three ranges separately? Majik speakers with Majik amps, etc.

I wonder if they used a Majik DS as well.

On the other hand, Philbo's comment was about the aktiv 109's. I believe the passive filter was made later.
Post Reply