The New Advent Loudspeaker Review (Vintage Speaker)

[rdenney]

https://www.parts-express.com/speaker-components/Speaker-Surround-Refoam-Repair-Kits
Yes, they all appear to come with dust caps

Not the kits I bought, which included the foam surrounds only, and sometimes some white glue to do the gluing. The only reason the dust cap was supposed to be removed is to use plastic spacers around the voice coil to keep it centered and to prevent rubbing. I found, however, that I could do just as well to prevent rubbing without that. Did I get mine centered? Well, who knows? Does it matter?

Rick "who has refoamed pairs of these woofer six times in total, and still has two backup woofers and two backup tweeters 'in stock'" Denney

 

[Dennis Murphy]

Thanks, maybe I'll look at the 1976 and earlier audio magazines. I'm not sure my second pair of Advents were the originals, the treble of that pair was anodyne, one of the speakers least obnoxious features. The trouble with the Advents is the crossover. In fact, that problem was directly addressed with the Powered Advents with very good results, at least sonically. $1000 a pair for speakers was real money back in 1978, haven't seen powered Advents for decades, but the passive versions of the Large Advent are still floating around. The crossover problem is that there's too much crossing over of each driver and the two drivers predictably don't sound similar. So there's lots of confusion in the frequency range that coincides with female vocals. I was working on several projects involving women's and girls chorus. There were multiple systems to check out the sound of recordings, one happened to use a pair of Large, walnut veneered, Advents. It was obvious that there was confusion/blurring with female vocals with the Advents. Mind you, my default monitor was a pair of Stax Lambda Pro earspeakers. Maybe a little too revealing, albeit great for editing.

I dunno. I did completely redo the crossover and was able to flatten the on-axis response considerably using a ton of components, but the off-axis was about the same and it really didn't sound very different except for a less tizzy top end. Of course, that could be implemented very easily with a little equalization. On the other hand, my redo of the KLH 5 was a big success. It ended up sounding as good as most high quality modern designs, due mainly to the very nice acoustic suspension midrange units that were also used full range with equalization in a portable KLH model.

 

[JimWeir]

This is a review and detailed measurements of the "The New Advent Loudspeaker" vintage speaker, circa 1977. The sample under test was kindly provided by our own @Dennis Murphy. He has looked it over and replaced a crossover capacitor to make sure it has the value it originally had. The woofer has been professionally reconed. Dennis can add more information here.

This speaker is in reasonably good shape seeing how it is made out of fragile particle board:

View attachment 141358

I didn't take a picture of the back side but there is a 3-way switch to adjust the high frequencies. Story is that this was to adjust for lack of uniformity of the recordings of the era and not to tune the speaker. I measured the difference as you will see later.

There is a site with a copy of the manual which I highly recommend to check out: https://www.theprojectasylum.com/el...adventspkrbrochure/adventspkrbrochurepg1.html

The manual is not just a manual. It is written as if it is an article for a hi-fi magazine! It is very boastful of its design approach without appearing too arrogant. There is also this bit of advertising about it:

View attachment 141361

As a woodworker, I detest particle board. It is horrible material and seemingly falls apart by just looking at it. Interesting that it didn't have this negative stigma then.

Fascinating that its max power rating was just 15 watts! I fed it a lot more than that.

Measurements that you are about to see were performed using the Klippel Near-field Scanner (NFS). This is a robotic measurement system that analyzes the speaker all around and is able (using advanced mathematics and dual scan) to subtract room reflections (so where I measure it doesn't matter). It also measures the speaker at close distance ("near-field") which sharply reduces the impact of room noise. Both of these factors enable testing in ordinary rooms yet results that can be more accurate than an anechoic chamber. In a nutshell, the measurements show the actual sound coming out of the speaker independent of the room.

I performed over 1000 measurement which resulted in error rate of about 1%.

Reference axis was the tweeter center or as best I could determine through the grill. I think I was a bit to the right of the tweeter. The grill was left on.

I picked the middle position (red below) in the switch that is marked as "decrease" for high frequencies based on my setup measurements (and later confirmed by Dennis):

View attachment 141363

The New Advent Loudspeaker Measurements
Acoustic measurements can be grouped in a way that can be perceptually analyzed to determine how good a speaker is and how it can be used in a room. This so called spinorama shows us just about everything we need to know about the speaker with respect to tonality and some flaws:

View attachment 141362

Bass response is deficient and we have good bit of variations but not as bad as I had expected. Near-field response shows a very slow response for the woofer in crossover region:

View attachment 141364

That then screws up some of the tweeter response.

I was pleasantly surprised how smooth the early reflections are:

View attachment 141365

This almost magically transforms the overall response to a flat one in-room:

View attachment 141366

Alas, we know that such a response subjectively sounds bright. Still, one wonders if this is an accident or by design.

Beamwidth shows lack of directivity control as the large woofer becomes directional before tweeter takes over with its wide response:

View attachment 141368

View attachment 141369

Vertical directivity is quite tricky. Stay at or below tweeter axis:

View attachment 141370

There are two minima in impedance graph:

View attachment 141371

Distortion was reasonable at 86 dBSPL but then went to hell at 96:

View attachment 141372

View attachment 141373

This is to be expected of the drivers of the era. The large woofer doesn't have to move much at lower amplitudes so does well. But when asked to moved, it can't do so with the precision of current drivers. Tweeter also falls apart.

The New Advent Loudspeaker Listening Tests
Oh gosh. I always start my listening tests with female vocals and these were unlistenable with the Advent pointed at me. The sound would be Ok and then one part of the vocal would hit a resonant peak (or something like it) and the sound would be so sharp as to attempt to go through you! I had to stop after a couple of tracks. Thinking older music may do better, I played a few Nina Simone tracks. They sounded terrible as well. Lack of bass is a major problem as it accentuates the highs so much.

As a quick experiment, I pointed the speaker straight out and this helped some but by then my mind was so corrupted that I stopped and started to type up this review.

Conclusions
I don't have a lot to offer you. The Advent is not as bad as I thought it would measure. Subjectively it is horrid in my quick l listening tests. Progress in speaker design is real and I am spoiled by that. I let you all discuss the rest.

------------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Appreciate any donations using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

All, these were my goto "high end" speakers in 1978, as a salesman at Stereotown DesMoines... As for on axis listening, we never did that back then speaker - even this big - were against the wall - flat! That means we were always listing at 20-30 degrees off horizontal axis. And speakers against the wall elevated so tweeters were at ear level. You could put together a system for about $750 with a 45Watt Receiver, Garrard TT, and the "vinyl" Advents. That would be a little over $2K today!

 

[Dennis Murphy]

Mine had 13 uF caps in the crossovers and that's what I used to replace them, though I had a stack a couple to attain that value. The resistors were for cutting the tweeter in the Normal and Decrease positions, as I recall. I always used the Decrease position, which was supposed to emulate the OLA's.

Rick "laughing at the notion of 'state-of-the-art factor'" Denney

Interesting. My sample had a pretty late serial number. I suspect they made a running change, just like they did in the original Advent crossover. The response is smoother with the 10 uF cap. With the 13 uF, the peak at 2500 Hz is a little higher.

 

[McFly]

Ha, Imagine the view to reply ratio on this one if he'd left (Vintage Speaker) out of the title

 

[Dennis Murphy]

This just in. The average age of posters on this thread is 107. Film at 11:00.

 

[rdenney]

All, these were my goto "high end" speakers in 1978, as a salesman at Stereotown DesMoines... As for on axis listening, we never did that back then speaker - even this big - were against the wall - flat! That means we were always listing at 20-30 degrees off horizontal axis. And speakers against the wall elevated so tweeters were at ear level. You could put together a system for about $750 with a 45Watt Receiver, Garrard TT, and the "vinyl" Advents. That would be a little over $2K today!

My first system was a pair of utility-cabinet Advent NLA's, a Kenwood KA-3500 integrated amp (40 wpc), a Kenwood KT-5300 tuner, and a Technics SL-20 turntable. I don't recall what cartridge I had on it from the start, but I (foolishly) replaced it with an Ortofon Concorde 10 (arm too heavy and imprecise for that cartridge) and later a Grado XT+ (about like a current Black--a much better fit). I paid $230 for the speakers, $175 for the Kenwood components, and $110 for the turntable. Without question, I hat the best-sounding sound system in my entire dorm, and was also probably the only person in the dorm that listened to classical music.

That half a kilobuck would be about $2K now. For that $2K, I have purchased a bunch of much-better stuff from the 90's and early 00's on the used market. But I spent a whole summer's job income on that first good stereo.

Rick "the old stuff still works fine, by the way" Denney

 

[DSJR]

We sold Stanton 500EE's with the SL20.. Sorry, I'll get me coat...

 

[rdenney]

This just in. The average age of posters on this thread is 107. Film at 11:00.

Who you calling old?

I SAID, WHO YOU CALLING OLD?

EH? EH? I CAN'T HEAR YOU, BOY!

Rick "now defines 'new' as made since 1990" Denney

 

[rdenney]

We sold Stanton 500EE's with the SL20.. Sorry, I'll get me coat...

I have no memory of what I bought, and that one is as likely as any other.

Rick "Stanton was sort-of the standard for cheap-cheerful cartridges in those days" Denney

 

[Labjr]

I think the magnetic cartridge was what made my first hi-fi system what it was. It was a Shure M91ED. A friend of mine had a Micro Seiki table with a Stanton 681EEE. Stereo systems were pretty expensive back in the day. And most of it seems mediocre when I think back.

 

[SKBubba]

This just in. The average age of posters on this thread is 107. Film at 11:00.

I was rocking Radio Shack Realistic amps, speakers and turntables before you were born! So get off my lawn.

 

[Jim Shaw]

I have a pair of these Advents in the bedroom. They never get much above 75 or 80 dB. I bought them used about 30 years ago. Both bass drivers have been reconed. Usually, they just reproduce the local PBS classical channel while I get dressed. Like others, I'm surprised they tested as well as they do. One thing I like, at 7:30 am, is they aren't boomy. They aren't annoying. I shall have no big bass reflexes in my life before 8. And no sopranos, ever, before 10.

They're probably here to stay until I'm not.

 

[amirm]

Wrong. I used a pair of Advent NLA's, and then two pairs driven by two amps, for quite a long time (45 years for the single pair), with EQ.

That's because you have wisdom behind your ears. Not sure everyone who still uses these, does.

 

[Putter]

Not the kits I bought, which included the foam surrounds only, and sometimes some white glue to do the gluing. The only reason the dust cap was supposed to be removed is to use plastic spacers around the voice coil to keep it centered and to prevent rubbing. I found, however, that I could do just as well to prevent rubbing without that. Did I get mine centered? Well, who knows? Does it matter?

Rick "who has refoamed pairs of these woofer six times in total, and still has two backup woofers and two backup tweeters 'in stock'" Denney

I've always bought surrounds sans kits so no dust caps. Never used the spacer/shim method and usually had good results by visual centering, i.e. if the surround is even around the frame it's usually centered. It is possible to use the spacer method without a new dustcap by carefully removing the old one with a razor blade and gluing it back on after completion.

 

[beagleman]

All, these were my goto "high end" speakers in 1978, as a salesman at Stereotown DesMoines... As for on axis listening, we never did that back then speaker - even this big - were against the wall - flat! That means we were always listing at 20-30 degrees off horizontal axis. And speakers against the wall elevated so tweeters were at ear level. You could put together a system for about $750 with a 45Watt Receiver, Garrard TT, and the "vinyl" Advents. That would be a little over $2K today!

according to my inflation calculator a little over $3,000!!!

 

[mhardy6647]

I think this model was referred to as the Baby Advent as there was a larger version that I owned in the early 1970s. At the time, the hot speakers were the Acoustic Research AR3, which seemed to be loved by the east coast and classical recording crowd, and the JBL L100 which was definitely a west coast rock speaker. These both sold for around $300 and I couldn't afford either of them at the time.

No, the Baby Advent was quite small (smaller even than the Smaller Advent).
Smaller Advent:

With the (in)famous "spitball" woofer dustcap

(original) Baby Advent:

Good pictographic "Know your Advent loudspeakers" ID thread at AK:
https://www.audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/identifying-your-advent-loudspeakers.126376/

I had, FWIW, a pair of Baby IIs (much later, Recoton-era "Advent", way past Kloss' involvement with the company) -- unprepossessing little two ways, but not bad at all.

123 by Mark Hardy, on Flickr

 

[Keith Conroy]

The owners manual is for the model Amir tested. I didn't use the grill in my testing and fiddling, and the tweeter is definitely the second generation "fried egg" tweeter used in the original Advent. It was a combination cone-dome, a design that was also used in vintage KLH speakers ("K" stands for Henry Kloss, after all). There's a good bit of discussion in the manual on why the tweeter level was increased. The manual is not only a good read, it has a refreshing degree of marketing restraint, to whit:
"The New Advent Loudspeaker, then, can radiate significantly more energy at 10,000 Hz than our original design...........We don’t believe that the difference is great enough to make more than a tiny percentage of present Advent Loudspeaker owners want to trade in their speakers. (We don’t design any of our speakers, including the least expensive, to make people want to trade them in after the honeymoon, however long, is over.) But the change is the kind we think should be made in a speaker designed to compete in the "best" category without compromise."

Dennis, thanks for the clarification on the manual. When I made my comment on the manual, I had only looked at the 1st page of the manual. The picture of the Advent speaker on this page looked like the later model Advents produced after Jensen bought the company. Then I remembered that the original Advent company did make 2 style boxes. One was a called the utility Advent. One was a fancier box with a nicer simulated wood grain & a trim piece around the grill. This was the same style Jensen/Advent used in later models. I believe these models had more of a standard soft dome shaped tweeter. Its been many years, but I think I'm correct? If not the group can chime in. As a side notes the upscale boxes were made at a Motorola television plant. This of course was during the console television era.

 

[rdenney]

Dennis, thanks for the clarification on the manual. When I made my comment on the manual, I had only looked at the 1st page of the manual. The picture of the Advent speaker on this page looked like the later model Advents produced after Jensen bought the company. Then I remembered that the original Advent company did make 2 style boxes. One was a called the utility Advent. One was a fancier box with a nicer simulated wood grain & a trim piece around the grill. This was the same style Jensen/Advent used in later models. I believe these models had more of a standard soft dome shaped tweeter. Its been many years, but I think I'm correct? If not the group can chime in. As a side notes the upscale boxes were made at a Motorola television plant. This of course was during the console television era.

The utility and deluxe cabinets were the same speakers except for the finish on the box, for both the Original Large Advent (aka The Advent Loudspeaker) and the New Large Advent (aka The New Advent Loudspeaker). The deluxe boxes had solid wood trim around the front edge—beveled for the OLA and rounded for the NLA.

Both had 10” woofers in a 12” frame. The OLA basket was borrowed and adapted using a Masonite ring, while the NLA used a purpose-shaped basket. The tweeter in the OLA was the original fried egg with the diagonal mounting, while the NLA used ferrofluid-cooled fried-egg cones with expanded metal protection screens. Both were Kloss designs and predate Kloss’s departure and the Jensen acquisition.

The Smaller Advent was the same design in a smaller box but provided less sensitivity, per Hoffman’s Iron Law (Hoffman was Kloss’s design partner).

Uppers are utility NLA’s that I bought in 1977, lowers are deluxe cabinets that I found more recently. Each pair had its own B&K amp.

Rick “now awaiting a new assignment” Denney

 

[milosz]

They are not very good by today's standards, but back in the day, for the price, they were reasonable. Compare these to the crappy Jensen and the various "house brand" speakers that the stereo chain stores sold.

It's almost hard to believe there were lots of chain stereo stores back then - Pacific Stereo, and then in the midwest you had Team Electronics, Schaak, United Audio, Tweeter.... now all you have in most places is Best Buy, and some small "High-End" boutique dealers.