I really liked the Radio Shack version of the FE-103s (1197s) and I built the Fostex-recommended backhorn for a friend. Its a very nice design and its sounds great.
I think these are great 4" drivers.
Not much to add here... just wanted to make my first post with my new Apple iBook. And here it is.
Kofi
I think these are great 4" drivers.
Not much to add here... just wanted to make my first post with my new Apple iBook. And here it is.
Kofi
The UN ain't what it used to be, man. World Government jobs... sheez you could just slide by in the 90s. Also, the purchase of a new Mac has put a serious strain on the funds available for DIY audio.
Well, just remember that the Alabama economy isn't exactly world class. I have never heard the 1354s, but again, the 1197s are awfully nice. I have 'em in GM's ML-TQWP and I like them a lot.
Kofi
Sylver300B said:
Again I've never heard the Zigmahornet, but according to my brother the difference in bass is not subtle. The swans can certainly hold their own in the bottom end. Also building the swans does not take a lot of skill, just time. There are no fancy cuts to make, all right angles.
Joe
Building the Swan
Well, I take your word. But let's say that the plan "seems" rather complex to translate in real world 3D in my mind..
I'll have a further look to it. I might try it just for fun at some point. I might well build both designs, just to explore and to learn.
Thanks Joe.
Sylvain
Josephjcole said:
Well, I take your word. But let's say that the plan "seems" rather complex to translate in real world 3D in my mind..
I'll have a further look to it. I might try it just for fun at some point. I might well build both designs, just to explore and to learn.
Thanks Joe.
Sylvain
planet10 said:
Gulp. I know the old RS drivers were supposed to be good, but you can get 4 Fostex FE167Es for only a little more. I know which I'd go for.
Cheers for sticking up the first ever decent Zigmahornet plans on the net by the way Dave -I too was thinking about giving these a whirl & now I have no reason not to! It's much appreciated.
Oh, and Franz: Love the horns; looks like you've made a really good job of them. The finish looks better than most commercial units I've seen recently. How do they sound so far?
Hello all,
I was intrigued by all the posts concerning the Fostex full range drivers, so I ordered a pair of FE103E's and built the recommended horn enclosures using 5/8" fir plywood. I finished assembling them on saturday and wound up spending most of the night listening.
They do a remarkable job with vocals and most acoustic instruments. Piano sounds especially realistic. There isn't an excess of bass, but enough to round things out. If I had to characterize these speakers in a single phrase, I would say that they sparkle.
Regards,
Mike L.
I was intrigued by all the posts concerning the Fostex full range drivers, so I ordered a pair of FE103E's and built the recommended horn enclosures using 5/8" fir plywood. I finished assembling them on saturday and wound up spending most of the night listening.
They do a remarkable job with vocals and most acoustic instruments. Piano sounds especially realistic. There isn't an excess of bass, but enough to round things out. If I had to characterize these speakers in a single phrase, I would say that they sparkle.
Regards,
Mike L.
Re: Hey Dave>>>
I'm not sure... the CC is pretty small (too small to my mind) and therefore the horns output goes fairly high. You'd need to mic them and figure out where (if) the baffle step is rolling the mids off and how high the output of the horn is. You size the supraBaffle such that the bafflestep is pushed down to meet the horn output.
The supra-baffle can be used to increase the CC size too... (which would mean a larger supraBaffle.
dave
moray james said:
I'm not sure... the CC is pretty small (too small to my mind) and therefore the horns output goes fairly high. You'd need to mic them and figure out where (if) the baffle step is rolling the mids off and how high the output of the horn is. You size the supraBaffle such that the bafflestep is pushed down to meet the horn output.
The supra-baffle can be used to increase the CC size too... (which would mean a larger supraBaffle.
dave
sticky answer...
I guess that that was a sticky question. So how about this one. I would assume that a BIB would be the most efficient means to get bass out of a set of these drivers? How much larger would an 1197 based BIB be? What about a Supra baffle for that? Thanks Dave. Regards Moray James.
I guess that that was a sticky question. So how about this one. I would assume that a BIB would be the most efficient means to get bass out of a set of these drivers? How much larger would an 1197 based BIB be? What about a Supra baffle for that? Thanks Dave. Regards Moray James.
Re: sticky answer...
BIB seems to swap some ripple for maximum extension (althou Scott's Spawn BVRs may go as load and trade complexity for maximum extension). Harvey would be an interesting box for 1197.
Scott might be able to get an estimate of where the terminus gain starts on a BIB -- on Harvey it is not much more than 100 Hz (so supraBaffle really needs to be quite wide in theory)
dave
moray james said:
BIB seems to swap some ripple for maximum extension (althou Scott's Spawn BVRs may go as load and trade complexity for maximum extension). Harvey would be an interesting box for 1197.
Scott might be able to get an estimate of where the terminus gain starts on a BIB -- on Harvey it is not much more than 100 Hz (so supraBaffle really needs to be quite wide in theory)
dave
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.