FE168ESigma and Brines MLTL?

[Idefixes]

I have a couple au FE168ESigmain D37 Back Horned Boxes. I want to try some different think, actualy smaller as D37. Has anyone experiences with MLTL box such 1600MKII from Bob Brines and these driver?

Marc

[Scottmoose]

I think you've already got one of the best possible cabinets for the 168s to be honest. It should be possible to use them in an MLTL though, I'll try to run some numbers for you in MathCad if I get chance later on today.

[Idefixes]

Originally posted by Scottmoose
I think you've already got one of the best possible cabinets for the 168s to be honest. It should be possible to use them in an MLTL though, I'll try to run some numbers for you in MathCad if I get chance later on today.

Thank's that nice. I built them for a couple of years. If don't find an other box charges that i prefer, i will redo Back horn but fostex ones these time and with multilayer plywood. I look to BIB boxes to but size is definitiv to big for me. Pearhaps will i try bin with FE127 or FE108EZ, but i'm a little bit anxious about the matching with à 10W 6080 PP tube amp.

Marc

[Bob Brines]

The 168ES is a good substitute for the 167 in the FT-1600MkII cabinet. Here is a mathcad modeled FR plot:



Bob

[Scottmoose]

Nice one Bob. 168ESigma in your cabinet? Now that sounds to me like it could be a frighteningly good system. Did you make any changes, or just straight driver swap?

Scott

[Bob Brines]

Originally posted by Scottmoose
Did you make any changes, or just straight driver swap?

Scott

I lengthened the port tupe to 6" and stuffed the pipe its full length. Otherwise, the basic cabinet is unchanged.

Working out the countour filter should be interesting. the 168ES has all of the problems the the Lowther drivers have -- rising response, 2kHz hump, dual top-end humps.

Bob

[one1speed]

Originally posted by Idefixes
I have a couple au FE168ESigmain D37 Back Horned Boxes. I want to try some different think, actualy smaller as D37. Has anyone experiences with MLTL box such 1600MKII from Bob Brines and these driver?

One other thought would be the folded TQWT of Supravox. I hear the Sigma's in those boxes and they were quite good. No stuffing or circuit, amazing bass. More or less a floor loaded, quarter waver version of the BIB.

I've attached the plans below.

[Bob Brines]

Those Supravox TQWT's are hugely too big for 168ES's. You say you actually heard this combo? And it actually had bass? Must have been placed in a corner. I get this for a FR plot:



Bob

[Scottmoose]

How did you run the sim Bob, if you don't mind my asking? Because this is what I got from a quick (& rough) model in ML TQWT, albeit with just the first section stuffed. I've probably messed up somewhere along the line, but I can't find where.

Approx length 70in, driver at 35.6in, So = 1.4in x 11.8in, Sl = 11in x 11.8in, vent radius 6in, length 0.75in.

As it stands, I agree that the cab is too large for a target alignment (though a damned site too small for the drivers it's actually intended for) -but I still reckon better too large a box than too small. GM's influence I suspect -you can't get rid of what isn't there in the first place.

Cheers
Scott

[one1speed]

Scott, I suspect your graph is more accurate, only because there were gobs of bass. This was in a rather large room with very high ceilings and the speakers were sitting out into the room a bit from the rear wall. Or front wall, depending on how you look at it.

I heard it through a 300B amp and suspected that the bass was almost a bit loose, as you said, as if the box was a bit large.

I'm certainly not saying it's better than the MLTL, (or BIB for that matter) just an option to consider. I do wonder if it could be tweaked for a more perfect fit.