I have inherited a pair of extremely nice lowther medallion horn cabinets that were designed for a lowther ex3 (which are dying...well one is pretty much dead), I was wondering is there an affordable drop in replacement? I was thinking either the audio nirvana super 8 (which is close in specs) or the tang band 1772 (which isnt) or the Fostex FE206En. The latter two which people seem to enjoy more.
Do driver specs matter on a BLH? (I know they matter, but is it only bass extension based on horn length?) or is it more a matter of "trying it out"...i know there are lots of threads, and yes I've read most of them...the problem is understanding them...
ps. i have had experience with regular port/box speakers, but not with horns, so i am at a loss...
Do driver specs matter on a BLH? (I know they matter, but is it only bass extension based on horn length?) or is it more a matter of "trying it out"...i know there are lots of threads, and yes I've read most of them...the problem is understanding them...
ps. i have had experience with regular port/box speakers, but not with horns, so i am at a loss...
Hello,
there are so many drivers outside which will work,
the point is the cutout diameter, IMHO you need 190 mm, or an extra baffle.
there are so many drivers outside which will work,
the point is the cutout diameter, IMHO you need 190 mm, or an extra baffle.
so the horn isnt driver specific? it doesnt create any problems/humps in response curves etc when swapping driver? I can create an extra baffle for my cabinet without too many problems, I just didnt know it was that simple
Qt and Vas matter, as they determine how large the compression chamber should be, and, along with Fs, how large the throat should be. I just looked at the T/S for the Lowther and the AN Super 8 and yeah...they're close enough.
I'm sure someone will disagree, but, as you suspect there's a fair amount of "slop" in BLH / driver matching - just compare the differing T/S parms of the various 8" Lowther drivers that are meant for use in the Medallion cabinet.
The higher Qt of the Tang Band driver means you'll get more bass. The problem is, you might get too much.
Honestly, the best way to check is simulate them. Download McBean's Hornresp program and plug in the Lowther, Fostex, and Tang Band parms and see what you get. (The Medallion cab's measurements are on the Lowther website, yes?) It's not the easiest program to figure out, but there are experts here on DIY audio who can answer questions. It's possible the Tang Band might actually be a significant improvment, bass wise.
I'm sure someone will disagree, but, as you suspect there's a fair amount of "slop" in BLH / driver matching - just compare the differing T/S parms of the various 8" Lowther drivers that are meant for use in the Medallion cabinet.
The higher Qt of the Tang Band driver means you'll get more bass. The problem is, you might get too much.
Honestly, the best way to check is simulate them. Download McBean's Hornresp program and plug in the Lowther, Fostex, and Tang Band parms and see what you get. (The Medallion cab's measurements are on the Lowther website, yes?) It's not the easiest program to figure out, but there are experts here on DIY audio who can answer questions. It's possible the Tang Band might actually be a significant improvment, bass wise.
I just noticed that the T/S parms for the Tang Band on Parts Express show a lower - .27 Qt than the website I first googled. So yeah - that should work.
That frequency response, if accurate, is really, really nice. Much less peaky than the Fostex, Audio Nirvana, or Lowther.
That frequency response, if accurate, is really, really nice. Much less peaky than the Fostex, Audio Nirvana, or Lowther.
because it is made by TB, and on a IEC baffle etc.
thumb norm is reso/Qts = more than 120 will work the rest is damping material check.
thumb norm is reso/Qts = more than 120 will work the rest is damping material check.
Have you checked into getting the Lowther reconed? I'm not sure how much it would cost, but you mention a couple of fairly expensive "replacements". If I had a pair of EX3 and giant matching boxes, I'd be highly inclined to keep them going!
Paul
Wild Burro Audio Labs - DIY Full Range Speakers
Paul
Wild Burro Audio Labs - DIY Full Range Speakers
fixing = $600...tangband = 360 or less used, fostex, AN= 180 or less used...i figure i would throw these on ebay and use funds to offset cost of other drivers...i was primarily looking at fostex/an, but while reading a bunch of threads everyone raved about the tangband so i included it as well...
so HM, its just FS/QTS > 120 = driver working in a horn? if so, then it is simple
so HM, its just FS/QTS > 120 = driver working in a horn? if so, then it is simple
The same here: EX3s frying SO easily, handling power 100 watts should read Milliwatts... screeching sound all the way (their trebble are quite crazy and wild) so replacement needed indeed.
In a TQWT, I have tried replacing them with Fostex 207: low medium is excessive, unbalanced indeed: the 207 is known to be better for DBR. So IMHO no 207 for a horn case.
So now am trying Fostex 206E, lots of happy users, I expect it to be successful.
By the way, I have a newly recoiled EX3 for sale.
In a TQWT, I have tried replacing them with Fostex 207: low medium is excessive, unbalanced indeed: the 207 is known to be better for DBR. So IMHO no 207 for a horn case.
So now am trying Fostex 206E, lots of happy users, I expect it to be successful.
By the way, I have a newly recoiled EX3 for sale.
You won't get much joy from a Lowther in that load without a fair ammount of correction -they really aren't designed for boxes like that.
Not so, you just need to ensure you've actually designed your cabinet for the drivers in question. If you don't, then you can hardly blame them for mediocre or poor results.
The 207 is actually quite well suited to back-horn loads (assuming the horn is designed for it); with a ~278Hz -3dB mass corner frequency, which will drop further if a high output impedance amplifier is used, it's 'in the zone' for a reasonably low acoustic XO without requiring a short front horn to support the lower mids.
Last edited:
My measured value was 0.46 & 0.5. Bob Brines has also published his measures.
dave
It's also, bluntly, rubbish.
Rather more than 'a possibility.' There are dozens of designs far superior to that DBR box, if you care to check. Most of the Fostex factory designs are mediocre.
I am well aware of Troels's EX3 remarks.
My point is that if you drop a 207 into a horn designed for another driver & don't get good results, that's not the fault of the 207. Nor does it mean that the 207 is unsuitable for use in back-horns: it simply means you need to design one for it rather than stuffing it into an existing box & hoping for the best.
It merely points out that the 207 is in fact perfectly suitable for a back horn. Since it doesn't require any help above the upper bass region, you don't need to run the horn up too high (which will cause severe phase / group delay issues in the lower midrange), or use a short midrange horn to fill in any gap in the response.
Well, I had the same problem and it costs 110 Euros to have it recoiled. and it stays as fragile as it was. This is the cost of a Fostex 206 which I used to replace the EX3 (much better sound in a BLH !). My experience is: don't hesitate to open the EX3 and recoil yourself with 1/10th of mm thick copper thread. It is quite easy to do and it works very well. The whole coil is 23 rounds of aluminum copper plated wire on the outside part of the paper former and another 23 turns on the inside part. This one can easily be turned also on the outside part of the former. the whole size is then 50 x 0,1 mm = 5 mms. Normally it should be 23 x 2 = 46 but allow for the alu / copper replacement.
You can easily adjust if needed the coil's position within the magnets by removing some paper spacers which are meant to adjust this position. Normally the whole coil should not stick out of the magnet assembly.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.