SEAS FA22RCZ vs. Fostex FE206En

[DJNUBZ]

It seems like these two drivers are in direct competition with each other. I'm surprised I there aren't more posts of people who have systems using the the Fostex; removing it and replacing it with the SEAS to try it out. Is the SEAS just not in the same league as the Fostex or is it just so new that people haven't tried it out much yet?

[Scottmoose]

Not really direct based on the published specs., other than that they both happen to be 8in wide-band drive units with paper cones and whizzers. Q on the Seas is higher, likewise Vas, while efficiency is lower.

[steviedon]

Originally Posted by DJNUBZ

It seems like these two drivers are in direct competition with each other. I'm surprised I there aren't more posts of people who have systems using the the Fostex; removing it and replacing it with the SEAS to try it out. Is the SEAS just not in the same league as the Fostex or is it just so new that people haven't tried it out much yet?

They won't be in direct competition until the seas has proven itself to be DIY friendly, and a few ambitious diyer's have experimented with it. With the 30hz FS it's not IMO in direct comparison with really any fullranger I'm aware of. Just need a few guinea pigs so to speak. With that said, it's a very interesting driver that I suspect won't require massaging in the form of overly complex enclosures to get good bass response. If the response graphs are accurate it might need some upper midrange taming like some fostex drivers depending on personal taste, and likewise the use of a supertweeter.

[Godzilla]

>>> I suspect won't require massaging in the form of overly complex enclosures to get good bass response.

And where's the fun/challenge in that?

[steviedon]

Originally Posted by Godzilla

>>> I suspect won't require massaging in the form of overly complex enclosures to get good bass response.

And where's the fun/challenge in that?

Admittedly I'm just going off of published specs, but with the 30hz FS, 6mm of p-p travel, and seemingly middle of the road QTS........the seas will be somewhat versatile as far as cab alignment. I'd love to see a graph of the seas in a behemoth BIB......I'd guess F3 would be in the 20's. This driver might be as close to actual full range as we've seen from an affordable driver......if the specs ring true that is.

[6L6]

My only complaint with the published specs of the FA22RCZ is the ragged and rising response in the high treble... I think these will be very sensitive to toe-in, and will only sound 'right' with the speakers pointing somewhere well short of the listening area. However, the possibility of real bass out of a 'normal' box will probably trump any oddities they might have in the higher octaves.

That said, I am very, very interested in this design, and will try them after my current speaker project is complete. (Troels Gravesen 3W-Classic)

[Bob Brines]

Actually, compared to other wide-range drivers, the FA22RCZ does't look all that bad. The rising response is handled nicely with a L||R filter. What bothers me is the spike @~7kHz. This driver has the potential of being very sibilant and might need a notch filter. This spike @ 2Khz will make this driver somewhat forward, particularly compared to my speakers where I try to get a BBC dip (1-3kHz).

Size of a useful speaker will be a problem if WAF is important. The published sealed box is 80L. A BR or MLTL will be very large.

Bob

[simplymortified]

I have a pair of the SEAS in a 80 lt sealed enclosures and have run them now for a couple of weeks (should be broken in) and the sound is just not that interesting. Top end is out to lunch and bass is just, flaccid. I might try them in something else (BR maybe?).

I cannot speak to the Fe206en's, but the pair Fostex Fe167e's I
have sound by my ears, manifestly better.

Richard

[planet10]

I just ordered a pair of those.

dave

[mp9]

...the 206en or FA22RCZ?