no worries - my turn next 😛
Per my earlier quote - ; (as in satisfying to the listener)
Of course I should have provided some of the (subjective and personal) context to which I alluded elsewhere in the same post - to wit: my listening habits and hearing acuity have "evolved" in an almost inverse relationship during the past 20yrs (on my next birthday I'll be 59). I have only average hearing loss as measured per occupational health regulations annually, but chronic tinnitus. I find music or movie playback louder than 90dB SPL at my average listening distance of 3-4meters to be very uncomfortable - indeed much of the time levels are well below 80 dB average. (room = approx 2400ft^3)
I'm not a fan of "doing the maths" myself, so please feel free to regale me with calculations as to how much compression or distortion my FE167E and Rotel 850 power amp are delivering under those conditions.
We're talking about the FE126E, right?
Well, to be pedantic myself for a moment, perhaps you meant "the Fostek (sic) has little Xmax"? can any driver moving a quantifiable amount of air have "no Xmax"?
gee, I dunno you're a math guy 93dB@1 W * 45W / x = ??? , I can tell you they play loud enough for me - but see above
BTW how exactly do those numbers translate to "little dynamics", and what number(s) would ensure the "correct" amount for my or Stevie's application?
Fair enough if you're a fan of multi-way speaker systems and the full monty HT experience, but have you actually heard the specific driver mentioned ( i.e. FE126E)? You might be surprised how much good they can do under 500Hz in any of the "appropriately designed enclosures" such as BLH, BIB, etc., and I'll repeat my invitation to discuss the matter frankly with cuzzin Ed. (just don't be taking a F to a S fight 😱 )
Last edited:
Doug really.......really. If I had inquired if I could achieve IMAX level sound out of 5 5" full range speakers and two horn subs I'd see your point. At this point you're just breathing hot air.....you're neither relevant to the original post or even somewhat subjective. I dare say I respect the opinions of Dave, Geddes, Brines, Pass, than any of your aforementioned "HT experts", who from MY experience are after exaggerated lows and highs, with a huge valley in between. At this point I seriously doubt that I'd be presumptuous in saying you're probably just regurgitating what whoever sold you your HT room setup told you, not from "subjective" experience as many others in this thread. Again, if you have a relevant driver suggestion or endorse another suggestion previously mentioned, I'm all ears.
Back to matters: I'm still contemplating the TB 1611 driver but it's hard to find listening impressions on the net. Anybody work first hand with the driver, or hear it @ a gathering/show?
Back to matters: I'm still contemplating the TB 1611 driver but it's hard to find listening impressions on the net. Anybody work first hand with the driver, or hear it @ a gathering/show?
>>> A 4" isn't the be all & end all, but a single one will do things a bigger rig with XOs just doesn't know about.
I agree.
>>> I'm still contemplating the TB 1611 driver but it's hard to find listening impressions on the net. Anybody work first hand with the driver, or hear it @ a gathering/show?
That driver is pretty new so probably not too many listening reviews yet. I hope some chime in having heard it. But for the sake of adding additional food for thought, assuming this driver or many of the others mentioned, is what you choose for your HT or listening enjoyment, you can always change things around in the future (assuming WAF also changes) and add a powered subwoofer which will really enhance the bass of 4 or 5" drivers in sealed boxes. Many new powered subs are small with powerful amps that do amazing bass.
My HT is in a much smaller room using ported TBs which i enjoy. In a larger room nearly triple the size these very same TBs sounded wonderful on music filling the room with a tiny T-amp. HT may need lots of power but for music i am always amazed at how little power is needed for satisfying real world listening.
Building out a stereo/HT system often starts this way. If you set things up meeting your minimal current requirements you may find it's all you need and live happily ever after... depends on the volume level you want and how happy you are with the overall sound... but there is always the option to change things in the future. I think starting out with full rangers in sealed boxes is a fine way to begin building a great sounding system.
Zilla
I agree.
>>> I'm still contemplating the TB 1611 driver but it's hard to find listening impressions on the net. Anybody work first hand with the driver, or hear it @ a gathering/show?
That driver is pretty new so probably not too many listening reviews yet. I hope some chime in having heard it. But for the sake of adding additional food for thought, assuming this driver or many of the others mentioned, is what you choose for your HT or listening enjoyment, you can always change things around in the future (assuming WAF also changes) and add a powered subwoofer which will really enhance the bass of 4 or 5" drivers in sealed boxes. Many new powered subs are small with powerful amps that do amazing bass.
My HT is in a much smaller room using ported TBs which i enjoy. In a larger room nearly triple the size these very same TBs sounded wonderful on music filling the room with a tiny T-amp. HT may need lots of power but for music i am always amazed at how little power is needed for satisfying real world listening.
Building out a stereo/HT system often starts this way. If you set things up meeting your minimal current requirements you may find it's all you need and live happily ever after... depends on the volume level you want and how happy you are with the overall sound... but there is always the option to change things in the future. I think starting out with full rangers in sealed boxes is a fine way to begin building a great sounding system.
Zilla
I think we need a big 
here.
I can easily see both sides here as there is validity to both but it really is each to his own and all the good advice in the world doesn't mean a pinch of rat $hit if it doesn't apply. I'm definitely in Doug's camp when it comes to the speakers. I think the bigger the better but I also know I have listened to a lot of the Dave and Chris' speakers and been suitably impressed. I have said to both of them "Those things have no business sounding that good" on many occasions.
I guess there is no real message in this post other than it's really tough to offer advice to a person whose tastes you are unaware of. Just like you can't tell a person what car to buy, just the one you like.
here.I can easily see both sides here as there is validity to both but it really is each to his own and all the good advice in the world doesn't mean a pinch of rat $hit if it doesn't apply. I'm definitely in Doug's camp when it comes to the speakers. I think the bigger the better but I also know I have listened to a lot of the Dave and Chris' speakers and been suitably impressed. I have said to both of them "Those things have no business sounding that good" on many occasions.
I guess there is no real message in this post other than it's really tough to offer advice to a person whose tastes you are unaware of. Just like you can't tell a person what car to buy, just the one you like.
As speakers go, always the bigger the better, but when room size or decor is limited, there's no point having large speakers. (Doug, remember there are 5 or 7 speakers working together so you do not need 100dB/w+ speakers here, and I guess anything around 83dB/w will be very good. You will be achieving 95dB when 4 are fed by 1W, so it's okay to use small speakers.) I recommend the Aurasound NS3-193-8A/4A together with one or 2 peerless subs, but if you can accept small, boutique subs, the TB 5 in Partsexpress or the Dayton/Aurasound 5" will do the job very well. They may only do 40Hz @-3dB, but usually unless you want to annoy your neighbor, that's acceptable performance ( of course, you can use a couple of these in 1.5way configuration to bring the f3 lower.)
I was going to mention that but contrary opinions don't seem welcome here. Since you brought it up first though...
In real life it's going to be even worse than those models show. Assuming the drivers are up near ear height (between 2 and 4 feet high) there's also going to be a floor bounce dip between 100 and 200 hz. It's probably likely that the speakers will also be located within 2 - 4 feet from other boundaries (walls) as well which will just accentuate the floor bounce dip, creating an even bigger hole between 100 and 200 hz. On top of all that, if the ceiling is 7 or 8 feet high, the floor/ceiling interaction will create another null, this one will be slightly below 100 hz but will subtract even more from the already mediocre midbass performance. The tapped horn subs will have trouble doing any higher than 80 hz (IIRC), so all this amounts to a potential for a massive hole in the midbass right where you don't want one, the spot where the sealed box's response is already very weak.
FWIW I'd go with larger drivers or at least a ported box. I'm pretty sure even Ed Shilling would agree that this is too much to ask of small drivers in a closed box.
Last edited:
I forgot to mention baffle step. I don't see any diffraction in the models so I assume there's no step losses shown either. That's going to take another 6db bite out of the bottom end. That alone ensures that passive filters are going to be required (bsc) which will further stress the drivers at lower frequencies.
actually anything other than a certain magic recipe?
Cal / Doug: group hug indeed (hint y'all - Cal gives great hugs) 🙂
Workable with ported fronts? The center/rears get fed very little LF info from movies, so I may just have to flex the muscle and tell the wife the fronts will be large(r). I could cross the bass horns as high as 100...maybe 110, but any higher and they are very locatable....a thing I despise in any system.
I'm definitely not a proponent of judging a book by it's cover so to speak, but I really like this driver (the one I mentioned @ thread start), even without hearing it. I know TB response graphs may be suspect, but if this one is even remotely accurate it could be their best driver for the $ yet.
Last edited:
You could but it wouldn't do you much good. The sub you choose really does not want to go higher than 80 hz, it has it's own massive hole hole in response between 80 - 110 hz or so (IIRC). If the sub is not built yet I would definitely go for a different design that can play up to 120 hz flat, that would make your situation a lot easier.
I'm not sure you understand the gravity of this situation. The system you described, depending on the room and placement inside the room, is likely going to have a huge hole in response from approximately about 80 - 200 hz. This hole could potentially be 30 db deep. IMO this is a big problem and probably would not sound any better than a shiny $100 HTIB from Best Buy (which your wife would probably like more anyway).
I'm just going to build it, either with the chr-70, fr125, or the TB 1611 driver, ported mains, everything else sealed. I'd rather take the advice of the truly experienced who say go for it.
If small(er) full range drivers are such a travesty in the HT world, and will have such a huge dip in response, please explain why Eric can market this for $1500.
http://www.tektondesign.com/theater.htm
If small(er) full range drivers are such a travesty in the HT world, and will have such a huge dip in response, please explain why Eric can market this for $1500.
http://www.tektondesign.com/theater.htm
Last edited:
Not a particularily good example... the FE126e (or the FE126En) is not really suited to anything but a horn (or mid-tweeter).
dave
as with several of his products that appear to be (based on ) pretty generic "factory recommended" designs - an excellent question
offering on the market and actually selling product are 2 quite different things
A .5 cubic foot box using the TB 1611 and a 2" x 4" long port will give you -3 at around 55Hz.
A .35 cubic foot box with a 2" x 5" long port will give you a -3 around 65Hz.
That's what i get in WinISD. My sealed measurements match Planet 10 pretty closely and may not be such a great idea for the mains but for surrounds i think they would be fine.
Zilla
A .35 cubic foot box with a 2" x 5" long port will give you a -3 around 65Hz.
That's what i get in WinISD. My sealed measurements match Planet 10 pretty closely and may not be such a great idea for the mains but for surrounds i think they would be fine.
Zilla
Attachments
Last edited:
I was bored so I created a quick example using the 5 inch tang band too.
Here's the predicted response that a simple box calculator like the one Dave used earlier (and Zilla) would give. Looks just like Dave's model right? The box is small, a sealed 6 inch cube (internally) since WAF is important. It's shown at xmax, 25 watts. Loud, right? Rock on.
Now, when using a more accurate modeling program like this one, you can predict the response when you account for the finite baffle size (it's a tiny baffle - this makes a HUGE difference) and add in the effect of the floor boundary. The ripple will go up or down in frequency depending on the actual height but the downward trend will remain regardless. This general downward trend towards the low frequencies is the baffle step, the ripple is caused by the floor bounce. The diffraction ripple is too high in frequency to see on this graph. This is (generally) what it would look like if you measured it outside.
And this is what it looks like when you place it randomly in a real room (only the floor, ceiling, side wall and wall behind the speaker are accounted for in this model). Different placement options could yeild a much better - or much worse - looking graph but placement generally suffers when dictated by WAF. The general trend is pretty clear. This type of hole in the midbass is common in situations when the midbass driver is up off the floor. Some of the boundary nulls can be dealt with (or made worse) by careful placement but the rising response won't go away without bsc.
In the real world, with all 6 room boundaries, room modes and other assorted room effects included the response above could get better or worse overall, it depends on a lot of things. But it should be very clear that boundary reflections have a lot of potential to cause big problems in the midbass area, especially when the midbass driver is up off the floor. This in itself is not necessarily a deal breaker but when you add the fact that the driver is small (displacement limited), the box is sealed (already 6db down at 80 hz BEFORE accounting for baffle step which eats another 6db) AND the subs can't play above 80 hz and you have a recipe for disappointment.
I could tweak the dimensions to sugar coat the reality but it wouldn't do you any favors. Your wife won't let you put them where you want anyway so you very well may end up with something just like this or worse. The results are not surprising. It needs bsc (a passive correction filter) and the midbass is probably going to be very weak unless you are extremely careful with placement. Especially since the sub can't play much above 80 hz.
Here's the predicted response that a simple box calculator like the one Dave used earlier (and Zilla) would give. Looks just like Dave's model right? The box is small, a sealed 6 inch cube (internally) since WAF is important. It's shown at xmax, 25 watts. Loud, right? Rock on.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Now, when using a more accurate modeling program like this one, you can predict the response when you account for the finite baffle size (it's a tiny baffle - this makes a HUGE difference) and add in the effect of the floor boundary. The ripple will go up or down in frequency depending on the actual height but the downward trend will remain regardless. This general downward trend towards the low frequencies is the baffle step, the ripple is caused by the floor bounce. The diffraction ripple is too high in frequency to see on this graph. This is (generally) what it would look like if you measured it outside.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
And this is what it looks like when you place it randomly in a real room (only the floor, ceiling, side wall and wall behind the speaker are accounted for in this model). Different placement options could yeild a much better - or much worse - looking graph but placement generally suffers when dictated by WAF. The general trend is pretty clear. This type of hole in the midbass is common in situations when the midbass driver is up off the floor. Some of the boundary nulls can be dealt with (or made worse) by careful placement but the rising response won't go away without bsc.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
In the real world, with all 6 room boundaries, room modes and other assorted room effects included the response above could get better or worse overall, it depends on a lot of things. But it should be very clear that boundary reflections have a lot of potential to cause big problems in the midbass area, especially when the midbass driver is up off the floor. This in itself is not necessarily a deal breaker but when you add the fact that the driver is small (displacement limited), the box is sealed (already 6db down at 80 hz BEFORE accounting for baffle step which eats another 6db) AND the subs can't play above 80 hz and you have a recipe for disappointment.
I could tweak the dimensions to sugar coat the reality but it wouldn't do you any favors. Your wife won't let you put them where you want anyway so you very well may end up with something just like this or worse. The results are not surprising. It needs bsc (a passive correction filter) and the midbass is probably going to be very weak unless you are extremely careful with placement. Especially since the sub can't play much above 80 hz.
Last edited:
Tomorrow (later today actually) if you like, I can explain in similar detail why a driver in a 6 inch sealed cube, fully stuffed with full bsc is definitely going to have real problems with thermal (power) compression and excessive doppler distortion. And why narrow dispersion speakers (like 5 inch fullrange drivers) are not a particularly good choice for home theater, especially for the center and surround speakers.
Let me know if you are interested.
Let me know if you are interested.
Last edited:
Thanks,
Exactly what I was looking for, thanks. Might you be so kind as to give me one more sim tuned slightly lower @ about .75 cu.ft.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.