hello all,
i heard an read a lot of good things about the 108EZ and the 168EZ. has anyone ever heard one of them and did not like the sound at all? if so, why?
and what is the diffrence, soundwise, between the 108EZ and the 168EZ. is the resolution, the soundstage and the holograpic presentation of the 168EZ as good as it is with the 108EZ.
thx
lilmik
i heard an read a lot of good things about the 108EZ and the 168EZ. has anyone ever heard one of them and did not like the sound at all? if so, why?
and what is the diffrence, soundwise, between the 108EZ and the 168EZ. is the resolution, the soundstage and the holograpic presentation of the 168EZ as good as it is with the 108EZ.
thx
lilmik
The 168 pretty much offers everything the 108 does but with more grunt in the lpower registers. Mounted in a BIB it's lethal.
Onur -that another double horn design or a single one?
Onur -that another double horn design or a single one?
No more confusing designs 🙂
I just designed a back loaded horn enclosure trying to stay in reasonable dimensions. Height is about 1.4 meters and the width is 70 cm and the depth is 60 cm. This is an exponential horn with a length of 1.7 meters and a rear chamber of 16 liters. Yes, yes I know, it is not a horn. I heard it a hundred times before. With a rear chamber that big, it doesn't qualify as horn. Who cares as far as it sounds nice 🙂
Again, the design will be on my web page after a couple of listeners comment on it first.
/Onur
I just designed a back loaded horn enclosure trying to stay in reasonable dimensions. Height is about 1.4 meters and the width is 70 cm and the depth is 60 cm. This is an exponential horn with a length of 1.7 meters and a rear chamber of 16 liters. Yes, yes I know, it is not a horn. I heard it a hundred times before. With a rear chamber that big, it doesn't qualify as horn. Who cares as far as it sounds nice 🙂
Again, the design will be on my web page after a couple of listeners comment on it first.
/Onur
Attachments
HI
I have made a "Cornu" horn, with FE168EZ. They sound very good 😉 look here -> www.micro-io.dk
Best regards
Kim Olesen
I have made a "Cornu" horn, with FE168EZ. They sound very good 😉 look here -> www.micro-io.dk
Best regards
Kim Olesen
Re: No more confusing designs 🙂
Nonsense. It's as much a horn as any other domestic horn design is. If it's got a long, expanding vent, then it's a horn. Ironically enough, GM decided to blow away the remnants of my misunderstandings earlier on today, and gently pointed out that all expanding lines are technically horns. Doesn't matter what they are coupled to, or even if they are not coupled to anything (i.e the TQWT) -they're horns. Period.
I like that definition. Solves many problems. Rather inverts much of my previous fooling around, but it's perfectly logical.
Here's the one I've been working on with Dave (P10) which is also a big vent reflex type. http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=85156 The primer on the prototype enclosures is drying as I type this. In my case I use MathCad rather than AJ horn, but we've clearly got simlar objectives in mind. I really like these BVR types over the smaller chamber, longer path length varieties -I can almost always get a smoother response (with just as much efficiency) this way as the more usual QW types. Goodness knows why the horn mafia get so worked up about them -they've been around just as long. And as you so rightly say, who cares what the method is, so long as it sounds good!
Best
Scott
Onur said:
Nonsense. It's as much a horn as any other domestic horn design is. If it's got a long, expanding vent, then it's a horn. Ironically enough, GM decided to blow away the remnants of my misunderstandings earlier on today, and gently pointed out that all expanding lines are technically horns. Doesn't matter what they are coupled to, or even if they are not coupled to anything (i.e the TQWT) -they're horns. Period.
I like that definition. Solves many problems. Rather inverts much of my previous fooling around, but it's perfectly logical.
Here's the one I've been working on with Dave (P10) which is also a big vent reflex type. http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=85156 The primer on the prototype enclosures is drying as I type this. In my case I use MathCad rather than AJ horn, but we've clearly got simlar objectives in mind. I really like these BVR types over the smaller chamber, longer path length varieties -I can almost always get a smoother response (with just as much efficiency) this way as the more usual QW types. Goodness knows why the horn mafia get so worked up about them -they've been around just as long. And as you so rightly say, who cares what the method is, so long as it sounds good!
Best
Scott
hello,
i know the 103e in the recommended horn-type enclosure and the 166e in the recommended horn-type enclosure, and to my ears, the 103e does the "disappearing-act" better then the 166e. of course that's an advantage. can the 108ez also disappear better than the 168ez.
also i am a little bit concerned about the 7khz peak you can see in the 168ez frequenze response: http://www.fostexinternational.com/docs/speaker_comp/pdf/fe168ez.pdf ... could it be that the 168es does sound very bright? the peak look's really nasty i think.
greetings
lilmik
i know the 103e in the recommended horn-type enclosure and the 166e in the recommended horn-type enclosure, and to my ears, the 103e does the "disappearing-act" better then the 166e. of course that's an advantage. can the 108ez also disappear better than the 168ez.
also i am a little bit concerned about the 7khz peak you can see in the 168ez frequenze response: http://www.fostexinternational.com/docs/speaker_comp/pdf/fe168ez.pdf ... could it be that the 168es does sound very bright? the peak look's really nasty i think.
greetings
lilmik
I haven't heard a problem in this respect with the pairs I've heard. And believe me, I don't like bright speakers -quite the reverese. Bright systems just give me a headache. Mind you, the peaks in the 168 are out of our ear's highest sensitivity region. The 108 has the edge in the disappearing act business (not in the Fostex cabinets though, neither of which are very good IMO) but the 168 counters with superior bass extension, dynamics and SPL capability.
Hello Scottmoose,
thank you for your comments. They are very helpfull.
That's good to hear 🙂.
So you don't like the Recoemmended Enclosures? Alternatively i could build the Frugel for the 108ES, Ron's Horn or the "Spawn of Frugel" (my favourite, though it is still in progress i think), but i have not found any other desing for the 168es but the recommended. I am not sure if i could build Nagaokas D-37 or the D-168 you can see here http://www.maclementhorn.it/Fostex_Progetti_Japan.htm ...... because, as far as i know, they were both designed for the 168ES2, not for the standard 168es with the little magnet.
Greetings
lilmik
thank you for your comments. They are very helpfull.
Scottmoose said:
That's good to hear 🙂.
Scottmoose said:
So you don't like the Recoemmended Enclosures? Alternatively i could build the Frugel for the 108ES, Ron's Horn or the "Spawn of Frugel" (my favourite, though it is still in progress i think), but i have not found any other desing for the 168es but the recommended. I am not sure if i could build Nagaokas D-37 or the D-168 you can see here http://www.maclementhorn.it/Fostex_Progetti_Japan.htm ...... because, as far as i know, they were both designed for the 168ES2, not for the standard 168es with the little magnet.
Greetings
lilmik
Re: Horn for 168EZ
i can't wait to see your project, hopefully with some measurements :-D.
the spiral horn looks cool, i think. it's a pitty you can't see the spiral anymore once the box is closed. but a spiral horn is, if you wnat to use wood, really hard to build. also, personally i do not want to hang the speakers on the wall.
can you tell me more about the sound of your spiral horn compared to a conventional horn-type speaker like fostex recos?
greetings
lilmik
Onur said:
i can't wait to see your project, hopefully with some measurements :-D.
KimBOlesen said:
the spiral horn looks cool, i think. it's a pitty you can't see the spiral anymore once the box is closed. but a spiral horn is, if you wnat to use wood, really hard to build. also, personally i do not want to hang the speakers on the wall.
can you tell me more about the sound of your spiral horn compared to a conventional horn-type speaker like fostex recos?
greetings
lilmik
You're welcome!
True, I don't like the Factory ESigma enclosures. They just don't seem to be a sound design to me. The mouth hangs in mid-air, so no coupling, length seems about right, as does the potential CC volume, but the throat CSA seems mis-matched to the rest of the system.
Little is relative. It's still not exactly small! Bigger is Better. If a cab is too large, you can always damp it down, and the D-37's pathlength isn't really that much different to the Sigma's enclosure. FS is similar between the two drivers I believe, so no worries about the midbass taking a walk on you.
The Frugelhorn is a proven design, and extremely good it is too. The currently un-named (must get that sorted!) large CC doublehorn I designed (the Spawnhorn you mention) works fine with various drivers according to the simulations, and I've got a test pair in the garage with a quick coat of paint drying on them as I type this. They need a little tweaking, which will take place over the next week or so, and preferably someone who's better at building than I am (I can design them, but I'm not great at building -no facilities or tools, and a distinct lack of money), but the basic concept and dimensions are now proven to my satisfaction. I like them. The sound with the FE126E is open and very large. Pretty strong to about 65-70Hz. I'd love to hear them with the 108. They're astonishingly precise: you can hear every inch you move them near to / away from rear and side-walls.
I've got a new, long pathlength, small CC version in the works at present. More ripple, but also more gain, and a whisker more extension.
Best
Scott
LilMik said:
True, I don't like the Factory ESigma enclosures. They just don't seem to be a sound design to me. The mouth hangs in mid-air, so no coupling, length seems about right, as does the potential CC volume, but the throat CSA seems mis-matched to the rest of the system.
LilMik said:
Little is relative. It's still not exactly small! Bigger is Better. If a cab is too large, you can always damp it down, and the D-37's pathlength isn't really that much different to the Sigma's enclosure. FS is similar between the two drivers I believe, so no worries about the midbass taking a walk on you.
The Frugelhorn is a proven design, and extremely good it is too. The currently un-named (must get that sorted!) large CC doublehorn I designed (the Spawnhorn you mention) works fine with various drivers according to the simulations, and I've got a test pair in the garage with a quick coat of paint drying on them as I type this. They need a little tweaking, which will take place over the next week or so, and preferably someone who's better at building than I am (I can design them, but I'm not great at building -no facilities or tools, and a distinct lack of money), but the basic concept and dimensions are now proven to my satisfaction. I like them. The sound with the FE126E is open and very large. Pretty strong to about 65-70Hz. I'd love to hear them with the 108. They're astonishingly precise: you can hear every inch you move them near to / away from rear and side-walls.
I've got a new, long pathlength, small CC version in the works at present. More ripple, but also more gain, and a whisker more extension.
Best
Scott
Scottmoose said:
I'm planning to build a BIB with the 168ES, and while the cabinets are in progress, I've got the drivers in open baffles in the back seat of my car. (Why? because my wife won't let me break them in around the house.)
The HF peak is distinctly audible and annoying (even to my 46yo ears), and I'm hoping this disappears when I put them in a proper enclosure.
It will, though the enclosure won't have a great deal to do with anything over 1KHz. It'll bring the LF into line with the rest of the range though. The Sigmas, unlike most other drivers, do appear to need a little time to settle down. Give them a good thrap of Iron Maiden, Metallica, the audio ripped from Jurassic Park, some Bach organ pieces etc. Get them to xmax (easy on OB) and it'll help.
hello,
this might be interesting for some people, at least for the people who life in germany.
usually we have to pay 160 Euro for one 168es here (about 200 USD) and 98 Euro for one 108es (about 120 USD). at www.musicians-gear.com , a shop in germany, you can get the 168es for 134 euro and the 108es for 83 euro. they sell lot’s of other stuff and speakers very cheap.
i ordered once a kappa 15lf from eminence and did not have any problems. for shipping cost look here http://www.musicians-gear.com/exp/ship_cost.htm . If you are not living in germany, here you can find an import guide http://www.musicians-gear.com/exp/impguid.htm .
Greetings
Lilmik
this might be interesting for some people, at least for the people who life in germany.
usually we have to pay 160 Euro for one 168es here (about 200 USD) and 98 Euro for one 108es (about 120 USD). at www.musicians-gear.com , a shop in germany, you can get the 168es for 134 euro and the 108es for 83 euro. they sell lot’s of other stuff and speakers very cheap.
i ordered once a kappa 15lf from eminence and did not have any problems. for shipping cost look here http://www.musicians-gear.com/exp/ship_cost.htm . If you are not living in germany, here you can find an import guide http://www.musicians-gear.com/exp/impguid.htm .
Greetings
Lilmik
What about the SPLmax response
I think at some point the SPLmax response which can be obtained from AJ-Horn simulations becomes more important than SPL response. When you examine that graph you can see the response when a couple of watts is delivered to the speaker cone. Some designs can not preserve the same response in SPLmax graph like you get in SPL response even under 1 watt.
According to my experiences (and if my memory doesn't fail me), the enclosures which you describe may fail to generate the a similar response like in the SPL graph. Or am I wrong? Have you checked both graphs? I am very interested.
Do the new worksheets of Martin King generate a similar response like the SPLmax graph?
/Onur
I think at some point the SPLmax response which can be obtained from AJ-Horn simulations becomes more important than SPL response. When you examine that graph you can see the response when a couple of watts is delivered to the speaker cone. Some designs can not preserve the same response in SPLmax graph like you get in SPL response even under 1 watt.
According to my experiences (and if my memory doesn't fail me), the enclosures which you describe may fail to generate the a similar response like in the SPL graph. Or am I wrong? Have you checked both graphs? I am very interested.
Do the new worksheets of Martin King generate a similar response like the SPLmax graph?
/Onur
Hi
I have tried ordering FE168EZ from "musicians-gear" and didn't get any speakers! after waiting nearly 3 month they finally gave up and i got my money back! They use some kind of business located in Dubai!!! but order is in german...
best regards
Kim Olesen
I have tried ordering FE168EZ from "musicians-gear" and didn't get any speakers! after waiting nearly 3 month they finally gave up and i got my money back! They use some kind of business located in Dubai!!! but order is in german...
best regards
Kim Olesen
KimBOlesen said:
hello,
i am sorry for you to hear this. again, i had nor problems, but i life in germany. this might be the reason for our diffrent experiences.
greetings
lilmik
I'm another, don't like the recommended Fostex horns very much. The limited selection i've heard have all been flawed, and the billion rectangle horn designs seem such a waste of material....
dave
dave
planet10 said:
Only 40 individual pieces per cabinet for the FE206ESR cabinet - and the only non 90 degree cuts are the driver cutouts.
With a commerical grade beam saw, you can cut all the parts in slightly under 1 hour, and if you don't make a mistake rotating the pieces to fit the CAD cut plan, you'll get over 95% yield from 4 sheets of 5x5' Baltic birch. (i.e. very little "wasted" )
But I certainly don't envy the guys putting the boxes together, or moving them around in the listening rooms. (Frank: I'll be busy that week)
I can't wait to get the time to build a pair of Scott's "non small horn" - I agree a more user friendly name is in order, "Spawn" just doesn't do it for me.
I nominate "moose horn"
- Status
- Not open for further replies.