Hi Chuyler1,
<<<Total build time was about 7 hours (I work slow -- and that includes a few beer breaks). >>>
7 hours! You have NO idea what slow is! I probably spent 7 hrs just cutting and sanding the pieces. Then I started on holes for the dowel pegs--several more hours of puttering. And as I said, I expect it to take another month for me to complete them. Note that I apply finish along the way. Everything--inside and out--gets coated. Then I will apply veneer; most likely red oak.
It's a fussy little build, but should be well worth the effort.
Cheers, Jim
<<<Total build time was about 7 hours (I work slow -- and that includes a few beer breaks). >>>
7 hours! You have NO idea what slow is! I probably spent 7 hrs just cutting and sanding the pieces. Then I started on holes for the dowel pegs--several more hours of puttering. And as I said, I expect it to take another month for me to complete them. Note that I apply finish along the way. Everything--inside and out--gets coated. Then I will apply veneer; most likely red oak.
It's a fussy little build, but should be well worth the effort.
Cheers, Jim
@chuyler1: you said there was a gap beetween the satellites and the sub. a quality gap? or a dip in the response?? you own a pair of frugels, can you stand the sound of the little sub? would you make a quick politically uncorrect comparison beetween the bass from the frugels and the little plastic sub, and also beetween the little cubes and the fostex drivers?
Now that you mention it, yeah, take anything above 15K with a grain of salt. I'm using an EMC8000 with a Mic Mate but it isn't calibrated or anything. Come to think of it, I've never taken a measurement that went flat beyond 15K. I guess my graphs are more for comparison than anything else.planet10 said:
Dowel pegs for the uFonkens? That seems a bit overkill to me. I've built sealed subwoofer boxes for my car using just wood glue and never had any of them fall apart. If I were building a chair or table, I might consider them but not for something this small.Jim Shearer said:
I put another 4 hours into them today. Sanded, added oak vineer, and finished it off with some dark walnut stain. This was my first attempt at vineer and I just used the iron-on stuff they sell at Lowes. I hope it holds up because they look great!
There is nothing "quality" about the set. The CS system plays highs, and it has some midbass punch if you turn up the subwoofer but even if you level set the sub with an RTA they never quite match up into a seemless sound. I've had it for about 10 years and used it for my computer off and on. It only cost me about $50 at the time so despite the name, it isn't an audiophile system.human.bin said:
When it comes to bass, the CS system is just a 5" driver in a ported enclosure. It might work as a decent subwoofer if the crossover point were lowered. I don't know what the port is tuned to but judging from the freq response it is tuned to enhance the 80-300Hz region. The Frugelhorns only really need help below 90Hz. If I level matched the two systems at 100Hz I'd certainly enjoy the bass coming from the frugels than the bass coming from the plastic fart can.
It is difficult to simply compare the cube speakers to the FF85K speakers given that the cubes need additional eq settings just to compete. But given their ideal environment (powered off the outputs on the back of the sub) they image worse than the FF85K, they don't play as low, and they still don't have as much high-end detail. They are cheap, and that's how they sound. Add the subwoofer to the cubes and there is more bass than the uFonkens will ever produce...but overall not great for anything more than playing video games and watching the occasional youtube video.
Now a better comparison would be how does the uFonken compare to the Frugelhorn? The frugel obviously has a size advantage but does the added size and added bass make for more enjoyable listening? ...well.... yes. The frugels are way more fun to listen to. The enabled drivers image perfectly as long as you are in the sweet spot (you'll have to be less than 15 degrees offaxis to get the high freq) and the bass is smooth and seamless. The uFonkens have more high freq detail and are less picky about location. I actually found they had to be at least 30 degrees off axis or there was too much high-freq. I'd like to try the enabled versions to see how they fair...and a few more hours of break-in might help. Listening material for me is limited to light jazz and acoustic material. I tried a few hard rock tunes and the lack of bass made it not worth listening to. Imaging wasn't as warm and inviting as with the frugels but it was clear and precise. For example, live music sounded like a mix off the sound board while the frugels simply put me at the concert. Make sense? It's hard to vocalize the difference. I become distracted by all the high-freq sounds (high-hat, cymbals, etc) coming from the uFonkens and it takes away from the warm sound of someone's voice. The frugels are natural while the uFonkens are dynamic (high-freq dynamic...obviously not low-freq dynamic, as there is no low-freq). With that said though, the uFonkens are quite possibly the best compact speaker I've ever heard and with a subwoofer added to them will complete any office....but don't think of them as a replacement for a full-sized speaker cabinet.
Photo of mine after vineer and stain...
I applied the vineer on the sides first, then the front (folding over the edges), and the top last. I didn't bother with the back or bottom. Sanded with 120 using a round orbital sander, wiped down with a damp cloth, sanded with 220 using the orbital again, whiped down again, then stained.
I applied the vineer on the sides first, then the front (folding over the edges), and the top last. I didn't bother with the back or bottom. Sanded with 120 using a round orbital sander, wiped down with a damp cloth, sanded with 220 using the orbital again, whiped down again, then stained.
i was worrying about the comparison just beacause you didn't made a WOW for the ufonkens. it let me tought they were in the same league (or not so far) as the increadbly cheap, all plastic creative/cambridge stuff, i used to have them too with the pc, and know how crappy they can be... this also let me thinks that maybe those logithec 2.1 200$ league pc speakers, or the klipsh ones may do the job...
everybody that went trought this little fostex seemed amazed far more than you are reporting... what amp are you driving them with?
everybody that went trought this little fostex seemed amazed far more than you are reporting... what amp are you driving them with?
I am powering them with a Sonic Impact gen 2 T-amp. If all I had to compare was the Cambridge Soundworks PC speakers then I probably would have had a bigger "WOW" response. But I really like the sound of the frugels and I was expecting better imaging from the 3" driver. Perhaps the FF85Ks need some more break-in time, or perhaps I should look into some of planet-10's treatments. I'm tempted to build a second pair and purchase a set of eNabled drivers (I don't trust myself to make those intricate patterns).
On a side note, should I consider any sort of BSC?
On a side note, should I consider any sort of BSC?
VDV said:Check if you can please, if my delta is too big i would buy a new pair, i think i could burnt them a little
Over the full sample of 44 drivers Re ranged from 6.9 - 7.3
But when considered in batches (ie out of the same case, batch 1 (4 units), 7.1-7.3, batch 2 (20 units) 6.9-7.1, batch 3 (20 units) 7.0-7.2
dave
planet10 said:
Thank you very much, i will stick with mine, my delta is acceptable i think .
Fostex grills are hurting speaker a little bit, the rubber ring on the top of the speaker unglued a little bit because of the pressing grill. And surround is deformated a little
Maybe a new pair will sound better, but this one's sound is just amazing on some records, for example with female vocal and guitar.
chuyler1 said:
I am a strong advocate of BSC, BUT in this case, perhaps not. I'm still in the middle of the micro-Fonken build, so I don't know for certain; I can say that with the Sprites, no BSC was needed. And I have no idea why. The baffles couldn't have been much smaller. And putting a driver in the end of a cylinder is the worst possible configuration. Yet the performance of the Sprites was stunning! (to me, anyway.)
Cheers, Jim
Over the last few days I've been breaking them in and finishing them off. I applied 4 coats of Minwax wipe-on poly with very VERY light sanding with 320 between coats. For the last coat I sanded with 00 steelwool and applied some Minwax finishing wax.
I also applied some strip cauck around the edges of the magnet to reduce reflections and I adjusted the amount of polyfill I put in. The imaging is much better but the bass is a little peaky. At times you might say "where's the sub" but when the bass player goes up or down a note or two the effect goes away.
I found that when placing them close together like on my desk they need to be towed way in so the speakers cross paths in front of you. If they are straight or even facing directly at you the vocals are basically omnipresent instead of centered. Placing them in the corners of my room ontop of my frugelhorns improves imaging even more and helps the bass by being in the corners.
I'll have a more detailed review later, gotta go run some errands now.
I also applied some strip cauck around the edges of the magnet to reduce reflections and I adjusted the amount of polyfill I put in. The imaging is much better but the bass is a little peaky. At times you might say "where's the sub" but when the bass player goes up or down a note or two the effect goes away.
I found that when placing them close together like on my desk they need to be towed way in so the speakers cross paths in front of you. If they are straight or even facing directly at you the vocals are basically omnipresent instead of centered. Placing them in the corners of my room ontop of my frugelhorns improves imaging even more and helps the bass by being in the corners.
I'll have a more detailed review later, gotta go run some errands now.
They’re finally done! The FF85k’s are in their micro-Fonken cabinets. Photo below shows one sitting on top of the larger FE127 Fonken.
I used Acousta-Stuff fiber from Parts Express, since the cabinet is so small and hard to install the foam lining I have used in other builds.
As you can see, I elected to use a round-over bit in the router than than doing a 45 degree chamfer on the vertical edges. I darkened the ports with Minwax red chestnut stain; veneered the cabinets in red oak; and coated with Minwax semi-gloss polyurethane.
Initial impressions:
-- No BSC needed; (I still don’t know why that should be, but, hey--it’s great!)
-- seems to have less bass than in the Sprites; probably because the Sprites have a ‘commercial’ tuning to put a little bump at the bottom end to make them sound like they have more bass than they actually produce.
Now I need to try integrating them with a sub--which should work better than the Sprites, since the bass is properly balanced and rolls off smoothly.
Cheers, Jim
I used Acousta-Stuff fiber from Parts Express, since the cabinet is so small and hard to install the foam lining I have used in other builds.
As you can see, I elected to use a round-over bit in the router than than doing a 45 degree chamfer on the vertical edges. I darkened the ports with Minwax red chestnut stain; veneered the cabinets in red oak; and coated with Minwax semi-gloss polyurethane.
Initial impressions:
-- No BSC needed; (I still don’t know why that should be, but, hey--it’s great!)
-- seems to have less bass than in the Sprites; probably because the Sprites have a ‘commercial’ tuning to put a little bump at the bottom end to make them sound like they have more bass than they actually produce.
Now I need to try integrating them with a sub--which should work better than the Sprites, since the bass is properly balanced and rolls off smoothly.
Cheers, Jim
Attachments
Thanks!
Comparing the Fe127e to the FF85k: I like the FE127e, but the FF85k (above the bass freqs) has more of everything I like. It has clarity, detail, and balance. As to sound stage: you need bass for that, so I can't say until I get a sub running w/ them. As to imaging: I think the FF85k is better, but this is something I'm not as sensitive to as may others here seem to be.
My ultimate endorsement is that after hearing the FF85k's, I changed my plans for next summer's builds. I will be purchasing another pair of FF85k's which I will try in an MJK OB configuration, and perhaps another design as well.
Cheers, Jim
Comparing the Fe127e to the FF85k: I like the FE127e, but the FF85k (above the bass freqs) has more of everything I like. It has clarity, detail, and balance. As to sound stage: you need bass for that, so I can't say until I get a sub running w/ them. As to imaging: I think the FF85k is better, but this is something I'm not as sensitive to as may others here seem to be.
My ultimate endorsement is that after hearing the FF85k's, I changed my plans for next summer's builds. I will be purchasing another pair of FF85k's which I will try in an MJK OB configuration, and perhaps another design as well.
Cheers, Jim
I tend to concur... the extra top the FF85 has (FF85KeN in my case) really fills things in. I'm wrking on adding a supertweeter to my FonkenPrime system in an attempt to bring the more dynamic Fonken+woof system closer to Tysen in those places where Tysen has an edge.
We also have parts for the MJK baffle variation.
dave
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.