Shouty FE167E in ML TQWT

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
MJK said:


What do you recommend?

My choice is something that can make some pressure required for real dynamics, has freq response closer to fullrange than fullrangers and has less distortion and coloration.
I chose Tannoy HPD385 coaxial or Altec Lansing 2 way with 288k+LeCleache horn and 416-8c.
Tannoys have coherence of single driver and Altecs have presence and power of live performance. :D
 
vuki said:


My choice is something that can make some pressure required for real dynamics, has freq response closer to fullrange than fullrangers and has less distortion and coloration.
I chose Tannoy HPD385 coaxial or Altec Lansing 2 way with 288k+LeCleache horn and 416-8c.
Tannoys have coherence of single driver and Altecs have presence and power of live performance. :D


It's wonderful that you have found speakers that please you. I wish you well in your pursuit of your hobby, but why are you even lurking here, let alone posting?

Bob
 
Bob Brines said:

That was my point. You problem must be elsewhere. BTW, This is the MODIFIED driver, isn't it? Is it still shouty? Your FR plot is not significantly different from mine, and mine is not shouty.

Mine either. ;)


Your plot is gated too high to clearly demonstrate whether you have solved the baffle step or not. Your speaker SHOULD need some unless it is up against a wall.

The baffle is quite wide (45cm) and IMO ( MLS & RTA measurements confirm this) there is no need for BSC.


That is not the general opinion on this forum.

Bob

Sorry! :D I just wanted to express my opinion and expirience and that was that I couldn't get rid of shoutiness with BSC but achieved satisfying results with described modification.
 
Bob Brines said:



It's wonderful that you have found speakers that please you. I wish you well in your pursuit of your hobby, but why are you even lurking here, let alone posting?

Bob


Well, the purpose of the forum is opinion exchange and help in solving problems. I had similar problem as qhisdal so I thought why not tell what I think about it. I'm not selling anything. ;)
 
i think he was just asking why someone who rpefers multi way systems s in the fullrange forum...

also you have to take into account, a system like that DOES have its drawbacks, and in an AVERAGE domestic enviroment, you only need the type of "pressure" to get to 75 or so db. I dont listen at realistc levels all the time(my parents would kill me), and i find a pair of fe166e in TQWTs to be satisfying, and i only need a couple watts to get to a "good" lsitening level. ive also heard a couple multi ways now, and i dont find ANYTHING as satisfying for low level listening than a single driver.

Going back to the topic of BSC, my 9" wide speakers seemed shouty with metal, and i heard they needed about 3db of bsc if theyre not rammed against the back walls(and theyre not), sop i got out the old EQ and started playing around. i found that 3db of boost to 125hz, 2db at 250 and 1 at 500, made it from a thoroughly unenjoyable experience with metal, to the type that keeps me in my chair. I have not tried test fitting supra baffles yet, but thats something for the near future!


however after some discussion with scottmoose, he was lead to believe that my solid state amp is causing the shoutyness more so than a lack of BSC. I will continue to tinker! but in its current incarnation, it sounds SWEET with metal, bass boost or not!
 
xstephanx said:
i think he was just asking why someone who rpefers multi way systems s in the fullrange forum...

also you have to take into account, a system like that DOES have its drawbacks, and in an AVERAGE domestic enviroment, you only need the type of "pressure" to get to 75 or so db. I dont listen at realistc levels all the time(my parents would kill me), and i find a pair of fe166e in TQWTs to be satisfying, and i only need a couple watts to get to a "good" lsitening level. ive also heard a couple multi ways now, and i dont find ANYTHING as satisfying for low level listening than a single driver.


One does not need to be limited by the type of the system - it's all about good sound.
And, as I said, I have some expirience with fullrangers that I thought could help.
So, even in an AVERAGE home environment sometimes you'll probably wish your system could play loud. Maybe when your parents are away and your buddies drop by? :cool:
 
vuki said:



Well, the purpose of the forum is opinion exchange and help in solving problems. I had similar problem as qhisdal so I thought why not tell what I think about it. I'm not selling anything. ;)


OK. That's fine. Your experience and advice is welcomed and helpful. What I object to is your condescension to full-rangers in general. Do you visit all of the niche forums a flame the residents as uninformed idiots for believing that their passion has any value? If I want to be flamed for my belief in full-rangers all I have to do is make a post at the AA general or speaker forums. I'll have a dozen flames in an hour.

As others are suggesting to you, full-rangers can be plenty loud and clean. A competent full-range speaker should be capable of 100dB, and that's a level that will produce permanent ear damage in less than an hour. You really need more?

Bob
 
I know the feeling Bob. I refuse to post on AA anymore. I've got better things to do with my life than be insulted. Not that I'm suggesting all posters over on AA are bad -90% aren't, but most of the trouble-makers / over-opinionated types seem to reside there. But I'm getting off the point.

vuki -I understand some of your points, and certainly from a dynamic point of view a multi-way will beat a single driver system, but then, there's the other trade-offs that have to be factored in. I've personally nothing against crossovers. The problem is, there aren't many good ones, and there are plenty of other issues as well. I certainly can't agree with your contention that FR setups cannot be 'serious' speakers. I've heard nothing from the multiway brigade, big Tannoys (and I owned a pair of 12in Golds BTW) included, that can match them on folk music or small ensemble pieces for example. And they can make a far better all-rounder than plenty of 2-way / 3 way you could build or buy for the same price. FF165K in a BIB for example will blow you across the room; major bass guitar and keyboard down to the high 20Hz regions from a little driver. Dynamics aren't VOTT standard, but then, not much is. They're certainly better than a few multiways I could mention.
 
Scottmoose said:
vuki -I understand some of your points, and certainly from a dynamic point of view a multi-way will beat a single driver system, but then, there's the other trade-offs that have to be factored in. I've personally nothing against crossovers. The problem is, there aren't many good ones, and there are plenty of other issues as well. I certainly can't agree with your contention that FR setups cannot be 'serious' speakers. I've heard nothing from the multiway brigade, big Tannoys (and I owned a pair of 12in Golds BTW) included, that can match them on folk music or small ensemble pieces for example. And they can make a far better all-rounder than plenty of 2-way / 3 way you could build or buy for the same price. FF165K in a BIB for example will blow you across the room; major bass guitar and keyboard down to the high 20Hz regions from a little driver. Dynamics aren't VOTT standard, but then, not much is. They're certainly better than a few multiways I could mention.

I said that my FE164 sounds nice... I like that speaker. Yes, those fullrangers sound better than anything you can build for the price. But I wouldn't say it's a serious loudspeaker - it has many limitations. It doesn't sound nice with complex music material and you have to be carefull with volume control. So, I understand that there are people who, based on all the rave on forums, could have get expectations that maybe are to big. IMO there could even be people who, after all modifications, box building etc., wouldn't be satisfied with the sound of- eg. FF165k- with its limited freq response, dynamics (0.3mm Xmax!!!) and coloration.
 
What on Earth are you going on about my friend? You're in the Full Range forum here, as Bob pointed out. People tend to know and accept the limitations inherent to this side of speaker design, in order to obtain the benefits they offer, before they build them. Who said the 165, for example, in a BIB was a panacea? I went out of my way to state that it wasn't perfect (though it can still beat many of the multi-way designs out there in areas where they supposedly have an advantage).

And as a Tannoy Gold owner myself, which sticks it to the later HPD units in no uncertain terms (certainly decent drivers, but hardly Tannoy's finest moment), I can't say I think they are any more 'serious' than an FR driver. Why are multiways somehow more serious? Are you suggesting they are somehow perfect? Because they aren't. They just have a different set of compromises / benefits. You value those more -fine. Other people value the different set of compromises / benefits FR units have, and it's not your place, or mine for that matter, to write those off, or suggest either method: single driver, or multiway, is not 'serious' or valid.
 
vuki said:


So, I understand that there are people who, based on all the rave on forums, could have get expectations that maybe are to big.


Scottmoose said:
What on Earth are you going on about my friend?



For example: if one even after many modificitaions, boxes types etc. still can't achieve satisfactory results with FR speaker, maybe one should try something else, not so perfect? :clown:
 
Oh, look what I found in another thread!
Scottmoose said:
Reds. Reds. You lucky, lucky...
Ahem. I shouldn't go on, I've an early pair of 12" Golds in immaculate condition, which I'm quite happy with, so I should not covet my neighb... damn! There I go again! (silver dreams, silver dreams;-)
I beg to differ that tubes don't work with these in the bass regions; I had a pair of World Audio Design KEL80 monoblocks which drove my 12" Gold DC drivers quite nicely thank you. In the horn a SET will do fine (not that I'm much of a fan of SETs) Mine were in scruffy Lancaster cabinets (terrible) when I bought them. In fact, they're back in them again until I have a MONSTER listening room (Ha! I can dream, can't I?). I did, for fun, rough up a pair of 8' tall TQWTs for them in MDF, although I dismantled quite quickly: in a small UK room, these were just comically large.
You'll never feel the need for another speaker again once you've set them up properly. The DC drivers are the best all-rounders I've ever heard for filling a large space. I even like the HPD variants, providing they've been serviced properly. Congratulations on your aquisition.
Best
Scott
 
How many times do I have to keep repeating that FR units aren't perfect? Your take on satisfactory is your take. Please understand other people might not value the sames things you do. That doesn't mean they are misguided, or they don't have 'serious' systems (which you still haven't defined BTW, I assume because there's no such thing) -just that they value something different.

Re the Tannoys, yes, and I stand by what I said before 100% -providing a) they've been serviced properly, and b) your tastes aren't inclined toward light classical & small accoustic pieces. Like I've (also) repeated several times. You only have quoted only a small part of the discussion above, which took place both on this forum and elsewhere, and clearly have missed several qualifications I made in it. Like rock, large classical et al and have a big space? Then big Tannoys are great. Stunning. Very little better. Most verstile speaker for those conditions you'll ever come across, with the possible exception of the VOTT. OTOH, small space, and you favour baroque, blues, small jazz, chamber music, acoustic folk music etc? Then they are a poor choice. Why do you think mine are in the loft at the moment? Because I can't afford a house with a 30ft x 20ft room, that's why. And if I ever can afford a house with such a space, I wouldn't just run the Golds, because I don't fancy making the myriad heavy modifications necessary for them to start perform properly with smaller pieces, which make up an increasingly large portion of my music collection, and my listening, even if I remain a rocker at heart.
 
It seems we don't understand each other - could be my language difficulties. :(
I'm trying to say: Just as somebody doesn't like Tannoys or Altecs or you-name-it, it could happen that somebody else doesn't have taste for FR's. Because nothing is perfect!
But! Because FR's are relatively cheap, there are number of hobbists who choose them for their first DIY speakers. Then, despite all the nice reviews on the forums and despite their best efforts sonic results aren't up to their expectations.

Starter of the thread didn't like the sound so I gave my advice and made a comment that such loudspeaker isn't end-all solution. Another member asked about my preferences so I mentioned them.
So... maybe the right question should have been "Had he ever listened to Fostex FE167 he liked?"
 
Hello,

Bob, how did you get the 1.5mh for L and 6ohm for R for your BSC?

I get 2.0mh for L with a Baffle width of 10.5in. and 8ohms for R. for -6db. I guess you are using less than -6db BSC?

Do you know the Le of the F167E?

Madisound told me to use 0.05 for the Le, my vibe is this is not correct.

I did some 24L BR with FE167E and FT17H. I used a 2.12"L X 2"W port and a 2.5mh L with a 8ohm R. My baffle width is 12.5". I calculated for -6db. I use these as near field monitors for mixing and tracking.

I have not measured them, I wanted to know what you thought of these. You are the guru of the FE167E.

Thank You,

Robert
 
Hello,

1st order 0.33uf GE cap. I tried a 0.68uf way too bright, then 0.47uf better. I wanted it to come in so you did not know it was there, 0.33uf seemed to work best for what I was hearing. Fostex recommends between 0.33uf to 0.68uf (no Padding) for FT17H with the FE167E.

Planet10,

Does it look like I did my BSC correct? I keep looking around here, and I am thinking I my have tuned my BR too low (53Hz) and used too much BSC. But I still prefer my FE167E's to commercial "studio monitors" I have used.


Out,

Robert
 
frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
Paid Member
rfenergy said:
1st order 0.33uf GE cap. I tried a 0.68uf way too bright, then 0.47uf better. I wanted it to come in so you did not know it was there, 0.33uf seemed to work best for what I was hearing. Fostex recommends between 0.33uf to 0.68uf (no Padding) for FT17H with the FE167E.

Thanx... i'll be XOing to a 207... and i think i want to start with something that actually rolls the 207 out 8-10k Hz.

Planet10, Does it look like I did my BSC correct?

I'm not a good guy to ask... i try like the dickens to avoid passive BSC, using all other ways of dealing with BS 1st (ie working on the BiFonken Mark II as we speak)

dave
 
Planet10,

The FE207E has a SPL of 95db. It seems fostex is recommending the same 0.33uf to 0.68uf cap for the FE207E, with the T90A which has a an SPL of 106db/watt without a pad as well. You may want to try 0.68uf to 1uf that may be good enough, without a pad. the spl of the FT17H is 98.5db/watt. You probably knew all this anyway.

I figured that the FT17H with a 0.33uf comes in around 15000cps with the FE167E. You can definately tell its there, but it is not over powering the FE167E. The whole really small cap thing is kinda strange but I think it all boils down to SPL diffences in the drivers.

Out,

Robert
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.