DaveCan said:
According to the stats it depends on the country, though your height hardly qualifies you as a giant except among dwarfs. Then there's the fact that the seating used has the most effect on ear/floor height. That said, I'm with you, a speaker's focal point firing below the ears and particularly below the chest leave much to be desired to the point where I prefer it high enough up to push floor bounce down below our acute hearing BW or put the mid-bass, lower mids at chest height if a multi-way to maximize a live performance's visceral effect.
GM
serenechaos said:
I find it sad.........
Recently I auditioned some 126 (i.e. physically short) BIBs in a small basement office which were floor mounted at the sides of a corner positioned 'L' shaped desk, so not surprisingly their performance left a lot to be desired in every way for me with no way to judge the driver's 'sweet' BW, the main reason I was interested in them. I wanted to hear why this driver is so highly praised, so he cleared the desk a bit and with them now much closer to an acoustic tile ceiling and somewhat above my ears it was a night n' day change for the better with a more 'full', extended LF and much more neutral mids/HF for as high as I can hear, which isn't very high anymore, so can't comment on its > ~12 kHz BW.
Indeed, it was too neutral/plain vanilla overall for me, though it was nice not hearing the typical 'FR' driver's ~2 kHz 'ring' that causes a sibilance that tends to excite my Tinitus enough to make me want to exit the room post haste.
Anyway, my long winded point is that like in real estate, for best speaker performance in a bounded space it's location, location, location, i.e. in 3D space, not the 2D folks normally limit themselves to. Or as a prominent prosound designer recently noted, simming in 2D is for fun and 3D is for real.
GM
that causes a sibilance that tends to excite my Tinitus enough to make me want to exit the room post haste.
Nice to know i aint the only one with the "running tweeter in the head" thing going on.
ron
Nice to know i aint the only one with the "running tweeter in the head" thing going on.
ron
REC1 said:
Ron, Greg, do we get gold stars on our senior's cards for that, along with special seating positions at all listening events?
Greg - (I think) I'm with ya on the 126 - a great bang for the buck driver, but not the most magical of the Fostex 4" family for everyone's ears.
nice to know someone else finds 126s "too neutral/plain vanilla overall," and " nice not hearing the typical 'FR' driver's ~2 kHz 'ring'."
i heard a pair of fonkens, beautifull bamboo cabs, with enabled drivers @ vsac.
after everything i'd read i was expecting "something else."
first listen, my wife gave me this blank look, and said "why would anyone bother? no body to the mids, no bass..."
i told her that apparently a lot of people like them.
she seemed very puzzled.
i was just very suprised, and went back a couple times, thinking it was the recording or something, guess my expectations were off.
anyway, the wife's eventual take was that maybe the upward tilt of the fr compensates for upper range hearing lose some people may be experiencing, without having that 'ring" or 'shout' many other single drivers have?
r
i heard a pair of fonkens, beautifull bamboo cabs, with enabled drivers @ vsac.
after everything i'd read i was expecting "something else."
first listen, my wife gave me this blank look, and said "why would anyone bother? no body to the mids, no bass..."
i told her that apparently a lot of people like them.
she seemed very puzzled.
i was just very suprised, and went back a couple times, thinking it was the recording or something, guess my expectations were off.
anyway, the wife's eventual take was that maybe the upward tilt of the fr compensates for upper range hearing lose some people may be experiencing, without having that 'ring" or 'shout' many other single drivers have?
r
serenechaos said:
the Fonkens are FE127E, which definitely have less of "something" in the upper midrange than the 126, but I wouldn't necessarily describe it as "body"
yeah, expectations can get in the way
maybe i shouldn't have put 126s & 127s in the same "family" or "class" sound-wise?
they seemed more the same than different compared to each other, than compared to everything else.
not like a lowther, or a compression driver, altec, etc.
i'd read so many people raving about 126s & 127s mid range, that it was, well, a suprise.
like the color was missing or something.
but maybe unfair to compare to what was at that show.
they seemed more the same than different compared to each other, than compared to everything else.
not like a lowther, or a compression driver, altec, etc.
i'd read so many people raving about 126s & 127s mid range, that it was, well, a suprise.
like the color was missing or something.
but maybe unfair to compare to what was at that show.
serenechaos said:
good points - all I was trying to relate is that even in the variety of enclosures arguably as well suited to the 126 & 127's parameters that I've heard ( & built
) they will sound different from each other in several respects - which definitely includes what's going on in the upper midrange (1.8 - 7k) don't forget that a fully tweaked out pair of either of these models costs less than the sales tax on some of the more esoteric drivers we all enjoyed at the show
I'm curious if you've had a chance to hear the F120A?
i don't know whut yur talkin' about?chrisb said:
oh, maybe GOTOs @ $10K a pair?
just buy "em from out-of-state to avoid the sales tax!
if i've heard F120As, i don't remember them.
they're like little F200As right?
alnico mags, even lower efficiency, 89 or something like that?
i'm still trying to get a pair of 138s to sound good
(i think that's what this thread started out about...
at least good enough to replace the 108es-rs...
serenechaos said:
that doesn't always work - depending on what kind of day the Customs officials are having, and which shipper is used - don't get us north of the 49th started on "what Brown can do to you today?"
something like that
of course, back on topic - but FWIW, (and admittedly not having heard them) I think it's possible that a lot of folks might be quite happy with performance that you currently find unacceptable with the 138s.
probably.chrisb said:
maybe expectations getting in the way again...
i expected them to be better than the 108es-rIIs.
too early to tell though really.
they are getting better, and i haven't had time to build proper boxes yet...
serenechaos said:
Forgive me if you've already mentioned it, but what direction are you leaning to as far as application/enclosure for them? i.e. will they be part of a full-zoot multi-way, or as close to FR as you can get?
Ron, Greg, do we get gold stars on our senior's cards for that, along with special seating positions at all listening events?
Everybody gets gold stars on their AARP membership cards.
ron
of course, back on topic - but FWIW, (and admittedly not having heard them) I think it's possible that a lot of folks might be quite happy with performance that you currently find unacceptable with the 138s.
Sometimes you cant please everybody!
Everybody gets gold stars on their AARP membership cards.
ron
of course, back on topic - but FWIW, (and admittedly not having heard them) I think it's possible that a lot of folks might be quite happy with performance that you currently find unacceptable with the 138s.
Sometimes you cant please everybody!
i'm building a "full-zoot multi-way" as close to "the monstrosity" @ vsac as i can get, with compression drivers, huge flh on the floor, & tapped horn for sub bass, eventually with seperate amps for each.chrisb said:
for the 138 i was wanting to go as far in the other direction as possible, one speaker, one amp...
maybe a sub, running off the same amp.
simple, but ok for reduced volume, dynamic and frequency range requirements.
what the super swans are doing.
i thought (hoped) the 138s would be able to do better.
a poor guy's version of what the 5" feastrex did in the nessies @ rmaf...
i listen to contempary classical composers and oparas. some jazz mostly smokey room type and rock but dont know what that is anymore. i try to listen at or below 82db on my ratshack spl meter. ..............................put new foam surrounds on the old epi 100 (8"&1"inverted dome/a single cap xover), to hear a supposed 90db speaker driven on 3.5watts of 2a3 set - went back to my thirtytwo year old 92db two way speakers, lol, at the moment "only a fool would say that" is sounding pretty darn good... think i skip to "brooklyn (owes the charmer under me)". i was thinking about the 138esr as being on the edge of efficiency for the 2a3 but worth a try. the 93db seas exotic was seemingly better however kloss said it's the other way around between the two. the exotic's fq res plot looks like its under 90db thru a good part of the bw. will be interesting to see the plots of the upcomming exotic bass driver. i dont listen loud and im stuck with small rooms so the 138esr may do, assuming i like them?GM said:
mp9,
i've gotten away with a 2A3 or el84 set with 108s or 166esrs @ lower levels like that. you do notice a little more headroom with 166s though.
low volume changes things (besides saving hearing).
i've gotten away with a 2A3 or el84 set with 108s or 166esrs @ lower levels like that. you do notice a little more headroom with 166s though.
low volume changes things (besides saving hearing).
REC1 said:
You've got plenty of company, I don't know any male over 40 that doesn't suffer from it to a greater or lesser extent. I've had mine for as long as I can remember, supposedly getting it from being repeatedly treated for a severe ear infection when I was 2-3 yrs old. Made me a life-long insomniac........
GM
yeah now that its winter i'm stuck in house more (i hate gyms), so i'll get around to building something for them soon. the iris shouldnt have the the dreaded hd so i may start with them and go from there. who knows once the insanity begins i may end up pairing the 166esr with a b&c 10nw64 or 12nw76 (if poss), in a version of rons latest experiment when he gets it ironed out. surprisingly the 2a3/vintage 92db 10" midbass 2way monkey coffins sound loud to me. actually very loud and very dynamic when i up it to +/- 10db to 80db/very short (if even), 90db (more like 86db) peaks. i'm listening to sarah mclachlan rarities b sides & other... and at this spl her voice is haunting and i'm not really even a big fan. got it for the xtc and joni m. cover tracks. doesnt take much to pressurize small rooms. this 2a3 kills my previous two 300b amps in that dept. i'm sure it has everything to do with the amp/spk & room synergy. i dont know how off the ratshack meter is. doesnt have b weighting so i know its at the edge of its c weighting bell curve which starts at ~85db. one of these days i'll get around to borrowing a friends industrial (whatever the code is), spl meter. how are your 138 comming along?
GM said:
i'm fortunate to live on a verry quiet street plus being kind of a hermit keeps it under control for me. nothing like sleeping with the windows open and listening to the birds and cricikets to make me forget that i ever had tinnitus.
