|
|
| Re: In case people have not, please check out the review of a lowther based bass reflex driver on en [message #19670 is a reply to message #19667] |
Fri, 02 January 2004 05:33   |
JLM
Messages: 69
Registered: May 2009
|
Viscount |
|
|
|
Yes, I've read that review (several times). David Dicks and his speakers came out of there smelling like yesterdays' diapers. I've heard his 2.5 cabinet with Fostex FE206E and it only sounded decent (although the driver was not broken in). Panels needed more bracing, bass was somewhat boomy and not extended (as you would expect from a single 8 inch driver with a low Qt of 0.18). Others have called the FE206E sound "cartoonish". But I also found a guy who has a Lowther based 2.5 that loves it (after futzing with set up issues). BTW, there are several single driver speaker professional reviews around. Four have been done for The Horn. Several more for Lothx and Omega speakers. And of course different several for Lowther based cabinet designs.
|
|
|
|
| Re: In case people have not, please check out the review of a lowther based bass reflex driver on en [message #19673 is a reply to message #19670] |
Fri, 02 January 2004 10:37 |
akhilesh
Messages: 1275
Registered: May 2009
|
Illuminati (3rd Degree) |
|
|
I haven't heard any of the classic audio speakers, except one pair at Phil's house...and he uses the Fostex drivers recommended by Classic audio. I thought they sounded decent....I mean they were clearly not full ranges, and clearly not for large orchestral movements, but for what they are (and I understand Phil listens mainly to small acoustic arrangements) they were not bad.
I suspect that if you try to test them as other speakers (meaning for rock, or pop, or complex musical arrangements) they will not be great.
I built a pair of full ranges using very good vintage drivers, in much larger boxes (around 4 cu feet) and they have good bass, but even they are not my first choice to listen to for classical or rock music. However, they are nice for intimate jazz or acoustic type music. The argument made by several single driver hobbyists is that I personally don't know if crossovers make such a great difference. My problem with 2 way designs is that often, most of the midrange and upper is handled by a $30 tweeter, so tonality and naturalness suffers. I would rather spend the bulk of the money in a good driver that is of decent size & construction, and that covers the listening spectrum all the way from upper bass to treble. I don't have a problem with supertweeters and or subwoofers, as long as they are properly matched. Just my opinion.
thanx!
-akhilesh
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Recommendations for Fostex FE206E driver [message #19682 is a reply to message #19680] |
Tue, 06 January 2004 14:13 |
akhilesh
Messages: 1275
Registered: May 2009
|
Illuminati (3rd Degree) |
|
|
Hi Jim,
I did some basic calcucations for this driver. IMHO, you should not do the big cabinet (2.5 ft^3).
Based on my calculations, if you build a 1 cubic foot box (leave about 20% for carpet & braces) so build a box with a volume of 1.25 cubic feet, and have a vent in it of diameter 2.25 inches, with no port tubes needed, you will get MUCH better lower midrange. In the bigger box, the lower midrange will get eaten up, and you WILL hear a one note samba on the low end. Use 3/4 inch birch ply or MDF.
You should get -3db at 60 Hz. You are NOT going to do any better with this driver, unless you are prepared to:
a) listen to the one note samba & the lower mifrange suckout
b) Build a horn cabinet as ercommended by Fostex. IN that case you may get response down to whatever. If you do do the bass reflex, just get a suitable subwoofer if the bass bothers you.
Hope this helps.
-akhilesh
|
|
|
|
| This also works for the FE207E driver [message #19683 is a reply to message #19682] |
Wed, 07 January 2004 05:52 |
DaveJ
Messages: 7
Registered: May 2009
|
Esquire |
|
|
|
I can speak from experience that the Fostex FE207E works exteeeeeemly well in a ported box of about 1 cubic foot. I have the driver mounted on the wide side of the enclosure, similar to Audio Note and Snell speakers. In this case the front baffle is 13"(w)x20"(h). I rear ported mine with a 2" diameter port. I'm still playing with the length for the best in-room sound. The front baffle is 3/4" baltic birch ply. The sides and rear baffle are 3/4" MDF, though I'm going to try 3/4" baltic birch on the rear also. These mate very well with 2A3 and 300B amps. Being somewhat of a cable sceptic, I was surprised how sensitive these were to different speaker cables though. DaveJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: This also works for the FE207E driver [message #19685 is a reply to message #19684] |
Wed, 07 January 2004 07:06 |
DaveJ
Messages: 7
Registered: May 2009
|
Esquire |
|
|
Hi akhilesh,
You're right, they are pretty close. I went with the 207E because of the slightly higher Qts and Qes values and the flatter frequency response in the 1k-10kHz region. Response rolls off above 12kHz but I haven't noticed this to be a problem.DaveJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: lenth of port for your FE207E [message #19687 is a reply to message #19686] |
Wed, 07 January 2004 10:58 |
DaveJ
Messages: 7
Registered: May 2009
|
Esquire |
|
|
Hi akhilesh,
Thanks for the port length calculation. I've been switching back and forth between a 2.75" and 0.75" (no tube, just wood thickness). The 0.75" sounds a bit thin and the 2.75" slighly exagerates some notes, so 1.6" may be a good compromise. I have some extra port tubes at home, so I'll give it a try.I should have the new baltic birch rear baffles mounted up this weekend. I'm curous as to the effect. Switching the front baffle from MDF to baltic birch was a step-up. I will report back with results soon. DaveJ
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Get a T-Shirt!
