|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
|
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.
Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cape Town,South Africa
|
OK, So I've decided I like the FE167e, and I can get it fairly easily.
And I'd like to try a TQWT (Tapered Quarter-Wave Tube), and it seems like ML (Mass Loaded) is a good idea. So... my plan is to build a ML TQWT for the FE167e (like the thread heading suggests). So far I'm looking at building the Demetri which I saw at Planet_10 hi-fi. http://www.planet10-hifi.com/boxes-fostex.html#demetri Is there anything I need to know about before I go ahead with this? Let me just say, I don't have much experience, and I have limited knowledge when it comes to building speakers. So I'm looking for something which is "tried & tested". I don't wan't to be calculating resonances, or comparing graphs. -Raphael
__________________
-R.Shaw |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cape Town,South Africa
|
One thing I'm a little worried about with the Demetri design, is that it extends right to a point.
I can't recall why at the moment, but I vaguely remember that to be a bad thing, and that there should be a small surface area at the small end of the taper. Any thoughts??
__________________
-R.Shaw |
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
diyAudio Moderator
|
Quote:
Another design to consider is MJK's original ML-TQWT. dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi p10-hifi forum here at diyA |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cape Town,South Africa
|
Thanks!
Yes I like MJK's Design very much. Any Idea about sonic differences? I need something to base my decision on. I'm not worried about the wood-work, and both are fine aesthetically. Can I just dump the FE167e MJK's box? (designed for FE164), or will I need to make any adjustments? -Raphael
__________________
-R.Shaw |
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
diyAudio Moderator
|
Quote:
dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi p10-hifi forum here at diyA |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: victoria BC
|
I haven't heard the MJK design, but I can tell you that Demetri definitely performs ( I daresay no BSC required on this puppy), and while it certainly depends on the individuals, passed the WAF around here.
__________________
you don't really believe everything you think, do you? community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com commercial site planet10-HiFi |
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
|
FYI, a throat area (if a cabinet expands toward the terminus, it's technically a horn) of 0 isn't actually a bad thing if used properly -quite the reverse in fact as you get the maximum pipe-gain.
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cape Town,South Africa
|
Quote:
-Thanks What do you mean about "maximum pipe-gain" And Thanks generally for the input guys. I'm still undecided about which one to go with though. -I think a good question to ask would be: "which one will be more versatile when it comes to amplifiers, and music styles?" I have a very diverse musical taste, and although they will mostly be running on my home-made 10W 6l6 tube-amp, I'll probably be connecting them to anything with an 8 ohm output, tubes or no tubes. -Raphael
__________________
-R.Shaw |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
diyAudio Moderator
|
If you ignore the LF these will be more similar than different... i've not heaed a set of the MJK pipes, but speaking in general terms based on experience & supposition:
1/ the wider baffle of demetri will give it a greater diffration signiture, but lowers the point at which baffle step occurs. Placed close to a wall, no BSC will likely be required. The diffraction signature can be larger ameriolated by using a supraBaffle to optimize wavelaunch and minimize late diffraction 2/ the high aspect ratio vent in Demetri is intended to minimize tuning errors due to the dynamic variability of driver (T/S) charateristics (it is like a resistor in series with the port). You lose some port gain (countered somewhat by the greater pipe gain due to the port), and in my experience gives the bass a sense of greater control (i always seem to by putting a wad of damping in the ports of BR, ML-V, and ML-TLs to kill what i feel is too much boom... 3/ cosmetic... i actually prefer the look of the MJK ML-TQWT (althou i'd change the presentation of the taper), Demetri with the 167 looks a bit out of place on the broad shouldered Demetri, this could be decreased i expect by dramatically rounding the top corners -- buit some would say that would make it look too much like a tombstone. Somewhere deep in my notes there is the basics of a slightly smaller monolith specifically for the 167 (not likely to go quite as low (maybe good, maybe not) ![]() dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi p10-hifi forum here at diyA |
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| WTB: Fostex FE167E | Studley | Swap Meet | 0 | 25th June 2008 07:46 PM |
| Shouty FE167E in ML TQWT | ghisdal | Full Range | 39 | 18th April 2007 11:14 PM |
| WTB : Fostex FE167E | Cacophonix | Swap Meet | 0 | 11th April 2007 11:49 PM |
| FE167e: Brines MLTL or folded King ML TQWT? | roundel325 | Full Range | 5 | 15th October 2006 06:19 AM |
| Aw ****. SI + Fostex FE167E | disconnec | Class D | 8 | 29th September 2005 01:53 AM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |
| Page generated in 0.12616 seconds (79.37% PHP - 20.63% MySQL) with 11 queries |