I built FH3's, now recommend my next "classic rock" full-ranger

Jump to Latest
T

tlarwa

Member
2008-01-21 10:09 pm
Lake Geneva, WI
  • #1
    I built a pair of Frugel-Horn Mk3's this fall, using MA CHP-70 drivers. I love them. Great for jazz, folk, etc. Now I'd like to build another set of full-rangers, likely with larger drivers, that would be my "classic rock" speakers. I find myself having to be careful to not over-drive the FH3's, and sometimes I want to crank it up more than I'm comfortable with. I like the idea of staying with a full-range design, as I'm no pro builder and have never built a crossover in my life. The simplicity of the full-range design suits me fine right now.

    Any suggestions? For informational purposes, they will be used on a 12x17 dedicated listening room, and driven by an Audio Analogue Puccini SE integrated amp. Source is vinyl only. I have 8' ceilings. And I have corners to work with ... and size doesn't really matter since its a dedicated space (same with the WAF). Attached is a pic of the equipment end of the room, along with the FH3's.

    Thanks for your input!

    Tom
     
    larryldspkr

    larryldspkr

    Member
    2007-11-22 4:32 am
  • #3
    A step up would be 8 inch TangBand 1772's in a mass loaded transmission line! Good bass able to "rock the house" on a few good watts! Fairly simple construction, great results and not TOO expensive! I have been enjoying mine for a couple years now running a 5 watt KT88 se amp.

    Larry
     
    D

    Dumbledog

    Member
    2012-11-30 1:51 am
    Western Massachusetts
  • #5
    I'm going to vouch for the WiBAQ. They are well suited for rock, since their sensitivity means that you are unlikely to overdrive the driver, and the Betsy K provides plenty of bass. The price is also very low and they are easy to build.
    I listen to many type of rock with the WiBAQ. From heavier very distorted stuff like The Dead Weather to softer more acoustic music like Arcade Fire. The WiBAQs take it in stride.
     
    G

    gafhenderson

    Member
    2012-01-18 8:28 am
  • #8
    12-15 inch coax.

    I honestly can't see past them anymore for music that is mor complex than just say an acoustic or single instrument composition. Anything like complex orchestral music or heavier electronic or rock just sounds rough and strained through a single full ranger. Big coax speakers blow most things out the waste with dynamic range and coherency IMO.
     
    T

    tlarwa

    Member
    2008-01-21 10:09 pm
    Lake Geneva, WI
  • #9
    gafhenderson said:
    12-15 inch coax.

    I honestly can't see past them anymore for music that is mor complex than just say an acoustic or single instrument composition. Anything like complex orchestral music or heavier electronic or rock just sounds rough and strained through a single full ranger. Big coax speakers blow most things out the waste with dynamic range and coherency IMO.
    Click to expand...

    Any specific designs/plans that would not be too difficult to build? I'm not so worried about construction, more about the wiring of the crossover. And cost isn't a major factor, although I'm not interested in Lowther-level prices:)
     
    chris661

    chris661

    Member
    2008-02-26 7:49 pm
    Sheffield
  • #10
    Hmmm...

    IIRC, Eminence has crossovers and cabinet volumes all done for their coaxial units.

    Might be worth a look there.

    Bear in mind, though, that their recommended crossovers will try to balance tweeter power handling. In a home situation, I really wouldn't expect that to become a problem, assuming reasonable use of the tweeter.

    Chris
     
    S

    ssportclay

    Member
    2010-01-16 12:16 pm
  • #11
    Most speakers I have heard over the years that were marketed as rock speakers were dependably pretty bad. I suppose an MTM design with quality drivers would be better than most because they move more air while bass remains tight. One of the micro tower designs that feature a pair of CHR70s in each cabinet could qualify as full range rock speakers. Any other thoughts on this.
     
    T

    tlarwa

    Member
    2008-01-21 10:09 pm
    Lake Geneva, WI
  • #14
    larryldspkr said:
    A step up would be 8 inch TangBand 1772's in a mass loaded transmission line! Good bass able to "rock the house" on a few good watts! Fairly simple construction, great results and not TOO expensive! I have been enjoying mine for a couple years now running a 5 watt KT88 se amp.

    Larry
    Click to expand...

    Larry,

    Can you point me to a link with more info (plans) on the dual 8" Tang Band speaker you're talking about?

    Tom
     
    xrk971

    xrk971

    Member
    Paid Member
    2012-10-20 4:50 am
    Metro DC (Virginia)
    www.etsy.com
  • #15
    You might want to check out Bob Brines' website - he sells plans (and speakers) for the TB 1772 MLTL. They are fully computer designed of course.

    If you haven't seen my thread on 'accidental MLTL design', I have come up (without any modeling, other than a bass reflex calc, so YMMV) a MLTL for the 1772 as: 42 in long x 110 square in cross sectional area with a 4 in dia x 2 in long vent for a fb=50 Hz, mount driver 14 in from top, vent facing direction of your choice near bottom, stuff top 28 in.
     
    Mike B1

    Mike B1

    Member
    2013-03-19 4:16 pm
    Central CA
  • #20
    If you want to rock & roll, I can recommend the Eminence Beta 10CX with a Selenium DT220 screwed into the back of it. It's what I run in the garage.

    3099011175_94dfb066c1_o.jpg


    You get pro sound SPL as well as the point source advantages. I also use a 12" vented sub.

    You can put half a kilowatt into these and get to almost concert level. It Rocks!

    4674991455_a7b38550eb_o.jpg
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Top Bottom