Hi everybody!
This is my first post on this forum, and I'd like to start with a question.
I've recently got a Fisher X-100-B tube amp. It's rated at 24 wpc.
I am planning to use it as a center of a secondary system for a small bedroom (about 12'x13').
Hooked up to my new small ported speakers (MTM with two Vifas and an Audax tweeter), it produces beautiful midrange and enogh SPL, but the bass is much slopier than with solod state amps. So, I'd like to build a new set of speakers for this application. They have to be floorstanding models, prefferably with small footprint, but can be tall. I'd also like to use non-ported enclosure, something with a single resonance peak to better couple to the output transformars of the Fisher.
I've been looking at BK-16 kit at Madisound. The size (and price) is perfect, however, I dont like the idea of the foam surround and metal cap of the FF165K as well as the additional tweeter.
So the question is: is there a better wide-range driver that is known to work in BK-16 horn? Perhaps FE-166E or 167? Or should I try FE168E Sigma? Also, there are these new Hemp Acoustic drivers.
I've seen a thread about this in the middle of last year, but it never came down to any conclusion.
Your advice would be greatly appreciated.
Vadim
This is my first post on this forum, and I'd like to start with a question.
I've recently got a Fisher X-100-B tube amp. It's rated at 24 wpc.
I am planning to use it as a center of a secondary system for a small bedroom (about 12'x13').
Hooked up to my new small ported speakers (MTM with two Vifas and an Audax tweeter), it produces beautiful midrange and enogh SPL, but the bass is much slopier than with solod state amps. So, I'd like to build a new set of speakers for this application. They have to be floorstanding models, prefferably with small footprint, but can be tall. I'd also like to use non-ported enclosure, something with a single resonance peak to better couple to the output transformars of the Fisher.
I've been looking at BK-16 kit at Madisound. The size (and price) is perfect, however, I dont like the idea of the foam surround and metal cap of the FF165K as well as the additional tweeter.
So the question is: is there a better wide-range driver that is known to work in BK-16 horn? Perhaps FE-166E or 167? Or should I try FE168E Sigma? Also, there are these new Hemp Acoustic drivers.
I've seen a thread about this in the middle of last year, but it never came down to any conclusion.
Your advice would be greatly appreciated.
Vadim
FF165K is the Madisound favourite. This driver is unfairly ignored in my view, I suspect due to its very low Xmax. Don't worry about that -loaded correctly, it's not a problem. It goes lower than the FE166E/167E, and does't have a whizzer cone, which I, for one, prefer, though it doesn't go quite as high. I love my pair.
http://www.zillaspeak.com/BK161ForSale.asp
Since your in NJ you may want to consider these mdf back horns i made based on the bk161 which is very similar to the bk16 kit.
all you need to do is pick them up and drive them home.
They should work with the 165 and 166 nicely.
Peace,
Godzilla
Since your in NJ you may want to consider these mdf back horns i made based on the bk161 which is very similar to the bk16 kit.
all you need to do is pick them up and drive them home.
They should work with the 165 and 166 nicely.
Peace,
Godzilla
I have some FE-166's in mine. They work well. Bass response is not stellar in depth (starts to roll off at 65hz) but is pleasant. There is a bump in the response around 150 hz IIRC, though I havent measured them lately. I built a short stand circa 6 inches to get the driver to ear height. I could say many things good about the drivers, most of that has already been said.
Basically with the BK-16 you have an OK but sub-optimal enclosure thats easy to build. I want to build some of the Austins from Ron on fullrangedriver.com, but I have been to busy listening to get around to it.
Sean
(I use modded dyna mk IV's on mine...never use much more than 5 watts peak according to the scope)
Basically with the BK-16 you have an OK but sub-optimal enclosure thats easy to build. I want to build some of the Austins from Ron on fullrangedriver.com, but I have been to busy listening to get around to it.
Sean
(I use modded dyna mk IV's on mine...never use much more than 5 watts peak according to the scope)
BKH vs. ML QWTL
Unfortunatelly, size matters in my situation. The room is pretty small for one, and not entirely under my control. Therefore, let me make a side step:
Am I better off making a ML QWTL? It's going to be taller than BK-16, but the footprint would be pretty small. Since I've never heard either one of those, I'd like to ask a very general question:
What is the consensus on this forum? What are the relative strong and weak sides of BLH vs. ML QWTL?
I'd like to hear both sonic and amp specific sides of the question.
I am really torn between these two implementations, but am really commited to finaly build and own a single driver high-efficiency speaker system.
Your help would be greatly appreciated, I mean it!
Vadim
Unfortunatelly, size matters in my situation. The room is pretty small for one, and not entirely under my control. Therefore, let me make a side step:
Am I better off making a ML QWTL? It's going to be taller than BK-16, but the footprint would be pretty small. Since I've never heard either one of those, I'd like to ask a very general question:
What is the consensus on this forum? What are the relative strong and weak sides of BLH vs. ML QWTL?
I'd like to hear both sonic and amp specific sides of the question.
I am really torn between these two implementations, but am really commited to finaly build and own a single driver high-efficiency speaker system.
Your help would be greatly appreciated, I mean it!
Vadim
Re: BKH vs. ML QWTL
Ownerd both drivers at one time, i preferred the FE166, .. seemed more open through out the range and went a lot higher in the treble, though they both had a peak somewhere in the frequency range, ... anyway YMMV, just presenting an opinion, I can see how some people would prefer the FF165K
I've head both the 166E and 167E drivers.
I'd say just look at a MLTL or QWTL with perhaps the FE167E if you don't have the space for a large enclosure.
The FE166E will sound stronger and more dynamic IN THE RIGHT horn enclosure, but for a smaller cabinet, the weaker FE167E will be better suited.
Scottmoose said:
Ownerd both drivers at one time, i preferred the FE166, .. seemed more open through out the range and went a lot higher in the treble, though they both had a peak somewhere in the frequency range, ... anyway YMMV, just presenting an opinion, I can see how some people would prefer the FF165K
VadimB said:
I've head both the 166E and 167E drivers.
I'd say just look at a MLTL or QWTL with perhaps the FE167E if you don't have the space for a large enclosure.
The FE166E will sound stronger and more dynamic IN THE RIGHT horn enclosure, but for a smaller cabinet, the weaker FE167E will be better suited.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.