Stacking Speakers

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 04:16:42 +0000, soinie wrote:

> If one had two pair of identical speakers and wanted to use both
> simultaneously as fronts would it be more advantageous to stack them
> vertically or horizontally if both arrangements were possible?
> Thanks.
______________________________________________________________

Soinie..

Stacking them vertically might well give you the
better setup. About a "hundred" years ago a dealer and
I in Savannah Ga. stacked a pair of KLH 6 speakers and
were impressed with the setup..a manufacturer's rep came
through and was also impressed with the sound and he
traveled on to Atlanta and mentioned it to a store in
Atlanta. Then, lo and behold one of the underground rags
wrote an article on it and this became all the rage. This,
all "many moons ago".

Having setup a number of speakers in this vertical stack
manner, including the small dynaco 10 speakers. We stacked
some ole AR-3 and AR-2 speakers and numerous others. The
sound front was notable better on all these speaker systems.
Needless to say, the low end on these setups was impressive.
There was a solidity to the sound on this setup.

So, give it try..However, the vertical stack will probably give
you the best audio presentation.

Leonard...

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

soinie wrote:
> If one had two pair of identical speakers and wanted to use both
> simultaneously as fronts would it be more advantageous to stack them
> vertically or horizontally if both arrangements were possible?

Vertically would be the less disadvantageous arrangement of the two you
suggest. Selling one pair would probably be the best solution; or
selling both and getting a single pair designed to accommodate your
requirements.

--
Mark.
http://tranchant.plus.com/

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

soinie soiniie@hotmailll.com wrote:



>
>If one had two pair of identical speakers and wanted to use both
>simultaneously as fronts would it be more advantageous to stack them
>vertically or horizontally if both arrangements were possible?
>Thanks.

If the speakers are vertically arrayed (drivers not horizontally opposed) you
should stack them vertically. If a 2-way system it's most likely better if the
tweeters were close together. If the speaker drivers are horizontally arrayed
(side by side) also stack them vertically.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On 17 Nov 2004 00:45:01 GMT, Kalman Rubinson <kr4@nyu.edu> wrote:

>On 16 Nov 2004 04:16:42 GMT, soinie <soiniie@hotmailll.com> wrote:
>
>>If one had two pair of identical speakers and wanted to use both
>>simultaneously as fronts would it be more advantageous to stack them
>>vertically or horizontally if both arrangements were possible?
>>Thanks.
>
>Vertically, tweeter-to-tweeter, if you have to.
>
>Kal

Thank you all for the consideration.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

soinie wrote:

> If one had two pair of identical speakers and wanted to use both
> simultaneously as fronts would it be more advantageous to stack them
> vertically or horizontally if both arrangements were possible?
> Thanks.

There was once a sort-of-fad, stacking Realistic Minimus-7 mini-speakers
vertically, the top one inverted so the tweeters were together in a kind
of imitative D'Appolito configuration.

Problem was, no matter what you did, the Minimus-7 could not play bass.
The stacked Minimus threw a good stereo image, though...better,
palpably so to me, than many a highly regarded bookshelf speaker of the
time.

-GP

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"Nousaine" <nousaine@aol.com> wrote in message
news:cnjf9m0j1@news4.newsguy.com...
> Gene Poon sheehans@ap.net wrote:
>
>
>
> >
> >soinie wrote:
> >
> >> If one had two pair of identical speakers and wanted to use both
> >> simultaneously as fronts would it be more advantageous to stack them
> >> vertically or horizontally if both arrangements were possible?
> >> Thanks.
> >
> >There was once a sort-of-fad, stacking Realistic Minimus-7 mini-speakers
> >vertically, the top one inverted so the tweeters were together in a kind
> >of imitative D'Appolito configuration.
> >
> >Problem was, no matter what you did, the Minimus-7 could not play bass.
> > The stacked Minimus threw a good stereo image, though...better,
> >palpably so to me, than many a highly regarded bookshelf speaker of the
> >time.
> >
> >-GP
>
> Ah Yes; the famous or was that infamous Mighty Mouse 7. It was the first
> palm-hand speaker that really worked well and was infamously inexpensive.
It
> was rhe kind of speaker with the metal case that could be trucked around
and
> used nearly anywhere. What the world needs today is molded case Boston
> Acoustics 2-way patio speaker that costs $50 like the Mighty Mouse 7
(which was
> always on-sale near Christmas.)
>
> When it disappeared itwas soon replaced by the larger, more expensive ,
but
> still cheap models from PSB, Paradigm, Polk and Boston Acoustics.
>
> One thing about the Minimus 7 was that it was probably produced OEM by
> different suppliers over time but I've never heard any analysis that the
> speaker varied in sound quality. If anybody has more detail on the
production
> of the Minimus 7 I'd love to hear it.


It was originally and for a long time, at least, produced by Goodman's of
England. Whether they changed suppliers near the end I don't know...my
impression is they did not...RS instead dropped the model and brought out
slightly different variations with different drivers.

I owned a pair and in 1989 teamed them up with a little 25wpc Sherwood
receiver with marvelous sound quality...gave it to my sister as a system
when she set up housekeeping on her own in Boston a few years ago. It was a
terrific "bedroom" system which also doubled as the sound system for my
computer up until that time.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Thanks for that update. As I mentioned I had no knowledge of how the supply
chain was handled.It just seemed that given the price and availability it was
likely that multiple suppliers and heavy competitive bidding may have been part
of the system.

Goodman's were making one heck of a lot of those guys over the years then. That
would be reason for excellent QC back in those days when some manufacturers
seemed to have difficulty making the same speaker twice in a row.

"Harry Lavo" harry.lavo@rcn.com wrote:
>"Nousaine" <nousaine@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:cnjf9m0j1@news4.newsguy.com...
>> Gene Poon sheehans@ap.net wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> >soinie wrote:
>> >
>> >> If one had two pair of identical speakers and wanted to use both
>> >> simultaneously as fronts would it be more advantageous to stack them
>> >> vertically or horizontally if both arrangements were possible?
>> >> Thanks.
>> >
>> >There was once a sort-of-fad, stacking Realistic Minimus-7 mini-speakers
>> >vertically, the top one inverted so the tweeters were together in a kind
>> >of imitative D'Appolito configuration.
>> >
>> >Problem was, no matter what you did, the Minimus-7 could not play bass.
>> > The stacked Minimus threw a good stereo image, though...better,
>> >palpably so to me, than many a highly regarded bookshelf speaker of the
>> >time.
>> >
>> >-GP
>>
>> Ah Yes; the famous or was that infamous Mighty Mouse 7. It was the first
>> palm-hand speaker that really worked well and was infamously inexpensive.
>It
>> was rhe kind of speaker with the metal case that could be trucked around
>and
>> used nearly anywhere. What the world needs today is molded case Boston
>> Acoustics 2-way patio speaker that costs $50 like the Mighty Mouse 7
>(which was
>> always on-sale near Christmas.)
>>
>> When it disappeared itwas soon replaced by the larger, more expensive ,
>but
>> still cheap models from PSB, Paradigm, Polk and Boston Acoustics.
>>
>> One thing about the Minimus 7 was that it was probably produced OEM by
>> different suppliers over time but I've never heard any analysis that the
>> speaker varied in sound quality. If anybody has more detail on the
>production
>> of the Minimus 7 I'd love to hear it.
>
>
>It was originally and for a long time, at least, produced by Goodman's of
>England. Whether they changed suppliers near the end I don't know...my
>impression is they did not...RS instead dropped the model and brought out
>slightly different variations with different drivers.
>
>I owned a pair and in 1989 teamed them up with a little 25wpc Sherwood
>receiver with marvelous sound quality...gave it to my sister as a system
>when she set up housekeeping on her own in Boston a few years ago. It was a
>terrific "bedroom" system which also doubled as the sound system for my
>computer up until that time.