The Frugel-Horn Project

[planet10]

Originally posted by chrisb
3) as Dave could better explain, the supra baffle is really intended to lower the baffle step frequency to blend with the LF gain of the horn load. It is not a substitute for corner loading of the enclosure, which serves to enlarge the effective mouth area and improve overall coupling of lower registers to the room.

Ron has done a good job:

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showt...43#post1623243

The more you step down from the full level 3 build, the more compromises you bring to the loudspeaker. You have built a level 0 version. The more complete builds all add acoustic fixes to problems that EQ with only band-aid. Just sit back & enjoy them.

dave

[just a guy]

as Dave could better explain, the supra baffle is really intended to lower the baffle step frequency to blend with the LF gain of the horn load. It is not a substitute for corner loading of the enclosure

Yeah, I know. They are in corners. I was just saying that pushing them or any speaker tight to the sidewalls as I have been doing effectively increases the apparent baffle size by a lot AFAIK which is why I'm probably doing fine without a suprabaffle so far. (BTW, if I did have a suprabaffle I would no longer be able to push them tight to the sidewalls).

Just sit back & enjoy them.

Believe me, I'm enjoying them a lot. I'm all done nitpicking. It's not hard to make them sound great with a bit of eq. But I was hoping to have plug and play idiot proof speakers for this gift and these may prove to be problematic in that regard (as has been pointed out several times, being corner horns and all). I don't even know if she even has eq capabilities. (For that matter I don't even know if she has suitable corners - this was supposed to be somewhat of a surprise but maybe I should ask her what she actually wants.) I might keep them and play with suprabaffles and deflectors, something I guarantee she would not be interested in. I find placement and toe in experimentation tiresome, I can't imagine she'll be interested in trying every possible combination for optimal results. They are great for me, maybe not so much for her.

[serenechaos]

Originally posted by planet10

The more you step down from the full level 3 build, the more compromises you bring to the loudspeaker.
You have built a level 0 version.
The more complete builds all add acoustic fixes to problems that EQ will only band-aid.
Just sit back and enjoy them.
dave

Or build a level 3 & get rid of the eq band-aid.
Or something like a A126 or Nagaoka Swan.
Or enjoy them AND keep building...

[just a guy]

Adding the SB and deflectors will get me close to level 3.

Or enjoy them AND keep building...

I don't think I could stop if I tried. The A126 is definitely in the queue (way down the line) but not the ugly duckling. Can you imagine a swan with a suprabaffle? That kind of thing might get me institutionalized by the waf monsters... (not saying they need it, but it sure would be funny lookin)

[serenechaos]

Originally posted by just a guy
but not the ugly duckling...
...That kind of thing might get me institutionalized by the waf monsters... (not saying they need it, but it sure would be funny lookin)

--DUDE--
This is too funny!!!

That's my wife's favorite fullrange/widerange speaker...

Her immediate reaction after listening to abeautiful pair of bamboo fonkens driven by a nice 300B @ VSAC was "Why would anyone waste the time to build something like that, when you can build the swans with the same size driver?"
She thought the Swans sounded that much better...

And no, they don't seem to need a SB, just to not be placed to close to a corner.

[just a guy]

You have a166 as well don't you? She likes the swan better than that?

I've never heard swans or fonkens, but I did hear a mini onken with fr125. It's an mdf box with no bracing, the drivers were brand spankin new out of the box, the room, music and all associated equipment were all unfamiliar to me and the session was only a few minutes but I thought they sounded freakin great with a wonderful tonal balance (no need for eq). I liked them a lot.

[serenechaos]

Originally posted by just a guy
You have a166 as well don't you? She likes the swan better than that?

Yep, she likes the swans better than the A166.
Actually they're the "super swans," Nagoka's latest design of the series, with the FE108ESRII drivers, & cc adjusted to compensate.

Cleaner, better detail than the 166ES-R, and they don't have the high-end "shout" at all that the 166s do sometimes.
She just walked in; in her words; "They're less muddy, they're less confused. It's eaiser to hear the words, the diction, to pick out the alto part in a massed choral part. Like in the song playing now (on the 166s) you can tell they're singing in Latin, on the Swan's you can tell what the words are."

"Compared to Fonkens, the Swans have range, and balance, and aren't distorted." The Fonkens mids that are there are pale, thin and watered down by comparison. I liked the bamboo though, they sure were pretty."

Both the swans & a166s are sensitive to rooms & don't like too live rooms.
The configuration I have the swans in now (and really like) is a JBL Paragon kludge kinda thing...
A 4' x 9' curved plywood "parabolic reflector" sits aginst the rear wall. The swans point sideways into it, like the midrange horns of the Paragon would.
I've also actually used it with the front of the swan driver firing into a Paragon front horn, firing into the reflector.
It really does distrubute the sound throughout the room smoothly & evenly, & gets everything back from being out in the middle of the floor.

--Suggestion on the frugal horn SB--
Just to experiment you might want to try heavy cardboard & tape. That's an easy way to tell you how much difference it makes.
That's what I did with the A166s, before deciding to made a U-shaped piece that goes around the sides and top (out 4x4s, cut at angles & glued together).

[thetubeguy1954]

Can someone here tell me specifically what the differences between the Fostex FE206E and the FE206ES-R are?

I own both versions of the driver ---{with the FE206ES-R}--- being prepared to be sent to Dave @ Planet 10 to work his magic on.

I've looked but, cannot locate what the specific differences are to justify the vast price differences between them. I'd really appreciate someone educating me on this issue.

Thetubeguy1954

Rational Subjectivism. It's An Acquired Taste!

[chrisb]

Originally posted by serenechaos

Yep, she likes the swans better than the A166.
Actually they're the "super swans," Nagoka's latest design of the series, with the FE108ESRII drivers, & cc adjusted to compensate.

Cleaner, better detail than the 166ES-R, and they don't have the high-end "shout" at all that the 166s do sometimes.
She just walked in; in her words; "They're less muddy, they're less confused. It's eaiser to hear the words, the diction, to pick out the alto part in a massed choral part. Like in the song playing now (on the 166s) you can tell they're singing in Latin, on the Swan's you can tell what the words are."

"Compared to Fonkens, the Swans have range, and balance, and aren't distorted." The Fonkens mids that are there are pale, thin and watered down by comparison. I liked the bamboo though, they sure were pretty."

Both the swans & a166s are sensitive to rooms & don't like too live rooms.
The configuration I have the swans in now (and really like) is a JBL Paragon kludge kinda thing...
A 4' x 9' curved plywood "parabolic reflector" sits aginst the rear wall. The swans point sideways into it, like the midrange horns of the Paragon would.
I've also actually used it with the front of the swan driver firing into a Paragon front horn, firing into the reflector.
It really does distrubute the sound throughout the room smoothly & evenly, & gets everything back from being out in the middle of the floor.

--Suggestion on the frugal horn SB--
Just to experiment you might want to try heavy cardboard & tape. That's an easy way to tell you how much difference it makes.
That's what I did with the A166s, before deciding to made a U-shaped piece that goes around the sides and top (out 4x4s, cut at angles & glued together).

Robert - you are more than doubly fortunate to have both the resources to play with the wide array of audio projects you describe, including it appears access to driver models with very limited release , and a wife who will apparently tolerate whatever the visual aesthetics might be and lets her ears guide her.

not all of us are so lucky in either regard

BTW, I did mention earlier in this thread that our early experiments with supra-baffles for the A126 several years ago was exactly the same - cardboard cut-outs. What dimensions did you settle on for the A166 suprabaffles?

[just a guy]

Well, I guess what your wife calls "pale, thin, watered down mids" I would call "normal". Of course we are talking about different drivers with different boxes (fonken vs monken - and I would expect the monken mids to be even more watered down than the fonken) and our points of reference are different. But in my (limited) experience so far, fostex drivers might sound great but they certainly don't sound "normal" without eq'ing the mids down a bit, and all my measurements show this so far. YMMV, and obviously it does. With the 126 I am currently cutting 1 - 4khz by at least a couple db (in addition to heavier midbass eq'ing), and from what I can tell, most or all of the fostex fullrange lineup will need the same type of treatment somewhere between 1 - 8khz, depending on the driver in question. I find the fostex presentation very forward and in yer face and painful at high volumes but wonderful with a touch of eq. I guess it's all about personal taste - I like flat(ish) - sometimes even slightly recessed - mids.