Fostex ~ ping planet10

otto88

Member
2007-12-05 10:39 am
Hi,
Over the range 1 – 10 kHz (ie upper mids, & treble less the less part I cant hear), which of the current Fostexs (or other for similar $) would you say is best?

I want to get 100 dB so that rules out the FE103 (89 dB + continuous power only 5 watts).
Thanks
 
otto88 said:
Over the range 1 – 10 kHz (ie upper mids, & treble less the less part I cant hear), which of the current Fostexs (or other for similar $) would you say is best?

Ignoring below, an EnABLed FF85K might well be the leading candidate.

I want to get 100 dB so that rules out the FE103 (89 dB + continuous power only 5 watts).

I hope you are not talking continuous levels. FE103 good for ~95 continuous, 105 peaks.

FE126 is probably the best compromise for that range, plus as loud as you'd like... the peaky bits need dealing with.

Do keep in mind that i never bother with stock drivers (except to use them to show how much potential there is in these beauties.

dave
 
Hi there, unless you want to spend a lot and get the FE-168EZ's (AU$240 each), the FE-167e (shielded driver) or FE-166e's have a good rep (both are AU$ 100 per driver). Both are 94db/w(m) with continuous power rated at 22 watts (peak 65). Fostex puts up box plans on there website as well which is rather handy.
Hope that helps, Good luck.
 

otto88

Member
2007-12-05 10:39 am
No, not talking continuous levels.
~95 continuous, 105 peaks would be fine. Does the FF85K have the same capability?

I haven't looked closely at Fostex power until lately. iirc the 103 has similar power ratings & sensitivity.
The FF85K specs say sensitivity of 88 dB, but the FR graph show that drops to 85 in the midrange.

Add 10 watts 'music power' to 85 gives about 94 dB.
Add 5 watts 'rated input'? to 85 gives about 91 dB.

Maybe I'm missing something (Fostex terms &/ or ratings are conservative?), but how do they achieve 95 continuous
Does the 103 sound better 1 - 10 kHz?

Thanks
 
otto88 said:
Add 10 watts 'music power' to 85 gives about 94 dB.
Add 5 watts 'rated input'? to 85 gives about 91 dB.

Add 4W to 85 dB you get + 6 dB = 91 dB
Add 10W to 85 dB you get +1- dB = 95 dB

Actually my max est with the FE103 should be ~101 dB (ie 16w gives 12 dB)

FE127e is 91 dB 15W cont, 45W peak = ~103 dB / 108 dB

FE126e is 93 dB 15W cont, 45W peak = ~105 dB / 110 dB

dave
 

otto88

Member
2007-12-05 10:39 am
sm

fyi ‘conventional’ drivers on the shortlist are

- the Seas 27TBFCG (Zaph’s favorite tweeter, Fs 550 Hz, can go to ~1450 Hz with a 4th order, $US 35)
- Peerless 810921 (“HDS”, Fs 600 Hz,$US 60)
- the Scan Speak 39 mm 3800 (Fs 450 Hz, can probably go to ~800/900 Hz with a 4th order) $US 145 probably only *if I could get a good deal

I recall very good wraps on the 166, the price & output are right, but wonder if the good sound/ $ is more for use as full rangers, down to ~100 Hz.
It seems for > 1 kHz, smaller drivers makes more sense?

Thanks
 
Otto,

You are typing with high ASCII keys and it is making it hard for anyone not using the same computer platform as you to read your posts.

dave
 

Attachments

  • otto-post.gif
    otto-post.gif
    8 KB · Views: 759
otto88 said:
drivers on the shortlist
It seems for > 1 kHz, smaller drivers makes more sense?

Over time i have grown to dilike domes... the FF85k struck me as good enuff to give some seriously expensive dome tweeters a real run for the money, and with an Fs of ~125 Hz makes XO point pretty flexible... the Mark Audio J6 and the 50mm Jordan are likely up there too.

dave
 

otto88

Member
2007-12-05 10:39 am
Dave,

Sorry about the ASCII asterisks > gaelic (used not to happen(?))


If all of the FF85k/ FE103/ FE126e/ FE127e, Mark Audio J6, and 50 mm Jordan (any JX53 left?) will handle 100 dB peaks (not for extended sessions), which would you go for over 1 - 10 kHz?

Thanks
:bigeyes:
 
otto88 said:
f all of the FF85k/ FE103/ FE126e/ FE127e, Mark Audio J6, and 50 mm Jordan (any JX53 left?) will handle 100 dB peaks (not for extended sessions), which would you go for over 1 - 10 kHz?

I've not heard the Mark Audio (uses tooling they made to make Jordans before the Swedes funded Ted's retirement) or the Jordans. I'd go for the FF85 (do keep in mind all my opinions are based on treated drivers). The rated power handling & level capability is for FR use -- it has to go up considerably if you XO them at 1k.

dave
 
planet10 said:


I've not heard the Mark Audio (uses tooling they made to make Jordans before the Swedes funded Ted's retirement) or the Jordans. I'd go for the FF85 (do keep in mind all my opinions are based on treated drivers). The rated power handling & level capability is for FR use -- it has to go up considerably if you XO them at 1k.

dave


Dave's observations on the FF85K(eN) are based on a brief listen on temporary, tiny OB's, (drivers rear mounted on 1/2" MDF and chamfered on the front side)

No bass at all of course, but stunningly clear and dynamic mids to top, and quite decent soundstage as well. My impression so far, from more extensive listening, is that they do such a nice job on vocals (even male - Kevin Mahogany/Jim Byrnes/Union Station) that it would be a shame to XO them anywhere between 200 and 6000.

Frankly, with my middle-aged hearing loss, tweeters would seem pointless- they certainly give nothing up to the FE126 in that regard. The big question would be how low to XO them, i.e. whether single "sub" or dual woofers. It's probably no surprise that we're playing around with that at present, but nothing concrete to announce.

They've been so much fun that I haven't even dug out the SPL meter, but if I was to hazard a guess as to the levels at which I've been listening, it would be less than 90dB peaks.

95dB continuous at the listening position is pretty freeking loud, and as Scott notes, guarantees accelerated hearing damage - ask any industrial audiologist.