i'd hope the exotic x3-06 tweeter is that good, hard to imagine a soft dome so far ahead of the others. i think the high points are it being able to xover at 1.5-1.8K and high sensitivity.
the exotic x2-08/x3-06 2way is appealing to me for higher usable sensitivity then the x1-08 fullrange and i try to convince myself the xover point and xover network interference won't be too much different or detrimental to the sound then the fullrange x1-08/correction network.
from everything i've read of single drivers the 2way will handle complex music better. i don't know if it'll be worth the trade off of a single drivers purity.
it's too bad they're so expensive. i was thinking @$250 the fostex 138 would've been a less expensive way to begin with the exotic tweeter for now and upgradable to the exotic mid-bass drive/bigger box, down the road. or not since new products are a given.
in getting back to inclinedplane's org. question, are they worth buying now at the reduced cost in light of all that we now know of the 138es-r? that large alnico magnet is hard to pass up but after reading reports of others with better linear fq response like the inexpensive 8" tangband, i'm not so sure.
the exotic x2-08/x3-06 2way is appealing to me for higher usable sensitivity then the x1-08 fullrange and i try to convince myself the xover point and xover network interference won't be too much different or detrimental to the sound then the fullrange x1-08/correction network.
from everything i've read of single drivers the 2way will handle complex music better. i don't know if it'll be worth the trade off of a single drivers purity.
it's too bad they're so expensive. i was thinking @$250 the fostex 138 would've been a less expensive way to begin with the exotic tweeter for now and upgradable to the exotic mid-bass drive/bigger box, down the road. or not since new products are a given.
in getting back to inclinedplane's org. question, are they worth buying now at the reduced cost in light of all that we now know of the 138es-r? that large alnico magnet is hard to pass up but after reading reports of others with better linear fq response like the inexpensive 8" tangband, i'm not so sure.
i can't imagine a soft dome being that much better...
than a ribbon???
and it's not that much higher efficiency...
purity--
i'm thinking too much is made of this...
it's more about in context of the quality of all the components used, and how well they work together.
the only single driver system that ever really did that much for me, that i really thought was better than what i have in my own house, was that mega-buck feastrex/nessie system @ rmaf in 2008.
but stupid expensive, like $69k for just the speakers, and the rest of the system was all one-off stuff as well... and yeah, it fell apart on complex material, was rolled off on the top and bottom octaves, would get loud, but didn't have very good dynamics... it was all a "keep it within the envelope" thing to my ears.
but so nice if in that envelope...
i thought it would be just the thing for low level, late night stuff.
i hoped the 138s might get 90% if the way there, for, ok, less than 10% of the cost.
for an "all out" system, i haven't heard anything close to a good five-way horn system.
so that's what i'm building.
everything else seems like a waste of time & money to me @ this point.
as to inclinedplane's org. question, i guess it depends on what you plan to do with them, and what you expect from them. reading enough of this thread would give one a pretty good idea of what to expect though, no?
than a ribbon???
and it's not that much higher efficiency...
purity--
i'm thinking too much is made of this...
it's more about in context of the quality of all the components used, and how well they work together.
the only single driver system that ever really did that much for me, that i really thought was better than what i have in my own house, was that mega-buck feastrex/nessie system @ rmaf in 2008.
but stupid expensive, like $69k for just the speakers, and the rest of the system was all one-off stuff as well... and yeah, it fell apart on complex material, was rolled off on the top and bottom octaves, would get loud, but didn't have very good dynamics... it was all a "keep it within the envelope" thing to my ears.
but so nice if in that envelope...
i thought it would be just the thing for low level, late night stuff.
i hoped the 138s might get 90% if the way there, for, ok, less than 10% of the cost.
for an "all out" system, i haven't heard anything close to a good five-way horn system.
so that's what i'm building.
everything else seems like a waste of time & money to me @ this point.
as to inclinedplane's org. question, i guess it depends on what you plan to do with them, and what you expect from them. reading enough of this thread would give one a pretty good idea of what to expect though, no?
robert, i'll guess a simpler x-over with the x3-06 soft dome then the ribbon and dispersion. if any driver can keep up with a ribbon it sounds like the little 5" 138 can??
inclinedplane, have you pulled the trigger or are you looking at other options?
inclinedplane, have you pulled the trigger or are you looking at other options?
mp9,
i looked it up, had it backwards on what i thought/remembered the x-over being;
the 138 is 1st order, a .6 foil inductor.
the point the tweeter & 138 lines cross on paper 8s @ ~4500 Hz.
it tilts down ~2dB from 150 to past 25kHz, and other than that varies ~ +-1dB. very smooth actually.
-and-
the big problem i've had with this speaker, the "muffled" sound, that i thought was coming from the box...
I brought them inside yesterday, for one more listen to before scrapping the BVR boxes.
Sounded same as I had remembered; not as detailed as the 108 or 166esrs.
My wife said she thought it was that "cone horn thing" on top and bottom, why don't you try just plugging it up?"
I told her I had already tried different amounts of felt, and wool stuffing, didn't help.
she just got some pillows & stuffed them in the "vents."
much better...
ok... so i kinda sealed off the vent openings, so they're not feeding into the big vent/horns (now more like a too large sealed box, instead of a bass reflex w/ expanding vent).
even better...
stuck a front horn (from jbl paragon, flat elliptical; ribbon can work above) in front of the driver; (using the 138 to drive the horn, with sealed back chamber, but no "tuning" involved).
nice. actually listenable, like this sounds comparable to the others, a little more bite on the bow on the cello strings than the 108s, more, cleaner highs than either the 108s or 166s, and good integration, more like the swans than the austins, where you can hear the highs seperate from the lows (front seperate from the back, delayed wave).
i looked it up, had it backwards on what i thought/remembered the x-over being;
the 138 is 1st order, a .6 foil inductor.
the point the tweeter & 138 lines cross on paper 8s @ ~4500 Hz.
it tilts down ~2dB from 150 to past 25kHz, and other than that varies ~ +-1dB. very smooth actually.
-and-
the big problem i've had with this speaker, the "muffled" sound, that i thought was coming from the box...
I brought them inside yesterday, for one more listen to before scrapping the BVR boxes.
Sounded same as I had remembered; not as detailed as the 108 or 166esrs.
My wife said she thought it was that "cone horn thing" on top and bottom, why don't you try just plugging it up?"
I told her I had already tried different amounts of felt, and wool stuffing, didn't help.
she just got some pillows & stuffed them in the "vents."
much better...
ok... so i kinda sealed off the vent openings, so they're not feeding into the big vent/horns (now more like a too large sealed box, instead of a bass reflex w/ expanding vent).
even better...
stuck a front horn (from jbl paragon, flat elliptical; ribbon can work above) in front of the driver; (using the 138 to drive the horn, with sealed back chamber, but no "tuning" involved).
nice. actually listenable, like this sounds comparable to the others, a little more bite on the bow on the cello strings than the 108s, more, cleaner highs than either the 108s or 166s, and good integration, more like the swans than the austins, where you can hear the highs seperate from the lows (front seperate from the back, delayed wave).
are you describing the second pic in the following link?
jbl paragon - Google Images
now, with the front horn in place are you finding less of a need to use the ribbon tweeter?
would seem as though you've tamed the little bugger, do you plan on developing a new front/back horn for it? lmk if you're on to something and i should grab a pair before they sell out.
i'm not opposed to building a few prototypes if they're a manageable size, not so thrilled about having to buy a ribbon tweeter too unless it's absoltly needed for a balanced fq.resp across the bw.
jbl paragon - Google Images
now, with the front horn in place are you finding less of a need to use the ribbon tweeter?
would seem as though you've tamed the little bugger, do you plan on developing a new front/back horn for it? lmk if you're on to something and i should grab a pair before they sell out.
i'm not opposed to building a few prototypes if they're a manageable size, not so thrilled about having to buy a ribbon tweeter too unless it's absoltly needed for a balanced fq.resp across the bw.
no, i'm talking about the paragon in all the other pictures on that page.
the front horn by itself wouldn't take away the two sharp 10dB peaks, just (most of) the rising freq response, and the "muffled," unclear sound.
the ribbon and filter does, and keeps the freq resp to ~ +- 1.5 dB from ~150Hz to over 25kHz, including the 2dB falling freq response as measured in the same 150 - 25kHz.
front horns are narrow band devices though, and would need something above, and below. would work for from, say, 200 - 4000 though, @ ~ 98dB, just need to design around it.
i'm already too deep working on a five-way system, using compression drivers.
i'm not saying i've "tamed" the bugger, and sure don't plan on spending the time to develop a front/back horn for anything!
don't think i'm building anymore blhs, in fact, i'm giving my 166 austins away.
and just adding the front horn raises sensitivity in that mid-band, so the balance is way off-- that ribbon is no longer matched, and as mentioned, something would be needed for the bass.
no, i just mentioned the "closing off the BVR and adding a horn" experiment to say i'm not blaming the driver, just the way i tried using it.
i still think the way to go is with one of the two provided plans, the nessie style, (which kloss used, with the same tweeter i did and liked), or the swan style.
that's all i'm going to do.
the front horn by itself wouldn't take away the two sharp 10dB peaks, just (most of) the rising freq response, and the "muffled," unclear sound.
the ribbon and filter does, and keeps the freq resp to ~ +- 1.5 dB from ~150Hz to over 25kHz, including the 2dB falling freq response as measured in the same 150 - 25kHz.
front horns are narrow band devices though, and would need something above, and below. would work for from, say, 200 - 4000 though, @ ~ 98dB, just need to design around it.
i'm already too deep working on a five-way system, using compression drivers.
i'm not saying i've "tamed" the bugger, and sure don't plan on spending the time to develop a front/back horn for anything!
don't think i'm building anymore blhs, in fact, i'm giving my 166 austins away.
and just adding the front horn raises sensitivity in that mid-band, so the balance is way off-- that ribbon is no longer matched, and as mentioned, something would be needed for the bass.
no, i just mentioned the "closing off the BVR and adding a horn" experiment to say i'm not blaming the driver, just the way i tried using it.
i still think the way to go is with one of the two provided plans, the nessie style, (which kloss used, with the same tweeter i did and liked), or the swan style.
that's all i'm going to do.
gotcha on that. i guess i'm best off skipping those, thanks. i'll look for another alternative for my bedroom system. or i could do a A166 and find something else to alternate between the den and living room.
i'm not quite ready for a compression driver multi-way horm system. good luck with yours, sounds like it's going to be good sounding and fun listening to.
i'm not quite ready for a compression driver multi-way horm system. good luck with yours, sounds like it's going to be good sounding and fun listening to.
i actually like these better than the A166s.
that's why i'm getting rid of the A166s, building nessies (probably) or swans for secondary system.
that's why i'm getting rid of the A166s, building nessies (probably) or swans for secondary system.
oh, i missed that thanks for clearing that up. so then, you're implying if i x to the ribbon in a nessie (not liking the swan, looks goofy), it may be worth doing? if so i'll have to think about it, i can use something for the bedroom.
i haven't heard the 138 in a nessie, but i sure did like the nessie with the 5" feastrex.
the ribbon and filter cleared up all the peaks, and made the 138 very nice on the top, smoother, and more extended than a 108ES-RII, and a lot more so than a 166ES-R.
Of the "fostex farm," i'm keeping the 108 super swan (wife won't let me get rid of it, it's her favorite, actually a very coherent, and all-around very musical speaker), am giving the A166s to rbond3, and will build a pair of nessies out of some spruce that has been rough cut and drying for the past year.
i had my doubts about the 138s mid-range until yesterday, now i think the problem was just in the BVR box. i'm hoping the nessie will clean it up, and give decent bass...
if not, put a field coil magnet on, and see how that sounds...
i spent a year going over a design w/ dave slagle, they were on the lowthers @ rmaf this year, made quite a difference.
the ribbon and filter cleared up all the peaks, and made the 138 very nice on the top, smoother, and more extended than a 108ES-RII, and a lot more so than a 166ES-R.
Of the "fostex farm," i'm keeping the 108 super swan (wife won't let me get rid of it, it's her favorite, actually a very coherent, and all-around very musical speaker), am giving the A166s to rbond3, and will build a pair of nessies out of some spruce that has been rough cut and drying for the past year.
i had my doubts about the 138s mid-range until yesterday, now i think the problem was just in the BVR box. i'm hoping the nessie will clean it up, and give decent bass...
if not, put a field coil magnet on, and see how that sounds...
i spent a year going over a design w/ dave slagle, they were on the lowthers @ rmaf this year, made quite a difference.
now you've got me thinking:
did the overall sensitivity drop with the xover and correction network?
how is the impedance Ω/phase, any sharp Ω peaks?
is the combination still a easy load for a 3watt set amp?
and definitaly, post progress reports on this one.
did the overall sensitivity drop with the xover and correction network?
how is the impedance Ω/phase, any sharp Ω peaks?
is the combination still a easy load for a 3watt set amp?
and definitaly, post progress reports on this one.
one other thing, any predictable advantage using the Raven point source tweeter in place of the lcy 110 or 130?
Raven
LCY Ribbon Tweeters -- Madisound Speaker Components, Inc.
or to get exotic, the ss d3004/6640-00 Beryllium dome -
www.madisound.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=8713
Raven
LCY Ribbon Tweeters -- Madisound Speaker Components, Inc.
or to get exotic, the ss d3004/6640-00 Beryllium dome -
www.madisound.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=8713
Last edited:
sensitivity is where it was @ 150 Hz.
but instead of staying flat to ~11k, then going up and down with two 10 dB peaks, then dropping off another ~12dB, to ~80dB or so,
it has a slow ~2dB tilt; or as madisound measured it; ~94dB @ 150Hz, and ~92dB @ 25kHz. the worst dip is 1dB below that, and is right where the drivers cross, which keeps it seamless.
you can't hear them cross, (or at least i can't, nor can anyone who's listened to them) or the "voice" change.
the impedance peak @ the 138 fs is still there, just the same, and another, much lesser one @ 2500Hz.
I use them w/ 2 watt or less set amps.
project will be shelved until horns are up.
horns to turn, compression drivers to prototype; may take a while.
but instead of staying flat to ~11k, then going up and down with two 10 dB peaks, then dropping off another ~12dB, to ~80dB or so,
it has a slow ~2dB tilt; or as madisound measured it; ~94dB @ 150Hz, and ~92dB @ 25kHz. the worst dip is 1dB below that, and is right where the drivers cross, which keeps it seamless.
you can't hear them cross, (or at least i can't, nor can anyone who's listened to them) or the "voice" change.
the impedance peak @ the 138 fs is still there, just the same, and another, much lesser one @ 2500Hz.
I use them w/ 2 watt or less set amps.
project will be shelved until horns are up.
horns to turn, compression drivers to prototype; may take a while.
man, if i were going to spend that much money, i think i'd go with:
Fostex T900A Top Mount Horn Super Tweeter from Madisound
those are really sweet sounding, and a lot higher sensitivity, enough to use w/ a flh.
good enough to warrent upgrading the base driver...
i heard those field coil lowthers in a pair of 160Hz lecleach FLH horns, sitting on klipsh cornerhorns for bass, in two different locations.
with less than one watt, they were the sweetest sounding cone driver speakers i've ever heard.
a 138 in a lecleach, with that fostex tweeter would be a sweet start, then with a pair of field coil lowthers in real horns...
Eleven Horns - for horn junkies, by horn junkies....
WAY better than a nessie, absolutly no comparison...
No mp9, I don't think I will buy them after reading Serenechaos' short review. He smoothed up the issues by using filters and a tweet; something I'm not willing to do. If I'm going to pay $900 (or even now $500) they better do everything well. I found the sound of the FE series drivers completely unacceptable and so was suspicious of this 5" driver. I almost bought it on looks alone - hot damn it's sexy!! It dethrones the 200A as the best looking driver of all time imo heh heh. But I need more.
You know what I really want? The F200A, 'Bud Purvined' AND with a whizzer and phase plug. Then I'll shut up for good.😀
You know what I really want? The F200A, 'Bud Purvined' AND with a whizzer and phase plug. Then I'll shut up for good.😀
the 5" 138 or a 6" DX55,65, A55 lowther in a le clea'h would be more managable for me then a 8". i'd prefer to not have to add a (super)tweeter at first, i guess that's not a option using the 138 with the mandatory (for us), correction network.
getting ahead of myself but i looked at the le'cleach links, still have trouble figuring out how to model the horn. do you have the time to help with a 140hz le'cleac'h throat length and diameter, flare profile, mouth diameter and x-over/correction network if i give it a try?
btw, the lowther field coil seems like a must have, would make me forget about the other ideas, just that i cant swing it now.
getting ahead of myself but i looked at the le'cleach links, still have trouble figuring out how to model the horn. do you have the time to help with a 140hz le'cleac'h throat length and diameter, flare profile, mouth diameter and x-over/correction network if i give it a try?
btw, the lowther field coil seems like a must have, would make me forget about the other ideas, just that i cant swing it now.
i know his summations are great and yes that chunk of alnico and contoured cone look very nice. i was put off by the foam udr's at $900, not so much at $500 on this one. it's too bad about the rest but then they wouldn't be -50%.
and don't shut up after you get those hotrodded f200a's, some of us are in need of a little inspiration.
Whizzer cone on a F200A - how exactly does that happen?
since we're talking about fantasy drivers, how about a field coil FF85K? - now that would make for an interesting mid/tweeter
then what about the 320 Hz le cleac'h?
that's good to 18k without a tweeter.
smaller & super simple.
-and- what's even easier, and cost less is to just use a compression driver, a little radian or something; now you're out of those inefficient cone drivers and up around 109dB.
yeah, i've spent countless hours running them, but it's already done for those two; on the above posted link Eleven Horns - for horn junkies, by horn junkies....
the field coils did seem to solve a lot of lowther problems.
listening to them a/b there was quite a difference, and it was commented on by many who were familiar with lowthers--the spiky top end cleaned up, much smoother, warmer. and the big motors give even smaller drivers dynamics.
I dunno about that whizzered f200a; reviews on dotted f200a are mixed if you get off this forum, one more discerning individual called them the worst drivers he'd had in his home, and sold them after trying them for a while in different ways/amps.
yeah, you could try making a whizzer & phase plug, might be better than what that metal dustcap is doing.
i'm guessing that dustcap is a lot of the problem w/ the 138, i just wasn't willing to spend time messing w/ it.
spent too much time working on the lowther field coil conversion thing, seemed more worth the time & effort...
and it was, we all learned enough about field coils that the built from scratch field coil compression driver project went a lot quicker.
field coil FF85K--that would be easy enough, same as the other conversions being worked on now. can you get the baskets separate, or have to end up w/ a bunch of refrigerator magnets?
i know it's cool to build something for the lower price point, and for different markets, just because people like them, but in my mind it begs the question of why...
why not just use a compression driver and be done with it...
i don't know enough about compression drivers to feel confident with it. haven't listened to that type of system either. every flh i've heard had dome tweeters or cone drivers.
i'm also uncertain of the listening distances needed for them to integrate or how to avoid gapes between hf & lf drivers. i had a jbl biradial front horn/1.25" soft dome between two midbass drivers in a d'appolito configuration. voice was very nice but their was a suckout around xover which wasn't too bad but there nevertheless. if i had a plan it would be one thing but i don't so maybe a project to look into at a later date but thanks.
i'm also uncertain of the listening distances needed for them to integrate or how to avoid gapes between hf & lf drivers. i had a jbl biradial front horn/1.25" soft dome between two midbass drivers in a d'appolito configuration. voice was very nice but their was a suckout around xover which wasn't too bad but there nevertheless. if i had a plan it would be one thing but i don't so maybe a project to look into at a later date but thanks.