Background:

My first thoughts were to slap the AN's in a new pair of FT-1600's I was building for a customer and then A/B them with my own FT-1600's with the stock FE167E's. The d... magnet wouldn't go through the driver cut-out! The I.D. of the AN flange is smaller than the O.D. of the magnet. And someone calls himself an engineer? Plan B: I slapped together a pair of FB-16 boxes. I enlarged the driver cut-out to 5 7/8". This leaves very little material on the baffle to mate with the flange of the basket, but it does go, and an FE167E will still fit.

Fit and Finish:

Fred's drivers are blems. There is a minor dent in the surrounds. No big deal and doesn't affect performance. The cone is black paper and the frame stamped steel painted flat black. The AN has zero eye appeal and when mounted on a black baffle, it will essentially disappear. For this reason alone, I will not be advertising the AN as a drop-in for the FE167E in my speakers. The cone and whizzer are standard speaker paper. They appear well made, gluing and alignment are good. The Magnet is huge. It appears to be the soft, rubbery material that refrigerator magnets are made of rather than hard ceramic. I could be wrong about this, but I can make a finger nail impression on the face of the magnet extending beyond the back plate. My question about this driver: With a magnet so heavy, why is the BL so low and the Qts so high? The AN is not shielded, but I have no problem with the drivers 20" away from the TV and in the plane of the screen. The T/S parameters measured are not significantly different from the published numbers, and, yes the AN is close to a one-for-one replacement for the FE167E.

Listening impressions:

The AN has the same type of sound that the FE167E has. Good detail and open mid-range. Highs seem to be comparable, although I haven't done any FR measurements yet. The AN has a bit more bite than the FE167E, a bit more forward. This could be real or it could be that the AN needs more break-in. I did not optimize the cabinet or the BSC for the AN, or have I tried the AN with/without a zobel. They are currently running without a zobel. The bottom end of the AN matches the FE167E in the FB-16 cabinet. This confirms that the T/S parameters are a close match.

I need to live with the AN's a bit longer, but my initial impression is that there is not much to choose from between the FE167E and the AN 6.5. IF the bite/brightness of the AN is real, then it might be a better choice with tube, and the FE167E better for SS. Time will tell. Still, IMO, the FE167E has much better eye appeal. That is the deciding factor for me. YMMV.

Bob