Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Full Range
Home Forums Rules Articles Store Gallery Blogs Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

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
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 16th July 2009, 06:08 PM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Bob Brines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Hot Spring Village AR
Default FE167En vs stock FE167E

I finally got around to doing a serious comparison between stock and fully enabled FE167E's. Not exactly a DBT, since I did all of the cable swapping myself, but I am satisfied with the results.

The speakers were my FB-16:

Click the image to open in full size.

loaded with the stock FE167E's This speaker was stacked on top of my FT-1600 MkII's:

Click the image to open in full size.

loaded with FE167En's. The two speakers have exactly the same width and the supra baffles are identical except that the port on the FB-16's exit through the supra baffle.

Both speakers have the same BSC filter -- 1.5mH||6ohm. While the MLTL will go almost an octave deeper than the BR, above 500Hz or so, the two speakers are acoustically identical. Any difference is do to the drivers, and the music I chose is not bass heavy anyway.

Electronics:

HP Pavillion Laptop with the music library a WD Passport USB drive.
Creative SB USB external sound card
SI Super T-amp.

Cables:

DIY CAT5 cross-connected -- 4 wires +ve, 4 wires -ve made up by chopping the ends off of Ethernet patch cords.

Dayton interconnects.

Music:

Alison Krauss: "Forget About It"
Diana Krall: "All or Nothing at All"
Jim Croce: "Operator"
Steely Dan: "Josie"
Mozart: "Rondo Alla Turca"
Vivaldi: Violin Concerto RV251
Telemann: Trumpet Concerto #2 - "Aria"

So. It didn't take a millisecond to hear the difference between the two drivers. The enabled drivers are softer, sweeter and more laid back than the stock driver. Not a little bit -- a lot! It is almost as if the EN's were playing at a lower SLP, but they were not. They take the edge off of Alison Krauss and Jim Croce. Gone are the spitty S's an P's. Just a really smooth sound.

On the other hand, the EN's lack the detail on the stock drivers. I have to be careful hear, because I've stated many times that detail is often nothing more than an exaggerated top end. However, I think that it is real. In the Vivaldi, there is a harpsichord buried under the orchestra in the opening ritornello that is obvious on the stock 167's, but virtually missing on the EN's. Also the solo violin doesn't have the sparkle that I expect from a gut-strung baroque instrument. Same kind of thing in "Operator". The EN's smooth out Croce's rather strident voice, but something is lost in the guitar work.

It's a mixed bag, and it all depends on what you are listening for. The EN's are great for voice, but not so great for instrumentals. This is the same kind of comment that visitors were making at my LSAF demo. There the comparison was the 167EN's and DX3's. The opinions were split about 50/50 as to which sounded better. If you like the sound of small SE amps, you will love the EN's. If you find you SS amp a bit edgy, the EN's will smooth it out. If you like a very detailed, almost edgy sound, then you will want to go stock. Any way you cut it, the EN's are less fatiguing in long listening sessions.

I'm going to offer the 167EN's as an upgrade for my speakers. I think that most folks will prefer the EN's Only die hard baroque nuts like me will actually prefer stock.

Bob
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th July 2009, 06:36 PM   #2
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Appleton, WI
A good report Bob.

I am learning the EN technique out of curiosity.

BudP states repeatedly that the EN removes certain forms of sound artifacts and cancels waves produced by the cone that are termed interference. Interested persons really have to read the theory rather than listening to me because I do not do it well.

My questions is: Will you also test the 167e with the phase plug and plus or minus EN?

My EN job is for application on the 127e. My 167e is stock in the GM designed MLTL with which I am very pleased.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th July 2009, 07:06 PM   #3
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 4
Bob,

Can you comment on the differences in imaging?

dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi
p10-hifi forum here at diyA
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th July 2009, 07:25 PM   #4
chrisb is offline chrisb  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: victoria BC
Quote:
Originally posted by planet10
Bob,

Can you comment on the differences in imaging?

dave

Bob - and dimensionality (depth /width) of soundstage?

I note that the pictured drivers lacked phase plugs - that would be the next step to try.

For those using BLH or BIB's, I've found the reduction in long session fatigue to be even more noticeable on the FE126E, and would expect* the same with FE166E.

* I've heard/built for at least 9 models in the FE/FF & FnnnA series over the past several years, but so far my only brief exposure to FE166E (stock) was in a version of C&C Abbeys at least 5 years ago. I'd love to know what Terry would have made of the EnABL process.
__________________
you don't really believe everything you think, do you?
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com commercial site planet10-HiFi
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th July 2009, 01:10 AM   #5
diyAudio Member
 
Bob Brines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Hot Spring Village AR
Quote:
Originally posted by planet10
Bob,

Can you comment on the differences in imaging?

dave
Ah, yes! Imaging! Don't get me started. Imaging on a studio multi-mic'd recording is exactly what the recording engineer chooses it to be. But I digress....

I don't put much stock in imaging, so I wasn't paying attention. So I pulled up the Chesky recording of a cut from Stravinsky's "Soldier's Tale". This has to be a multi-mic'd session, but the instruments have pin-point placement. Both of the drivers image pretty darn well, but with the stock 167, the instruments would float around a bit. The bassoon and trumpet which are sitting side-by-side would occasionally swap places. With the EN, everyone remained locked in place. So, the nod goes to the EN on imaging.


Quote:
Originally posted by chrisb



Bob - and dimensionality (depth /width) of soundstage?
Then I pulled up Alison Krauss' "The Lucky One" I started on the EN's because they happened to be plugged in from the last test. Nice round sound stage with Alison 3-4' in front of the band. I switched to the stock 167's and OMG -- Alison was in my lap. Never had a singer jump out at me like that. Could be the jury-rigged set-up. Could be that the stock driver was getting some phasing detail that the EN was missing.

Depth of sound stage in a studio recording is 100% due to the engineer screwing with the phasing. Same goes with sound stage extending beyond the outside of the speakers. Can't happen unless the phasing is screwed with. Play around a little with SRS WOW and see what I mean.

Last thing on imaging: One thing that really annoys me is a recording with a performer glued to one speaker. I have a couple of Oscar Robinson recordings where the drum kit is on the left channel, the bass on the right and Oscar in the middle. No bleed from right to left. Really gives a fake sound to an otherwise decent recording.

Quote:
I note that the pictured drivers lacked phase plugs - that would be the next step to try.
The pictures I presented were stock photos from my web page. The FB-16 as tested is indeed stock without a phase plug. The FT-1660 MkII as tested had a full enabled driver with phase plug Here is a picture of the FT-1600's next to LT-2000/DX3's from the Dallas LSAF:


Click the image to open in full size.

Note that the FE167EN's are stealth mode -- you can't see the dots, well -- dashes, until you get about a foot away. Well done, Dave.

I did test the phase plugs alone against stock drivers. The phase plugs worked as a notch filter up around 6-7kHz. The result was a reduction in sibilance. Well worth doing for the price.

Bob
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th July 2009, 12:14 PM   #6
diyAudio Member
 
Alex from Oz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canberra, Australia
Default Re: FE167En vs stock FE167E

Quote:
Originally posted by Bob Brines
- snip -
If you like a very detailed, almost edgy sound, then you will want to go stock. Any way you cut it, the EN's are less fatiguing in long listening sessions.

I'm going to offer the 167EN's as an upgrade for my speakers. I think that most folks will prefer the EN's Only die hard baroque nuts like me will actually prefer stock.

Bob
Never settle for stock - that would be nuts!

If you really like the very detailed sound, get dave to EnABL a pair without the mod podge pre-treatment.
Huge improvement over the stock driver.

You are right though, for 'normal' folk the 167EN's are the way to go.

Cheers,

Alex
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th July 2009, 02:21 PM   #7
GM is offline GM  United States
diyAudio Member
 
GM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chamblee, Ga.
Default Re: Re: FE167En vs stock FE167E

Quote:
Originally posted by Alex from Oz

If you really like the very detailed sound, get dave to EnABL a pair without the mod podge pre-treatment.
Ah! Saved me from asking as there's no way EnABL is going to have this much impact unless all the radiating area is ~completely covered.

GM
__________________
Loud is Beautiful if it's Clean! As always though, the usual disclaimers apply to this post's contents.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th July 2009, 04:03 PM   #8
diyAudio Member
 
Godzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New York
>>> Then I pulled up Alison Krauss' "The Lucky One" ... I switched to the stock 167's and OMG -- Alison was in my lap.

I think that's sort of what the song is about actually. I like that song.

Do you think the brighter sounding stock driver was the reason for her voice moving forward?

Godzilla
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th July 2009, 04:07 PM   #9
chrisb is offline chrisb  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: victoria BC
Bob - thanks for the clarifications and posting your impressions.

as for Alison suddenly appearing in your lap, that could explain taking your time getting back to the keyboard
__________________
you don't really believe everything you think, do you?
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com commercial site planet10-HiFi
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th July 2009, 06:48 PM   #10
fergs1 is offline fergs1  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: melbourne
I think Bobs gone back to the sweet spot!
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WTB: Fostex FE167E Studley Swap Meet 0 25th June 2008 06:46 PM
WTB : Fostex FE167E Cacophonix Swap Meet 0 11th April 2007 10:49 PM
fe167e enclosure? jwb009 Full Range 17 31st January 2006 08:30 PM
Fe167e Br regal Full Range 19 31st August 2005 12:30 PM
what to do with FE167e's? AudioGeek Full Range 8 27th February 2005 07:16 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:08 AM.

Page generated in 0.13161 seconds (83.37% PHP - 16.63% MySQL) with 10 queries

Copyright ©1999-2012 diyAudio