Fullrange home theatre

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Since we like the FF85WK and FF125WK, is there some reason we don't like the FF105WK? Or have we not heard it, or ??

second question first - no "we" 've not heard the 105WK -

after more than a decade of experience with most sizes (available here) from 83 to 206/7, I've personally found that except for the 108Sigma, the 103 (etc) size is a bit of an orphan - very little difference in cost from the next model up, with no particular advantage to the models bracketing it

not rigorously scientific, but - there it is
 
Last edited:
frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
Paid Member
Since we like the FF85WK and FF125WK, is there some reason we don't like the FF105WK? Or have we not heard it, or ??

We have not heard it yet. At less than $7 each price differential, the larger FF125wk seemed a better starting place especially considering that if treated FF105s would be $205/pr vrs $220/pr for the FF125.

We will eventually look at the 105, but i have 125 & 85 to work thru 1st.

dave
 
a few thoughts:

at 14.59m^2 ( 157ft^2) the described room is approx 1/2 the size of my own- I think you could definitely go for much smaller drivers all round- and sub woofer(s) - yes multiples of small units even (or particularly ) in a small room, and take advantage of the AV receiver's bass management - I don't think it can be overstated how much of a godsend that feature and the autocalibration / EQ functions of current HT processors are to someone looking to assemble a surround system with FR drivers.

definitely keep the drivers in the front row the same, but the rear surrounds could afford to be much smaller than 8"

If you want to stick with Fostex, and larger than 4" for the mains, consider the FF165WK for the front row, and FF125WK for surrounds - but honestly, I think even one size smaller than those for each location - i.e. FF125K front row and FF85WK surrounds. I've heard all three of these and the smaller 2 are very good and don't need tweeters - for some folks the 165WK might, and based on previous experience with 8" Fostex, the 225 would almost definitely .

"Power Handling" rating of loudspeakers is one of the most useless specs out there - to expand on talaerts comment - there are many other ways to damage a loudspeaker (and your hearing/enjoyment) than connecting to a properly functioning amplifier with higher "rated output" than the speakers'.


so for the size of my room would there be any point of running dual FF125K for the fronts and single FF85WK for the backs but my orignial plan was to make the fronts produce a decent amount of bass but after watching this video that i found on youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itHRCOpc5zI i think that my original plan can go out the window :)
 
Last edited:
so for the size of my room would there be any point of running dual FF125K for the fronts and single FF85WK for the backs but my orignial plan was to make the fronts produce a decent amount of bass but after watching this video that i found on youtube My Other Listening Room - YouTube i think that my original plan can go out the window :)



Honestly, in a room your size I think a single FF125WK per channel in the front row and FF85WK for surrounds would be plenty

With any of the current generation of surround processors or receivers, it's a breeze to set the size of speakers and XO points to let the .1 channel do all the heavy lifting below say 100-150HZ , and with 5 or more drivers plus woofer(s) pumping air, you could get louder than the room might be able to support.

This could be one of those instances were less is more.

I'm sure that engineers at THX, Dolby,. et al as well as equipment manufacturers didn't have FR nuts like us in mind when writing performance specs and designing features for multichannel A/V , but damn, they make it easy to get decent sound.
 
Last edited:
Do you know was AVR you'll be using?

As Chris mentioned, a receiver with good bass management will help a lot here. And if you can use 2 or 3 woofers each set under L&R or L,C,&R speakers, you'll have a seamless cross over high enough to really help those Fostex.

* and multiple woofers smooth room modes too :D *
 
Honestly, in a room your size I think a single FF125WK per channel in the front row and FF85WK for surrounds would be plenty

With any of the current generation of surround processors or receivers, it's a breeze to set the size of speakers and XO points to let the .1 channel do all the heavy lifting below say 100-150HZ , and with 5 or more drivers plus woofer(s) pumping air, you could get louder than the room might be able to support.

This could be one of those instances were less is more.

I'm sure that engineers at THX, Dolby,. et al as well as equipment manufacturers didn't have FR nuts like us in mind when writing performance specs and designing features for multichannel A/V , but damn, they make it easy to get decent sound.

would it be any better if i tweak the box for the ff125wk to make them produce 50hz or just keep a flat response?
 
I'm with Chrisb here; the 125wk is a very nice small full range speaker that could be used for HT: I have a pair hooked up in my shop to a Rotel BX 990 , the sounds just pours out of them. I never feel I'm missing out on any highs; the imaging is crazy, like 3D sound.

I'm sure you would want to add a sub to the system. I couldn't resist posting a pic of a a T-TQWT with 4 - $8 woofers that a (designed here on DIYAudio).

[I do have a pair of the FF85s, I need to build Fonken cabs. for them]
 

Attachments

  • Other Set.JPG
    Other Set.JPG
    428.6 KB · Views: 262
  • NEOREVOLIVBJOR.JPG
    NEOREVOLIVBJOR.JPG
    319.5 KB · Views: 63
I'm sure you could build a set of Fonkens; you would need a table saw. Since the project is small, you wouldn't need a cabinet shop monster.

Agree with Andy 17, the engineering has been done and tested; go with P10 plans. The liters(s) and vent sixes are extremely important!!
 
I'm with Chrisb here; the 125wk is a very nice small full range speaker that could be used for HT: I have a pair hooked up in my shop to a Rotel BX 990 , the sounds just pours out of them. I never feel I'm missing out on any highs; the imaging is crazy, like 3D sound.

I'm sure you would want to add a sub to the system. I couldn't resist posting a pic of a a T-TQWT with 4 - $8 woofers that a (designed here on DIYAudio).

[I do have a pair of the FF85s, I need to build Fonken cabs. for them]

did you bother putting in the reinforcement panel or just leave it out?
 
Not a ton difference in cost of 85 vs 125, I would go 125's all around for 7 channel and then do two low end subs... I like overkill so I would go 12 in each corner with a monster amp... ha... of use them as stands for the fonkens up front... Could be really cool...

JP

I figure if you are going to build one cabinet, might as well build them all the same.... simply easier
 
would it be any better if i tweak the box for the ff125wk to make them produce 50hz or just keep a flat response?

Firstly, let's stipulate that I consider any multichannel HT system should incorporate separate "sub(s)" and take full advantage the processor's bass management as well as auto calibration and EQ if present.

For this application, ( small room, all FR drivers) as long as the LF response of the 5 or 7 channels is good to even low 60s, I'd not make any heroic efforts to extend that, and in doing so perhaps compromise their excursion and dynamics. With appropriate fiddling of processor settings, all LF content can be folded into the single dedicated channel as high as well over 100 HZ.



Not a ton difference in cost of 85 vs 125, I would go 125's all around for 7 channel and then do two low end subs... I like overkill so I would go 12 in each corner with a monster amp... ha... of use them as stands for the fonkens up front... Could be really cool...

JP

I figure if you are going to build one cabinet, might as well build them all the same.... simply easier

Yes - but I tend to chose drivers / enclosure designs for the room, and given the size of this one, and issues that can occur with placement of surrounds (they can often be the hardest to locate, even in rooms not this small), I'd still be inclined to suggest the something the size of the 85s for that function.

In my own case it's Alpair7 and 6s - a combination chosen for much the same reason . I had to tuck the surrounds in back ceiling corners of the room - not the best location, but short of major structural renovation to the room and all new furniture, there was simply no other choice . The other issue with identical boxes for the front row, again particularly in smaller rooms, is the placement of center. It's not without reason that many designs for center channels are horizontally oriented - they can simply "work better" aesthetically.

Another consideration is to which if any of the front row can be floorstanders or need wall mounting. Often it's a case of former for the L&R, and the latter for C and surrounds. The FF125WK works very well in a range of enclosures - I'm playing right now with a test pair of simple MLTLs (about the same size as Alpair 7 Pensil), and they don't disappoint. If this box was turned on its side, it could easily function as center as well, and either provide a nice stand for moderate sized (up to 46") flat screen, or be wall mountable on a french cleat.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.