Howard's FF85wKeN - 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 19th September 2013, 12:27 AM   #21
howardg is offline howardg  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
hi Chris

Quote:
Howard, you may remember seeing/hearing the faceted enclosures at Dave's place in August. This was 85WK in a tapered MLTL(?), passive LLXO at 240Hz, to 2 opposing pairs per enclosure of Peerless 830870 midbass. I've been test driving those over the past few weekends, and it's quite amazing how much LF energy 4 of those little Peerless per side can deliver - within sane limits - at least enough in my room to rattle some of the loose ornaments. No doubt a much simpler configuration would work quite well for the bottom.
What type of cabinet design do the Peerless 830870 midbass operate in? An MLTL also?
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th September 2013, 12:31 AM   #22
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 howardg View Post
Also seems like a super tweeter crossed high might be a great way to go with a nice full range
FF85wk is already a decent super-tweeter.

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 19th September 2013, 12:33 AM   #23
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 chrisb View Post
... the faceted enclosures at Dave's place in August. This was 85WK in a tapered MLTL(?), passive LLXO at 240Hz, to 2 opposing pairs per enclosure of Peerless 830870 midbass.
FF85wKeN in an over-large, "dynamically-shaped" aperiodic TL, and the Peerless in an ML-Voigt.

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 19th September 2013, 07:53 AM   #24
diyAudio Member
 
Scottmoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by howardg View Post
What does FAST stand for?
It has a couple of definitions, one being the daft 'full range and subwoofer technology.' Where the 'technology' comes in of course is mysterious. 'Full range assisted' is a (marginally) better interpretation. Alternatively, you could just call it, as they always used to be called, 'a two way speaker.' It's one of the classic 2-way types of a large mid-tweet coupled to bass units that was relatively popular until ~the early '60s. Can work very well, like the examples above.

Last edited by Scottmoose; 19th September 2013 at 07:55 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th September 2013, 05:22 PM   #25
howardg is offline howardg  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Quote:
It has a couple of definitions, one being the daft 'full range and subwoofer technology.' Where the 'technology' comes in of course is mysterious. 'Full range assisted' is a (marginally) better interpretation. Alternatively, you could just call it, as they always used to be called, 'a two way speaker.' It's one of the classic 2-way types of a large mid-tweet coupled to bass units that was relatively popular until ~the early '60s. Can work very well, like the examples above.
And 2.1 systems with a lowish x-over point would be in a different category I guess? Because the woofer is separate and there is only one?
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th September 2013, 05:27 PM   #26
diyAudio Member
 
tuxedocivic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ladysmith, BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by howardg View Post
xrk971,

I have been thinking along similar lines. tuxedocivic was at DIYFEST with a minidsp that had 4 on-board amp channels and a computer programmable active crossover that retains it's settings when detached from the computer. Can easily hold it in one hand and it sounded great to my quick-listen on unfamiliar speakers.

I have a minidsp also, but that was Kyle. His has the miniamp as well I think. The minidsp is a great way to do this.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th September 2013, 06:43 PM   #27
diyAudio Member
 
Scottmoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by howardg View Post
And 2.1 systems with a lowish x-over point would be in a different category I guess? Because the woofer is separate and there is only one?
Presumably, since they rarely seem to appear under that term. It does need to be very low though to avoid obvious localisation issues.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th September 2013, 11:53 PM   #28
howardg is offline howardg  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
tuxedocivic,

Sorry for the mistaken identification. You had the sub that I borrowed, but it was Kyle who had his minidsp there. Got it now.
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th September 2013, 12:42 AM   #29
howardg is offline howardg  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Quote:
Presumably, since they rarely seem to appear under that term. It does need to be very low though to avoid obvious localisation issues.
What is low enough?

A full range that is larger than the 85wk would probably be best for a 2.1, unless it is for near field/small room listening only. An 85wk dipole might be gutsy enough for louder listening, but then I suppose that would get really fussy about placement.

How much imaging precision is lost with stacked (2 per side) front facing FF85wk's?

One of the advantages I like about the 2.1, as long as there is a high pass filter on the full range satellites, is that it can play with less distortion at higher SPL than the same full range drivers can when unaided.
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th September 2013, 12:55 AM   #30
diyAudio Member
 
Bob Brines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Hot Spring Village AR
Quote:
Originally Posted by howardg View Post
One of the advantages I like about the 2.1, as long as there is a high pass filter on the full range satellites, is that it can play with less distortion at higher SPL than the same full range drivers can when unaided.
This is how I do it. My HT rig is Alpair 7.3's as mains and a Peerless 850146 (10" BR) in the front right corner. My XO is 165Hz, chosen to avoid a room suck-out. (The rears are Fostex FE167E's up-firing in the back corners.) While the XO is technically too high, I haven't found localization to be an issue. In pop music, the bass guitar is typically on the left, so that might be an issue with certain mixes, but classical music usually has the basses on the right. Works out fine.

Bob
  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
Help/advice needed - Howard S2 midbass Blew kirby299 Multi-Way 4 9th January 2013 06:33 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:38 AM.


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