Re-cone for early Blue frame Eminence 10"s?

[imguitardan]

I LOVE the sound of my tweed Bassman with these speakers BUT... I've blown FOUR of them over the years. I'd like to be able to fix them (preferably myself but I'd be curious to hear other options). Any one have any suggestions? Thanks!

 

[EFK]

These are the earlier version of the 1028K. Same speaker. I think the only difference is the earlier versions used a paper VC former but I believe the cones, spider etc all else is the same. CEDist pricing on the 1028K is $64, I doubt you'd get a rebuild for much less than that and it would use all new components anyway so frankly I'd just buy a new one or multiples depending upon how many you need. I think the power rating has gone up by @ 5W or so, but I've compared the new ones w/ older 90s production side by side and other than the newer speakers sounding a bit tighter (obviously), they sound like the same speaker to my ear so I'd have no problem just using a new 1028K. They're fantastic 10" speakers, definitely.

 

[J M Fahey]

Good suggestion.

That said, *if* you want to try your hand at it, you may buy new cones, voice coils, spiders, dust caps and tinsel wire from Weber.
Watch a few reconing videos in YT first.

Good for a long rainy boring Sunday afternoon

 

[Steppin' Wolfe]

+1 with EFK. The early ALP(paper former) speakers were 20 watts. The ALK(kapton former) is a 30 watt speaker.
I don't know if it makes any difference, but I prefer older Eminence speakers that were MADE IN THE USA.....meaning all parts were sourced in the USA. The new speakers are assembled in the Eminence factory in Kentucky, but the parts are sourced from China. I am holding on to the two 1994 ALK's that ran in my super champs for over two decades. IF you could find older ALk's, I would suggest going for those. YMMV....
and....the problem that you are having, imguitardan, is the same problem that vintage 5F6A amps had with the P10R's and even the P10Q's.I bought a '59 5F6A that had had the original speakers replaced within a year....it had a pair of later '59's and a pair of very early '60 P10R's in it....matched pairs. The amp had not been played in maybe 4 decades when I bought it, so there was not 'vintage speaker to match an amp' shopping done to try to maintain vintage amp value. The amp wasn't worth much in the early '70's, and the vintage market was not what it would come to be for vintage speakers. I surmised that they were factory provided matched pairs.
A bass player probably took Fender seriously that he could play bass through it at volume?!?!? (8^O

 

[swiveltung]

The paper formers are the reason those speakers are so good.... like the original Jensen P10R's and the 10" used in Super Reverbs. They aren't as sturdy as modern VC formers, but that's where the picking dynamics /sound comes from. Not sure if you can get Paper formers anywhere or not. Weber makes one speaker still with a Paper former, the CTC10, but I think it is 1.5" VC.
I heard there was a new version of the Emi 10 Blues that has a Fender designation... does it have a paper former?

 

[dcbc]

No, the new Fender/Emi blue frame has a kapton former. It is a 1028K painted blue from all I have read.

I'm not sure Weber still offers the CTC10 with the paper former. On their FAQ, weber has some statements indicating that they don't believe there is much difference sonically in voice coil former materials. Obviously, plenty of people disagree with that sentiment.

 

[swiveltung]

No, the new Fender/Emi blue frame has a kapton former. It is a 1028K painted blue from all I have read.

I'm not sure Weber still offers the CTC10 with the paper former. On their FAQ, weber has some statements indicating that they don't believe there is much difference sonically in voice coil former materials. Obviously, plenty of people disagree with that sentiment.

Yes they do offer only that one, (at least a couple months ago) no alnico or CVC 10 now though. I've spoken to them recently about those speakers and the VC's.. Frankly I would not put a Paper VC speaker in a single or maybe even a dual speaker amp. But for 4 x 10 they are heaven. Tweed Bassman, Super Reverb etc. IMO it is one of the reasons above all else those amps are so highly touted. Let's face it the Super circuit is almost identical to most the other Fender amps from DR to Super and even the Twin.
Early Emi Blues and of course vintage P10R's often go for big money. People love those that when pushed will go into that smooth non harsh compression. My theory, and it's only a theory of course, is that the lightweight former allows the cone to float in that compressed state some love. The added mass of the heavier, more robust former interferes with that. I don't know, it's the only thing I can figure why a modern P10R is so spikey and harsh vs the old ones.
I had 3 version of the Weber CTC, CVC and the Alnico when I had my old SR. Tried them all and they were all amazing, too bad not that many people caught on so Weber would keep making them. They became expensive though after Ted's initial offering. At the original price I would have a bunch of them!

 

[EFK]

On their FAQ, weber has some statements indicating that they don't believe there is much difference sonically in voice coil former materials. Obviously, plenty of people disagree with that sentiment.

I'm not one of them. I don't think the little tube the coil wire is wrapped around makes any difference and I fail to see how it could affect sound, *unless* there is a weight difference between the paper and the kapton. I can see a difference in weight affecting the mechanical reaction of the speaker, just like a heavier cone or heavier spider would affect the way the speaker reacts. But if the weight is the same and the dimensions are the same, coil gap the same etc., then I'd seriously doubt any perceivable difference.

 

[dcbc]

Yes they do offer only that one, (at least a couple months ago) no alnico or CVC 10 now though. I've spoken to them recently about those speakers and the VC's.. Frankly I would not put a Paper VC speaker in a single or maybe even a dual speaker amp. But for 4 x 10 they are heaven. Tweed Bassman, Super Reverb etc. IMO it is one of the reasons above all else those amps are so highly touted. Let's face it the Super circuit is almost identical to most the other Fender amps from DR to Super and even the Twin.
Early Emi Blues and of course vintage P10R's often go for big money. People love those that when pushed will go into that smooth non harsh compression. My theory, and it's only a theory of course, is that the lightweight former allows the cone to float in that compressed state some love. The added mass of the heavier, more robust former interferes with that. I don't know, it's the only thing I can figure why a modern P10R is so spikey and harsh vs the old ones.
I had 3 version of the Weber CTC, CVC and the Alnico when I had my old SR. Tried them all and they were all amazing, too bad not that many people caught on so Weber would keep making them. They became expensive though after Ted's initial offering. At the original price I would have a bunch of them!

My mistake. I was remembering searching for the alnico speaker after this came up in my bassman speaker thread. CTC10 is $94 from Weber.

 

[dcbc]

I'm not one of them. I don't think the little tube the coil wire is wrapped around makes any difference and I fail to see how it could affect sound, *unless* there is a weight difference between the paper and the kapton. I can see a difference in weight affecting the mechanical reaction of the speaker, just like a heavier cone or heavier spider would affect the way the speaker reacts. But if the weight is the same and the dimensions are the same, coil gap the same etc., then I'd seriously doubt any perceivable difference.

I don't know if it's the former or the fact that they're "old school" and severely broken in, but my 1968 Jensen C12N sounds a lot better than my Weber 12F150 or any other 12" speaker I have tried in my 73 DR. Nice and sparkly on the top end.

 

[swiveltung]

I'm not one of them. I don't think the little tube the coil wire is wrapped around makes any difference and I fail to see how it could affect sound, *unless* there is a weight difference between the paper and the kapton. I can see a difference in weight affecting the mechanical reaction of the speaker, just like a heavier cone or heavier spider would affect the way the speaker reacts. But if the weight is the same and the dimensions are the same, coil gap the same etc., then I'd seriously doubt any perceivable difference.

It is hard to figure why some speakers with only very subtle differences sound soooo different for sure. I don't really know if kaptan (sp?) formers are thicker than paper or real thin like the paper ones. But I could see when a speaker goes into floating compression (the cone moving in suspension in and out like a string vibrating) would be effected by a heavier weight VC.... momentum.... hard to say what's going on.

 

[EFK]

I don't know if it's the former or the fact that they're "old school" and severely broken in, but my 1968 Jensen C12N sounds a lot better than my Weber 12F150 or any other 12" speaker I have tried in my 73 DR. Nice and sparkly on the top end.

It's been my experience with American speakers that it seems pretty much impossible to get new cones that match up to the old cones. As far as I'm concerned, this is the primary issue. All the new material seems overly thick, overly stiff and this affects the mechanical response of the speaker in a very noticeable way once the signal is hitting it.

 

[Pickaxe]

I'm with you on the blown blue Eminence (10446) in the tweed Bassman - though I have only blown 3 thus far. I love the crap outta those speakers though, so I've contemplated reconing en mass.

Cheapest recone kits I've found are around $30 each.

 

[dcbc]

It's been my experience with American speakers that it seems pretty much impossible to get new cones that match up to the old cones. As far as I'm concerned, this is the primary issue. All the new material seems overly thick, overly stiff and this affects the mechanical response of the speaker in a very noticeable way once the signal is hitting it.

In any event, glad I lucked into four of those old CN12 speakers.

 

[J M Fahey]

Old speakers were built very different to modern ones on a few critical points

1) a paper former is way lighter than a kapton one, not only because of intrinsic density but because of usually being very thin
* Paper density: average about 0.5 gram per cubic centimeter , for comparison one half the water density
* Kapton density: 1.42 gram per cc : almost 3 times as heavy

that alone is a HUGE difference,a paper voice coil will accelerate and stop way faster than a Kapton one, (way less mass) , so it will track guitar string movements more accurately.

Think Strat and Tele twang and you'll find sounds where this is important.

Also think Greenback or even more, Celestion Blue, vs. modern high power speakers, same frame/magnet/cone/wire

Of course the penalty is power handling: paper (cellulose) dries up and becomes brittle above 60 or 70C , is compromised above 90C , starts toasting at 100C (water boiling point) and crumbles not much above that.

Kapton is *guaranteed* as having 80% of its normal strength (which to boot is way higher than that of paper) at 200C and does nor really weaken until reaching 400C.

Also is way more rigid than paper , this ends up making Kapton coil former speakers punchier, strong high mids, maybe buzzy, compared to smoother fast extended range paper ones.

There's way more subtle differences but this one alone is important enough.

 

[imguitardan]

I'm with you on the blown blue Eminence (10446) in the tweed Bassman - though I have only blown 3 thus far. I love the crap outta those speakers though, so I've contemplated reconing en mass.

Cheapest recone kits I've found are around $30 each.

Do you have the link please?

 

[Pickaxe]

http://reconingspeakers.com/product/eminence-10-10446-aftermarket-recone-kit/