Vintage Products

Re: RL 45 vs RL 60.2

Søren Mexico — Sun, 26 Jun 2011 10:45:52 GMT

Paul:

do you have links to the posts? they should have something on this forum where repairs and modifications are categorized so anyone can access them without having to ask the same five people everything there is to know.....

I'll be getting out my screwdriver and doing this surgery myself. It can't be that hard...

Use the search box and you shall find

Re: RL 45 vs RL 60.2

tournedos — Sun, 26 Jun 2011 10:41:19 GMT

Hi Paul,

I wrote this thread on my RL6000s - not particularly about a recap, but it might save you some time with disassembly & assembly:

http://forum.beoworld.org/forums/t/24303.aspx

All RLs (except for the smallest models) are similar mechanically.

Re: RL 45 vs RL 60.2

Paul — Sun, 26 Jun 2011 10:30:55 GMT

do you have links to the posts? they should have something on this forum where repairs and modifications are categorized so anyone can access them without having to ask the same five people everything there is to know.....

I'll be getting out my screwdriver and doing this surgery myself. It can't be that hard...

Re: RL 45 vs RL 60.2

Eugene — Sat, 25 Jun 2011 06:30:30 GMT

Paul:

did u do the work on the speakers yourself and if so, are you trained or did someone walk u through it?

I did the work myself but I did have to ask for help here on the forums to find the proper resistance value for the burned ones. As I recall Mika, Peter and SpeakerHobby were very helpful.

There is a nasty typo in the service specs and the crossover design was changed at least 3 times during production so you will have to open them up and have a look before you start ordering parts. Not a hard job to do yourself Paul.

Re: RL 45 vs RL 60.2

tournedos — Sat, 25 Jun 2011 04:44:10 GMT

soundproof:
How do RL 60.2s compare to RL 6000s?

I have both. Never did any direct comparisons, but technically they differ very little, so I wouldn't expect much difference.

I replaced the old electrolytics in the 60.2s with MKT foil caps, and they improved a great bit - much more than my passive Pentas, which received the same operation at the same time. The treble improved no end, but that will of course depend on how shot the old caps in a particular pair happen to be. I have the 60.2s on ceiling poles at the office and love them.

Re: RL 45 vs RL 60.2

Paul — Sat, 25 Jun 2011 00:27:19 GMT

did u do the work on the speakers yourself and if so, are you trained or did someone walk u through it?

Re: RL 45 vs RL 60.2

soundproof — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 19:01:50 GMT

How do RL 60.2s compare to RL 6000s?

Re: RL 45 vs RL 60.2

Eugene — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 18:38:24 GMT

Medogsfat:

Like your new Avatar Eugene - much warmer than your previous one

Chris.

Thanks Chris, I am considering painting up a canvas of this one.... but I suppose ity is time to change it - again.

Re: RL 45 vs RL 60.2

Medogsfat — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 17:57:53 GMT

Like your new Avatar Eugene - much warmer than your previous one

Chris.

Re: RL 45 vs RL 60.2

Eugene — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 17:51:58 GMT

I have had my 60.2's on the floor on flooor stands and now currently mounted about 2 meters up on the wall with a set of B&O swivel mounts for that purpose.

I have a BM5000 that I use for this arrangement and I like it better than when I was using the S80.2's Wall mounting is the way to go but I dont suggest mounting them all the way up to the ceiling. Mine are at roungly midway up,.

Now with respect to the muddy sound. My set origianlly didnt sound so hot either and when I opened it up to look at the crossover I found both had a fried resistor that had more or less muted out the the mid driver. Once that was all sorted through and the caps replaced it was all good.

Re: RL 45 vs RL 60.2

Medogsfat — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 17:14:13 GMT

Peter :

I have had RL60.2s and have the following observations:

1. I think sited on the floor they sound exactly as you describe - muddy.

2. Changing the capacitors does liven them up a bit.

3. They are far better on stands.

They do sound better than RL45s though.

1. I've owned both RL45.2's (Not RL 45's) & RL60.2's - the 60.2's replaced the RL45.2's connected to a BM5500 & agree that floor mounted is the least favaourable option.

2 . Changing the cap's is well worth the effort.

3. Mine were both wall mounted & the difference was very marked with the RL60.2's easily outperforming the 45.2's in all areas. I have never compared them on floor stands though so cannot comment there but would certainly go with Peters judgement which is normally a pretty good yardstick although he'd never admit it. Oh - nearly forgot my reason for posting - I never found either of these speakers "muddy" wall mounted.

Chris.

Re: RL 45 vs RL 60.2

Peter — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 16:31:39 GMT

I have had RL60.2s and have the following observations:

1. I think sited on the floor they sound exactly as you describe - muddy.

2. Changing the capacitors does liven them up a bit.

3. They are far better on stands.

They do sound better than RL45s though.

RL 45 vs RL 60.2

Paul — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 15:57:09 GMT

I own a pair of RL 45's, and when they are either connected with my beomaster 3300 or 5500, they sound crystal clear, tight base, and excellent stereo imaging. On the other hand, I recently aquired a pair of RL 60.2s. They dont sound so nice, actually. Yes, their base is more powerfull, but the sound is a bit muddy and although they don't distort, I'm wondering if anything has gone wrong inside with either the crossover network, or something else. They are placed on their sides on the floor, and not hung vertically from the stands that I don't own. I'm wondering whether the RL 60.2s are just a bad match for the beomaster 5500, whether they just dont have as nice a sound as the RL 45s, or if something actually goes wrong with them over time to degrade their sound quality. Anyone else experienced with these?