I really need to do a direct comparison yet. I have the feeling that the FF85 has the edge within its bandwidth, but the FF105 is close and seemingly without the artifacts that get in the way of the FF125. What amazed me is how much bass they do in Vampyr-V. For FR use without woofer, FF105 is better all round. If you don't need the bass or have woofers FF85.
dave
Hmm, well I think maybe I should get a pair of those FF105 KANSPEA for starters. It's a fast start, fairly cheap, people like mods for commercial products, and I could probably shoehorn an Alpair 6p into those cabinets, too (could order one at the same time either way).
The KANSPEA is such a tiny starting volume for a ported box but I guess it could work if you don't mind the high tuning. Personally, in a volume that small, I'd consider it as a starting point for going sealed (reducing the internal volume as needed).
I estimate the net internal volume of 3.2 litre for the larger enclosure.
With the FE103En i would set tuning to 105 Hz (25 mm D x 24mm long). Given my rule about zero crossings of the responses 1st derivative this is about optimum for this driver. F3 100 Hz, F10 80 Hz.
With the FF105En i would set tuning to 76 Hz (25 mm D x 64mm long). F3 89 Hz, F10 60 Hz. I would choose 5.5 litre for an optimum (large) box.
dave
With the FE103En i would set tuning to 105 Hz (25 mm D x 24mm long). Given my rule about zero crossings of the responses 1st derivative this is about optimum for this driver. F3 100 Hz, F10 80 Hz.
With the FF105En i would set tuning to 76 Hz (25 mm D x 64mm long). F3 89 Hz, F10 60 Hz. I would choose 5.5 litre for an optimum (large) box.
dave
Spec. sheet says 3.6 liters, but guys, the pair of boxes is $26, so even just as something to do some measuring with...
I missed that (a bit hard to find). That would mean that the material thickness is less than the 12mm i used for getting 3.3 litre (less 0.1 for driver volume). 3.6 liter would mean 9.5mm thick chipboard for the box.
dave
Fostex made a website for KANSPEA that I clicked to from madisound and it was on there, lessee... KANSPEA | DIY Speaker by FOSTEX
9mm particle board. Nothin' but the best.
9mm particle board. Nothin' but the best.
These sure look like pretty different flavors, eh? Well, actually I guess not that different the more I look at them.
Last edited:
Oh wait, I had forgetten most of the MA folks recommended the 7A in here. Agreed? I think I'll order some stuff in the morning.
On the NY DIY which I host we haven't had many full range speakers but usually they score the lowest in the price category compare to the 2-way or 3-way systems. The scoring is done by 20 or so people on a variety of subjective parameters. If anyone wants to bring in the system and either challenge an existing design or just present it, it's fine by me. I could even set up a blind listening/evaluation session.
A proposal for another driver candidate: the Tang Band W3-1797S flat aluminium sandwich cone. It's a very unique little driver that people may not be widely familiar with, but I believe it meets the other criteria for the experiment, and have also wondered how it may or may not benefit from a separate HF unit. It has been used and praised in this Swiss boutique manufacturer's design.
Last edited:
Looks like 300-3000Hz is the sweet spot for that driver. Well, or maybe to be approx. inaudible by 200 and 3000Hz would be a better way to say it.
The unit does indeed extend up into 20khz range and in an appropriate enclosure, down much further than 300Hz. Did you glance at all three links in my post above?
Yep, all response, impedance, CSD, and distortion graphs in the links show the best behavior in the range I mentioned.
Indeed. I used the W4-1798S in a pair of MTM's, and they are still one of the most open sounding designs I've built.
Later,
Wolf
While I have heard only 5 fullrange designs ( backloaded horns and one TQML ) using FE208EZ, FE208 ( the whizzler Sigma ), FE127en, Visaton FRS8 and a locally produced driver in Bulgaria, my own impressions are that a well designed 2-way sounds better. Of course, my experience with full range drivers can be regarded as limited and perhaps there are better designs utilizing such loudspeakers. The worst of them all were back-loaded horns where the lenght was over a meter.
W3-1797S - this one has 1mm of excursion only, you sure it would fit into a 2-way at 200Hz for even moderate listening levels? Its 85db 1W/m only too. I did model the FE108ES for such application, crossed to a 18cm woofer, for 12db slope and 30W of power at 89db base system sensitivity it required a crossover of above 800Hz if I remember correctly.
W3-1797S - this one has 1mm of excursion only, you sure it would fit into a 2-way at 200Hz for even moderate listening levels? Its 85db 1W/m only too. I did model the FE108ES for such application, crossed to a 18cm woofer, for 12db slope and 30W of power at 89db base system sensitivity it required a crossover of above 800Hz if I remember correctly.
Hello, please note I said "approximately inaudibly by", which is much different than a 12dB/octave xover point.
Despite falling under the heading of "Midrange" at Parts-Express, it's really not limited to that, and the Tang Band info sheet lists it as "Midrange/ Full-range". It excels well up into 20kHz with good detail, and is quite usable below typical midrange limits, despite the claimed 1mm xmax (which certainly appears incorrect when watching the driver – but bear in mind this is an entirely typical pistonic driver, and seems to function more like a BMR). It's also appearing in this commercial satellite speaker, not as a midrange unit. I do hope you'll consider it a contender for this experiment, as it is one of the most unique and capable 3" drivers on the market.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.