Its amazing how almost every discussion in the full range forum is turned into a sales ad for the MA drivers. Isn't there a rule against this sort of stuff?
It is not like FRs are sold at Best Buy so some brands fit better for different things. Fostex IMO seems to be constantly mentioned for low powered tube amps and there are plenty of threads for those drivers. Tang Band seems to take the lower cost FR market with dozens of threads for their speakers. I own some Tang Band 3" FRs I mounted in wood boxes for surround speakers.
I'm looking at MA because it does something quite different, the rising bass response and decent Xmax should solve a lot of problems for my first build. (FR for bass heads?) Fostex makes woofers, mids, tweeters and horns--Seas and Tang Band do the same... MA makes one thing. Since some glaciers move faster than most FR revisions, MA revises quickly in comparison so gains more "press" to discuss the latest. They don't cost insane amounts of money to purchase, have the Enable trick option, available is several sizes and baffle step correction should be easy with them.
For the newbie FR wanna-be that is not using tube amps, wants to build something simple to try them out--it cuts down the amount of brands considerably. I'm not going to blow $69,000 on a pair of Feastrex FRs just to try out full ranges. Going one step up above Tang Band gives me Fostex and MA which happens to be the most popular. I guess I'm not alone in my interest in FRs but can't dedicate a huge amount of space, piles of money or half a forest of plywood to the cause.
Not to mention Mark is quite active and helpful on these boards. When is the last time we had a discussion with the owner of Tang Band or other FR manufacturer.
I certainly am not troubled by shout... amplifiers running out of steam are usually the 1st signs of strain.
The path that has lead to where i am now, started with efforts to get the shout out of RS 40-1197, then FE126/127
dave
The MA drivers are not bad in any way. I own a pair and I think they have their advantages. However, it is sad that incipient diyers, such as yourselves, are sucked into buying one or two members' opinions just because that is all you see on this forum. Just because it is repeated everywhere doesn't make it true.
There are certainly other drivers out there (fostex, tang band, and many more) that can sound as good, if not better, in proper designs. And they don't cost more, they cost less. They are not necessarily inferior in design or build quality because someone says so. There is an agenda here and it is starting to get a little irritating to see it shoved in our faces on every single thread.
We were discussing the merits of full range drivers versus 2-way systems. But where's that discussion now?
There are certainly other drivers out there (fostex, tang band, and many more) that can sound as good, if not better, in proper designs. And they don't cost more, they cost less. They are not necessarily inferior in design or build quality because someone says so. There is an agenda here and it is starting to get a little irritating to see it shoved in our faces on every single thread.
We were discussing the merits of full range drivers versus 2-way systems. But where's that discussion now?
The difficulty is getting full range drivers. Those that are small and light to get high frequencies are not good at low frequencies and vice versa.
It becomes even more difficult when you run a mobile disco and you have to resort to high power multi driver systems. Bass is especially important in disco work.
It becomes even more difficult when you run a mobile disco and you have to resort to high power multi driver systems. Bass is especially important in disco work.
Last edited:
If above 13K is immaterial to you than you have absolutely no reason to even consider using a dedicated tweeter AFAIC.
Well, I think part of the discussion, as in the title, is "how good do FR units have to get" and that opens the way for discussion of how good existing units are and how they could be improved. Since Mark Audio has been very notable in improving units at quite a rapid rate, it's not so surprising this comes up in threads - but so does Tangband and Fostex. We don't hear much about Jordan JX92 recently, though, or other exotica that tend to be expensive for what they are.
andy
Properly selected and hornloaded 1, 2, and 3 inch drivers can acheive very high volumes and very excellet response from 80hz to 20Kz. Crossover to a very dynamic subwoofer below that and you're in business. If these drivers have insufficeint high frequency response a front horn with an integraded phase plug can be the answer.
Agreed. I also like the MA's quite a bit. But if you only hear those, you're missing out. The MA's are robust, and well-behaved, and in some ways they are a better general-purpose driver than many of the Fostex.
On the con side, if you are a tube / analog person looking for "warm," the MA's might not be it. I would probably go to a Fostex for the "midrange magic" especially with SET.
And those are just two companies -- there are so many out there. I'm currently listening to some really expensive drivers (AER Mk I's) and while they certainly outperform the Fostex FE206E's they replaced, they are not perfect. There are no perfect drivers out there.
I kind of disagree. I have a pair of alp6s. Good detail retrieval, relatively flat response. But they sound distinctly metallic. It is immediately evident upon switching to a paper driver.... paper sounds so much more natural.
As far as bass is concerned, despite the generous linear x-max (and they really are linear), they are no match for a 15" dipole woofer. Simply no contest. So, for me, the bass properties of a full range driver don't really matter much. In fact, all the full range drivers I've heard start complaining when you put <100 Hz through them. Some, more than the others.
Yes, that is true. Coming back to the discussion of 2-ways. Full range drivers should really be treated as wideband. In many ways they are already superior to conventional two-ways: No crossovers in the sensitive frequency region, coherance through the midrange, and simpler to design.
I know what you're referring to (the "zing" thing). But:
1. How far back are you sitting? I found it got better as I sat further away.
2. What styles of music do you listen to? On some music, I found the "zing" pleasing (e.g., Johnny Cash, Dire Straits, percussive stuff) but didn't love it on jazz and classical.
By "general purpose" I meant that they can do rock, home theater, etc. and other styles respectably, but not necessarily "best in category" for acoustic, female vocal, jazz trio etc. in my limited experience.
I absolutely agree.
Fostex Fe206e exhibits cone breakup ( resonance) as per measurement, couple that with an accelerating baffle will make it less likely to compete with a good 2 way IMO. I have also heard various configs with this speaker and it's larger cousin and the shortcomings are obvious vs a good 2 way .
Attachments
Last edited:
Yes , i just checked it was not a Fostex it was a Seas and you are correct it was 8 inch also ...
Came across some posts recently from someone about their Coral full rangers with CSD plots (maybe this thread? don't think so tho, can't remember), comparing them to the FE206E, going on about how superior the Corals were. The measurements did indeed look a lot nicer, with a lot less ringing than the 206. Why aren't sensitive full rangers with these attributes more common? I mean, Corals are old. What's the deal with this? On the other hand, there are cleaner drivers like the Markaudio Alpair 10.2, which seems very nice indeed, but with very poor sensitivity, reaching a much lower frequency than I'd like (I'd use them with woofers anyway), even its huge Xmax won't allow for much over 100dB continuous (with high doppler distortion from cone movement of course). I wish both attributes could be had from a single driver that was readily available and priced reasonably. Why can't this be the case?
EDIT:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full...rangers-get-replace-2-ways-2.html#post2592292
..and it was a 207E being compared, not a 206.
EDIT:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full...rangers-get-replace-2-ways-2.html#post2592292
..and it was a 207E being compared, not a 206.
Last edited:
It seems that these days, you can have acceptable bass from a number of FR units - as long as you are ok with the fact that these have very low sensitivity, and a limited maximum loudness.
Compared to two way speakers, I think that FRs -despite shortcomings- give a certain "openness" to the sound which works well with more acoustic stuff and speech.
Even so, all things considered, to get overall precision together with deep bass at enough volume (for me, good bass is important), I think you need to turn to multiway.
Compared to two way speakers, I think that FRs -despite shortcomings- give a certain "openness" to the sound which works well with more acoustic stuff and speech.
Even so, all things considered, to get overall precision together with deep bass at enough volume (for me, good bass is important), I think you need to turn to multiway.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.