Basic questions about Fostex drivers - 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 26th November 2004, 04:45 PM   #1
zachary is offline zachary  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Greater Cincinnati Area
Default Basic questions about Fostex drivers

Hello everyone,

I am new to the Fostex line, but like the full-range and especially the high efficiency.
I have a few questions though:

1. The Xmax on their drivers is REALLY small (similar to Lowther I guess, but at a substantially lower price), how do they achieve the base/lower ranges? How will these speakers sound compared to drivers with a larger more typical Xmax?

2. Are any Fostex drivers suitable for a small enclosure box for use in a 5.1 HT setup? If so, which one(s) would you recommend?

3. Are there any recommended/tested Fostex HT designs available online?

Thank you!!
Zach
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2004, 04:59 PM   #2
MarkMcK is offline MarkMcK  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Ohio
Zach,

I have started work on one of the Fostex full-range drivers. I have some preliminary test results that might interest you.

E-mail me directly and I would be willing to share.

Best,

Mark
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th November 2004, 06:36 PM   #3
dvdwmth is offline dvdwmth  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Toronto
check out the enclosure recommendations for the fe103 on madisounds fostex page. There's a smallish BR box there. I couple of other drivers have BR designs too. I built it but I cant comment on the sound because I used the radioshack driver which is not at the same level as the fostex.
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th November 2004, 01:26 PM   #4
kepa1 is offline kepa1  France
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Paris
hi,

i build the acr fe103s (which is a replica of the fostex) in BR - 6 litres, after i read a 5.1 thread in a french forum where people got very enthusiast about it.

it's true they sound very good, detailed, open, with a very good image.

my system is just a 2.1 : lately i've had a bassbox with a beyma 10lw30 in it. it adds the bass that was lacking with the fostex alone and listening isn't painful anymore.

beware to chose a fast woofer to go with the fostex because they are really fast too (avoid the peerless stuff).

also, on the first days i was disappointed about the sound but within a week the speakers opened up.

i'm sure you'll find plenty of info on this site. check the full range driver web site also.

bye

BTW the fe108s now replaces the fe103s
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th November 2004, 08:41 PM   #5
diyAudio Member
 
Timn8ter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
Default Re: Basic questions about Fostex drivers

Quote:
Originally posted by zachary
Hello everyone,

I am new to the Fostex line, but like the full-range and especially the high efficiency.
I have a few questions though:

1. The Xmax on their drivers is REALLY small (similar to Lowther I guess, but at a substantially lower price), how do they achieve the base/lower ranges? How will these speakers sound compared to drivers with a larger more typical Xmax?

2. Are any Fostex drivers suitable for a small enclosure box for use in a 5.1 HT setup? If so, which one(s) would you recommend?

3. Are there any recommended/tested Fostex HT designs available online?

Thank you!!
Zach
The Fostex full-range drivers tend to rely on some fashion of horn-loading to achieve adequate bass response. As a result the cabinets tend to be largish. My experience with full range drivers that have a large Xmax is that cone control becomes an issue and need to be used in smaller enclosures with an amp that can provide a reasonably high damping factor. My question is; How much more floor space does a FE166 or FE167 ML-TL (ala Bob Brines or Martin King) require compared to a smaller enclosure on a stand? Fostex does sell drivers for making HT speakers and has published plans on-line. These are, however, two-way BR designs.
http://www.fostexinternational.com/d...fw85k_tboy.pdf
http://www.fostexinternational.com/d...fw137_2way.pdf
If you like Fostex full-range drivers and want to use them in a HT setting I would recommend the FE167E in a ML-TL for the mains and a FE167E in a BR for the center. The subwoofer is up to you. I've used the FE207E with a super tweeter in a ML-TL for mains and it handles the task quite well.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st December 2004, 02:38 AM   #6
diyAudio Member
 
Bill Fitzpatrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Eugene, OR
Quote:
Originally posted by MarkMcK

E-mail me directly and I would be willing to share.

You won't share openly?
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd December 2004, 12:04 AM   #7
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Brooklyn,NY
Default Re: Re: Basic questions about Fostex drivers

Quote:
Originally posted by Timn8ter

I would recommend the FE167E in a ML-TL for the mains and a FE167E in a BR for the center. I've used the FE207E with a super tweeter in a ML-TL for mains and it handles the task quite well.

Hello Timn8ter,
How would you compare 167E to 207E in ML TLs. say for 50% Music, 50% theater. Is Beaming from larger mains a problem for HT? Does beaming from 167E & 207E differ a lot. I understand that beaming for CC is actually very good.
Another thing: i see u did not recommend SuperTweeter for 167E but did for 207E. Do 167E sound more extended? How is the camparison of bass? If you were to do it all over again which driver would you chose?
As for me i was thinking 207E+ST MLTL and 167E MLTL(F3=50-60Hz) for center, 127MLTL(F3=60-70hz) for surround. Maybe u'll change my mind now.(i did not want to make surround smaller than 127E since i use it for DVD-Audio sometimes and i cross my sub as low as i can because i can hear where the bass is coming from)

Thank you, if you can tell me some other things i should note it would be good.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd December 2004, 12:22 AM   #8
diyAudio Member
 
Timn8ter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
I think the whizzer cone helps with the beaming issue. The 207 has more bass but is that important in HT when you have a sub? The 207 ML-TL will give you about 10Hz lower bass response than the 167. The 167 does have better HF response than the 207 so I didn't see the need for a super tweeter but there are many that don't see the need for a ST for the 207 either. I always recommend using the same drivers (if not the same speaker) for the mains and center. Remember that the majority of audio information in HT comes through the center channel. If you like the idea of the larger driver go for 3 207s. The Fostex recommended BR enclosure for the 207 isn't that big IMO but I guess that may depend on the size of your TV. If you want to be true to DVD-A then all five speakers should be the same and in a perfect world able to handle 20 - 20kHz.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd December 2004, 01:14 AM   #9
MJK is offline MJK  United States
Account disabled at member's request
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Clifton Park, NY
Tim,

On your Alegria Audio site :

http://www.alegriaaudio.com/

I saw the following circuit sketch :

http://www.alegriaaudio.com/207BSC.htm

It is amazing how similar it looks to a sketch on my site :

http://www.quarter-wave.com/Project05/BSC_Circuit.pdf

If you guys are going to steal information off of a copyright labeled site, at least have the decency to give the designer credit or redraw it so it is not so obvious.

For the rest of you reading this post, this is one prime example of why I have decided to not release any more free upgraded MathCad worksheets (they exist), any more free speaker designs (they are coming), and have changed the way I document my work so that it is not so clear how I get from point A to point B (as evident in my recent baffle step calculation write-up). To be fair to Tim, there are a number of other examples on the Internet of people using my MathCad worksheets for commercial purposes against my wishes. But the others have at least done some of the work themselves, redrawn the figures in their own format, and given credit for the MathCad worksheets.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd December 2004, 03:47 AM   #10
diyAudio Member
 
Timn8ter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Seattle, WA
I'm sorry you feel that way Martin. Your name is all over my website. For example:
http://www.alegriaaudio.com/prod03.htm
Since you feel that I'm not giving you enough credit I will make the appropriate changes. Furthermore, I have not sold anything that has been produced through the use of your MathCAD worksheets and in fact contacted you when I did take to market a design that was based on your work. Please note that I am not selling the plans you refer to, only the parts to make them. I apologize for not giving you more credit.
  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
Some basic questions about Q wigginjs Multi-Way 8 20th October 2004 08:22 PM
basic questions for new guy jlh28 Everything Else 1 12th January 2004 01:49 AM
Basic LED Questions lgreen Parts 22 19th December 2003 07:26 PM
Basic Questions DarkMage Multi-Way 2 5th November 2003 03:51 PM
Basic Questions wnichol Solid State 4 16th November 2001 05:59 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:24 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