Scottmoose said:
500 Hz-1k seems to be the best region to XO if you have to do something in the telephone band (considering an informal survey of historically significant 2-way systems)
This Jordan system gives some insight in some tricks to deal with BS.
http://www.t-linespeakers.org/projects/rune/index.html
dave
Thanks for the concern about my hearing, 95 dB continuous is *not my normal listening levels. just when the wife is out, the album is a fave, etc, or when we have a party.
(I don't listen much to vocals
, I tune into percussion/ lead guitar/ organ, so XO outside the vocal range isn't a priority)
I hadn't known by how much the power handling ability rises if their XO is raised to 500 Hz or above..
So the low Fostex power ratings reflect how low the drivers are being used, for their magnet size, xmax etc
If the FF85K/ 126e are crossed at say 1000, they could handle 50 watts rms?
I've only had time for the odd look at EnABL, but seems very promising . .
(I don't listen much to vocals
, I tune into percussion/ lead guitar/ organ, so XO outside the vocal range isn't a priority)I hadn't known by how much the power handling ability rises if their XO is raised to 500 Hz or above..
So the low Fostex power ratings reflect how low the drivers are being used, for their magnet size, xmax etc
If the FF85K/ 126e are crossed at say 1000, they could handle 50 watts rms?
I've only had time for the odd look at EnABL, but seems very promising . .
Sounds favourite. I'm thinking Fonkens or Frugel-horns here.
As Dave points out, power handling as a measure is pretty useless -it tends to be what the driver will take as a maximum before it disintegrates, and does not account for the different requirements as frequency varies. You're basically correct though -the lower you go, typically the more power / current is required as the driver has to work harder -especially as this zone is where the majority of energy put out by, say, an orchestra or rock-group is concentrated.
FWIW, if you go with a 100Hz XO, I'd suggest one LF driver per channel rather than a single one, as anything over ~70Hz becomes increasingly directional
As Dave points out, power handling as a measure is pretty useless -it tends to be what the driver will take as a maximum before it disintegrates, and does not account for the different requirements as frequency varies. You're basically correct though -the lower you go, typically the more power / current is required as the driver has to work harder -especially as this zone is where the majority of energy put out by, say, an orchestra or rock-group is concentrated.
FWIW, if you go with a 100Hz XO, I'd suggest one LF driver per channel rather than a single one, as anything over ~70Hz becomes increasingly directional
Re: Getting full benefit of EnABL
Next question for the inveterate DIYer of course would be: candidates for physically small, high performance powered (sub)woofer?
the nominations are open
My personal recommendation for max SPL sensitivity would be:
FE126eN in the Brynn cabinet, with one powered woofer per side. The new CSS SDX7 would be a great candidate. This latest version of the XDBL Extremis design is quite a sexy little beast, although of course it strictly adheres to the sensitivity penalty inherent in Hoffman's Iron Law.
(Dave, got any pictures to publish yet)
Either PLLXO for the FE126eN with conventional style plate amps (i.e. unless you're confident in the quality of the HP filter section of the plate amps, avoid them at all costs with drivers of this quality) or full blown outboard XO and stereo or mono blocks for the subs.
With the Brynn's wide baffle configuration and powered subs in this system, it's probably fair to say that BSC would be the least of your worries - it should certainly be able to rock at 95dB+ for longer than your ears should be subjected.
Note to any builders of Brynn - if you plan on experimenting with different drivers in this cabinet, be aware that the depth of magnet structure varies among the Fostex candidates. (FE126, 127 and FF125K) If you cut the driver magnet brace for the deepest magnet of this group (FE127), you can pad the back of the others with dense PSA felt pads to retain coupling.
Now, for slightly lower sensitivity, but I dare say smoother midrange, more finesse in the lower mid bass octave before XO to powered sub, and superior imaging/ depth of soundstage, the "standard" Fonken with FE127eN and powered SDX-7 per side. It wouldn't be much of a challenge to extend the dimensions of the standard Fonken box to the floor to accommodate for separate woofer/amp enclosure, or simply build a separate cabinet as sub& stand. Same caveats apply re amplification & HP filters to the Fostex drivers.
otto88 said:
Next question for the inveterate DIYer of course would be: candidates for physically small, high performance powered (sub)woofer?
the nominations are open
My personal recommendation for max SPL sensitivity would be:
FE126eN in the Brynn cabinet, with one powered woofer per side. The new CSS SDX7 would be a great candidate. This latest version of the XDBL Extremis design is quite a sexy little beast, although of course it strictly adheres to the sensitivity penalty inherent in Hoffman's Iron Law.
(Dave, got any pictures to publish yet)
Either PLLXO for the FE126eN with conventional style plate amps (i.e. unless you're confident in the quality of the HP filter section of the plate amps, avoid them at all costs with drivers of this quality) or full blown outboard XO and stereo or mono blocks for the subs.
With the Brynn's wide baffle configuration and powered subs in this system, it's probably fair to say that BSC would be the least of your worries - it should certainly be able to rock at 95dB+ for longer than your ears should be subjected.
Note to any builders of Brynn - if you plan on experimenting with different drivers in this cabinet, be aware that the depth of magnet structure varies among the Fostex candidates. (FE126, 127 and FF125K) If you cut the driver magnet brace for the deepest magnet of this group (FE127), you can pad the back of the others with dense PSA felt pads to retain coupling.
Now, for slightly lower sensitivity, but I dare say smoother midrange, more finesse in the lower mid bass octave before XO to powered sub, and superior imaging/ depth of soundstage, the "standard" Fonken with FE127eN and powered SDX-7 per side. It wouldn't be much of a challenge to extend the dimensions of the standard Fonken box to the floor to accommodate for separate woofer/amp enclosure, or simply build a separate cabinet as sub& stand. Same caveats apply re amplification & HP filters to the Fostex drivers.
OK, for those who might care, a quick check of some dimensioned drawings: the SDX7 can certainly be fit in a box the same width as the standard beveled Fonken ( i.e. ~220mm), but finding a plate amp to fit is the biggest challenge.
One candidate if you don't mind turning it sideways (not my first aesthetic choice) would be the BASH 300S
One candidate if you don't mind turning it sideways (not my first aesthetic choice) would be the BASH 300S
Musical Sub
I built this sub to augment my FE166ESR backloaded horns. The sub uses the SEAS L26 Woofer, same as the Terry Cain's Baily Sub. I like it lot and I plan to eventually build another to match.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=627919#post627919
I built this sub to augment my FE166ESR backloaded horns. The sub uses the SEAS L26 Woofer, same as the Terry Cain's Baily Sub. I like it lot and I plan to eventually build another to match.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=627919#post627919
Re: Re: Getting full benefit of EnABL
Attached... data sheet for these is nearing completion
So far the most appealing box to me for these is sealed (with XBL a bit of boost on the bottom for more extension is plausible) -- It would be easy to turn the void + a bit of added base to Brynn to accomodate a rear firing SDX7 "stealth" woofer. (BTW StealthWoofer is copyright for a frugel-horn woofer)
On the table for some time has been an add-under FonkenWoof, that was delayed by the dissaperance of the Extremis,,, the SDX7 makes it much easier to implement.
The SDX7 will fit in 7 litre (Q=0,7) to 21 liter (Q=0,5) sealed box. The latter with room gain should get you into the 30s.
dave
chrisb said:
Attached... data sheet for these is nearing completion
So far the most appealing box to me for these is sealed (with XBL a bit of boost on the bottom for more extension is plausible) -- It would be easy to turn the void + a bit of added base to Brynn to accomodate a rear firing SDX7 "stealth" woofer. (BTW StealthWoofer is copyright for a frugel-horn woofer)
On the table for some time has been an add-under FonkenWoof, that was delayed by the dissaperance of the Extremis,,, the SDX7 makes it much easier to implement.
The SDX7 will fit in 7 litre (Q=0,7) to 21 liter (Q=0,5) sealed box. The latter with room gain should get you into the 30s.
dave
Attachments
I've got a vaulted ceiling that's like 14' to the right of the entertainment center. If I could just get someone local to build a cab to spec for me and get it finished to match the oak of the existing furniture, I bet I would get that past the Livingroom Police. That corner's not good for much, and the side wall there is a "plant shelf" so only about 8' tall, opening the whole vault up to both livingroom and kitchen. Figure the SDX7 would go near the floor to get that .416 point in the line. Sub amp might need a nice oak little sub-enclosure. Pricey project, but can you imagine the sound from such a small driver?
Kensai
Kensai
Just to add a note.
EnABL'd drivers do not have much of a warning system left, from typical pretreatment overdrive activities. It is VERY easy to overdrive both the speakers and your ears. Smoking voice coils are a serious consideration here.
Not to scare you off. You will not actually need to exceed 90dB continuous, to get the full benefit of the ultra clear downward coherence and extra, dynamically uncompressed, head room available after treatment.
In addition, you really do want to EnABL the woofer. The results will astonish you. We have all been talking about he rest of the FR, but the Bass and mid Bass frequencies are even more amenable to this sort of treatment, than upper ranges.
The little Fostex eN drivers, with bass support worthy of their clarity, will be the last system most WAF limited music lovers will ever need.
Then will come an exploration into just how good the upstream components can be made, vis-a-vis information density. Here is where the real joy of an EnABL'd set of speaker systems will be found.
Bud
EnABL'd drivers do not have much of a warning system left, from typical pretreatment overdrive activities. It is VERY easy to overdrive both the speakers and your ears. Smoking voice coils are a serious consideration here.
Not to scare you off. You will not actually need to exceed 90dB continuous, to get the full benefit of the ultra clear downward coherence and extra, dynamically uncompressed, head room available after treatment.
In addition, you really do want to EnABL the woofer. The results will astonish you. We have all been talking about he rest of the FR, but the Bass and mid Bass frequencies are even more amenable to this sort of treatment, than upper ranges.
The little Fostex eN drivers, with bass support worthy of their clarity, will be the last system most WAF limited music lovers will ever need.
Then will come an exploration into just how good the upstream components can be made, vis-a-vis information density. Here is where the real joy of an EnABL'd set of speaker systems will be found.
Bud
so, Bud - if we paint little dots on the ground shells of our RCA plugs, and the GESP dielectric sleeves ......
But seriously, we really need to EnABL at least one pair of enclosures - probably start with the Brynns. However things are getting a bit hectic, so it's looking iffy for anything before the new year.
BTW, for you compulsive shoppers, or hopeless romantics, today is the "12th day of gift-mas"
But seriously, we really need to EnABL at least one pair of enclosures - probably start with the Brynns. However things are getting a bit hectic, so it's looking iffy for anything before the new year.
BTW, for you compulsive shoppers, or hopeless romantics, today is the "12th day of gift-mas"
I agree with a XO at 100 Hz , one LF driver per channel is better, but SWWWTBO has put lots of furniture on the floor and theres only room for one sub ~ so I got a 15", to go in a "slim" tall 80 litre box
while I'm sure a Fonken or Frugel-horn would be best, I want only a simple construction, so it will have to be a sealed/ BR or aperiodic.
I've looked at the fostex range, and can't help thinking that for my musical tastes (extending to Zeppelin, garage rock) with a lot of energy in the range 80 - 500 Hz) whether a 6.5" would be better, ie the 166.
I see P10 has an 166En coming: for an aperiodic box for hard rock, thoughts on 166 v 126 or 127?
(Esp now I've seen Bud's warning re overdriving speakers) . .
Thanks
while I'm sure a Fonken or Frugel-horn would be best, I want only a simple construction, so it will have to be a sealed/ BR or aperiodic.
I've looked at the fostex range, and can't help thinking that for my musical tastes (extending to Zeppelin, garage rock) with a lot of energy in the range 80 - 500 Hz) whether a 6.5" would be better, ie the 166.
I see P10 has an 166En coming: for an aperiodic box for hard rock, thoughts on 166 v 126 or 127?
(Esp now I've seen Bud's warning re overdriving speakers) . .
Thanks
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.