The Frugel-Horn Project - Page 49 - 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 20th December 2006, 04:28 PM   #481
Svein_B is offline Svein_B  Norway
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
GM, if you apply your analysis to the FE126E, does it look better from a theroretical point of view, or is it just producing nice sound by "sheer luck"?

I assume that the suprabaffles that Dave added as an option is supposed to help fill out some of the upper mids, although many of us are happy without this. I guess this may also depend on room conditions, amplification etc.

SveinB.
  Reply With Quote
Old 20th December 2006, 05:35 PM   #482
chrisb is offline chrisb  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: victoria BC
Mike:

Ed Schilling is definitely a guy not be be misquoted, but I think he has modified his position on break-in of FE126E. While they definitely sound impressive out of the box, a few hundred hours improves them substantially.

Furthermore, cone and basket damping treatment a la Planet10 dramatically mitigates some of the midrange grain, harshness or aggresively forward presentation that some (myself included) find in comparison to the 108 E Sigma. The improvement is not subtle.

Based on own experience with several models of Fostex FR series, I'd heartily recommend an accelerated e break-in program as suggested by Moray, et al.

Build a pair of cheap, small, sealed enclosures - wire them out of phase, and run them at between 90-96dB for at least 200 hrs ( a soundproof booth would help ). The Hagerman fry-klean would be a great, Toccata & Fugue in D, or Histoire De Soldat - something with lots of dynamics and LF content, and that you'll likely not want to listen to anytime soon.

Svein:

If I may offer my POV re the chamfered "supra baffles" as implemented in the FrugelHorn and Ron Clark Austin series ( A126 at least). They serve 2 purposes:
(1) to lower the baffle step frequency of the direct radiation to reduce any dip in the area were the rear horn "lift" in driver's trailing LF response takes affect

(2) to reduce diffraction artifacts and provide a closer to spherical wave launch

Whatever the technical explanation(s), they've certainly worked well for me - improving the weight of upper midbass-lower midrange without blurring the articulation or transient response, as well as increasing soundstage width /depth and vertical imaging


of course it's very driver / room / system synergy dependant.

  Reply With Quote
Old 20th December 2006, 05:55 PM   #483
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 LilMik
ed schilling says that the 126e does not need burn in time at all.
That is official stance. He has contradicted himself on this thou. (edit: and by Chris' comment may have made a public statement)

The 126 does need break in, but gets there quite a bit quicker than the 108.

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 20th December 2006, 05:59 PM   #484
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 Dennis Hui
I'm wondering if you think it's suitable to use the
FH in a corner, but where the 'back wall' is
actually a window with drapes in front of it.
I'm interested in the FH because of its small
size and the possible availability of a cabinet
flat pack. (I have no woodworking abilities.)
The corner with the window won't be quite as effective as a solid wall but it is better then not having it. How close to the floor does the window get?

dave

PS: flat-paks are coming. They are now in their 3rd revision, and time to do them is opening up as we are close to finishing all the customer builds that landed on us in Sep/Oct.

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 20th December 2006, 06:16 PM   #485
GM is offline GM  United States
diyAudio Member
 
GM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Chamblee, Ga.
Greets!

'Luck' has absolutely nothing to do with a driver's base performance. This driver has the most basic of all proven wide BW profiles, so can be made to perform acceptably with minimal 'voicing' and how much it 'breaks' in will be a function of its diaphragm material properties and its doping parameters, ditto for the suspension.

Correct, suprabaffles can only support the driver's response, so even if it was big enough to 'square' the corner enough to make it a near I.B. horn, distortion and/or suckout will increase with increasing power if the horn's gain can't fill the void, so while the average SPL may be fine and go loud enough to please, any low/mid-bass/lower mids fundamental transients that make it sound more realistic will be increasingly depressed. In this respect, the 126 is actually slightly worse in theory, so if it sounds more balanced in the same horn, then its lower Fs/higher compliance explains it if the filter chamber/throat more closely matches it.

GM
__________________
Loud is Beautiful if it's Clean! As always though, the usual disclaimers apply to this post's contents.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st December 2006, 10:26 AM   #486
LilMik is offline LilMik  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: germany
Hello all!

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisb
Ed Schilling is definitely a guy not be be misquoted, but I think he has modified his position on break-in of FE126E. While they definitely sound impressive out of the box, a few hundred hours improves them substantially.
sorry for quoting ed wrong. a few month ago (okay, it's more than a year...) ed said that the 126e does not need break-in time. look here http://www.6moons.com/industryfeatur...schilling.html

my mistake.

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisb
Build a pair of cheap, small, sealed enclosures - wire them out of phase, and run them at between 90-96dB for at least 200 hrs ( a soundproof booth would help ). The Hagerman fry-klean would be a great, Toccata & Fugue in D, or Histoire De Soldat - something with lots of dynamics and LF content, and that you'll likely not want to listen to anytime soon.
i already did this with my 108es for 250 hours. i will do it for another 750 hours. but to be honest, i do not think that it will improve things enough.

Quote:
Originally posted by GM
Anyway, working with what you have, it sounds like a BSC ckt. is called for to tonally balance it out.
i already did this -- with my EQ. did not help at all.

have a nice day
mike
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st December 2006, 05:23 PM   #487
chrisb is offline chrisb  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: victoria BC
Mike - my bad as well, I meant that I didn't want to "mis-quote" Ed* re the break-in on the 126 - i.e. I seem to recall he's more recently acknowledged that there could be some marked improvement in the performance over time.

He was characteristically very enthusiastic when he first "discovered" the 126, and with good reason - in his speaker it certainly has been overwhelmingly accepted by all who've tried it. Indeed, he singlehandedly precipitated a temporary shortage in supply last year when Madisound's estimated inventory turns were overtaken by demand.

(*that's been known to happen)

Sounds like your 108's are well on their way - but even at their ultimate best, they could well be less satisfying at the bottom end than any of the FE16N series drivers in appropriately designed enclosures.

In case this hasn't been discussed yet, what amp(s) are you using?
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st December 2006, 06:29 PM   #488
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Costa Rica
Send a message via AIM to johninCR Send a message via MSN to johninCR Send a message via Yahoo to johninCR
Mike,

What kind of baffle are you running on your FH's? I went directly to an appropriately sized supra-baffle and I have a nice balanced response with surprizing bass response in my room with good corners. I did a quick test with some side additions on my Metronomes, and I can easily see how the FH supra-baffle must significantly change overall response.
__________________
Everyone has a photographic memory. It's just that most are out of film.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st December 2006, 07:18 PM   #489
chrisb is offline chrisb  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: victoria BC
Quote:
Originally posted by johninCR
Mike,

What kind of baffle are you running on your FH's? I went directly to an appropriately sized supra-baffle and I have a nice balanced response with surprizing bass response in my room with good corners. I did a quick test with some side additions on my Metronomes, and I can easily see how the FH supra-baffle must significantly change overall response.

what John said; I definitely would recommend trying them on any narrow baffle cabinet attempting to run these 4" drivers full range - the improvement in upperbass/low mids was quite marked for my ears.

Even the initial "look-see" with single layer cardboard squares masking taped on the front of the cabinet made a noticable difference, but for full effect, I went for 3 x3/4" layers with a 45 degree chamfer.
If you're really adventurous, try rear mounting the driver, and bevelling the opening to create a short wave guide in front.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st December 2006, 09:26 PM   #490
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Costa Rica
Send a message via AIM to johninCR Send a message via MSN to johninCR Send a message via Yahoo to johninCR
The strange thing is that with the Metronomes (mine are 6.5" wide at the driver due to the 35mm material used), they need to be kept narrow. The comb filtering of edge diffraction with that cab works to create a smooth response because it is happening at such a high frequency. When I added 35mm to the sides at driver level, the response became very top heavy and BSC would definitely be required. With the very narrow cab and a sharp edged 90 angle to the sides, you can easily live without any filter even with placement well into the room.

This opposite of what is typically expected result is a primary reason I want to explore edge diffraction in some depth.
__________________
Everyone has a photographic memory. It's just that most are out of film.
  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



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:02 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