Dave - let me elaborate a bit, and it could just be our lexicons - I'm referring to the ambience of spread of output of the lower frequencies from the rear mouth output of any of the Frugels as compared to Pensils. I've lived for a while with examples of the latter with A7.3 and A10.3, and for a shorter time, the former with A10.3 and 10Ps.
While I've not built / heard every single enclosure in the Lindgren oeuvre - who exactly has? - of those I have, ether of the horns mentioned, or that matter the rear mouthed Maeshowe / Valiants as compared to the Aiko or Saburo of the double mouth series have always sounded bigger than any direct firing mono-poles using the same driver.
While I've not built / heard every single enclosure in the Lindgren oeuvre - who exactly has? - of those I have, ether of the horns mentioned, or that matter the rear mouthed Maeshowe / Valiants as compared to the Aiko or Saburo of the double mouth series have always sounded bigger than any direct firing mono-poles using the same driver.
4-5hz in the 100hz region is really not that much ("4-5%").
But now go lower...
around 50hz it is a lot more ("8-10%").
And even lower...
at 32hz go just 2hz lower and it is subjectively (by ear) almost double as low.
I'm certainly on record with that - I just don't have the space myself.
As i said before, with the horn dominating the difference in FR is lead… sealed with a max flat alignment the metal has an F10 of 50 Hz, the paper about 52 Hz. In an optimum miniOnken the difference is 41 vrs 43 Hz.
dave
And unless the approx 1.63 dB difference in sensitivity (advantage paper ) is a critical factor, it comes down to which tonal signature works best for you. With the A7, I definitely prefer the metal, but in the case of either the A6 or A10, I'm more ambivalent, and would choose based on application. Of course at the end of the day it's your ears you need to live with, and some folks definitely prefer the papers.
Yes.
Our initial comparison of A10PeN vrs A10.3eN with a couple hundred hours low level break-in had us choosing the paper cone as better, but we lent the metals to Bernie and he got many, many more hours on them and when they came back the comparison was 6 of one, half dozen of the other. Both very good. I believe those drivers are now in Pensils in CHris’ HT.
dave
Our initial comparison of A10PeN vrs A10.3eN with a couple hundred hours low level break-in had us choosing the paper cone as better, but we lent the metals to Bernie and he got many, many more hours on them and when they came back the comparison was 6 of one, half dozen of the other. Both very good. I believe those drivers are now in Pensils in CHris’ HT.
dave
A10.3 gets smoother up top and greater DDR as it breaks in. I guess metal takes longe rto settle in than paper.
Except for the angle cuts, not really. Pensil has more fiddly bits… the bits on the back so the back can be removed (and sealing and screwing that), and althou the holey brace is only shown in 1 drawing, not optional as far as we are concerned.
dave
Except for the angle cuts, not really. Pensil has more fiddly bits… the bits on the back so the back can be removed (and sealing and screwing that), and althou the holey brace is only shown in 1 drawing, not optional as far as we are concerned.
dave
As a builder of a set I can atest to putting braces into the cabinet. It is a little tricky to get it just right, but it is worth the effort. When you put your hand on the panels with deeper bass notes playing the cabinets are free from vibration. The cabinet does not add or detract from the music being played. Just nice clean music coming from them.
Spend the time and effort, it is really worth it.
I hope this helps
Spend the time and effort, it is really worth it.
I hope this helps