just received my Faital Pro 6RS140 drivers and I'm rather disappointed in what I see.
The dust cap is off center by quite a bit. Should this be acceptable for a $170 driver?
You would expect this from cheaper drivers, but for a premium product this isn't acceptable IMO.
The dust cap is off center by quite a bit. Should this be acceptable for a $170 driver?
You would expect this from cheaper drivers, but for a premium product this isn't acceptable IMO.
Attachments
You must be joking.
I had to enlarge your picture just to notice a slight asymmetry.
And that only because the dustcap is HUGE and almost reaches cone edge,
I had to enlarge your picture just to notice a slight asymmetry.
And that only because the dustcap is HUGE and almost reaches cone edge,
No, I'm not joking. The dust cap is off by 1/4". The smudged glue and lighting is making it look less off center.
Seems like much asymmetry would make the stiffness across the surface of the driver asymmetric. Not sure how critical that is. I'm an engineer not a speaker expert.
https://es.aliexpress.com/item/1005001620030350.html
Am I seeing wrong or are they two different speakers with the same nomenclature?
Am I seeing wrong or are they two different speakers with the same nomenclature?
Can you mount/measure it and see if it complies with your over units?
Sometimes asymmetry is good right?
Sometimes asymmetry is good right?
Here's another shot of the cone and of the lead wire dressing through the cone. It also looks like the driver has previously been mounted, so its definitely going back.
The second driver looks a little better but overall I'm disappointed considering the $170 price tag. I went on the positive writeups from Troels G and Vance D from VC mag to give these a shot for use with a JBL WG in a 3 way high efficiency setup, but now I'm actually leaning towards a B&C or 18 Sound driver instead, possibly even a JBL 2169H which is actually designed for use with the WG.
Some of you may think I'm too fussy, but IMO this is not a premium driver based on the fit and finish alone. The skimpy bulk packaging (a piece of folded cardboard) it came in also leaves alot to be desired. The foam gasket is squished unevenly from the packing being scrunched on its sides by the super tight banding that was around it, to the point the surround was also lightly dented in. That however ended up recovering after a few hrs of being unpacked.
For comparison sake, the $65 Eminence Beta 6As I just got look way better than this and they all measure consistent too just based on TS parameters. I'm not even going to bother measuring these Faitals based on cosmetics and the fact I'm returning them, but I dont think dustcap offset will have a significant impact on that. I'm just not in love with the way the driver is put together overall even aside from the dust cap being off center. I've had a few bad experiences with Faital drivers so far and I've come to the conclusion you have to order a few extra drivers from them to get a pair that passes muster cosmetically.
The second driver looks a little better but overall I'm disappointed considering the $170 price tag. I went on the positive writeups from Troels G and Vance D from VC mag to give these a shot for use with a JBL WG in a 3 way high efficiency setup, but now I'm actually leaning towards a B&C or 18 Sound driver instead, possibly even a JBL 2169H which is actually designed for use with the WG.
Some of you may think I'm too fussy, but IMO this is not a premium driver based on the fit and finish alone. The skimpy bulk packaging (a piece of folded cardboard) it came in also leaves alot to be desired. The foam gasket is squished unevenly from the packing being scrunched on its sides by the super tight banding that was around it, to the point the surround was also lightly dented in. That however ended up recovering after a few hrs of being unpacked.
For comparison sake, the $65 Eminence Beta 6As I just got look way better than this and they all measure consistent too just based on TS parameters. I'm not even going to bother measuring these Faitals based on cosmetics and the fact I'm returning them, but I dont think dustcap offset will have a significant impact on that. I'm just not in love with the way the driver is put together overall even aside from the dust cap being off center. I've had a few bad experiences with Faital drivers so far and I've come to the conclusion you have to order a few extra drivers from them to get a pair that passes muster cosmetically.
Attachments
I would be curious about that myself, but I'd have to mount these drivers in a baffle to measure them correctly which would void my ability to return them both. Yes, asymmetry can be a good thing im some cases - those ugly looking surrounds on Purifi drivers are an example of this - I definitely wouldn't want to see them in any of my own speakers since I don't use grilles and their relatively low efficiency alone won't work for most of my designs.
I think that's just the wrong picture. I wouldn't trust that site for anything name brand - mostly a place selling lots of Chinese stuff, so the likelihood of receiving a counterfeit product is very high.
I had similar issue with a Fane driver I ordered recently, dust cap was glued differently making it look odd.
Thomann sent me a replacement free of charge, I could keep the odd looking unit as spare. Great service for sure.
Thomann sent me a replacement free of charge, I could keep the odd looking unit as spare. Great service for sure.
Look at the photos in the link.
There is a new model that incorporates better quality terminal blocks non-solderable, which is not always bette.. and it has a "dust cover" (this has always been an old trick of some manufacturers to impress unsuspecting people who deduce - they think the VC is the same size as the cover) of the conventional dome-shaped type but still larger than the actual CV. That's one of the reasons I've always respected and admired JBL's judgment, the 4-inch boot is for a 4-inch VC, period.
The speaker the OP has received has those large-area "plugs" that have become all the rage. I have not seen any article that speaks if that means any improvement in sound, with respect to conventional cones, but in reality, aesthetically I dislike them, they are neither flat nor conventional - concave -, a mixed monstrosity that I also see as something misleading to simulate "progress" in the development of the cones. It is the one that appears in the link as a "new" model. I do not intend to open discussions by mentioning this, what if the Mms, what if the VAS, etc.
I understand the OP's discomfort, receiving a speaker with a cone that seems to be repaired is very unpleasant.
There is a new model that incorporates better quality terminal blocks non-solderable, which is not always bette.. and it has a "dust cover" (this has always been an old trick of some manufacturers to impress unsuspecting people who deduce - they think the VC is the same size as the cover) of the conventional dome-shaped type but still larger than the actual CV. That's one of the reasons I've always respected and admired JBL's judgment, the 4-inch boot is for a 4-inch VC, period.
The speaker the OP has received has those large-area "plugs" that have become all the rage. I have not seen any article that speaks if that means any improvement in sound, with respect to conventional cones, but in reality, aesthetically I dislike them, they are neither flat nor conventional - concave -, a mixed monstrosity that I also see as something misleading to simulate "progress" in the development of the cones. It is the one that appears in the link as a "new" model. I do not intend to open discussions by mentioning this, what if the Mms, what if the VAS, etc.
I understand the OP's discomfort, receiving a speaker with a cone that seems to be repaired is very unpleasant.
I'm not a fan of large inverted dust caps at all. They have their own issues that affect the bandwidth of cone breakup, usually creating a sharper peak rather than spreading the breakup mode across a wider area, reducing its sonic impact and the need for sharp notch filters and LP slopes.
I agree the dust cap should be no larger than enough to cover the VC opening. Almost all the great cone drivers i know of have dust caps that merely large enough to cover the VC. These stupid goofy looking huge dust caps that give the impression of a huge VC are ridiculous cod pieces for "VC envy". They just create more problems with earlier cone breakup and add unnecessary extra mass to the moving assembly. Maybe the only purpose of those is to increase dispersion characteristics in the upper mids if the driver can still muster to produce them with the added mass.
I suppose the main purpose of such big dust cap is not to give an impression of large voice coil, but to work as low pass filter.
If you do not use any dust cap, you can have significant highs comming directly from voice coil. Like some full range drivers do.
Big dust cap blocks more highs, no envy.
If you do not use any dust cap, you can have significant highs comming directly from voice coil. Like some full range drivers do.
Big dust cap blocks more highs, no envy.
http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?11085-Dust-Cap-in-or-Out
I'm sure you can figure a way to mount the driver on a large baffle for testing without nicking it up.
I'm sure you can figure a way to mount the driver on a large baffle for testing without nicking it up.