Those are uFonkenSETs with (well) matched helper woofers which act as stands. Plans are part of the FF85wk Fonken. The A5.2 set has much the same boxes but tuned for the different driver.
planet10-hifi miniOnken Plan-Set Subscriptions
dave
planet10-hifi miniOnken Plan-Set Subscriptions
dave
all i can say is 1 driver is not enough, i was in the same confusing moment but i decided to buy Alpair10p, listened to several fostex series from NOS and new batch but never liked them. last i bought AN 8" super and still best investment on speaker driver.
MA driver does not have enough guts to play loud, AN has it due to higher sensitivity but it needs extra bass support. I had 12" fane fullrange, at low level it's not a good driver but when you want it very loud level then it can give you a clean sound where MA or AN start to get distorted.
so pick your choice, you want a clean driver but has low guts or muscle driver? then it will depend on your pocket anyway
MA driver does not have enough guts to play loud, AN has it due to higher sensitivity but it needs extra bass support. I had 12" fane fullrange, at low level it's not a good driver but when you want it very loud level then it can give you a clean sound where MA or AN start to get distorted.
so pick your choice, you want a clean driver but has low guts or muscle driver? then it will depend on your pocket anyway
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
That's a very important tradeoff that unfortunately isn't discussed very much.
A lot of people are listening mostly to girl & guitar and so small drivers are fine. Or maybe they are listening to loud rock where distortion isn't the biggest issue.
So what's the best answer for listening to Mahler with virtually no distortion. I don't think a pair of MA or Fostex drivers are going to do it. My AN 10"s are good, but I'm still looking for the next step up. Cost is not really the biggest issue. Lack of distortion with plenty of power is.
Last edited:
With those requirements, the Altec 604 comes to mind. Or a proper HE setup with a couple of quality 15in woofers per channel in a low Q sealed box mated to an equally high quality compression horn. If that's excessive, a well-designed conventional 3 or 4-way. Single driver systems can do a lot of things well, but the avenue you take is best defined by acoustic requirements and budget. If you wanted to stick mostly with wideband drivers, then a traditional 2-way using a high quality, high sensitivity unit as the midtweeter with supporting quality woofers; crossed at about 500Hz, give or take.
I like the idea of a FAST/WAW as you suggested and that’s the direction I’m headed at the moment.
Gave some thought to a rectangular array of small FR drivers in order to keep the distortion down and still move some air, but I think the comb filtering and lack of coherence prevent that from being a useful idea. Any thoughts about it?
Well, that's more or less how it used to be done, albeit with small units e.g. Bozak B310 / B310A Concert Grand etc. as the HF in a 3-way. Works very well, done right. Badly if not. 
The above also explains why I don't much like either the FAST or WAW terms: I prefer to call them what they are & always have been: 2-way loudspeakers. And nothing wrong with that. Nobody ever said where the crossover has to be or that the HF unit is obliged to follow certain specific design characteristics. Traditionally XO frequencies tended to be lower when compression mid-tweeters, larger wideband drivers or multiple small wideband drivers (assuming the Fs of the latter was low enough) were used. We're just seeing a resurgence of interest in them, no more.
The above also explains why I don't much like either the FAST or WAW terms: I prefer to call them what they are & always have been: 2-way loudspeakers. And nothing wrong with that. Nobody ever said where the crossover has to be or that the HF unit is obliged to follow certain specific design characteristics. Traditionally XO frequencies tended to be lower when compression mid-tweeters, larger wideband drivers or multiple small wideband drivers (assuming the Fs of the latter was low enough) were used. We're just seeing a resurgence of interest in them, no more.
I have havd both Jordan JX92S and the Eikona 2's. The Eikona are substantially better than the older generation JX92S. The older JX92s are very nice drivers, very impressive, but the Eikona do everything better in every way. It is a pity they jacked up their prices so much. That kind of takes them off the table for .lst folks. I have heard a MA Pluvia and was very impressed, without a doubt the MA drivers now represent the best bang for the buck right now.
Well, that's more or less how it used to be done, albeit with small units e.g. Bozak B310 / B310A Concert Grand etc. as the HF in a 3-way. Works very well, done right. Badly if not.
The above also explains why I don't much like either the FAST or WAW terms: I prefer to call them what they are & always have been: 2-way loudspeakers. And nothing wrong with that. Nobody ever said where the crossover has to be or that the HF unit is obliged to follow certain specific design characteristics. Traditionally XO frequencies tended to be lower when compression mid-tweeters, larger wideband drivers or multiple small wideband drivers (assuming the Fs of the latter was low enough) were used. We're just seeing a resurgence of interest in them, no more.
You’re right about the FAST and WAW terms from a purist point of view, but I think they do serve a useful purpose in discussions. These terms are used primarily by full range fans to describe a 2-way with a rather low XO. But more importantly the starting point for that group is almost always the FR driver itself. Get that right and the woofer becomes easy. Plenty of good choices once you decide on the enclosure type you want to use. But no comprises on the FR itself. That’s king.
If you go over to the multi-range forum there are ample discussions about 2-way and 3-way designs, but more often than not they start with the woofer. There seems to be a much large concern, almost a preoccupation, with those fans about the bass. The mid often comes later. And they almost never consider a XO as low as a FAST/WAW does.
Right now there are two discussions going on regarding a group design for both a multi-way tower and a monkey coffin. They have spent the better part of two months debating about the woofer and are certain to be crossing over somewhere around 2K. I got so bored with them that I stopped following the discussion. You get the impression that most of them don’t even know what coherence is, or if they do they don’t care about it. At one point in the early part of the discussion someone suggested a FAST design and was promptly ignored by everyone else. (I thought they might even have him banned for it ☺)
I still like the idea of using the FAST/WAW terms, because it tells you right away where the design emphasis is going to be placed.
More on WAW:
During diyFEST we ended up playing the big MTM TLs all evening. I put them back into the system Friday so a customer could listen to them.
That reminded me again how very good those WAW are. Relieved of bass, the A7.3eN really shines and has no isssues playing pretty loud (if you have the power) and the bass from the ML-TL loaded pair of 6.5/7” Mark Audio bass drivers is fantastic.
The Alpair 12pw is a fantastic bass driver (that goes up to 10k — better top than FRs such as FE208e∑ & FF225wk) but does not get enuff love. The design is flexible enuff that one could sub in A7ms/A6.2/A5.2 (but you will need to bi-amp).
Given that lack of love i am going to forgo any income on the plans for these, including passive XO, just in the hope that more people try the A12pw. I have some changes to make in the document before releasing it, but if anyone wants an early version, email me.
I do have a derivation percolating in my head that would use 4 bass drivers. That one i will charge for.
dave
During diyFEST we ended up playing the big MTM TLs all evening. I put them back into the system Friday so a customer could listen to them.
That reminded me again how very good those WAW are. Relieved of bass, the A7.3eN really shines and has no isssues playing pretty loud (if you have the power) and the bass from the ML-TL loaded pair of 6.5/7” Mark Audio bass drivers is fantastic.
The Alpair 12pw is a fantastic bass driver (that goes up to 10k — better top than FRs such as FE208e∑ & FF225wk) but does not get enuff love. The design is flexible enuff that one could sub in A7ms/A6.2/A5.2 (but you will need to bi-amp).
Given that lack of love i am going to forgo any income on the plans for these, including passive XO, just in the hope that more people try the A12pw. I have some changes to make in the document before releasing it, but if anyone wants an early version, email me.
I do have a derivation percolating in my head that would use 4 bass drivers. That one i will charge for.
dave
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
I’ve been tempted to try the 2 way approach too, just makes so much sense. For HE though you need a high sensitivity driver on the top and that’s where it’s more difficult. Tweeters are sensitive and large drivers are sensitive but small FR drivers are not. So I was thinking 2 way for SS amps but not my tube amps. One approach for HE would be to keep the large FR and add a supporting woofer to keep high sensitivity but still unload the FR from the more demanding lower notes and get more overall impact. Another option for more impact without going beyond the single driver is to go to a back loaded horn, something from the stables of Scott. I’ve never heard one of Scott’s double mouthed horns. Imagine a horn with an 8” or 10” FR. Which BLH design is considered the best? I don’t see BLH designs around on this forum very much, seems they are out of favour.
Last edited:
You any bass & reasonable efficiency the enclosure is ideally pretty big.
dave
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
dave