This is the Fostex recommended enclosure for the FE126E, and works surprsingly well - except for the clarity of the lowest octaves. With the bottom cut off as marked, you get a "cute" presentation that almost disappers (at least compared to any large BLH)
The FE127E works much better in any of the MLTL designs posted by Dave Dlugos, starting here (post 536 and forward)
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=843956#post843956
We've heard several variations on both the mono-pole and bipole design - if you've got the required floor space, go for the bipoles.
The FE127E works much better in any of the MLTL designs posted by Dave Dlugos, starting here (post 536 and forward)
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=843956#post843956
We've heard several variations on both the mono-pole and bipole design - if you've got the required floor space, go for the bipoles.
mbcy said:
It really is a stand-mounter, whether that stand is a stand, a false base (filled with sand) that looks like a floorstander, or something with the stand built-in like the ones above that Chris is doing for his mom (those are a bit unusual, but work well and are just damn cute)
dave
I'm not sure that Dave made it clear - the raw plywood boxes in the picture are the FE126 BR/horn, and the mahogany boxes are the monopole MLTL 127.
They arrived at within mm of each other without even comparing plans - I didn't even realize that until I put them side by side.
The bass is cleaner and more smoothly extended on the MLTL, but the efficiency and midrange prescence on the "horn" is remarkable.
Cutting the bottom of the 126 design results in approx 9dg tilt back - when my wife's initial reaction is "cute", I'll try to use that feature wherever I can. At about 8-10 feet listening distance, and a bit of toe-in, you're still within a the driver's HF dispersion pattern, and the imaging is quite nice indeed - they don't sound at all like they're sitting on the floor. Mated to a powered sub, either would make a great HT system (just keep the 126 away from the screen)
In contrast, (Ron Clark's) A126 horn design, in all other respects a vastly superior performer, is not inobtrustive, and creates an elevated soundstage presentation.
They arrived at within mm of each other without even comparing plans - I didn't even realize that until I put them side by side.
The bass is cleaner and more smoothly extended on the MLTL, but the efficiency and midrange prescence on the "horn" is remarkable.
Cutting the bottom of the 126 design results in approx 9dg tilt back - when my wife's initial reaction is "cute", I'll try to use that feature wherever I can. At about 8-10 feet listening distance, and a bit of toe-in, you're still within a the driver's HF dispersion pattern, and the imaging is quite nice indeed - they don't sound at all like they're sitting on the floor. Mated to a powered sub, either would make a great HT system (just keep the 126 away from the screen)
In contrast, (Ron Clark's) A126 horn design, in all other respects a vastly superior performer, is not inobtrustive, and creates an elevated soundstage presentation.
summilux said:
If they are angled wrt the wall, you can probably get away with 1.5-2 ft for background... 2.5-4 ft for serious listening (true of most speakers). As you push them towards the wall you can end up with lots of bass lift -- my current (CSS) bipoles often have me looking for the sub when they are pushed back in their parked position (about 1.5' from the wall). When used with cable TV programming this is where they are left. When watching a DVD or listening to a CD they come out another 1-1.5'.
dave
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.