I just destroyed a pair of FE166En's - Page 3 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Full Range

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 3rd April 2011, 02:56 PM   #21
diyAudio Member
 
Godzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New York
>>> Yes, any hint of sibilance is gone, but at what price.

Strangely enough, i find nowadays a hint of sibilance no longer bothers me. Too much and it does. If i had the choice i would rather do without it but NOT at the expense of the overall sound.

I looked at the charts again and am surprised at the difference the tweaks make. The upper frequencies are certainly different! I did not expect them to be as ragged as the original 'virgin' driver.

I don't modify expensive drivers. I guess we all have to make a decision as to what is expensive to us since we all have different budgets. The Fostex 166 is something i'd choose to leave 'as is' or perhaps try the removable 98 cent tweak. I feel bad about what happened.

Thanks Leon for posting your subjective listening results.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2011, 03:24 PM   #22
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eindhoven
Thank's Zilla for the correct term : "98 cents tweak".
Couldn't find it in my memeory at the time of posting.
2 out of 4 people now do use a FT17H ( 1,8oHm , 2,2~1 uF) in combination with the FE166En
The other 2 only use some foam : around 3 pieces 1cmx 1cm and a sligtly oversized square piece inside the whizzer. This is special open foam ; you can breath throuh it!!
__________________
Leon
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2011, 05:55 PM   #23
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
I tried several different "doping" schemes on drivers in the mid-seventies, adding mass just seemed to roll off the top end! Makes sense really, glad I got that out of my system! Now I just listen to speakers the way the "factory" intends.

Cheers
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2011, 05:59 PM   #24
BudP is offline BudP  United States
diyAudio Member
 
BudP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: upper left crust, united snakes
Quote:
Hi Bob
I think I have done my last Enable and mod podge treatment.
I just did a pair of 126en and don't like the results,
just way to bright sounding you hear all the details
but just to much, I guess I lean toward a warmer sound,
enable is just way to in your face sounding to me.
Can't speak to the modge podge portion, I have never attempted to treat speakers with that material, though I have used straight PVA on literally hundreds of drivers, working for Nestorovic Labs.

I have to agree with the way too bright and in your face comment about the 126, but my opinion covers treated and untreated 126's. I really do not understand why Fostex deleted the 127 and left the 126. I have a pair of 127's, with the full Dave treatment, and three extra ring sets that come from the "tap test" advancement. The drivers are incredibly smooth, lively and colorful, with not a single shriek from any of Jessica Williams piano notes and her playing will find them. I have attached the modified 126 / 127 pattern guide, you really should use it on those 126's. They will still be bright and in your face, but at least it should kill the painful ear zings. I have treated a few pairs of 126's and I really did not like them, at all.

Bob, is there some way I can get involved with this 166 problem? Maybe you can send the drivers here and allow me to fiddle about with them?

Bud
Attached Files
File Type: pdf 127 En rings.pdf (27.2 KB, 46 views)
__________________
"You and I and every other thing are a dependent arising, empty of any inherent reality" Tsong Ko Pa
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2011, 09:21 PM   #25
diyAudio Member
 
Bob Brines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Hot Spring Village AR
Quote:
Originally Posted by BudP View Post
Bob, is there some way I can get involved with this 166 problem? Maybe you can send the drivers here and allow me to fiddle about with them?

Bud
I suppose I could send them to you. They are of no value to me.

I don't think that doping the main cone is the problem. The disaster occurs around and above the frequency I would expect the dome and whizzer take over. It would require sacrificing several drivers to confirm, but I suspect that this is one driver that you don't want to dope the whizzer and you done want to remove the dome/dust cap. The dust cap is horn loaded by the whizzer. Other than the ringing around 12k, there is no HF output on my modified driver.

Bob
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2011, 09:53 PM   #26
BudP is offline BudP  United States
diyAudio Member
 
BudP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: upper left crust, united snakes
Perhaps you should send them to me. I have been worrying at this whizzer cone issue for a while now and the last three pairs done were musically very useful. I would be happy to treat a pair of new ones for you too if you like.

The real issue with them appears to be some form of Raleigh wave at both ends of the small cone. I am used to finding and treating these on cones larger than 5 inches actual outside diameter. The same process used there also works on the whizzer. I will provide you with whatever I can discover and an untreated pair will show where you can get to. I will be happy to purchase the untreated pair should I not understand what they need and mess them up.

Do please PM me and I will provide an email so we can plan.

Bud
__________________
"You and I and every other thing are a dependent arising, empty of any inherent reality" Tsong Ko Pa
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2011, 10:26 PM   #27
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North Carolina,
Bud
I actually put all those ring sets on the 126en,
you had already sent the pdf files to me a few weeks back,I don't know what is going on
with these drivers,maybe I need to go with
a warming sounding driver all together.
I had the old 126e I did 2 coats of mod podge
and the tri foil pattern and used them for
maybe 3 or 4 years they seemed to be much smoother not in your face,actually they sounded
amazing in the set of Saburo's I built.
wishing I still had those.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BudP View Post
Can't speak to the modge podge portion, I have never attempted to treat speakers with that material, though I have used straight PVA on literally hundreds of drivers, working for Nestorovic Labs.

I have to agree with the way too bright and in your face comment about the 126, but my opinion covers treated and untreated 126's. I really do not understand why Fostex deleted the 127 and left the 126. I have a pair of 127's, with the full Dave treatment, and three extra ring sets that come from the "tap test" advancement. The drivers are incredibly smooth, lively and colorful, with not a single shriek from any of Jessica Williams piano notes and her playing will find them. I have attached the modified 126 / 127 pattern guide, you really should use it on those 126's. They will still be bright and in your face, but at least it should kill the painful ear zings. I have treated a few pairs of 126's and I really did not like them, at all.

Bob, is there some way I can get involved with this 166 problem? Maybe you can send the drivers here and allow me to fiddle about with them?

Bud
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2011, 10:48 PM   #28
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigaudioscotto View Post
I actually put all those ring sets on the 126en,
Scott,

Please post a picture of your application, it will give people some important context to your results.

dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com, frugal-phile.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi
p10-hifi forum here at diyA
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2011, 10:59 PM   #29
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North Carolina,
Here you go Dave.
hammer away.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Speaker pics 003.JPG (832.0 KB, 244 views)

Last edited by bigaudioscotto; 3rd April 2011 at 11:02 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd April 2011, 11:07 PM   #30
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
Thanx Scott. By way of comparison:

Click the image to open in full size.

I will leave it to Bud to comment.

dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com, frugal-phile.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi
p10-hifi forum here at diyA
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
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
New FE166En's Bob Brines Full Range 44 4th October 2010 06:21 PM
Are my two TDA1562 destroyed?? newbadboy Chip Amps 2 10th June 2009 12:13 PM
Drivers and FETs destroyed, Help Please smitten Class D 1 9th June 2007 06:33 PM
SG3525 destroyed MOSFETs SMPS3525 Power Supplies 16 21st September 2006 12:38 AM
Is SAA7378GP destroyed? Gasho Digital Source 5 8th August 2005 04:10 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:23 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2