Monitor Audio Silver 100 7g crossover upgrade

[rsd29]

Hi there!
I really love my MA Silver 100 7g and pretty pleased with them. Recently I started reading about crossover components upgrade and decided to take a look at mine. Attached you will see the stock x-over. Do you consider that there are components worth changing?
Looks kind of good to me but my insight is limited

 

[staticV3]

Are you interested in evidence-based upgrades?

In that case, Amir's review gives some clues about possible changes, which however would have to be double-checked with your own measurements.

For example, I'd measure the tweeter in isolation to see if it can handle playing slightly lower.

If so, then I'd try reducing the crossover frequency to prevent the woofer from beaming.

 

[Jeza3975]

Hi there!
I really love my MA Silver 100 7g and pretty pleased with them. Recently I started reading about crossover components upgrade and decided to take a look at mine. Attached you will see the stock x-over. Do you consider that there are components worth changing?
Looks kind of good to me but my insight is limited

Beat you to it! I've had mine upgraded for a while now. Was it worth it. Yes. But I reckon if I were to do it again I'd replace the laminated inductors with air core also and perhaps use a single higher quality capacitors rather than bypassing with the miflex. Bit of a faff.
The upgraded parts list for one speaker:
1xJantzen cross cap on woofer
1xJantzen superes resistor on woofer
2x Clarity cap CSA on tweeter
2x Miflex kfpm-01 0.022uf as bypasses on tweeter.
2x Ohmite audio gold 5w resistors on tweeter.
2x original polypropylene caps originally in series with tweeter moved to c4 position with 1x clarity cap px .82uf added to make up value.

 

[beagleman]

All these type of changes, seem based on expectations and "Beliefs" that anything higher priced will pass a signal more transparently.

I have not found any evidence of this.
Measuring the stock response and altering the crossover to FIX actual response issues could help for sure, but this thread seems based more on the philosophy of Danny and cheesy parts logic.

Having said all that, and looking at the actual measured response, this speaker does not look like it is bad in any major or simply fixed way. Not saying it is perfect for sure either, but it appears to not be "Begging" for changes such as tweeter level etc that could be easily implemented.

Resonances at a few points, and perhaps a bit too high of tweeter level seem to be the main things one could try to attack.

To the OP, what seems lacking or annoying to make you WANT to change the crossover to begin with??

I would honestly try to calm enclosure resonances first, and make sure all screws are well secured, and possibly make a slight alteration to tweeter level as a start.

 

[Beave]

Keep in mind that this thread is about the 7G Silver 100, while Amir's measurements are for the previous generation, 6G.

I haven't seen measurements of the 7G version anywhere.

 

[Jeza3975]

Id suggest that if your happy with them as they are why not leave it alone! They are great as is. What I did to mine was more a case of fortunately sourcing the speakers nearly new at a 60% discount of rrp in the UK and thinking why not have a nice soldering project while adding closer tolerance potentially superior parts. I subjectively hear differences in attack and decay and less fatigue after long listening. Was I bias, Perhaps however even if the quality of the parts made no audible difference the parts I replaced were matched and measuring way closer to actual design values than the caps I took out minus the bypass caps that I added at a later date. I appreciate this forum probably isn't the place for such subjective thoughts. My intent was to just provide an example of something being done with these specific speakers!

 

[Nopiano]

Keep in mind that this thread is about the 7G Silver 100, while Amir's measurements are for the previous generation, 6G.

I haven't seen measurements of the 7G version anywhere.

Incredible how lacking attention some contributors are. Let’s not allow the facts stop a good argument! The larger Silver 500 7G had very good technical reports in Hifi News and Stereophile.

 

[beagleman]

Keep in mind that this thread is about the 7G Silver 100, while Amir's measurements are for the previous generation, 6G.

I haven't seen measurements of the 7G version anywhere.

Yeah, there is a "Difference" for sure, but also read, from a few that audible differences were quite minor.

I would love to see measurements, which would mean a LOT more to me though!

Good catch!

 

[Ageve]

The larger Silver 500 7G had very good technical reports in Hifi News and Stereophile.

Yep, this is the summary by John Atkinson:

The Monitor Audio Silver 500 7G's measured performance is superb. That it achieves this level of performance at an affordable price is even more commendable.

Monitor Audio Silver 500 7G loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements I measured the Monitor Audio Silver 500 7G's farfield behavior with DRA Labs' MLSSA system, an Earthworks microphone preamplifier, and a calibrated DPA 4006 microphone. I used an Earthworks QTC-40 mike, with its small ¼"-diameter capsule, to measure the nearfield...

www.stereophile.com

I measured the older Silver RX1 a while back, and horizontal directivity was almost identical to the RX6 floorstander:

My measurement (RX1):

Stereophile (RX6):

Monitor Audio RX1 Spinorama measurements (CTA-2034)

Here are some measurements of the Monitor Audio Silver RX1 bookshelf speaker. It was released in 2010 and discontinued in 2014. The MSRP was $675 / pair. It's a very nice looking speaker, with real wood veneer and excellent build quality. My measurements are quasi-anechoic, with...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Monitor Audio Silver RX6 loudspeaker Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

www.stereophile.com

If Silver 100 7G is as similar to 500 7G, as RX1 is to RX6, then the directivity is improved compared to older models (RX1 and 6 are more similar designs though, so without measurements, it's just a guess*).

RX1 is a nice speaker. Very good build quality and it sounds ok, but it's a bit bright because of the directivity issues, and it can't be fixed with EQ. The newer models should* respond better to EQ.

As for the crossover component quality, it's more than good enough.

I posted this picture in the RX1 review. Some of the components are "cheesy" according to Danny and others, but they provide no evidence. The picture was a jab at him. Maybe I have a weird sense of humor...

 

[beagleman]

I like Monitor audio overall, but cringe seeing their "in room -6db" frequency response specs.

I mean, to me, not a realistic way to compare actual low end with pretty much any other brand.
I have realized you can add about 15hz more to get the real low end cutoff, or an approximate idea of it.

Instead of 27hz, think more like 42hz.

 

[Mnyb]

You migth look for the port tuning frequency for the true response. You don’t get much at a reasonable level far below the tuning frequency

 

[Jeza3975]

Using a umik and rew the -3 db point for the 100 7g was around 45hz in my room. The 35hz at -6db is aspirational but perhaps in some rooms. They are really nice bass wise for bookshelf/stand mounts however if your expecting truly full range get ready to buy a sub!