Looking at the Martin King TQWT speakers but the FE167E is no longer available. Are any of the current line suitable or does anyone have a pair to sell?
The new FF165WK is close to a drop-in for a TQWT. You will have to play with port length and stuffing density to arrive at the best response without a redesign.
I have some FE167E's lying around, but I expect that shipping half way around the world would be prohibitive.
Bob
FWIW: When I saw the specs for the new FF165wk, I plugged them in to MJK's MathCAD worksheets to see how they would do in the Metronomes I built for the FE167e. (built according to the Planet 10 Met tables.) The model looked like it would be reasonably close, but not optimal. There was a rise of a couple dB in bass before cut-off.
Cheers, Jim
Cheers, Jim
FWIW both the new 85&125s WK had a chance for exposure to a few more pairs of ears at a little DIY get together here over the weekend, and while an absolute consensus amongst audio-geeks is a statistical impossibility, I think it's fair to say that neither of these was considered a horrible step side- or back wards from the previous models they replaced ( FF85K and FE127E/FF125K).
As risky as it might be to extrapolate on that, in combination with Bob's impressions posted already on the matter, I'd opine that with appropriate (and relatively minor?) adjustments to enclosure volume & tuning, the 165WK could be very satisfying.
The biggest surprise and disappointment of the weekend respectively, and without contention, were the FF85WK and FE138ESR - a. The latter (not ours) had been awaiting some listening tests for some time now, and were a barely tolerable running full range as I'd read them to be. Interestingly enough, on a quickly hobbled together bi-amped system (with 85WK @ 100Hz), they made for a very acceptable, if not frugal-ish FAST.
As risky as it might be to extrapolate on that, in combination with Bob's impressions posted already on the matter, I'd opine that with appropriate (and relatively minor?) adjustments to enclosure volume & tuning, the 165WK could be very satisfying.
The biggest surprise and disappointment of the weekend respectively, and without contention, were the FF85WK and FE138ESR - a. The latter (not ours) had been awaiting some listening tests for some time now, and were a barely tolerable running full range as I'd read them to be. Interestingly enough, on a quickly hobbled together bi-amped system (with 85WK @ 100Hz), they made for a very acceptable, if not frugal-ish FAST.
If you've got a SET amplifier, you should get away with the 165 in Martin's cabinet, with a slight adjustment to the damping. Rather than the stuffing, I'd line the box, top, back & one sidewall down to the bottom, with 1in acoustic fiberglass or similar. If you don't have such an amplifier, you should be able to ~mimic its behaviour with 2.5 - 3ohms series resistance.
I'm not entirely surprised re the FE138ES-R, given previous reports. It's a while since I looked at it, but I dug out the Japanese data sheet, & winced. That thing looks to have a response that'd strip feathers from a vulture at a hundred yards.
I'm not entirely surprised re the FE138ES-R, given previous reports. It's a while since I looked at it, but I dug out the Japanese data sheet, & winced. That thing looks to have a response that'd strip feathers from a vulture at a hundred yards.
Last edited:
well, we haven't dispatched ZaBu into the woods yet to check for dead crows, but then since we were sitting much closer and couldn't endure ourselves them full range for more than a couple of minutes, perhaps no wildlife was endangered
pretty decent job as an upper woofer in the FH3 though - did require a shoe-horn and spacer blocks to fit that magnet
was the FE138 run w/ a low-pass, and/or notch filter?
as i remember, that (attenuation, crossed over to a nice LCY ribbon on top) took care of the high-end peak problems.
it was the mids, and what lows they had (until they quickly ran out of steam) that made them not worth pursuing. easily the worst in the house. a good example of showing an acceptable, or even good frequency response does not correlate to "sounding good."
as i remember, that (attenuation, crossed over to a nice LCY ribbon on top) took care of the high-end peak problems.
it was the mids, and what lows they had (until they quickly ran out of steam) that made them not worth pursuing. easily the worst in the house. a good example of showing an acceptable, or even good frequency response does not correlate to "sounding good."
When we bi-amped we used a handy 100 Hz 1st order PLLXO.
The particular shreik (when run FR) i heard was, i estimate, lower than a ribbon tweeter would reach.
dave
The particular shreik (when run FR) i heard was, i estimate, lower than a ribbon tweeter would reach.
dave
interesting.
no shreiks heard from the one's i had, just those (sharp) peaks, which measured right about where the data sheet said they would be, ~5k & 10k.
smooth enough below 1k, but rolling off @ 200, most of what was below that was from whatever box they were in.
i did break them in, slowly, 24/7 for weeks (like loathers), hoping they'd get better in general.
but don't ever remember any "shreiks" below 1k...
maybe the drivers were just that inconsistent?
no shreiks heard from the one's i had, just those (sharp) peaks, which measured right about where the data sheet said they would be, ~5k & 10k.
smooth enough below 1k, but rolling off @ 200, most of what was below that was from whatever box they were in.
i did break them in, slowly, 24/7 for weeks (like loathers), hoping they'd get better in general.
but don't ever remember any "shreiks" below 1k...
maybe the drivers were just that inconsistent?
Wherever and to what degree the measurements might display major and lesser FR issues, for me they were overall an unpleasant experience from lower mids (including male vocals) on up - but quite tolerable when bi-amped ( XO'd at 100Hz cause it was right at hand). If it's a matter of driver break-in, it would certainly be the worst case I've encountered yet - while they arrived to us "new", they did get approx 400hrs in the break-in bench before our listening.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.