Now with these Vampyr's, can they be designed into a medium-size bookshelf style loudspeaker? IOW, can the depth of them be increased, the width increased and the height decreased?
The reason I ask is because with the current design, they put the driver's way too low at 28.75". That's not much higher than my knees! 😱
It looks like the internal area of the Vampyr is right at 0.5cf, which is exactly what my cardboard enclosures are as well. I imagine the vent area and mouth size would have to be recalculated to function properly as planned in the original Vampyr.
I know I could go with the Fonken, but I would like to be different if possible.
So what do you all think?
The reason I ask is because with the current design, they put the driver's way too low at 28.75". That's not much higher than my knees! 😱
It looks like the internal area of the Vampyr is right at 0.5cf, which is exactly what my cardboard enclosures are as well. I imagine the vent area and mouth size would have to be recalculated to function properly as planned in the original Vampyr.
I know I could go with the Fonken, but I would like to be different if possible.
So what do you all think?
chops said:
Tilt them back a bit... standard ear height when listening has been measured to be 33-36"
dave
planet10 said:
That's what I've been told for years! LOL
Seriously though, that's where my computer chair puts me. Plus the way my room is laid out, this is about the only way I can go.
chops said:
That is probably where my computer chair puts me too, but i don't use it for listening.
dave
Well, since this is just a secondary system, mainly for experimentation purposes, I'm willing to try "off the wall" techniques just for fun and to learn a few things along the way.
Speaking of experimenting, what if I were wanting to try using a bypass capacitor on these 103's, what size cap should I try? I've been doing research on it, but nowhere can I find anything like a calculator or formula for one. I just want to try it to see what it does exactly.
Any pointers?
Speaking of experimenting, what if I were wanting to try using a bypass capacitor on these 103's, what size cap should I try? I've been doing research on it, but nowhere can I find anything like a calculator or formula for one. I just want to try it to see what it does exactly.
Any pointers?
planet10 said:
You know... When people use BSC on some drivers, it takes away some of the top end sparkle. They then use a bypass cap (also paralleled with the BSC) to help bring out the top end again.
I'm not saying my 103's need this. In fact, they don't. But I have capacitors coming out my ears here and just wanted to try it out to see what happens. That's all. Besides, it would only take about 5 seconds to insert them and it's a completely 100% reversible modification.
No, no RCL traps here. 😉
Scottmoose said:
Thanks Scott. If you would be willing to work out the "retuning" for me sometime, or Dave for that matter, I certainly would appreciate it. As far as I'm aware of, there aren't any double-mouth bookshelf speakers around. So this would still be a fist. 😀
chops said:
It works like an RLC trap when you add a capacitor to it. It goes down, then it comes up again. It attenuates a band effectively. Lighter or heavier Q depends on the resistor, central frequency depends on LC combo. Try it, but be patient, it usually takes a lot of substitutions so to get it right by ear. I attach an example of what such a circuit can do on a speaker in practice.
Attachments
My one brush with fame -- I met Henry Kloss in 1989, during a job interview at Cambridge Soundworks, which at the time was a funky little startup in a loft in Newton, MA. He was inspecting or testing a bunch of cone/coil assemblies for a little 4 or 5 inch driver in his glass-walled office (which was more like a test bench area).
Part of the interview was an audition of their first model (satellites with two subs) and I just wasn't all that thrilled with them. I guess they sensed that, because I did not get the job. 🙂
Part of the interview was an audition of their first model (satellites with two subs) and I just wasn't all that thrilled with them. I guess they sensed that, because I did not get the job. 🙂
salas said:
Actually, the more I listen, the more I feel that I don't need to try it. These little 103's still have plenty of crisp, smooth airiness to them. They're actually quite amazing in that respect. They sound just as good as any tweeter I've ever had or heard, and I've heard them all at one point or another.
One thing I seriously would like to address is a Zobel network to tame that peak at Fs and to flatten the rise in the higher frequencies.
If anyone could give me some input on this, that would be great!
How important is it to be able to turn "toe-in" any of these enclosures? The Spawn, Vampire style would look nifty built into an entertainment center or wall or shelf unit. They could be slid into slots so to speak and still have the ability to be turned or built with some "toe" included. I recall it was mentioned that the "on-axis" performance was noticably better in one enclosure but does this apply to all? I suppose it will.
I know nothing about amps. What amps work the best with the FR enclosures and a FE103 or FE127 ? By best I'm looking at the Frugal angle and bang for buck.
I know nothing about amps. What amps work the best with the FR enclosures and a FE103 or FE127 ? By best I'm looking at the Frugal angle and bang for buck.
901Fixer said:
There are just too many variables (room size/acoustics, listening position, etc) for there to be a simple answer to that one. Be careful about recessing the front baffle / or mouths of any of these designs behind the face of a shelf unit / entertainment center.
"snails or oysters"?
which amp works "best" - groan, here we go again.
Sorry dude, but notwithstanding the plethora of anticipated advice, this is one of those questions to which there is no "correct" answer, other than quite simply, whichever appeals to you.
I presently have six different amplifiers in rotation in 3 different systems, all of which are comprised of FR drivers (Fostex and Hemp Acoustics 4.5, although currently no FE103) . My personal all 'round favorite with any of these speakers is a George Wright 7 WPC 300B design.
However, for great bang for the buck, it's pretty hard to deny the appeal of something like the latest flock of Class T amps - Trends, Kingrex, etc. I just recently installed a Trends in my wife's new bedroom TV system (microFonken/FF85K)
"Honey, I guess all those years of listening has finally caught up with me - those crappy little speakers built in the new LG HD TV are horrible - could you do something about that?"
Depends on how much of a 'hole' in the middle of the sound-stage is considered acceptable.
Assuming no super tweeter is used, the rising on axis response of a typical 'FR' driver requires it be over-toe'd such that the left speaker points ~ at the right listening position and vice versa. For solo seating, having them cross ~ 2 ft in front of your face works well. Of course different drivers have different power (polar) responses, so may not be ideal for all, but a good first approximation to begin fine tuning them.
With a super tweeter (ST), its power response usually dictates toe-in and depending on it and its XO point/slope you may can point the speakers straight ahead and at worst angle only the ST.
WRT amp choices, this is a 'dead horse' subject, i.e. a 'minefield' of personal preferences since we all basically hear the same, yet not so much perceptually, so do a search for a mind numbing amount of opinions from the ridiculous to the sublime.....
From a strictly technical POV, a zero -fb matching impedance SET amp is a synergistic match to 'FR' and compression horn drivers if their specs complement it, so any existing design must account for how much total system output impedance there is, i.e. designs suitable for vanishingly low output impedance (SS) amps yield 'bloated'/'boomy' responses with a typical SET amp. Conversely, a vintage design driven with a SS amp will sound 'thin'/'peaky' if a much higher Qts driver and/or series resistance isn't used.
FWIW, I prefer plenty of the ultra clean power the pioneers of audio would have sold their souls for that a good SS amp provides and burn off some of it with series resistance to get the desired system response because I want to be able to reproduce all that a recording has to offer at vanishingly low distortion without clipping the amp. This also keeps the majority of the signal's dynamic headroom in a Class AB amp's Class A 'sweet spot', i.e. > ~25 dB away from its residual noise? when it's just idling along during much of the signal's reproduction.
As always the usual disclaimers apply.
GM
Assuming no super tweeter is used, the rising on axis response of a typical 'FR' driver requires it be over-toe'd such that the left speaker points ~ at the right listening position and vice versa. For solo seating, having them cross ~ 2 ft in front of your face works well. Of course different drivers have different power (polar) responses, so may not be ideal for all, but a good first approximation to begin fine tuning them.
With a super tweeter (ST), its power response usually dictates toe-in and depending on it and its XO point/slope you may can point the speakers straight ahead and at worst angle only the ST.
WRT amp choices, this is a 'dead horse' subject, i.e. a 'minefield' of personal preferences since we all basically hear the same, yet not so much perceptually, so do a search for a mind numbing amount of opinions from the ridiculous to the sublime.....
From a strictly technical POV, a zero -fb matching impedance SET amp is a synergistic match to 'FR' and compression horn drivers if their specs complement it, so any existing design must account for how much total system output impedance there is, i.e. designs suitable for vanishingly low output impedance (SS) amps yield 'bloated'/'boomy' responses with a typical SET amp. Conversely, a vintage design driven with a SS amp will sound 'thin'/'peaky' if a much higher Qts driver and/or series resistance isn't used.
FWIW, I prefer plenty of the ultra clean power the pioneers of audio would have sold their souls for that a good SS amp provides and burn off some of it with series resistance to get the desired system response because I want to be able to reproduce all that a recording has to offer at vanishingly low distortion without clipping the amp. This also keeps the majority of the signal's dynamic headroom in a Class AB amp's Class A 'sweet spot', i.e. > ~25 dB away from its residual noise? when it's just idling along during much of the signal's reproduction.
As always the usual disclaimers apply.
GM
901Fixer said:
These drivers tend to like amplifiers withy higher output (low damping factor)
In general, most single ended tube amps will fall into this category, and SS amps exemplifed by FirstWatt F1 & F2. My electonics guy is working on some variable transcomnductance amps -- both diskreet & chip amps, that let you dial in output impedance.
If you can build your wom amp, things like the TubeLab simple SE and a few others make it pretty easy top make an affordable SE amp.
dave
I do believe that this is either the second or third time I have mentioned Zobel networks with my FE103E drivers, and every time, it simply gets overlooked and/or ignored.
I don't know if it's done on purpose or not, but it's getting quite bothersome.
Any particular reason why no one wants to comment on Zobel networks?!
I don't know if it's done on purpose or not, but it's getting quite bothersome.
Any particular reason why no one wants to comment on Zobel networks?!
- Status
- Not open for further replies.