First Fullrange suggestions.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#143
I thought that the FF225WK's were very nice sounding drivers. IMO they do need a tweeter. I sold these demo's. Sort of wish I had them back, but I can only store so many speakers. The tweets are FT17H's.

B18-F225.jpg


Bob
 
#146
I have used Eminence APT-80 horn tweeters ($30 each) with the FF225wk (see my Pappa's TL thread). And I took Bob's advise and pointed the tweeters into the corner rather than at the listener. Just a 1 uf cap on the tweeter. I think it sounds very good!

Cheers, Jim
 
#150
LeMoNFuZzY said:
Very interesting! any of you guys have experience using the FF225WK in 'home' similar or same as the FHXL? Sounds promising with a tweeter combo later on?
Click to expand...


It is more suited for classic bass reflex or mltl boxes.
But, you will want a tweeter from the beginning, the sound while smooth and musical is really too dark without it !
The 165wk could be borderline used without a tweeter, though obviously with less bass and in my opinion/taste it lacks some freshness in the highs when used on its own.

I once found this interesting and feasible dbr design for the ff225wk on a japanese forum. Very tempting. Add a tweeter, experiment with its crossover (ft17h with 1uF as simple filter was mentioned) and you will have a pseudo fr box with enough bass.

An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
 
Last edited:
#151
Actually the 225 will do fine in a back horn (assuming the horn is designed for it of course 😉 ), there's nothing about it that will cause any issues on that score. With that said, Fostex were indeed thinking of simpler types of enclosure for the wk series.

For what it's worth, my friend Steve (225s in Metronomes) is currently finding the small peak at 3KHz slightly problematic, although in his case, it seems to be aggravating his tinnitus etc., and in general, most find it a reasonably smooth unit, albeit needing a tweeter. The 165 is similar, as noted above. Some are happy without HF support, so YMMV on that score. For widebanders in the higher efficiency category, they're both pretty decent as far as bass performance is concerned, and flexible when it comes to working with them, so plenty of options.
 
#152
I think the FF225WK struck a good balance of sensitivity and bass for not too large enclosures - within reason of course. I initially played it without a super tweeter, but it was too dull save for very specific music genres. FWIW I hear decent to 16-17kHz. When used in a small Karlson (admittedly a certain deviation from what most folks will use it in), I had success with a vintage Foster phenolic dome horn with a 1µF cap IIRC, which I found to blend better than FT17H. I also used the 225 as a midbass-midrange, with passive crossover to a small 3kHz round waveguide with compression driver, as well as 700Hz tractrix horn actively crossed lower, ~900Hz, but that was mostly to test the horn.

The plan shown above seems to be a Fostex-style DBR, but I'd go for a smoother bass kneepoint than shown in the simulation. A DCR might be good to, but I have to wonder how much better, if at all, it is versus a standard reflex of same Vb/Fb. Both schemes will reduce excursion a bit in the midbass region, but that does not take away the LF excursion limit, so might not have that much benefit. That being said, my only experience with these enclosures is a DCR for a 4" TB driver, which works quite well.

FWIW, measurement of my two FF225WK with LIMP:

Loudspeaker parameters:

Fs = 48.04 Hz
Re = 6.50 ohms[dc]
Le = 76.49 uH
L2 = 792.85 uH
R2 = 4.75 ohms
Qt = 0.42
Qes = 0.49
Qms = 3.22
Mms = 14.80 grams
Rms = 1.497692 kg/s
Cms = 0.000736 m/N
Vas = 50.10 liters
Sd= 220.09 cm^2
Bl = 8.032742 Tm
ETA = 1.19 %
Lp(2.83V/1m) = 93.78 dB

Added Mass Method:
Added mass = 14.00 grams
Diameter= 16.74 cm

****************

Loudspeaker parameters:

Fs = 50.05 Hz
Re = 6.50 ohms[dc]
Le = 78.61 uH
L2 = 813.23 uH
R2 = 4.73 ohms
Qt = 0.44
Qes = 0.50
Qms = 3.56
Mms = 14.82 grams
Rms = 1.414117 kg/s
Cms = 0.000675 m/N
Vas = 45.89 liters
Sd= 220.09 cm^2
Bl = 8.078177 Tm
ETA = 1.21 %
Lp(2.83V/1m) = 93.82 dB

Added Mass Method:
Added mass = 14.00 grams
Diameter= 16.74 cm

FF225WK.PNG
 
Last edited:
#153
Thanks! WRT horn loading, its mass corner dictates a large throat [St], ergo a much larger mouth [Sm] to get down to Fs, so done right it needs a proper corner to get enough [Sm] with a short horn [semi-reasonable net bulk by this forum's standards]; otherwise a FHXL or other BVR out in the open would need to be huge to load down to the driver's Fs, probably making a tall, wall/ceiling loaded BIB the best overall horn compromise.

GM
 
#154
Since DBR / DCR was brought-up, I'll post this link to a cool online box calculator again:

Advanced Speaker Box Calculator

It can do most any type of bandpass box, DCR and Fostex-style DBR. Hornresp can do the latter as well, but not the former.

My above T/S parameters for FF225WK shows a bit higher Q and Fs than factory, but does not really invalidate alignments produced using the Fostex numbers. My data results in a bit of a bigger box. Others measurements may come up different yet, just the reality of it. 🙂 FWIW, my data is ballpark to Bob Brines' :

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/191815-just-got-pair-ff225wks.html#post2624602
 
Last edited:
#155
ra7 said:
No, I have not heard the Alp10. I owned A12s once and still own A6s. I didn't hear what the fuss is about. They have problems, just like other full range drivers. And they are quite pricey and plasticky. You make correct points about the Vifa needing help down below. I suggested adding subs. You can never really get satisfactory bass out of full range drivers anyway. Doppler distortion also kicks in at some point, but it is likely not a big factor.

My point is, there is no need to hear the drivers. Given all the research, it is easy to determine what can sound good and what will not. I like the fact that I don't have to subscribe to Stereophile to know what something is going to sound like. I don't have to listen to Dave's opinion, or Scott's. I can judge for myself. Just show me the measurements and I can tell if I am going to like it or not. It is quite liberating. I have tested and verified this in practice. Improve the crossover, it sounds good. Use drivers with fewer resonances, it sounds better. Eliminate response aberrations through EQ, it sounds better. So, what the research shows works in practice. I like the fact that I'm not stumbling in the dark, not knowing what is going to improve the sound, relying on somebody else's personal opinion. Thanks to light shone by Toole, Olive and others, I can see the path.

For the first few years, I tried following others subjective opinions, reading diyaudio, reading the popular audio rags, scouring the internet for information. Everybody has an opinion, everybody has their favorites, but does that lead to better sound? After gaining the knowledge of what actually matters in sound reproduction, things became so much clearer and easy. I can easily add a resonance to give more detail to female voices. Some people might like that. They may like a driver that has that resonance. But the same resonance could make violins sound shrieky. I like to leave those decisions to the mastering engineer. I want to enjoy the art. I don't want to add layers of coloration on top of what the mastering engineer intended for a particular recording.

So, this is a long winded way of saying to LemonFuzzy that gain the knowledge first. Know what matters in audio reproduction. There is nothing magical about the Alpair10 or the Vifa TC9. What makes them sound good or bad is well known, well published and well understood.
Click to expand...

Ra7,
Very eloquently said. I can't agree more. Having a calibrated mic and software like REW or Holimpulse has been the technical liberator. My speakers sound immensely better now than before I had a mic and software to measure.
 
#156
IG81 said:
Since DBR / DCR was brought-up, I'll post this link to a cool online box calculator again:

Advanced Speaker Box Calculator

It can do most any type of bandpass box, DCR and Fostex-style DBR. Hornresp can do the latter as well, but not the former.

My above T/S parameters for FF225WK shows a bit higher Q and Fs than factory, but does not really invalidate alignments produced using the Fostex numbers. My data results in a bit of a bigger box. Others measurements may come up different yet, just the reality of it. 🙂 FWIW, my data is ballpark to Bob Brines' :

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/191815-just-got-pair-ff225wks.html#post2624602
Click to expand...

Based on Don Hill's script, I posted a simple condensed 11 line akabak script of a DCR here to show that it is easy to model a DCR in Akabak:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/subwoofers/259509-new-sub-design-constricted-transflex-simple-build-series-tuned-6th-order-81.html#post4178828

2 lines of code to give the script a name and to define the driver TS params. Remaining 9 lines represent the 9 elements that make up a DCR.
1. Driver front cone and back cone and wiring to amp
2. Chamber 1
3. Radiator for frontside cone
4. Duct from chamber 1 to chamber 2
5. Chamber 2
6. Duct from chamber 1 to outside
7. Duct from chamber 2 to outside
8. Radiator for duct 1
9. Radiator for duct 2

That's it. Note that with 4 more elements you can have a TCR. Sims nice and smooth.
 
#157
To LemonFuzzy :

I think you've been given good advice on the Frugelhorn XL with Alpair 10. I have two different builds under my belt using Alpair 7s, one the Pensil, the other an open baffle. They're both great. My reference loudspeakers are Quad ESL 57s, pretty much one of the best ever, and the Mark Audio drivers acquit themselves extremely well by comparison.

I'm waiting to read more as your build progresses and particularly on your experience having the boxes cut commercially.

I'm considering building a pair myself here in NZ.

It would be nice if this thread could settle down into topic now as too much has been said that detracts from the intended topic.
 
#159
gazzagazza said:
To LemonFuzzy :

I think you've been given good advice on the Frugelhorn XL with Alpair 10. I have two different builds under my belt using Alpair 7s, one the Pensil, the other an open baffle. They're both great. My reference loudspeakers are Quad ESL 57s, pretty much one of the best ever, and the Mark Audio drivers acquit themselves extremely well by comparison.

I'm waiting to read more as your build progresses and particularly on your experience having the boxes cut commercially.

I'm considering building a pair myself here in NZ.

It would be nice if this thread could settle down into topic now as too much has been said that detracts from the intended topic.
Click to expand...


cheers!
im pritty excited!
The initial quote ive had to get the speakers cut is $85. which considering the time it would save me i think is fair.
As far as materials go, i have settled on ply even if it means going over budget slightly.
I will be staining the front panel a dark coffee but not to dark as to hide the grain completely.
and the sides and top will be beewaxed.
something similar to this look, but ide like it a little more "timber" looking

http://hifipig.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/FRUGEL_1.jpg

ill start a new thread soon, once i have figured out all the details, as i want it to be strictly a build thread not a question thread 😛
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom