In the early 90's while working as an audio engineer in the film/TV industry I managed to obtain a pair of NS-1000's from a facility that was closing. I was really excited to have a pair of these iconic speakers, but never really had an opportunity to do much more than hook them up and verify that they worked before they met their demise in the 94 earthquake here in Los Angeles. Since then I've always regretted not having them in my collection. I don't feel so bad now. Funny, because at the time, these were "reference" monitors in control rooms all around the area.
I still use my 1000m's as my daily setup and still love them, had them for around 15 years now, got them from a friend who got them new in 1991. Potentiometers at 0 seems to be the best for me. I will never be getting rid of these...
Thank you Danny. I am in the process of restoring my NS1000’s and was planning on sending them to you to fix the issues. And thank you to the person who sent his speaker in so I didn’t have to ship mine 🤗
Hi 👋 Tom, if you’re not going to repair these loudspeakers as stock I would look at selling them to the vintage collector to retain fair blue book or slightly below blue book and then purchase a brand new pair of GR Research speakers. These loudspeakers will sell for the price of a cup of coffee even with 1,000 in DIY modifications. They will sell for many cups of coffee ☕️ without any modifications. The drivers are in fine condition but are older and measuring there dc resistance at the crossover frequencies may or maybe not part of the original voice. Other t/small may not be available as well. Danny builds new loudspeakers that can easily match the drive units for his own designs and supports artistic integrity of the loudspeakers cabinet 🗄️ . If a change in sound is needed,then change the loudspeakers. If you are going to keep the Yamaha for aesthetic and or nostalgia then by all means improve them however you like 👍 Cheers.
FYI I bought these new in 1977 and they haven't been the outstanding speakers that many think they are. Danny's kit might be the fix to make them sound better. I had saved a rebuild suggestion from another website that probably does some of the things Danny's kit does. The bottom line is that they always sounded a little too bright and the woofer sounded weak. I understand where you are coming from, but the chance to fix the factory issues and enjoy these speakers better than factory is worth it to me.@@gg.6967
This example continues to show Danny’s commitment to taking on challenges and improving the listening experience no matter how difficult. Great outcome on this one as well. Congrats!!
Still have a pair that I purchased in 1983 and they look as good as they did then. Continue to use them in my entertainment system. The issues you highlighted are real and have always bothered me but the detail has always been impressive. Certainly something to consider. Thanks for tackling!
The old vs new impedance data tells the story very well. It actually shows all the signs of intelligent corrections and not just "electrical" crossover, rather, a true acoustic correction filter. I also very much appreciate pulling the level across the board down to align better to the sealed box response, I'm sure they sound far fuller on the bottom end now. I'm a bit surprised to hear the 1st order filter for the mid-range high-pass (assuming that's what you meant when you said "on the bottom" as that's how I would conceptualize the high-pass). I always run into problems trying to achieve a usable slope on a 1st order filter on the bottom of a mid as they always wind up with a nasty peak in response around resonance since the first order just has no way to combat this. Also usually runs into excursion/distortion problems if driven hard. I do believe that the hyper-expensive parts are going to be wasted here on these mediocre drivers. I would just use basic 18AWG Airs for the tweeter/mids, iron cores for the woofer, and cheap poly caps all around. I might spring for some "audio grade" resistors because they are only a few bucks a pop and they look cool, but otherwise, nope. These drivers all suck way too much to throw any sonicaps at.
@@asterixx6878 An old-school crossover that is "calculated" will often maintain relatively even impedance through the band, or at least, level through each drivers band, with peaks at resonances and sometimes crossover points depending on whether they targeted an acoustic or electrically flat crossover calc. These were often the norm back when amplifiers were sensitive to differences in load across the band, and in some cases, these designs actually did sound better on those old amps that would generate different levels of gain into different levels of impedance. Modern crossover designs can largely ignore concerns about maintaining a flat impedance curve, as modern amps act like near-perfect-gain devices into a wide range of impedance, since they have effectively 0 ohm output impedance. 3 ohms is a good lower limit to aim at to ensure the resistance of wire and crossover parts doesn't start to dominate the circuit too much, though I like to aim for 5+ ohm when feasible. A simulated crossover built for the modern world, will have obvious signs of acoustic corrections, like slanted impedance curves, and especially more noteworthy lumps and bumps around crossover frequency as the summation of 2 drivers is carefully corrected and aligned to produce flat acoustic response in-phase on target. It would be remarkably rare to see a pair of drivers sum flat with a "calculated" crossover that produces a classic impedance curve. If you show me an impedance curve that looks like the designer was either targeting a flat impedance curve, or that wound up that way due to calculated component values, I will assume that the acoustic response of the system has NOT been tuned flat through modern measured/simulated crossover design.
Those speakers were introduced in the 70's. Compared to what else was available, their sound was pretty amazing. First time I heard them was at the Perth Audio Show. The music being used to demo them was Christopher Cross - Sailing and the Sheffield Lab Thelma Houston album. Considering the time of their release, there is today significantly more knowledge, tech and research available as opposed to then. Perhaps there shou;d be a bit more credit given to those pioneers whose efforts and forward thinking got us to where we are today. Nobody else that I can think of back then was using Beryllium drivers, and even today, there are probably only a handful.
I've listened to well over 500 speakers in my lifetime, from the Magneplanar Tympani's down to the venerable Rogers LS3/5a's, and everything in between. As a musician, I've played through just about everything that's out there. First off, let me say that the Sheffield Thelma Houston disc is phenomenal. When the horns kick in on "I've Got The Music In Me", it brought tears. The Tympani's did true justice on that cut. Until...the NS1000M's. The clarity was like glass slowly cracking...you could actually feel her vocals in your spine. I would like to enter another album, Earl Klugh's Finger Paintings. The cut "This Time", was a sonic miracle. There's a sound of clip clop/castanets in the background. They start 4 feet BEHIND your left shoulder, continue across the stage, all the way to BEHIND your right shoulder! I've never heard such clarity and separation in my life! That started a lifelong crusade to one day have a pair in front of me. That started over 40 years ago, and I still hold onto that dream... One can dream, am I right?
I lust after them too but have yet to find a pair that I wanted to buy that wasn’t way overpriced. In the interim I bought a pair of Celestion Ditton 551 and upgraded the tweeters to Morel 448. I haven’t daydreamed about the NS-1000 in a long time…..
When this speaker was released in 1974, everything else out there was crap. These guys wrote the book on product/process/QE for beryllium drivers back then.
Not all were crap.. Radford speakers for example used all air core inductors and poly caps in their crossovers. All non ferrous materials in the cabinet and binding posts. Litz wire throughout. 1975.
Very few did and most had low quality crossovers not to mention at the time they all used chipboard ( particle board ) to build their cabinets, which is low quality. The NS1000m were one of the few loudspeakers that was built right ( even that has chipboard cabs ) weighs in at 68 lbs I think, braced ( most speakers were not then ) well damped etc... sold for over 20 yrs... I don't think there is another manufacture in history that has done that. Obviously a few people liked them.
Since these speakers are so common and recognized, it would be interesting to do a double blind test between a stock NS-1000M speaker and the GR upgraded version to see which speaker the majority of listeners pick as their favorite. Could make for a very cool video!
My buddy helped me in a single-blind test (pushing the A-B buttons on the receiver) for the B&W CDM-1NT speakers (I owned two pair at the time). The GR-Research upgrade made this speaker sound fuller, richer, and more 3-dimensional. At first I didn't like it - I was used to the "house sound" which turned out to be nothing more than a scooped out middle, at best. After a while, I was starting to comprehend what was really happening. The non-upgraded speaker sounded like a hollow tin can in comparison. I wouldn't have noticed the difference if I hadn't tried this upgrade. If you have the time to do it, I highly recommend it. What I've seen since I did that upgrade over a year ago is that to get these type of crossover components already built-in, you have to spend $15K plus for a pair of consumer-grade speakers. This one continues to be one of those dirty little secrets in the industry, but the DIY movement is slowly bursting that bubble. And even if you decided to just upgrade what you have with better components, you are not benefitting from Danny's engineering, which corrects other errors in the original design.
They have more bass too which would make things sound better. There may be some who feel the old speaker has "better vocals" due to the increased midrange output. Also level matching speakers with such varying response can be tricky as with some songs speaker A will seem louder, with other songs speaker B will sound louder
Like vintage JBL's, the Yamaha NS-1000's have collectible value. If you're starting from scratch, the big-box GR Brutes would do even better for about $2K/pair with the CNC-cut flat packs.
Hope this inspires some people to do the same to their vintage speakers. Specially those with good drivers. The difference a high quality crossover makes, has to be experienced to listen to what was missing. Everything improves so much.
Although I didn't have the capacity to redesign the crossover I did a full rebuild on a pair of 1985 Klipsch Forte 1's, I did the cabinet bracing and no res that had been recommended for the 3's, used Dynamite on the horns, rewired with Danny's wire, and put the crossovers outboard and used really nice parts. And the difference with just the parts and really working on dampening some resonances was enormous. I also use Danny's kit on a pair of RP600m's and that was killer. If I have the resources I would love to see what he would do with the Forte one!
@@dannyrichie9743 I just saw pictures of the internal bracing on the brute.... That is absolutely amazing especially after seeing how the fortes are constructed...super impressed with those brute cabinets!!! So tempting
Man, Danny, That sure was a Lot of work, I sure hope you earn your money back. With you as inspiration I just finished developing new XO's for 3 pairs of Linn Tukans and 2 pairs of their AV5110's as the Atmos surrounds in our new home Home Theater here in Germany. Keep up the great work and thanks again for all that you do for us.
I have upgraded two pairs of those speakers. Actually Yamahas original sound was already good(by the way it was a big surprise to me). But i still decided to change the original filter Layout(never used any notches!) and filter components. Also I changed the inner wiring, terminals, bypassed the regulators and evened R and L speaker. The final result was awesome. The details, air, imaging, staging and everything else was there and the all the annoying sharpness was gone. Also the bass control was awesome(closed box with a right size and with q-factor 0.7 worked perfectly) But there was one trick that I did. As those speakers have to be put on the speaker stand anyway, the stand can be built exactly the height that is needed. So first when I measured the speaker element responses, I run to the similar problems as Dan. But then I fast realized, that i all works much better, if the listening height(sweet spot) is not at the tweeter level as it usualy, but rather on the midrange height. So i took new measurements and designed a new filter from that new perspective. The result was almost a straight line within +/-1 db, the phase alignment(between different speaker elements worked perfectly and there were no such big problems (as Danny had) while i took the off-axis measurements (from the midrange height). The original crossover points 450hz and 4500hz worked really well and there was no need to change them. All the filters i used, were 2. order. So my final point is - those speakers have a great potential and with a smart upgrade, they can be surprisingly good :)
Ear level of 1000s and 690s are at centre of the speaker as manuals says! Anyway I agree with mods but they are amazing even without any mod. And if someone decide to do mods do it step by step starting from dedicated stands!
The speakers came with potentiometers for the mids and highs so u could adjust the response quite a bit + or - . Wonder why Danny didn't cover that aspect in detail
wondering the same thing... Could it be to "hide" the fact that these adjustments can be used to achieve some of the same improvements he did with the redesign? hmmm....
I have a bunch of measurements showing what happens with the adjustments. I left them where they measured the best (the 0 position) for the stock measurements.
What a great job Danny but not sure I would criticize the engineers much since this speaker was designed about 50 years ago! I bought mine used around 1982 and had many years of service and still have them though no longer in use. A quick observation though. I just went back and looked at my in-room Audyssey readings and my readings were so different from yours, I don’t think I could consider your crossover even though I consider it expertly designed. The hump starting at 500 hz, 450 being the original crossover I believe, just doesn’t exist for me-at all. The rise just below 2k is a dip for me and there is also zero rise in the 8k range. I realize I’m not using a calibrated mic and my readings are at listening position, 8.5 ft away, but that is a big difference from what you measured. With all that said, I didn’t realize it until I got my new speakers but those Yamahas were fatiguing. I never just sat down and listened to them for hours and that is just not an issue with my new speakers-modern design, good crossovers, good drivers. Thanks again for your work. Mabe
There is a big difference in a room response measurement and a speaker measurement (zero room reflections). That fatigue you speak of is mostly due to the resonances issues that I notched out.
I have a pair that I inherited from my in laws..they played the heck out of them in the 70s and then they went silent thru the mid 80s, 90s and until today where they are in my vintage Yamaha collection…they sound really good with a sub..and the mods and highs dialed down….I would be interested in taking them to Danny.. oh , and Yamaha makes a “new” version of these speaker that go for 15Gs a pair ..NS 5000 M. .
These speakers have been heavily modded in the UK for years... Encouraged by hi fi mags... Now the same mags are saying they prefer the originals.. It creates a market just like these mods
A thorough job Danny! The NS1000M have been my primary listening pair for quite a few years now and I’ve had them in various iterations. Nothing else I’ve heard can compete - especially for the price. I’ve got mine in a tri-amp setup with a DSP (surprisingly a decent noise floor). I’ve modified the crossover design with similar changes to the ones you outline. Interestingly I don’t think I have the 1.8-2k ringing in the mid. There is no evident peak in the response on measuring and listening. I have to fetch out the graphs to confirm. I know the fibreglass dampening behind the beryllium cone can be upset/disrupted over time and I got mine replaced. Additionally I removed the protective grill. Perhaps age and the grill were the primary causes for this?
@@dannyrichie9743 thanks so much for the response! Yeah, fantastic. I’ve been going off my gated measurements but again I’m sure you have a much more sophisticated measuring configuration than my mere UMIK-1 haha. Thanks for the honest breakdown of this.
@@Bombo503 you don't need anything sophisticated. Place your UMIK-1 right next to the midrange grill, turn off tweeter, run a sweep tone. Run the decay analysis in REW and you won't find the resonance at 1.8kHz. Your approach with tramping and digital crossover is the best approach from technical point of view, assuming you are using good quality components.
I have both speakers, and the 500M's are a lot easier on the ears with most SS amps. If you own a good class A tube amplifier however, the 1000M's cleans their clock.
I have a pair of Japanese-made Coral DX-7 speakers that look almost identical. A friend of mine is rebuilding the crossovers by replacing the parts with high-grade parts but keeping the crossover design the same. I would have loved to send you one speaker for testing first, but I live in Japan, and sending this large, heavy speaker to you would cost too much money. I sure hope they sound good when my friend completes the job.
That's funny I also have a pair of DX-7's from Japan but I live in Thailand strange that Coral made these about 10years before the Yamahas I wonder if the the drivers were supplied to them or paid by Yamaha to copy or use as Coral made a whole load of drivers themselves
These are already game-changing speakers, that compare very favourably to newer speakers that cost multiples of thousands. I have a pair. What is missing in your sales pitch is a before your mods and after commentary on the sound. Have you actually listened to them ? Their ability to replicate the actual sound of the music being played is phenomenal. You make them sound like a crappy pair speakers before your mods and the hundreds of reviews from actual owners tell a very different story.
You do make a big point, something that Danny doesn't do and feels unnecessary to do as his measurements tells all. In comparison take a look at Troels Gravesen upgrade kit on these ( 6 yrs ago ) designing a new crossover he then listens to them ( not a single unit ) and adjust if necessary, read his comments, its worth it.
Reading messages like this is always funny to me. Do you really think a response curve that is choppy and all over the place will sound better than a smooth and accurate one? Is a high level of driver resonance better than less driver resonance? Is extreme comb filtering (cancellation) in the vertical off axis better then an improved driver integration and being more in phase over a wide range? Is extreme cabinet resonances better then a cabinet with damped out resonances? Is the smearing effect of cheap electrolytic caps better then the clean signal transfer of top level poly caps? Is the smearing caused by iron core inductors better then the cleaner sounding air core inductors? Are the cheap and old sand cast resistors better sounding then new noninductive wire wound type? Is the thin and old oxidized internal wire with PVC on it better then new four 9's pure solid core Copper in polyethene? Are the push on style connectors that take only bare wire and have steal parts in them better then tube connectors? There was also nothing phenomenal about this speaker. It is a dated vintage speaker that was hard to listen to in the beginning. Comparing it to what we did with it is like showing up to a new car dealership in a covered wagon and asking the salesman if they have any new cars that ride as good as your covered wagon.
@@cruise2023 I have had his work sent to me as well: th-cam.com/video/5xsfQi1hlzU/w-d-xo.html That one was a disaster that was one of the biggest transformations that I have done.
@@dannyrichie9743 Well thanks for replying , even it it was in a condescending manner. History and numbers do not lie. These speakers have had glowing reviews ever since they were produced and still do ! There are revered as iconic speakers and with good reason, because although you may not think so , they do sound great, even now. They were made out of market leading materials, sold in the hundred of thousands and were designed in the height of the HIFI era , which meant that a lot of thought would have gone into their design by the Yamaha team, probably in the hundreds in number - and yet you believe you can better the sound. Music is about listening - it is a shame you don’t provide real proof of the success of your designs with comparisons of before & after. I wonder why ?
@@highfell1 They are iconic and ahead of their time in some ways. However, in their stock form they don't hold a candle to even our least expensive kits, and they are not even close. They are in no way any performance bench mark. By todays standards they are a joke. What do you want? Do you want me to make some in room recordings for you to play back as a compressed TH-cam file through your laptop? That bottlenecks hearing what we've done. The proof of the improvement is a given. Questioning the results is a little insulting. They have been improved in every way. Imagine showing up at a hot rod shop that does upgrades on sports cars and they tell you they have added a super charger. The engine makes 200 more horsepower. They changed the converter to let it launch at a higher rpm. They changed the suspension to allow it to transfer weight to the rear wheels. They swapped out the rear tires for drag radials for better traction, and other modifications to improve performance.... They you say to them, but did you have a race of the stock version compared to the new version to see if it really does run faster? They already know that everything they did makes the car faster. They do it all the time. They know the result of each and every modification. Upgrading speakers for us is the same way. We know the exact result of every single part, every wire, and every change. We know exactly what happens when we add No Rez to the cabinet walls. We do all of this all the time. It's our jobs. We are professional in the field. We know what the results will sound like compared to stock. We've bad listening comparisons of every single part. The proof is clear.
i myself have a pair of pioneer CS-A700, also sealed enclosure and yeah lots of ring issues as well BUT once you update the crossover parts and fill the boxes with glass fiber to reduce the ring they sound just amazing silky smooth with crazy humongous soundstage
Wow! you have certainly opened up a debate of comments on these Yamaha's. You could also say the same for the vintage JBL loudspeakers of the same era , that people love so much. They all need help but its the JBL sound that they like. I agree with the upgrade but without it, if you like the sound, them that is all that matters, whether they measure well or not.
I think it’s important to keep in mind that when engineers use “reference” monitors, this is in order to mix for the average listening experience and have a consistent reference of whether a mix will sound good on the average system, be it a TV or a typical hifi setup of the period. Much like the NS-10, not an amazing speaker but reliable and consistent.
You know its an iconic speaker when - nearly 50 years later - the company releases the NS-5000....looking very similar, and costing $15,000. The vintage models caught my EYE every time i saw them, but i was listening to Magnepan Tympani 1-C's and the were just as "cool"....(and sounded better). Thanks for all you do, Danny. I'm reeeeally leaning toward pulling the trigger on a pair of NX-Otica's soon. I think the NX-Treme are probably a little large for my listening area, although I'll research it further. Really enjoy your channel and your willingness to share your knowledge.
Sacrificing sensitivity to boost lower-levels is key for tuning. In my car, the lowest EQ value is 50hz, but I want boost at 30hz, so I lower EQ in the sub's range, especially @ 50hz. 50hz is cabin-boosted to the moon anyways. To counter the lowered EQ, I add gain to the subwoofer output.
We tried them in different positions and left them where the response was the most linear (0 settings). When we redesigned them it did not put that stuff into the signal path for obvious reasons.
Danny just keep taking things to the next level. I would like to see him take a speaker like a Martin Logan 60 series and take it to the next level or a Bowers and Wilson's 700 series.
Well done. Good video which highlights issues which would be very common in a lot of Vintage speakers. Back then designers chased large woofers, high efficiency (for the reasons you mentioned) but it was always at the expense of sound quality. Also, I would think the various ringing and uneven response issues could also be cabinet or diffraction issues too? Again back then they loved putting multiple chrome rings around drivers to make them look good, but it was all at the expense of sound quality, causing diffraction and too much driver spacing. Maybe they didn't know about this stuff back then?
The NS-1000M surrounds are not chrome, they're anodised aluminium - and play next to no part in the overall sound. The metal driver grilles are more invasive, but again relatively quiet.
Thanks for this very interesting review. I never heard about that 1800Hz resonance. There is a lot of damping stuff behind the mid dome, maybe some black damping ‘dot’ has come off the back of the dome? At Hifi-selbstbau in Germany they have tested these mids as one of the best still today. They didn’t like the tweeter at all though and proposed an AMT. I am sure with your upgrade this is going to be a really nice speaker (again).
why would you hear about something that doesn't exists? I provided measurements in the comments section showing measurements of a couple midrange drivers. This mid is definitely one of the best.
I recently attempted to upgrade my NS-500’s only to find the access panel to the crossover components encased in a clear thick resin layer. Don’t really know why or what a solution might be.
Why don’t you make a speaker for the market? I don’t have a clue about electronics, but I get mesmerized watching your channel. Have you ever had a chance to work on the Hyperion 968 and if so, any upgrades?
I saw a video that said that a main engineer of JBL left that company and moved to Yamaha. This NS-1000M was their answer to the JBL L100. I never played the two against each other to see which one sounded the best.
The L100's / 4311's are more enjoyable, as I still own both of them. The NS's are cool & rarer but more desirable as collector's item rather than a speaker.
Nice one. Been curious about these since their debut. I've never worked on, or heard them in any capacity despite experiencing just about everything else! So ... very interesting to see them assessed. Nice work on the fix. Sucks pulling down that midband energy capability, but its at an easier load then maybe it's a push. Driver close-ups would've been nice as would more on your take of the cabinet. Maybe I missed it. Regardless ... this was wonderful material here, these Yamahas. I remember one thing, their great looks and slick magazine advertising were spectacular. Again, nice one.
From what I understand, when you make these changes, you only use one speaker...very interesting! I also noticed that you find mistakes in a lot of speakers... are all the manufacturers in error and only you are right? Engineers may work for years to release a product and then you come and find errors and in one afternoon you have the solution. I have to admit that it is a good business idea.
We have tools today that companies didn't have back in the 70's and 80's. So it is no surprise that we can find issues quickly and easily that they could not see and address back in the day. Also keep in mind that customers don't send us great speakers that they love and don't want to change. They send in speakers that don't sound they way they wish they did. So we typically get the cheaply made or problematic models.
You ask the right questions, now ask ask yourself what`s in for him. I think he`s a know it all, that doesn`t care about respect for sound, as long as it measures well. And sounds according to HIS liking. He just sells you some miracle cure, and people buy it because they don`t know better.
Keep in mind that the response is also dictated by the size of the baffle, surface reflections, and edge diffraction. So any application will make the response very different.
Zaph didn't do in box measurements of tweeters. I can't recall if he used IEC baffle dimensions but you are seeing a wonky tweeter further exacerbated by baffle diffraction. Likely the typical 2khz hump followed by 3Khz dip or thereabouts for a baffle this size
My Brother Was Stationed In Japan And Yamaha Had The Natural Sound Series With The Beryllium Tweeters and Beryllium Midrange And Non/Ported Matched or Symmetrical NS-1000 Where Export By Yamaha Yet The NS-890 Model Where a 4 Way With 2 Beryllium Super Hi and Mid Hi and Then Paper Mid and The 12” Woofer These Where Non/Export So My Brother Bought a Matched Set and Shipped Them Over Where I Only Had Too Service The 12” Woofer For Re/Coning Still Used Them Through a Phase Linear 700-B The ESS Heil Wire Tweeter Have The Best Hi End From a Non/Paper Cone Tweeter Yet The Yamaha NS-Series With Beryllium Tweeters Are Outstanding
I have it. It is perhaps one of the most technologically advanced as far as speaker designs go in recent times and it plays ball against any high end Wilson, Magico, etc at any price. It required all the sim/tooling/novel prove-in for that brand new xylon application , not to mention all the smart engineering built into it for resonance control, etc. The doofuses at Wilson bought drivers from somebody else, i.e., Focal, put it in a box and charged the dumb dudes 80k. Go figure.
Thanks for the video and interesting measurements that you made. Indeed the material for new crossovers (quality parts) is so hefty in price that the step to a full DSP's active version (again with quality parts, i.e. no Wondom/Dayton Audio cheapy) isn't much more expensive. I'd go for active, and maybe I will one day (have still the drivers of my old NS1000M).
Most DSP system's have a lot of bottlenecks that limit performance in the end. Doing it right is a LOT more expensive than a passive filter, and it leaves a lot of room for good electronics.
I used to own a pair of these, and loved them, but... you want to warn people who have left them idle for a long time to have the woofer checked for corrosion and magnet shift. They're known for it, and you wouldn't want to spend a grand on a crossover to then have your woofer self-destruct on the first listen due to crappy 70s glue. I have a misused pair of the non-beryllium driver, little brother version (the NS-690) I have to repair at some point. I'm hoping they don't have similar ringing issues. Would definitely be interested in a revised crossover for those if anyone (not on the other side of the planet) sends you a pair to update.
These speakers were awesome when released, its a 40yr.old speaker and to me, they still.sound great, but mine have been sold off quite some time ago. Not saying I wouldnt want to buy them back again. But any speaker in 90s sound superior to the NS1000m. I love Yamaha and credit them on them being a pioneer to the audiophile world. The make musical products with engineering.
The original is perfect for mnitoring, your modification looks amazing for music listening in a sofa . Great job, would love to listen to them modified. Peace
Dome midranges sound so good , but they are difficult to implement because their average resonant frequency is always around 400 Hz. , very difficult to cross to any woofer. That's why 4th order crossovers are frequently used , but as much as I like them , I tend to avoid them altogether.
Was in the retail trade when these came out in the mid ‘70s, and I’d be interested in Danny’s - or any other folks’ here opinion of the NS690s - soft dome mid and tweeter. Still a bit wider spacing of acoustic centres than might now be considered optimal, but they were for my ears and wallet at the time a sweet spot. Actually ended up with a pair of NS670s and CA1000 from a sales promo contest at the time, and kept those until upgrading to Dahlquist DQ10 and passive sub - but that’s a war story for another time.
I don't think they are pure beryllium but rather some kind of alloy like aluminum covered with Be dust as I've seen them dented in already, they most certainly don't shatter immediately. Also, if you still have them at home - you MUST re-glue the magnet to the woofer basket! They are notorious for letting go and if the speaker is on it's side when that happens - it will wreck the voice coil.
It would be fun to listen to the upgrade. Never liket the NS series, ok I only heard the NS 2000 that have the carbon-fiber drivers but It sounded as You described the NS 1000. And watching the graph and Your explanation it makes seance what I heard back then.
These were a big deal back in the day. Not to my taste, but they were very popular. I was more an EPI kinda guy, but whatever ... With your mods, I'm sure I would really like these now. Of course my tastes have changed, so Infinity's in the LP system, and BA Towers for the AV system. You are absolutely right that power is readily available now. We had to hock the house to get big usable power back then. Glad you are offering crossover kits to correct classic speakers. Well done 😊 OBTW - I've had some interesting one-offs using old CRT TV full range speakers in 2 cu ft boxes. Seems many of those old full range drivers were pretty good, mostly suffering from bad TV cabinets ...🙃
I'm impressed that you were able to, mostly, tame some really problematic drivers passively, albeit with a costly solution. This is one of those times where a DSP-based approach might be more cost effective, given the problems that these drivers presented with, and possibly preserved some of the efficiency that had to be sacrificed here. Truth be told, Danny managed to hold onto more efficient here than I would have thought possible. I would have guessed dropping closer to 84 dB to wrestle these artifacts into submission, but that's why Danny does what he does, and I continue to watch and learn!
@@user-db8hs6dy4m Ha, ha, ha, good luck with that. Most of the information necessary for designing a crossover properly are things that software doesn't even take into account.
Berylco was a private/gov financed plant built outside my home town during the 60s to turn beryllium ore from India into space components like the antenna on the lunar lander. It was going to take the coal regions into the atomic age but ended up with cancer and lung disease issues. A cousin of my uncle who worked there had a son born retarded which happen to several other workers...
@@dannyrichie9743 The original thick felt-like material lining will do this job quite nicely. No need to remove/replace. The cabinets on these are actually built incredibly well with Baltic Birch grade plywood. Far beyond their original price point at 1K. I have owned/restored at least 10 pairs of these over a 20+ year period. Also if you are an original crossover enthusiast (like myself), it is my understanding, the Silver caps Yamaha used were of very high quality and self-healing. (No need to replace those) I do replace the 47uf & 2.7uf electrolytics and leave everything else intact (typically use Mundorf E-cap series or sometimes opt for more expensive film caps if my budget allows). Also these speakers are very sensitive to the electronics you use to power them. (You cannot simply use a mass market receiver or amplifier to power them (including Yamaha electronics) and expect great results) For example, I use a 30 watt Class A Pass Labs Aleph 3 in conjunction with an Audible illusions 3B tube preamplifier and this complete combo sounds absoluetly incredible!!! (with the factory crossover design).
Yamaha has a new series at 21.200$ model ns5000 using Zilon. More than most Asian products aren't going to be anything other than cheesy. If I was to run across a pair at a garage sale. I could definitely change them up to what we're looking for. Danny your getting the old man look .lol
Being an engineer myself, I understand the importance of data and measurements. However when it comes to speakers, imagine a world where all speakers had flat response. How boring. The fact that speakers DO color the sound makes some of them more exciting to listen to and means you can find the one that sounds best to you.
Speakers can measure "flat" and still be very fun and engaging, dare i say "exciting," to listen too without having a boosed treble or bass. Just as there are speakers that measure really well, but also sound very dull. But in the end it's if you are getting what you want out of your speakers that matters.
Thats funny that Yamaha put a berilium driver in here as a selling point but sort failed on many levels to make a coherent speaker all around. Were they measuring speakers back when these were made Danny? Do you think they ignored the obvious issues or were they unaware?
I appreciate that this GR guy wants to upgrade speakers in general, but in this case he is just clueless. The Yamaha NS1000m are among the most transparent, dynamic and neutral speakers ever made. Keep the original crossover design, do some widely available simple tweaks, use some very good amp (preferably tube) and you will not ever want to buy any other speaker.
Thank you so much for making this video! Although I love vintage receivers and amps and I do think they can sound very very good, speakers more than about 25 years old are another story. The vintage people need to understand that they never did sound accurate and most can't. Take a look at some Sansui speakers from the 70's. Nice to look at but the wooden grills themselves are enough to make a big mess of the sound. 95% of old speakers don't have much of a chance of sounding good ever imo without spending gobs of money.
Maybe you are right. I would need to hear them. About what year were these made? I also would love to see them tested through GR-Research. My bet is they are pretty messed up compared to a new $800 speaker made today. But then again there are tons of bad $2,000 made today.@@hastingspiper9266
Very interesting video as usual, well done. Btw, do you happen to have 6.5K laying around to solve Thomas and Stereo's Indonesian new speaker from Indonesia(Alexandria Audio, The Monitor) being too aggressive ;)
Ah ,,, what is it they say ,,, never meet your heroes ,, have you done the NS10M yet , it was another must have of the time , every near field space seemed full of them.
Danny did the NS10M back in 2013. When I was setting up the kit page for the NS1000, I went ahead and made a page for the NS10M kit as well, showing the before & after measurements. It was an equally big transformation.
Hi Danny I'm always fascinated by your take on speaker manufacturers poor crossovers and your word cheesy parts😆..My question is you said you spent all day on the NS1000s do you run a electronic computer program that tells you frequency faults and the program tells you what specific parts to remedy the problem or is trial.and error and how much emphasis is actually down to your ears when listening to the speakers when you tweek the crossovers for the final decision on approval of the sound?Apologize for the long question.. You're friends Down Under.🇭🇲👍 18:51
I do not use software packages that will theorize a result. I use nothing but experience to know what the drivers need. I also spend many hours comparing and listening to ever signal part that I have in stock to know exactly what the audible effect is going to be.
with trained ear, you can tell what a speaker need. measurement just to confirm it. newbie cannot know what to listen for. this stuffs is complex. good luck :)
Would there be a non electronic way to damp the ringing? I'm trying to learn a bit about this stuff. Could those driver baskets or another physical part be cushioned or something like that in an effort to help?
Yes and no. If the ringing is caused by the basket, it can be wrapped with insulation putty rope. If the ringing is caused by the cone, then about the only thing you can do it put plasticine or something lightweight like a bit of foam tape on it. The issue is you are adding weight to the cone, so it will not respond as fast. Back in the day, it was common to see speakers with a bit of poster putty stuck to the cone. Ringing like this is why so many of us hate metal drivers. They tend to ring and sound harsh and fatiguing. Paper cones do not ring, but suffer from break-up (the cone itself flexes). Some modern composites have some self-damping like paper, but are stiff enough to resist break-up. They tend to be a bit heavier than paper, so sound less crisp. It is all a compromise. The ideal cone material has the lowest possible mass, the highest possible stiffness, and the highest possible self-damping characteristics. In the real world, you really only get to pick two of the three.
@@joshua43214 Aerogel sandwich, a la Mission. low mass, good damping, middleing stiffness a little better than paper. Or you could go with doped paper. As in all things engineering, it's a series of trade offs and where you want to make them.
Danny upgraded some NS10Ms sent back in 2013, I put up a page for the NS10M right after getting the NS1000M page up. The page includes the before & after measurements. It was also a big transformation in performance from the stock.
As much as this was a great salvage job Danny, spending $1000 on the upgrade kit would be better spent on a new speaker. Maybe these Yamahas were a bad example but they seem inherently flawed. Nostalgia is the correct word here.
Yeah, but good luck finding a new speaker in this price range that doesn't also need an upgrade. For those that own these and want to keep them, it is a fun project that will restore them to much better than new form.
@@dannyrichie9743 maybe one of your new speaker kits? Or add in the sale price of moving the NS1000 on. I do take your point though. With only $1000 you would need to carefully research your new choice. Perhaps shortlist some products reviewed on Audio Science Review? As a man who (rightly) promotes the virtues of good speaker measurements, you may like what you read there. And I suspect many of your viewers would too. 😊👍🏻
@@mattholland315 You might want to put a little more faith into someone that actually has a playback system and actually listens and knows what to listen for. Also, if you are looking for a high performing modern old school speaker then have a look at our Brute model.
@@BostonMike68 I haven't had time to watch the video, but this model goes back to the 70s. Stereophile's venerable J. Gordon Holt did a review of them.
@scottbernard8824 I'm not sure exactly but he said those were the first to use berlium tweeters and mid domes but I don't know what models came out before those.
@@BostonMike68 Later I'll link to the article, which talks about beryllium drivers, or just Google NS1000M review Stereophile. It's from the late 70s, I think.
Interesting to see my original back in the day rejection of the NS-1000M so well validated with objective measurements. And says so much about those that found it so appealing.
What you did made it a flat frequency and that means you have to take the speakers out more into the room. and it's Yamaha speakers were not made for being placed out in the room. That's why you get such a big difference in what you're doing.
@@dannyrichie9743Well, if you have a hump in the midrange, then you have to get more support from the bass from the wall, but if you have a straighter frequency, you might as well have it out into the room, so the speaker releases better in and of itself as well.
I have a mint condition pair of next generation NS2000 in storage for many years. I wonder how much better they sound and how much improvement can be made for them?
They are basically the same with a different cabinet. Don`t touch them if you can and keep them as original as possible. They are worth much more than a tinkered version.
Interesting to compare original to modified... Quad 303s were altered in HiFi News circuit redone... And recapped.. The reviewer liked the original 1967 more
Back in the day (early 80's) when I was shopping for speakers and ended up with the same model Boston Acoustics A100 I'm using now, I always thought the Yamaha speakers were built more for show than for sound. I love my Yamaha receiver but I never desired a Yamaha speaker. edit: after watching the entire video, with the kit that speaker does look pretty nice.
@@veroman007 To be fair I never heard the model in the video (maybe I did, I was shopping most of the time at a Navy Exchange in Italy during a Med cruise in 1983). My best friend got JBL Studio Monitors for just a little more than I spent on the A100s and I kind of wish I had those instead. We were room mates in a big house and we'd put my receiver and tt (Yamaha R1000 and JVC with Shure V15) on his speakers and that was the combo.
I actually had the monster A400's back in the 80's, and was blown away by their tremendous dynamics and LF extension. With dual 8" woofers on a large baffle, sealed cab.... the low end was sooooo smooth and powerful. I wish i still owned them.
Why did HiFi switch from multiple different drivers to a more single driver design? Benefits of single driver vs multi driver? All the same or different drivers. Could you make a video explaining that kind of stuff? I'm curious on your take.
@@intothevoid9831 true, but I think there was a clear shift from large faced boxes with multi sized drivers all over to tall vertical stacks of multiple similar cones, and now I see lots more single driver options popping up as hi-fi. But yeah some companies still do the front arrangement set up. Id be curious to know why. I'm sure there is also some aesthetic nostalgia going on as well.
![เหนื่อยหน่อยนะ (SOMEONE LIKE ME) - GEMINI Prod. by URBOYTJ [ OFFICIAL MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/M55XjfhbrNw/mqdefault.jpg)
In the early 90's while working as an audio engineer in the film/TV industry I managed to obtain a pair of NS-1000's from a facility that was closing. I was really excited to have a pair of these iconic speakers, but never really had an opportunity to do much more than hook them up and verify that they worked before they met their demise in the 94 earthquake here in Los Angeles. Since then I've always regretted not having them in my collection. I don't feel so bad now. Funny, because at the time, these were "reference" monitors in control rooms all around the area.
Cool story bro
people were using their ears, then
Sure you’re not talking about the NS-10m as the studio reference?
@@rapfreak7797 Oh. Every dubbing stage or control room had NS-10s on the console. I think I have a pair in my garage in fact.
The 94 earthquake in Los Angeles was caused by the NS-1000's thunderous bass
I still use my 1000m's as my daily setup and still love them, had them for around 15 years now, got them from a friend who got them new in 1991. Potentiometers at 0 seems to be the best for me. I will never be getting rid of these...
Thank you Danny. I am in the process of restoring my NS1000’s and was planning on sending them to you to fix the issues. And thank you to the person who sent his speaker in so I didn’t have to ship mine 🤗
Hi 👋 Tom, if you’re not going to repair these loudspeakers as stock I would look at selling them to the vintage collector to retain fair blue book or slightly below blue book and then purchase a brand new pair of GR Research speakers. These loudspeakers will sell for the price of a cup of coffee even with 1,000 in DIY modifications. They will sell for many cups of coffee ☕️ without any modifications. The drivers are in fine condition but are older and measuring there dc resistance at the crossover frequencies may or maybe not part of the original voice. Other t/small may not be available as well. Danny builds new loudspeakers that can easily match the drive units for his own designs and supports artistic integrity of the loudspeakers cabinet 🗄️ . If a change in sound is needed,then change the loudspeakers. If you are going to keep the Yamaha for aesthetic and or nostalgia then by all means improve them however you like 👍 Cheers.
I plan on using them@@gg.6967
@@gg.6967 The NS1000 is going up in value like crazy, 750 euros 10 years ago, today 1200-1500.
Wow! You got lucky enjoy the restoration process it should be fun
FYI I bought these new in 1977 and they haven't been the outstanding speakers that many think they are. Danny's kit might be the fix to make them sound better. I had saved a rebuild suggestion from another website that probably does some of the things Danny's kit does. The bottom line is that they always sounded a little too bright and the woofer sounded weak. I understand where you are coming from, but the chance to fix the factory issues and enjoy these speakers better than factory is worth it to me.@@gg.6967
This example continues to show Danny’s commitment to taking on challenges and improving the listening experience no matter how difficult. Great outcome on this one as well. Congrats!!
Still have a pair that I purchased in 1983 and they look as good as they did then. Continue to use them in my entertainment system. The issues you highlighted are real and have always bothered me but the detail has always been impressive. Certainly something to consider. Thanks for tackling!
You should definitely get the kit. It’s allot of fun!
The old vs new impedance data tells the story very well. It actually shows all the signs of intelligent corrections and not just "electrical" crossover, rather, a true acoustic correction filter. I also very much appreciate pulling the level across the board down to align better to the sealed box response, I'm sure they sound far fuller on the bottom end now.
I'm a bit surprised to hear the 1st order filter for the mid-range high-pass (assuming that's what you meant when you said "on the bottom" as that's how I would conceptualize the high-pass). I always run into problems trying to achieve a usable slope on a 1st order filter on the bottom of a mid as they always wind up with a nasty peak in response around resonance since the first order just has no way to combat this. Also usually runs into excursion/distortion problems if driven hard.
I do believe that the hyper-expensive parts are going to be wasted here on these mediocre drivers. I would just use basic 18AWG Airs for the tweeter/mids, iron cores for the woofer, and cheap poly caps all around. I might spring for some "audio grade" resistors because they are only a few bucks a pop and they look cool, but otherwise, nope. These drivers all suck way too much to throw any sonicaps at.
@@asterixx6878 An old-school crossover that is "calculated" will often maintain relatively even impedance through the band, or at least, level through each drivers band, with peaks at resonances and sometimes crossover points depending on whether they targeted an acoustic or electrically flat crossover calc. These were often the norm back when amplifiers were sensitive to differences in load across the band, and in some cases, these designs actually did sound better on those old amps that would generate different levels of gain into different levels of impedance.
Modern crossover designs can largely ignore concerns about maintaining a flat impedance curve, as modern amps act like near-perfect-gain devices into a wide range of impedance, since they have effectively 0 ohm output impedance. 3 ohms is a good lower limit to aim at to ensure the resistance of wire and crossover parts doesn't start to dominate the circuit too much, though I like to aim for 5+ ohm when feasible.
A simulated crossover built for the modern world, will have obvious signs of acoustic corrections, like slanted impedance curves, and especially more noteworthy lumps and bumps around crossover frequency as the summation of 2 drivers is carefully corrected and aligned to produce flat acoustic response in-phase on target. It would be remarkably rare to see a pair of drivers sum flat with a "calculated" crossover that produces a classic impedance curve.
If you show me an impedance curve that looks like the designer was either targeting a flat impedance curve, or that wound up that way due to calculated component values, I will assume that the acoustic response of the system has NOT been tuned flat through modern measured/simulated crossover design.
Those speakers were introduced in the 70's. Compared to what else was available, their sound was pretty amazing. First time I heard them was at the Perth Audio Show. The music being used to demo them was Christopher Cross - Sailing and the Sheffield Lab Thelma Houston album.
Considering the time of their release, there is today significantly more knowledge, tech and research available as opposed to then. Perhaps there shou;d be a bit more credit given to those pioneers whose efforts and forward thinking got us to where we are today.
Nobody else that I can think of back then was using Beryllium drivers, and even today, there are probably only a handful.
Totally agree!
I've listened to well over 500 speakers in my lifetime, from the Magneplanar Tympani's down to the venerable Rogers LS3/5a's, and everything in between. As a musician, I've played through just about everything that's out there.
First off, let me say that the Sheffield Thelma Houston disc is phenomenal. When the horns kick in on "I've Got The Music In Me", it brought tears. The Tympani's did true justice on that cut.
Until...the NS1000M's. The clarity was like glass slowly cracking...you could actually feel her vocals in your spine.
I would like to enter another album, Earl Klugh's Finger Paintings. The cut "This Time", was a sonic miracle. There's a sound of clip clop/castanets in the background. They start 4 feet BEHIND your left shoulder, continue across the stage, all the way to BEHIND your right shoulder! I've never heard such clarity and separation in my life!
That started a lifelong crusade to one day have a pair in front of me. That started over 40 years ago, and I still hold onto that dream...
One can dream, am I right?
I lust after them too but have yet to find a pair that I wanted to buy that wasn’t way overpriced. In the interim I bought a pair of Celestion Ditton 551 and upgraded the tweeters to Morel 448. I haven’t daydreamed about the NS-1000 in a long time…..
When this speaker was released in 1974, everything else out there was crap. These guys wrote the book on product/process/QE for beryllium drivers back then.
Not all were crap.. Radford speakers for example used all air core inductors and poly caps in their crossovers. All non ferrous materials in the cabinet and binding posts. Litz wire throughout. 1975.
@@hastingspiper9266 and the slightly later 104/2 which was another stunner from Kef (they sit beside my Radford M180s:)
Very few did and most had low quality crossovers not to mention at the time they all used chipboard ( particle board ) to build their cabinets, which is low quality. The NS1000m were one of the few loudspeakers that was built right ( even that has chipboard cabs ) weighs in at 68 lbs I think, braced ( most speakers were not then ) well damped etc... sold for over 20 yrs... I don't think there is another manufacture in history that has done that. Obviously a few people liked them.
Since these speakers are so common and recognized, it would be interesting to do a double blind test between a stock NS-1000M speaker and the GR upgraded version to see which speaker the majority of listeners pick as their favorite. Could make for a very cool video!
That is kind of like having people taste fresh verses soured milk and asking them which one they like.
@@dannyrichie9743Good answer Danny👌👍
My buddy helped me in a single-blind test (pushing the A-B buttons on the receiver) for the B&W CDM-1NT speakers (I owned two pair at the time). The GR-Research upgrade made this speaker sound fuller, richer, and more 3-dimensional. At first I didn't like it - I was used to the "house sound" which turned out to be nothing more than a scooped out middle, at best. After a while, I was starting to comprehend what was really happening. The non-upgraded speaker sounded like a hollow tin can in comparison. I wouldn't have noticed the difference if I hadn't tried this upgrade. If you have the time to do it, I highly recommend it. What I've seen since I did that upgrade over a year ago is that to get these type of crossover components already built-in, you have to spend $15K plus for a pair of consumer-grade speakers. This one continues to be one of those dirty little secrets in the industry, but the DIY movement is slowly bursting that bubble. And even if you decided to just upgrade what you have with better components, you are not benefitting from Danny's engineering, which corrects other errors in the original design.
@@dannyrichie9743 Then it should be really easy for the listeners, and a great marketing video for GR Research!
They have more bass too which would make things sound better. There may be some who feel the old speaker has "better vocals" due to the increased midrange output.
Also level matching speakers with such varying response can be tricky as with some songs speaker A will seem louder, with other songs speaker B will sound louder
Good job! And thanks for your effort to keep vintage stuff up to date.
Like vintage JBL's, the Yamaha NS-1000's have collectible value. If you're starting from scratch, the big-box GR Brutes would do even better for about $2K/pair with the CNC-cut flat packs.
Just got done reading all the comments, 7 hours after your post. And this is the best post of all
Thanks for enlightening on the collectability of NS 1000s..Nobody has known this for the last 25yrs
The old jbls sound great thougb
@@matthewtaylor7355 what you are talking about? Troel Gravesen done it mate .
Hope this inspires some people to do the same to their vintage speakers. Specially those with good drivers. The difference a high quality crossover makes, has to be experienced to listen to what was missing. Everything improves so much.
Although I didn't have the capacity to redesign the crossover I did a full rebuild on a pair of 1985 Klipsch Forte 1's, I did the cabinet bracing and no res that had been recommended for the 3's, used Dynamite on the horns, rewired with Danny's wire, and put the crossovers outboard and used really nice parts. And the difference with just the parts and really working on dampening some resonances was enormous. I also use Danny's kit on a pair of RP600m's and that was killer. If I have the resources I would love to see what he would do with the Forte one!
@@chelillingworth9466 If you like a big three way speaker like that then consider our Brute model.
@@dannyrichie9743 I just saw pictures of the internal bracing on the brute.... That is absolutely amazing especially after seeing how the fortes are constructed...super impressed with those brute cabinets!!! So tempting
@@chelillingworth9466 For clean uncolored bass, that is the way it has to be.
Man, Danny, That sure was a Lot of work, I sure hope you earn your money back. With you as inspiration I just finished developing new XO's for 3 pairs of Linn Tukans and 2 pairs of their AV5110's as the Atmos surrounds in our new home Home Theater here in Germany. Keep up the great work and thanks again for all that you do for us.
I have upgraded two pairs of those speakers. Actually Yamahas original sound was already good(by the way it was a big surprise to me). But i still decided to change the original filter Layout(never used any notches!) and filter components.
Also I changed the inner wiring, terminals, bypassed the regulators and evened R and L speaker.
The final result was awesome. The details, air, imaging, staging and everything else was there and the all the annoying sharpness was gone. Also the bass control was awesome(closed box with a right size and with q-factor 0.7 worked perfectly)
But there was one trick that I did. As those speakers have to be put on the speaker stand anyway, the stand can be built exactly the height that is needed. So first when I measured the speaker element responses, I run to the similar problems as Dan. But then I fast realized, that i all works much better, if the listening height(sweet spot) is not at the tweeter level as it usualy, but rather on the midrange height. So i took new measurements and designed a new filter from that new perspective.
The result was almost a straight line within +/-1 db, the phase alignment(between different speaker elements worked perfectly and there were no such big problems (as Danny had) while i took the off-axis measurements (from the midrange height).
The original crossover points 450hz and 4500hz worked really well and there was no need to change them. All the filters i used, were 2. order.
So my final point is - those speakers have a great potential and with a smart upgrade, they can be surprisingly good :)
Ear level of 1000s and 690s are at centre of the speaker as manuals says! Anyway I agree with mods but they are amazing even without any mod. And if someone decide to do mods do it step by step starting from dedicated stands!
What was the height of the stand?
The speakers came with potentiometers for the mids and highs so u could adjust the response quite a bit + or - . Wonder why Danny didn't cover that aspect in detail
wondering the same thing... Could it be to "hide" the fact that these adjustments can be used to achieve some of the same improvements he did with the redesign? hmmm....
I have a bunch of measurements showing what happens with the adjustments. I left them where they measured the best (the 0 position) for the stock measurements.
I would consider taking them out of the signal path all together. There could be a gain in quality from eliminating them.
@@JR-ho5qm We did not include their use in the upgrade.
@JR-ho5qm & what add resistors ? No difference
Ideal with valves. Female vocals clear , powerful ,solid and loud. Clinical to but revealing.
Just bought my set of NS-1000s, your kit is next on my shopping list 😁
What a great job Danny but not sure I would criticize the engineers much since this speaker was designed about 50 years ago! I bought mine used around 1982 and had many years of service and still have them though no longer in use. A quick observation though. I just went back and looked at my in-room Audyssey readings and my readings were so different from yours, I don’t think I could consider your crossover even though I consider it expertly designed. The hump starting at 500 hz, 450 being the original crossover I believe, just doesn’t exist for me-at all. The rise just below 2k is a dip for me and there is also zero rise in the 8k range. I realize I’m not using a calibrated mic and my readings are at listening position, 8.5 ft away, but that is a big difference from what you measured. With all that said, I didn’t realize it until I got my new speakers but those Yamahas were fatiguing. I never just sat down and listened to them for hours and that is just not an issue with my new speakers-modern design, good crossovers, good drivers. Thanks again for your work. Mabe
There is a big difference in a room response measurement and a speaker measurement (zero room reflections). That fatigue you speak of is mostly due to the resonances issues that I notched out.
I have a pair that I inherited from my in laws..they played the heck out of them in the 70s and then they went silent thru the mid 80s, 90s and until today where they are in my vintage Yamaha collection…they sound really good with a sub..and the mods and highs dialed down….I would be interested in taking them to Danny.. oh , and Yamaha makes a “new” version of these speaker that go for 15Gs a pair ..NS 5000 M. .
They sound much better
😊 I would also like to look at STEP RESPONS before and after altering the acoustic filters. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
These speakers have been heavily modded in the UK for years... Encouraged by hi fi mags... Now the same mags are saying they prefer the originals.. It creates a market just like these mods
That`s right, don`t touch these speakers, they are true classics thet need to be restored exactly the way they where. No tinkering.
A thorough job Danny!
The NS1000M have been my primary listening pair for quite a few years now and I’ve had them in various iterations. Nothing else I’ve heard can compete - especially for the price.
I’ve got mine in a tri-amp setup with a DSP (surprisingly a decent noise floor). I’ve modified the crossover design with similar changes to the ones you outline.
Interestingly I don’t think I have the 1.8-2k ringing in the mid. There is no evident peak in the response on measuring and listening. I have to fetch out the graphs to confirm. I know the fibreglass dampening behind the beryllium cone can be upset/disrupted over time and I got mine replaced. Additionally I removed the protective grill. Perhaps age and the grill were the primary causes for this?
Keep in mind that I am not measuring a room response. I am measuring the speaker only without room reflections.
@@dannyrichie9743 thanks so much for the response! Yeah, fantastic. I’ve been going off my gated measurements but again I’m sure you have a much more sophisticated measuring configuration than my mere UMIK-1 haha. Thanks for the honest breakdown of this.
@@Bombo503 you don't need anything sophisticated. Place your UMIK-1 right next to the midrange grill, turn off tweeter, run a sweep tone. Run the decay analysis in REW and you won't find the resonance at 1.8kHz. Your approach with tramping and digital crossover is the best approach from technical point of view, assuming you are using good quality components.
@@Bombo503 what values you have used in dsp for active crossover if you can share that?
I have a pair of ns500’s and love em. I have read that they are tamer in the midrange than the 1000’s.
I have both speakers, and the 500M's are a lot easier on the ears with most SS amps. If you own a good class A tube amplifier however, the 1000M's cleans their clock.
@@user-bc6ok1yh4s
That is the key… a good class A tube amp. I love mine with the NS-1000’s
I have a pair of Japanese-made Coral DX-7 speakers that look almost identical. A friend of mine is rebuilding the crossovers by replacing the parts with high-grade parts but keeping the crossover design the same. I would have loved to send you one speaker for testing first, but I live in Japan, and sending this large, heavy speaker to you would cost too much money. I sure hope they sound good when my friend completes the job.
That's funny I also have a pair of DX-7's from Japan but I live in Thailand strange that Coral made these about 10years before the Yamahas I wonder if the the drivers were supplied to them or paid by Yamaha to copy or use as Coral made a whole load of drivers themselves
Danny getting shredded up! Looking like an athlete not some speaker nerd. Haha rock on man. Being fit feels great
These are already game-changing speakers, that compare very favourably to newer speakers that cost multiples of thousands. I have a pair. What is missing in your sales pitch is a before your mods and after commentary on the sound. Have you actually listened to them ? Their ability to replicate the actual sound of the music being played is phenomenal. You make them sound like a crappy pair speakers before your mods and the hundreds of reviews from actual owners tell a very different story.
You do make a big point, something that Danny doesn't do and feels unnecessary to do as his measurements tells all. In comparison take a look at Troels Gravesen upgrade kit on these ( 6 yrs ago ) designing a new crossover he then listens to them ( not a single unit ) and adjust if necessary, read his comments, its worth it.
Reading messages like this is always funny to me.
Do you really think a response curve that is choppy and all over the place will sound better than a smooth and accurate one? Is a high level of driver resonance better than less driver resonance? Is extreme comb filtering (cancellation) in the vertical off axis better then an improved driver integration and being more in phase over a wide range? Is extreme cabinet resonances better then a cabinet with damped out resonances? Is the smearing effect of cheap electrolytic caps better then the clean signal transfer of top level poly caps? Is the smearing caused by iron core inductors better then the cleaner sounding air core inductors? Are the cheap and old sand cast resistors better sounding then new noninductive wire wound type? Is the thin and old oxidized internal wire with PVC on it better then new four 9's pure solid core Copper in polyethene? Are the push on style connectors that take only bare wire and have steal parts in them better then tube connectors?
There was also nothing phenomenal about this speaker. It is a dated vintage speaker that was hard to listen to in the beginning. Comparing it to what we did with it is like showing up to a new car dealership in a covered wagon and asking the salesman if they have any new cars that ride as good as your covered wagon.
@@cruise2023 I have had his work sent to me as well: th-cam.com/video/5xsfQi1hlzU/w-d-xo.html
That one was a disaster that was one of the biggest transformations that I have done.
@@dannyrichie9743 Well thanks for replying , even it it was in a condescending manner.
History and numbers do not lie. These speakers have had glowing reviews ever since they were produced and still do ! There are revered as iconic speakers and with good reason, because although you may not think so , they do sound great, even now. They were made out of market leading materials, sold in the hundred of thousands and were designed in the height of the HIFI era , which meant that a lot of thought would have gone into their design by the Yamaha team, probably in the hundreds in number - and yet you believe you can better the sound. Music is about listening - it is a shame you don’t provide real proof of the success of your designs with comparisons of before & after. I wonder why ?
@@highfell1 They are iconic and ahead of their time in some ways. However, in their stock form they don't hold a candle to even our least expensive kits, and they are not even close. They are in no way any performance bench mark. By todays standards they are a joke.
What do you want? Do you want me to make some in room recordings for you to play back as a compressed TH-cam file through your laptop? That bottlenecks hearing what we've done.
The proof of the improvement is a given. Questioning the results is a little insulting. They have been improved in every way.
Imagine showing up at a hot rod shop that does upgrades on sports cars and they tell you they have added a super charger. The engine makes 200 more horsepower. They changed the converter to let it launch at a higher rpm. They changed the suspension to allow it to transfer weight to the rear wheels. They swapped out the rear tires for drag radials for better traction, and other modifications to improve performance.... They you say to them, but did you have a race of the stock version compared to the new version to see if it really does run faster? They already know that everything they did makes the car faster. They do it all the time. They know the result of each and every modification.
Upgrading speakers for us is the same way. We know the exact result of every single part, every wire, and every change. We know exactly what happens when we add No Rez to the cabinet walls. We do all of this all the time. It's our jobs. We are professional in the field. We know what the results will sound like compared to stock. We've bad listening comparisons of every single part.
The proof is clear.
i myself have a pair of pioneer CS-A700, also sealed enclosure and yeah lots of ring issues as well BUT once you update the crossover parts and fill the boxes with glass fiber to reduce the ring they sound just amazing silky smooth with crazy humongous soundstage
Wow! you have certainly opened up a debate of comments on these Yamaha's. You could also say the same for the vintage JBL loudspeakers of the same era , that people love so much. They all need help but its the JBL sound that they like. I agree with the upgrade but without it, if you like the sound, them that is all that matters, whether they measure well or not.
I think it’s important to keep in mind that when engineers use “reference” monitors, this is in order to mix for the average listening experience and have a consistent reference of whether a mix will sound good on the average system, be it a TV or a typical hifi setup of the period. Much like the NS-10, not an amazing speaker but reliable and consistent.
You couldn't be any more correct, so well said!
For the 1000M's intended purpose and design, they were the best.
This is unrelated: you're looking great Danny! Loving the facial hair and haircut combo. Glad to see you're looking good.
The haircut style is called the Avalon it's in the Paul Mitchell book of modern hairstyles and was sculpted by Zohan he likes it's silky smooth 😂😂
@@BostonMike68 The haircut style is called Middle Class As*hole
You know its an iconic speaker when - nearly 50 years later - the company releases the NS-5000....looking very similar, and costing $15,000. The vintage models caught my EYE every time i saw them, but i was listening to Magnepan Tympani 1-C's and the were just as "cool"....(and sounded better). Thanks for all you do, Danny. I'm reeeeally leaning toward pulling the trigger on a pair of NX-Otica's soon. I think the NX-Treme are probably a little large for my listening area, although I'll research it further. Really enjoy your channel and your willingness to share your knowledge.
Sacrificing sensitivity to boost lower-levels is key for tuning. In my car, the lowest EQ value is 50hz, but I want boost at 30hz, so I lower EQ in the sub's range, especially @ 50hz. 50hz is cabin-boosted to the moon anyways. To counter the lowered EQ, I add gain to the subwoofer output.
No word about the effect of the switches on the front.
We tried them in different positions and left them where the response was the most linear (0 settings). When we redesigned them it did not put that stuff into the signal path for obvious reasons.
Danny just keep taking things to the next level. I would like to see him take a speaker like a Martin Logan 60 series and take it to the next level or a Bowers and Wilson's 700 series.
We're game to work on most anything that gets sent our way.
I owned a pair of these for 10 years or so. I could never get them sounding right with whatever I used with them but they weren't without merit.
Well done. Good video which highlights issues which would be very common in a lot of Vintage speakers. Back then designers chased large woofers, high efficiency (for the reasons you mentioned) but it was always at the expense of sound quality. Also, I would think the various ringing and uneven response issues could also be cabinet or diffraction issues too? Again back then they loved putting multiple chrome rings around drivers to make them look good, but it was all at the expense of sound quality, causing diffraction and too much driver spacing. Maybe they didn't know about this stuff back then?
The NS-1000M surrounds are not chrome, they're anodised aluminium - and play next to no part in the overall sound. The metal driver grilles are more invasive, but again relatively quiet.
Thanks for this very interesting review. I never heard about that 1800Hz resonance. There is a lot of damping stuff behind the mid dome, maybe some black damping ‘dot’ has come off the back of the dome? At Hifi-selbstbau in Germany they have tested these mids as one of the best still today. They didn’t like the tweeter at all though and proposed an AMT.
I am sure with your upgrade this is going to be a really nice speaker (again).
why would you hear about something that doesn't exists? I provided measurements in the comments section showing measurements of a couple midrange drivers. This mid is definitely one of the best.
I own a pair of the Yamaha NS 500 2 way. They still sound good, it would be nice to upgrade them as you did on these.
Send one in.
I recently attempted to upgrade my NS-500’s only to find the access panel to the crossover components encased in a clear thick resin layer. Don’t really know why or what a solution might be.
Why don’t you make a speaker for the market? I don’t have a clue about electronics, but I get mesmerized watching your channel. Have you ever had a chance to work on the Hyperion 968 and if so, any upgrades?
Thank you-I will have another go at these using your recomendations.
I saw a video that said that a main engineer of JBL left that company and moved to Yamaha. This NS-1000M was their answer to the JBL L100. I never played the two against each other to see which one sounded the best.
The L100's / 4311's are more enjoyable, as I still own both of them. The NS's are cool & rarer but more desirable as collector's item rather than a speaker.
Nice one.
Been curious about these since their debut. I've never worked on, or heard them in any capacity despite experiencing just about everything else!
So ... very interesting to see them assessed. Nice work on the fix.
Sucks pulling down that midband energy capability, but its at an easier load then maybe it's a push.
Driver close-ups would've been nice as would more on your take of the cabinet.
Maybe I missed it.
Regardless ... this was wonderful material here, these Yamahas.
I remember one thing, their great looks and slick magazine advertising were spectacular.
Again, nice one.
From what I understand, when you make these changes, you only use one speaker...very interesting! I also noticed that you find mistakes in a lot of speakers... are all the manufacturers in error and only you are right? Engineers may work for years to release a product and then you come and find errors and in one afternoon you have the solution. I have to admit that it is a good business idea.
We have tools today that companies didn't have back in the 70's and 80's. So it is no surprise that we can find issues quickly and easily that they could not see and address back in the day. Also keep in mind that customers don't send us great speakers that they love and don't want to change. They send in speakers that don't sound they way they wish they did. So we typically get the cheaply made or problematic models.
You ask the right questions, now ask ask yourself what`s in for him.
I think he`s a know it all, that doesn`t care about respect for sound, as long as it measures well. And sounds according to HIS liking.
He just sells you some miracle cure, and people buy it because they don`t know better.
If I'm not mistaken Zaph tested this tweeter about 10 years ago or so, and the tweeter looked considerably better than this.
moreover the midrange was mentioned on Martin Collloms' book as the lowest distortion midrange ever tested.
Keep in mind that the response is also dictated by the size of the baffle, surface reflections, and edge diffraction. So any application will make the response very different.
Zaph didn't do in box measurements of tweeters. I can't recall if he used IEC baffle dimensions but you are seeing a wonky tweeter further exacerbated by baffle diffraction. Likely the typical 2khz hump followed by 3Khz dip or thereabouts for a baffle this size
My Brother Was Stationed In Japan And
Yamaha Had
The Natural Sound Series
With The Beryllium Tweeters and Beryllium
Midrange And Non/Ported
Matched or Symmetrical
NS-1000 Where Export
By Yamaha
Yet The NS-890 Model
Where a 4 Way With
2 Beryllium Super Hi and
Mid Hi and Then Paper Mid
and The 12” Woofer These Where Non/Export
So My Brother Bought a Matched Set and Shipped
Them Over Where I Only Had Too Service
The 12” Woofer For
Re/Coning Still Used Them
Through a Phase Linear
700-B
The ESS Heil Wire Tweeter Have The Best Hi End From a Non/Paper Cone Tweeter Yet The Yamaha
NS-Series With Beryllium Tweeters Are Outstanding
You can buy the modern version, NS5000 for a mere $14,999. That includes the stands!
I have it. It is perhaps one of the most technologically advanced as far as speaker designs go in recent times and it plays ball against any high end Wilson, Magico, etc at any price. It required all the sim/tooling/novel prove-in for that brand new xylon application , not to mention all the smart engineering built into it for resonance control, etc. The doofuses at Wilson bought drivers from somebody else, i.e., Focal, put it in a box and charged the dumb dudes 80k. Go figure.
I never got rid of my ns1000x I'm still gonna send it to you
Thanks for the video and interesting measurements that you made.
Indeed the material for new crossovers (quality parts) is so hefty in price that the step to a full DSP's active version (again with quality parts, i.e. no Wondom/Dayton Audio cheapy) isn't much more expensive. I'd go for active, and maybe I will one day (have still the drivers of my old NS1000M).
Most DSP system's have a lot of bottlenecks that limit performance in the end. Doing it right is a LOT more expensive than a passive filter, and it leaves a lot of room for good electronics.
I'd be very curious to see how the new version that was just released would do against these. I'm betting the modified version here will sound better.
You might be right.
I used to own a pair of these, and loved them, but... you want to warn people who have left them idle for a long time to have the woofer checked for corrosion and magnet shift. They're known for it, and you wouldn't want to spend a grand on a crossover to then have your woofer self-destruct on the first listen due to crappy 70s glue.
I have a misused pair of the non-beryllium driver, little brother version (the NS-690) I have to repair at some point. I'm hoping they don't have similar ringing issues. Would definitely be interested in a revised crossover for those if anyone (not on the other side of the planet) sends you a pair to update.
Mega job Danny. Great transformation
These speakers were awesome when released, its a 40yr.old speaker and to me, they still.sound great, but mine have been sold off quite some time ago. Not saying I wouldnt want to buy them back again. But any speaker in 90s sound superior to the NS1000m. I love Yamaha and credit them on them being a pioneer to the audiophile world. The make musical products with engineering.
I would love you to measure a pair of Tannoy dual concentrics, particularly the vintage ones. They have their issues too I believe.
Wow. You did a great job with those.
The original is perfect for mnitoring, your modification looks amazing for music listening in a sofa . Great job, would love to listen to them modified. Peace
Thanks for your video!! Ive been looking for pair of these and knowing the age i will want a rebuilt crossover!
Dome midranges sound so good , but they are difficult to implement because their average resonant frequency is always around 400 Hz. , very difficult to cross to any woofer. That's why 4th order crossovers are frequently used , but as much as I like them , I tend to avoid them altogether.
Was in the retail trade when these came out in the mid ‘70s, and I’d be interested in Danny’s - or any other folks’ here opinion of the NS690s - soft dome mid and tweeter. Still a bit wider spacing of acoustic centres than might now be considered optimal, but they were for my ears and wallet at the time a sweet spot.
Actually ended up with a pair of NS670s and CA1000 from a sales promo contest at the time, and kept those until upgrading to Dahlquist DQ10 and passive sub - but that’s a war story for another time.
I don't think they are pure beryllium but rather some kind of alloy like aluminum covered with Be dust as I've seen them dented in already, they most certainly don't shatter immediately.
Also, if you still have them at home - you MUST re-glue the magnet to the woofer basket! They are notorious for letting go and if the speaker is on it's side when that happens - it will wreck the voice coil.
48 years have elapsed since they left the factory. Not a major surprise it has problems.
It would be nice to get the parts list at a price of course for those of us that want to choose our own cap brand
Then you wouldn't be getting out upgrade.
It would be fun to listen to the upgrade. Never liket the NS series, ok I only heard the NS 2000 that have the carbon-fiber drivers but It sounded as You described the NS 1000. And watching the graph and Your explanation it makes seance what I heard back then.
These were a big deal back in the day. Not to my taste, but they were very popular. I was more an EPI kinda guy, but whatever ... With your mods, I'm sure I would really like these now. Of course my tastes have changed, so Infinity's in the LP system, and BA Towers for the AV system. You are absolutely right that power is readily available now. We had to hock the house to get big usable power back then. Glad you are offering crossover kits to correct classic speakers. Well done 😊
OBTW - I've had some interesting one-offs using old CRT TV full range speakers in 2 cu ft boxes. Seems many of those old full range drivers were pretty good, mostly suffering from bad TV cabinets ...🙃
I'm impressed that you were able to, mostly, tame some really problematic drivers passively, albeit with a costly solution. This is one of those times where a DSP-based approach might be more cost effective, given the problems that these drivers presented with, and possibly preserved some of the efficiency that had to be sacrificed here. Truth be told, Danny managed to hold onto more efficient here than I would have thought possible. I would have guessed dropping closer to 84 dB to wrestle these artifacts into submission, but that's why Danny does what he does, and I continue to watch and learn!
Actually using DSP to correct those issues come with bottlenecks and limitations too. Doing it right using DSP can be much more costly.
@@user-db8hs6dy4m Ha, ha, ha, good luck with that. Most of the information necessary for designing a crossover properly are things that software doesn't even take into account.
Berylco was a private/gov financed plant built outside my home town during the 60s to turn beryllium ore from India into space components like the antenna on the lunar lander. It was going to take the coal regions into the atomic age but ended up with cancer and lung disease issues. A cousin of my uncle who worked there had a son born retarded which happen to several other workers...
Awesome work Danny.
Awesome redesign.
A tip for vintage speakers. Cut a rubber mat and put something of with the weight of a brick on top.
What does that do exactly?
@@PTS74 Alter the character of the speaker. It vibrates less.
Or in the case of this upgrade, line it with No Rez. That eats up the cabinet resonances.
@@dannyrichie9743 The original thick felt-like material lining will do this job quite nicely. No need to remove/replace. The cabinets on these are actually built incredibly well with Baltic Birch grade plywood. Far beyond their original price point at 1K. I have owned/restored at least 10 pairs of these over a 20+ year period. Also if you are an original crossover enthusiast (like myself), it is my understanding, the Silver caps Yamaha used were of very high quality and self-healing. (No need to replace those) I do replace the 47uf & 2.7uf electrolytics and leave everything else intact (typically use Mundorf E-cap series or sometimes opt for more expensive film caps if my budget allows). Also these speakers are very sensitive to the electronics you use to power them. (You cannot simply use a mass market receiver or amplifier to power them (including Yamaha electronics) and expect great results) For example, I use a 30 watt Class A Pass Labs Aleph 3 in conjunction with an Audible illusions 3B tube preamplifier and this complete combo sounds absoluetly incredible!!! (with the factory crossover design).
Yamaha has a new series at 21.200$ model ns5000 using Zilon. More than most Asian products aren't going to be anything other than cheesy. If I was to run across a pair at a garage sale. I could definitely change them up to what we're looking for. Danny your getting the old man look .lol
The tweeters are a bit fragile on these. Don't play them loud. Nice fairlly neutral and accurate sound otherwise.
Being an engineer myself, I understand the importance of data and measurements. However when it comes to speakers, imagine a world where all speakers had flat response. How boring. The fact that speakers DO color the sound makes some of them more exciting to listen to and means you can find the one that sounds best to you.
Speakers can measure "flat" and still be very fun and engaging, dare i say "exciting," to listen too without having a boosed treble or bass. Just as there are speakers that measure really well, but also sound very dull. But in the end it's if you are getting what you want out of your speakers that matters.
This video is for you: th-cam.com/video/Z0hXuEyNwh0/w-d-xo.htmlsi=fy2_Vm6p2ljSMhYg
Thats funny that Yamaha put a berilium driver in here as a selling point but sort failed on many levels to make a coherent speaker all around. Were they measuring speakers back when these were made Danny? Do you think they ignored the obvious issues or were they unaware?
It is hard to say.
With all this ringing, sounds like this speaker would be great for telephone calls
normal ns1000m doesn't have ringing problem at 1.8kHz. I have measured several sets.
Why not do a before and after sound comparison so we can hear the difference.
Someone in the US needs to send him a set of NS-500Ms now.
He won't be getting my pair anytime soon. Interesting topic and opinion though.
I appreciate that this GR guy wants to upgrade speakers in general, but in this case he is just clueless. The Yamaha NS1000m are among the most transparent, dynamic and neutral speakers ever made. Keep the original crossover design, do some widely available simple tweaks, use some very good amp (preferably tube) and you will not ever want to buy any other speaker.
Thank you so much for making this video! Although I love vintage receivers and amps and I do think they can sound very very good, speakers more than about 25 years old are another story. The vintage people need to understand that they never did sound accurate and most can't. Take a look at some Sansui speakers from the 70's. Nice to look at but the wooden grills themselves are enough to make a big mess of the sound. 95% of old speakers don't have much of a chance of sounding good ever imo without spending gobs of money.
Maybe you are right. I would need to hear them. About what year were these made? I also would love to see them tested through GR-Research. My bet is they are pretty messed up compared to a new $800 speaker made today. But then again there are tons of bad $2,000 made today.@@hastingspiper9266
Nice work Danny.
You should remove that phase plugs on mid and tweeter and try without them.
Very interesting video as usual, well done. Btw, do you happen to have 6.5K laying around to solve Thomas and Stereo's Indonesian new speaker from Indonesia(Alexandria Audio, The Monitor) being too aggressive ;)
Ah ,,, what is it they say ,,, never meet your heroes ,,
have you done the NS10M yet , it was another must have of the time , every near field space seemed full of them.
Danny did the NS10M back in 2013. When I was setting up the kit page for the NS1000, I went ahead and made a page for the NS10M kit as well, showing the before & after measurements. It was an equally big transformation.
@@Hobblesmrkat I shall go dig it out ,,, they were nasty little things , but those white cones were everywhere .
Hi Danny I'm always fascinated by your take on speaker manufacturers poor crossovers and your word cheesy parts😆..My question is you said you spent all day on the NS1000s do you run a electronic computer program that tells you frequency faults and the program tells you what specific parts to remedy the problem or is trial.and error and how much emphasis is actually down to your ears when listening to the speakers when you tweek the crossovers for the final decision on approval of the sound?Apologize for the long question.. You're friends Down Under.🇭🇲👍 18:51
I do not use software packages that will theorize a result. I use nothing but experience to know what the drivers need. I also spend many hours comparing and listening to ever signal part that I have in stock to know exactly what the audible effect is going to be.
He explained how he can tell what is wrong from the waterfall decays and frequency sweeps he just explained how he tested each driver individually. 😅
with trained ear, you can tell what a speaker need. measurement just to confirm it.
newbie cannot know what to listen for. this stuffs is complex. good luck :)
Wish you guys would do a Realistic Mach One upgrade. Btw what’s your shirt about Stone by Stone?
Would there be a non electronic way to damp the ringing? I'm trying to learn a bit about this stuff. Could those driver baskets or another physical part be cushioned or something like that in an effort to help?
Yes and no.
If the ringing is caused by the basket, it can be wrapped with insulation putty rope. If the ringing is caused by the cone, then about the only thing you can do it put plasticine or something lightweight like a bit of foam tape on it. The issue is you are adding weight to the cone, so it will not respond as fast. Back in the day, it was common to see speakers with a bit of poster putty stuck to the cone.
Ringing like this is why so many of us hate metal drivers. They tend to ring and sound harsh and fatiguing. Paper cones do not ring, but suffer from break-up (the cone itself flexes). Some modern composites have some self-damping like paper, but are stiff enough to resist break-up. They tend to be a bit heavier than paper, so sound less crisp. It is all a compromise.
The ideal cone material has the lowest possible mass, the highest possible stiffness, and the highest possible self-damping characteristics. In the real world, you really only get to pick two of the three.
@@joshua43214 Aerogel sandwich, a la Mission. low mass, good damping, middleing stiffness a little better than paper. Or you could go with doped paper. As in all things engineering, it's a series of trade offs and where you want to make them.
@@englishsteve1465Yes, aerogel has some real potential, its main issue is brittleness. It might turn out to be really good for midrange drivers
Why don't they make cones or domes out of carbon fibre? Too expensive? They build whole cars out of that stuff.
@@scotth6814 see magico
would love to see someone send him a ns 10m
Danny upgraded some NS10Ms sent back in 2013, I put up a page for the NS10M right after getting the NS1000M page up. The page includes the before & after measurements. It was also a big transformation in performance from the stock.
@@Hobblesmrkat thats a very interesting mod! it looks like some extra filtering on the woofer to bring down the classic midrange hump.
I was wondering if you bothered to measure the values of the old electrolytic caps in the stock crossover
Nope, not interested. Definitely not going to reuse them.
there are only a few electrolytic caps in this crossover since most of them are paper in oil caps.
Wow ...... This is way impressive 🎉
As much as this was a great salvage job Danny, spending $1000 on the upgrade kit would be better spent on a new speaker. Maybe these Yamahas were a bad example but they seem inherently flawed. Nostalgia is the correct word here.
Yeah, but good luck finding a new speaker in this price range that doesn't also need an upgrade. For those that own these and want to keep them, it is a fun project that will restore them to much better than new form.
@@dannyrichie9743 maybe one of your new speaker kits? Or add in the sale price of moving the NS1000 on. I do take your point though. With only $1000 you would need to carefully research your new choice. Perhaps shortlist some products reviewed on Audio Science Review? As a man who (rightly) promotes the virtues of good speaker measurements, you may like what you read there. And I suspect many of your viewers would too. 😊👍🏻
@@mattholland315 You might want to put a little more faith into someone that actually has a playback system and actually listens and knows what to listen for.
Also, if you are looking for a high performing modern old school speaker then have a look at our Brute model.
Excellent, Danny.
Almost bought a new pair for $500 in 1983, but they were too large to be shipped home when I was in the navy.
I thought that model came out in the 90s he said
@@BostonMike68 I haven't had time to watch the video, but this model goes back to the 70s. Stereophile's venerable J. Gordon Holt did a review of them.
@scottbernard8824 I'm not sure exactly but he said those were the first to use berlium tweeters and mid domes but I don't know what models came out before those.
@@BostonMike68 Later I'll link to the article, which talks about beryllium drivers, or just Google NS1000M review Stereophile. It's from the late 70s, I think.
Interesting to see my original back in the day rejection of the NS-1000M so well validated with objective measurements. And says so much about those that found it so appealing.
@glenncurry3041 Its just one opinion, sound is subjective.
@@cruise2023 Preferences are, sound isn't.
You turned a near-field monitor into a regular speaker, but that wasn't what Yamaha prioritized from the beginning.🎉
What I did to it has nothing to do with listening distance.
What you did made it a flat frequency and that means you have to take the speakers out more into the room. and it's Yamaha speakers were not made for being placed out in the room. That's why you get such a big difference in what you're doing.
@@batomatovic6286 Having a flat frequency response really has no correlation to how far a speaker has to be placed out into the room.
@@dannyrichie9743Well, if you have a hump in the midrange, then you have to get more support from the bass from the wall, but if you have a straighter frequency, you might as well have it out into the room, so the speaker releases better in and of itself as well.
I have a mint condition pair of next generation NS2000 in storage for many years. I wonder how much better they sound and how much improvement can be made for them?
Probably a lot.
They are basically the same with a different cabinet.
Don`t touch them if you can and keep them as original as possible.
They are worth much more than a tinkered version.
Interesting to compare original to modified... Quad 303s were altered in HiFi News circuit redone... And recapped.. The reviewer liked the original 1967 more
Back in the day (early 80's) when I was shopping for speakers and ended up with the same model Boston Acoustics A100 I'm using now, I always thought the Yamaha speakers were built more for show than for sound. I love my Yamaha receiver but I never desired a Yamaha speaker. edit: after watching the entire video, with the kit that speaker does look pretty nice.
I had the Boston Acoustic A120 back in the day, my first real speakers!
I had those same speakers I thought they were pretty darn good actually
@@veroman007 To be fair I never heard the model in the video (maybe I did, I was shopping most of the time at a Navy Exchange in Italy during a Med cruise in 1983). My best friend got JBL Studio Monitors for just a little more than I spent on the A100s and I kind of wish I had those instead. We were room mates in a big house and we'd put my receiver and tt (Yamaha R1000 and JVC with Shure V15) on his speakers and that was the combo.
I actually had the monster A400's back in the 80's, and was blown away by their tremendous dynamics and LF extension. With dual 8" woofers on a large baffle, sealed cab.... the low end was sooooo smooth and powerful. I wish i still owned them.
Please make a kit for my ALTEC Model 14's!
Hello! Why don’t you indicate phase characteristics in your videos? This is the second time I’ve asked this question, but you ignore it? Thank you!
Electrical or acoustical?
@@dannyrichie9743 Acoustical
@@home_lab I can do that. We typically don't show that as it is hard for most people to grasp what it is.
Why did HiFi switch from multiple different drivers to a more single driver design? Benefits of single driver vs multi driver? All the same or different drivers. Could you make a video explaining that kind of stuff? I'm curious on your take.
Lots of hifi companies still use a multi-driver approach.
That's a good idea for a video.
@@intothevoid9831 true, but I think there was a clear shift from large faced boxes with multi sized drivers all over to tall vertical stacks of multiple similar cones, and now I see lots more single driver options popping up as hi-fi. But yeah some companies still do the front arrangement set up. Id be curious to know why. I'm sure there is also some aesthetic nostalgia going on as well.
was never my cup of tea but,
these are almost like a classic car.
might be worth more "unrestored".
Vintage speakers tend to bring more money with our restoration and upgrades.
Love this!