LOWTHER vs FOSTEX -Opinions please

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#61
Godzilla said:

Godzilla

PS, the best way to appreciate Fostex drivers is not to compare them to Lowther.
Click to expand...

perhaps the same could be said of Lowther to Feastrex? :smash:


But seriously, it would depend of course on the execution, scaling of the design to the room and total system synergy.

I've experienced the extremes of musical involvement at past VSAC shows, with quite different Lowther based systems- the fabulous Rethm2 with a highly modified driver and very interesting enclosure design, driven by DeHavilland electronics, and several huge FLH and bass bin combos- so intolerable for me that I couldn't stay in the room long enough to survey the equipment.

For ease of listening I'd take a tweaked FE167 in an MLTL or Fonken enclosure over any of the latter above that would never fit in any room I have available.
 
#62
100Hz w/ FE168∑

Godzilla.

as you are fully aware, most subs will play well above that. If you crossover say at Fs Xs3 or so, then you should be very safe to use whatever slope you wish, and help clean up the Fostex as a nice side benefit. Going through this with JX92S drivers and powered subs now.

Just 'cause a driver can go to 60Hz, doesn't mean it should be taken there, particularly when a sub is available. We're looking at crossing over the Jordans at 180-200Hz, and they have an Fs of 45Hz, and 8mm p-p excursion.

If you want to hear a "purist" OB, consider the "JE Labs style OB", for use with a single driver. There is magic in that OB, and no crossovers required... some background information is provided as well as to the origins of the dimensions of the baffle (read : Quad electrostatics and Wharfedale SFB3 speakers)

Really the simplest OB I know of that requires nothing else.... (except for maybe a Yamaha B2 to run them...🙂 )
 
#63
Hi Guys,
Sorry to reuse this old topic.

I own a pair of Fostex FE127E Enabled in a Fonken enclosure. You can see my project here: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/88557-new-fonken-pair-born-24.html

I'm currently running in parallel here: The Fonken above and a pair o Lowther PM7A in Medallion cabinets.

What I like in this specific lowthers
- The sound speed
- The medium range
- The medium-low range
- The bass
(maybe I like the horn-based build?)

What I don't like:
- It lacks high frequency extension, therefore lacks clarity and air.

What I like in my fonkens:
- The highs, the air and clarity.

What I don't like:
- Lacks medium-low range
(bass is not a problem since I use a sub)

Now I'm wondering about how to join these good things together?
Some alternatives I see:
- Get rid of lowther and put the fostex in a horn enclosure (spawn of frugel horn? Gabriel Chang?)
- Get rid of fostex and add a tweeter to lowther
- Use lowther and fostex as tweeter.
- Get rid of both and buy a new driver.

What do you think?
I appreciate any comment.

thanks
Highef
 
#66
Hi!

There's normally no comparison between Lowther and Fostex, certainly in the 8 inch size - the Lowther's you're using - are you using the old bullet phase plugs or the new? Are you using the old straight whizzer cone types or the new rolled back types?

The new rolled back types can be more polite on ceramic magnet units - are you using the PM7A or PM7C units? In general the PM7 magnet is so strong that a lack of transparency is difficult to comprehend - they are normally very well behaved if not agreesive rather than retiring in the treble. With PM7A or DX/EX 3 or 4 units the old straight cone whizzer gives a good sound. The old bullets give a wider treble dispersion but the new phase "stabilisers" give a much more focussed sweet spot.

Eminence 15 beta woofers are GREAT!

Best wishes

David P
 
#67
Hi Nelson,
OB is as interesting option, would it improve the sound clarity? Do you know any reference project? Is this suitable? Open Baffles Lowthers

Hi David,
I'm using PM7A, old straight wizzers and the bullet... possibly the old one. How does the new one looks like? Do you believe the new plug would increase the clarity? I made some listening on-axis and it had better clarity but I prefer the 10 or 20 degrees off.

thank you
Highef
 
Last edited:
#70
>>> OB is as interesting option, would it improve the sound clarity? Do you know any reference project? Is this suitable? Open Baffles Lowthers

This morning as i rode in on the train i thought this type of speaker might be the best design... a simple open baffle with the best quality drivers you can afford... Certainly this type of speaker 'gets you there'... and that's where i want to be.
 
#71
Highef said:
I'm using PM7A, old straight wizzers and the bullet... possibly the old one. How does the new one looks like? Do you believe the new plug would increase the clarity? I made some listening on-axis and it had better clarity but I prefer the 10 or 20 degrees off.
Click to expand...

Hi!

Firstly what age range are you? I'm in late middle age and my hearing beyond 15k has evaporated and is possibly optimistic at that. If you're younger, then you'll be more sensitive to the top octave variations.

It's worth trying without a phase plug at all. The new phase stabilisers beam the top frequencies forward and personally I find that both piercing and unnatural. The PM7A units had grey phase plugs which were a little longer than the C series plugs. My experience of these is in front horns where the longer and larger plugs can beam more, so I use the shorter ones. However in a pair of TP1 speakers they seem better with the door-knob types and a friend of mine with a lathe is making me some more. . . .

Essentially however, as no speaker is said to be able to perform more than 4 octaves of a frequency range, what Lowthers achieve is a miracle. Cymbals are so much more lifelike through them - the speaker relates more to the size of the original source making the sound . . .

Best wishes

David P
 
#72
Bob Brines said:
Graham,

Different application, but.....

I put a pair of EX2's in MLTL's. Never worked right. The drivers wouldn't load the cabinets properly. I removed the rear baskets and the drivers loaded up as predicted. For the extra price of EXx drivers, you also get the lemon squeezer phase plug. I replaced these with the bullet phase plugs -- better dispersion. So, I now have DX2's in all features except the die cast magnet covers.

The EXx is advertised as controlling the back wave. This may be fine in a tight compression chamber, but for resonant cabinets, and I presume OB, where the back wave is important, the DXx is the way to go.

Bob
Click to expand...

Hi Bob,

Sorry for re-activating this old thread.

How did you remove the back cover? I will be purchasing a pair of EX2 (the only Lowthers available locally, Philippines) and I will be building an MLTL enclosure as published by MJKing.

Thanks.
 
#73
alexg said:
Hi Bob,

Sorry for re-activating this old thread.

How did you remove the back cover? I will be purchasing a pair of EX2 (the only Lowthers available locally, Philippines) and I will be building an MLTL enclosure as published by MJKing.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Run a utility knife around the joint between the cover and the frame. Gently pry the cover off with a putty knife. Disconnect the wires between the frame and cover. Go!

Bob
 
#74
Nelson Pass said:
With an electronic crossover, the amp is directly attached to the driver.

Personally, I don't use op amps in active crossovers. I can get the job
down to a single JFET with no feedback with less effort and cost.

Dialing in the amplitude and phase is the headache. Many times the frequency
response is flat but the phase response is off in the crossover area, screwing
up the transient information.

😎
Click to expand...

This sounds quite interesting to me - currently I'm using an Ashly PA crossover in my setup. Do you have a PassDIY version of this "Zen active crossover"?
 
#75
#76

Attachments

  • x-over_Stein.gif
    x-over_Stein.gif
    13 KB · Views: 487
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom