166 ES-R Abbey style cabinet
"Abby cabinet? No, this driver (fe166esr) will benefit from hornloading in a properly sized horn. Not only that, the massive magnet won't fit through Abby's cutout. BTW the magnet/cutout only clears the frame dimension by 3/16", making backcutting and beveling mandatory for enrgy transfer in to the cabinet. Also the magnet itself will benefit form some damping between the cone and face as it will reflect midrange back through the diaphram somewhat."
Hello I have just contacted Terry Cain and he told me they have been working on a slightly larger abbey style cabinet that will accomidate the larger magnet of the 166ES-R. He said that it will still stand 70 inches tall but will be an inch or 2 wider and deeper at the base. They are pretty expensive for just the cabinets but Cains & Cains wood work is exceptional!
JC
"Abby cabinet? No, this driver (fe166esr) will benefit from hornloading in a properly sized horn. Not only that, the massive magnet won't fit through Abby's cutout. BTW the magnet/cutout only clears the frame dimension by 3/16", making backcutting and beveling mandatory for enrgy transfer in to the cabinet. Also the magnet itself will benefit form some damping between the cone and face as it will reflect midrange back through the diaphram somewhat."
Hello I have just contacted Terry Cain and he told me they have been working on a slightly larger abbey style cabinet that will accomidate the larger magnet of the 166ES-R. He said that it will still stand 70 inches tall but will be an inch or 2 wider and deeper at the base. They are pretty expensive for just the cabinets but Cains & Cains wood work is exceptional!
JC
Hey Badwater...that's a pretty nice find! I just threw in some layered cotton felt/batting stuff (probably 1/4" thick) that I had laying around so as to cover the bottom steps and the visible back wall. I'm not exactly set up here to do any definitive FR measurements, but I like the apparent effect on the lower midrange/upper bass so far. As I reported earlier, I did measure a fairly sizeable peak at around 315 Hz last week.
I would also agree that the top end seems extended enough without a tweeter, at least to these 50-something ears...but who knows?!
As far as the single sidewall thing goes...do you feel any vibrations through the sides with the volume at moderate levels at least? If you do, you might want to try a double-wall at least temporarily with some kind of plywood...maybe just clamped on or something. I feel absolutely no vibrations of any kind on my double walls. Now, the top...that's an entirely different story!
I think the single sidewall is a "cooler" look if you can get away with it. Maybe a denser MDF would be OK here, I dunno.
I would also agree that the top end seems extended enough without a tweeter, at least to these 50-something ears...but who knows?!
As far as the single sidewall thing goes...do you feel any vibrations through the sides with the volume at moderate levels at least? If you do, you might want to try a double-wall at least temporarily with some kind of plywood...maybe just clamped on or something. I feel absolutely no vibrations of any kind on my double walls. Now, the top...that's an entirely different story!
I think the single sidewall is a "cooler" look if you can get away with it. Maybe a denser MDF would be OK here, I dunno.
Not pertaining to the 166ES-R but someone had to take this thread off topic ....
http://www.gealoudspeakers.com/eng_version/GEA.htm
An Italian take on the Swan style of enclosure.
http://www.gealoudspeakers.com/eng_version/GEA.htm
An Italian take on the Swan style of enclosure.
Nelson Pass said:
I notice a great deal of similarity between our measurments (peaks and valleys), yet I seem to have a "downward tilt"? I'm sure something must be wrong with my setup to cause this (perhaps the mic, amplifier, or soundcard). The odd thing though is that when I test other drivers they seem to "match" their (manufac.) curves fairly well.
Is that a Zobel you have there with capacitance and resistance (10UF 10Ohm)? I'm assuming it is and that you're not getting any gain via the amp/driver interaction.
Also, subjectivly, how would you compare this driver with the normal fe 166 and the "corrected" Lowther DX55 from 500Hz up? (I figure that beyond freq. response deviations, price will tell.. but you never know.)
All these drivers are generally corrected in some way or
another, it's simply a matter of correct disclosure. In this
case we are enjoying the bottom end of a FQWTP driven
by a current source. By the way, this is ungated response,
and the dip you see around 150 Hz is floor reflection - it's
not from the driver nor the port.
The DX55 tends to have a little more detail in the mid and toward
the top as does the FE166ES-R as compared to the FE166E, even
when the amplitude response is corrected. Whether you prefer
that is a subjective call.
I like all three of those drivers for the kind of music I usually
play, which is not Pink Floyd or Rite of Spring. Naturally I
haul out the heavy equipment when it's time to evince a
brown note.
another, it's simply a matter of correct disclosure. In this
case we are enjoying the bottom end of a FQWTP driven
by a current source. By the way, this is ungated response,
and the dip you see around 150 Hz is floor reflection - it's
not from the driver nor the port.
The DX55 tends to have a little more detail in the mid and toward
the top as does the FE166ES-R as compared to the FE166E, even
when the amplitude response is corrected. Whether you prefer
that is a subjective call.
I like all three of those drivers for the kind of music I usually
play, which is not Pink Floyd or Rite of Spring. Naturally I
haul out the heavy equipment when it's time to evince a
brown note.
Carcass construction
I'm just sketching out the recommended cabinet carcass, I decided to double rear panel to remove those two "pillars" on the back and have now decided to add an extra layer on the top after the above comment?
As I'm about it? how about doubling the front speaker baffle - if any vibrations are to appear this must be a sure candidate!
On my cutting schedule, it looks like I need 4 (4x8) sheets of 18mm MDF (obviously with waste). Has anyone been more "economical" than this?
tmmuch said:
I'm just sketching out the recommended cabinet carcass, I decided to double rear panel to remove those two "pillars" on the back and have now decided to add an extra layer on the top after the above comment?
As I'm about it? how about doubling the front speaker baffle - if any vibrations are to appear this must be a sure candidate!
On my cutting schedule, it looks like I need 4 (4x8) sheets of 18mm MDF (obviously with waste). Has anyone been more "economical" than this?
Attachments
Nelson Pass said:By the way, this is ungated response,
and the dip you see around 150 Hz is floor reflection - it's
not from the driver nor the port.
Nelson's comment re floor reflection worries me. I have floating timber laminated floor on a concrete base, with with only one small rug in the room. Will this "hard" surface cause acousic problems with the BLH - I appreciate other room dimensions will also come into play?
greenie512 said:
Have a read of Section 9 of Martin King's horn series (this is going to be a book-size doc by the time he is done)... he adds floor bounce to his equations. If you are into flat frequency response as a prime goal, it will drive you crazy....
I'm not, but i'm still considering how one would build a faom table to occuppy the appropriate spot on the floor (a rug will help, but they usually aren't thick enuff to do anything at the place where most of the problems are)
dave
tmmuch said:
I have the wood cut, but I am reluctant to install the panels. At the volumes that I normally listen vibration does not appear to be an issue. I am trully amazed at how good this project has turned out. It is one amazing sounding spearker.
Could someone please explain to this computer phobic how to attach a picture? I tried and nothing happened.
Bill
Re: Re: Carcass construction
Dave - I wrote MDF without thinking. Are you specifically saying, with this design it's better to use plywood??.
Bill .. have your picture (jpg file) saved to your hard disk and when using the reply feature here, use the browse button (slightly lower than the text message panel) and click the button and locate/select the picture wherever you saved it on your hard disk - post reply - vola
planet10 said:
Dave - I wrote MDF without thinking. Are you specifically saying, with this design it's better to use plywood??.
Bill .. have your picture (jpg file) saved to your hard disk and when using the reply feature here, use the browse button (slightly lower than the text message panel) and click the button and locate/select the picture wherever you saved it on your hard disk - post reply - vola
Re: Re: Re: Carcass construction
No question... MDF is used because it is cheap, is easier to finish, and to machine. I've never really used MDF, but used to use HDF all the time. I now use ply in any critical application. If you can recycle some 40 or 50 year old plywood, it is usually even better.
dave
greenie512 said:
No question... MDF is used because it is cheap, is easier to finish, and to machine. I've never really used MDF, but used to use HDF all the time. I now use ply in any critical application. If you can recycle some 40 or 50 year old plywood, it is usually even better.
dave
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.