Here is a picture of my main 2-channel system:
The speakers are Lowther DX3's in MLTL's with FE206E's in 35 l BR's on top of them. The other pair are FE207E's in the same 35 l BR's, just different cosmetics. The tweets on top of the 207's are FT17H's.
The electronics are a 6BX7 p-p amp built by Jef Larson, a SI Super-T, a diyParadise Monica DAC, a Sound Blaster USB external modem and a Panasonic walkman. My "real" source is a laptop through the DAC's.
This is a basement room that is on grade on the right side.The room is 25'x15'x8' and the speakers are centered on the long wall. The front wall is cast concrete as is the floor. The right wall is all double pane glass. The other two walls are standard 2x4/dry wall. The ceiling is drywall on 2x10's.
The speakers are 8' apart and the listening chair is a high-back recliner 8' back. there is a sofa on the right angled at 30* and a futon on the left. The floor is carpeted.
With all of that background, here is an FR plot of the speakers:
NOTE: There are no filters on the speaker. No BSC, no nothing. I do all on my EQ on the computer rather than passive at the speakers. The tweeters are not hooked up. I did sort of nomalize the plots in the midrange, as the DX3 is a couple of dB hotter than the two Fostex. The microphone is at my head position in the listening chair and the plots are ungated 24th octave smoothed.
Black=207
Red=206
Blue=DX3
I was pleasantly surprised at how well behaved the room is. Other than the peak at 40 and the dip at 60, things look pretty good. A bass trap is in order. The MLTL show a strong floor bounce, but the two BR's don,t(?). The rising response of the 206 and DX3 are clearly evident. One would expect a straight line decrease of something like 6dB/octave.
OK, so what does the tweeter do?
This is the 207 BR with the FT17H. The FT17H is crossed in with only a cap.
Black=No tweet
Red=1uF
Blue=2uF
Green=3uF
I tried the FT7RP, but it didn't have enough oats.
Comments?
Bob
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
The speakers are Lowther DX3's in MLTL's with FE206E's in 35 l BR's on top of them. The other pair are FE207E's in the same 35 l BR's, just different cosmetics. The tweets on top of the 207's are FT17H's.
The electronics are a 6BX7 p-p amp built by Jef Larson, a SI Super-T, a diyParadise Monica DAC, a Sound Blaster USB external modem and a Panasonic walkman. My "real" source is a laptop through the DAC's.
This is a basement room that is on grade on the right side.The room is 25'x15'x8' and the speakers are centered on the long wall. The front wall is cast concrete as is the floor. The right wall is all double pane glass. The other two walls are standard 2x4/dry wall. The ceiling is drywall on 2x10's.
The speakers are 8' apart and the listening chair is a high-back recliner 8' back. there is a sofa on the right angled at 30* and a futon on the left. The floor is carpeted.
With all of that background, here is an FR plot of the speakers:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
NOTE: There are no filters on the speaker. No BSC, no nothing. I do all on my EQ on the computer rather than passive at the speakers. The tweeters are not hooked up. I did sort of nomalize the plots in the midrange, as the DX3 is a couple of dB hotter than the two Fostex. The microphone is at my head position in the listening chair and the plots are ungated 24th octave smoothed.
Black=207
Red=206
Blue=DX3
I was pleasantly surprised at how well behaved the room is. Other than the peak at 40 and the dip at 60, things look pretty good. A bass trap is in order. The MLTL show a strong floor bounce, but the two BR's don,t(?). The rising response of the 206 and DX3 are clearly evident. One would expect a straight line decrease of something like 6dB/octave.
OK, so what does the tweeter do?
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
This is the 207 BR with the FT17H. The FT17H is crossed in with only a cap.
Black=No tweet
Red=1uF
Blue=2uF
Green=3uF
I tried the FT7RP, but it didn't have enough oats.
Comments?
Bob
Well, I like it cosmetically, for a start. 😉
Hmm. The 1st FR plot is the kind of balance I tend to prefer for extended listening, rolling off in the highs. Bright systems just give me a headache. I'm with you on the digital Eq too -I'm increasingly wary of the passive circuits; they're just not precise enough, & I'm increasingly thinking they don't do the transient response any favours. At the very least, digital should allow for much finer / specific tailoring & adjustments.
Looks quite a nicely damped room anyway -the MLTLs look like they've got a similar narrow dip in the LF at about 45Hz[ish] that my last pair had -I've not quite figured where that comes from yet. Are the measurements taken for the speakers in the positions they're in in the picture, or were things swapped around a bit?
Interesting re the tweeter. Just to confirm, that's just a cap, no resistance or Eq applied?
Cheers
Scott
Hmm. The 1st FR plot is the kind of balance I tend to prefer for extended listening, rolling off in the highs. Bright systems just give me a headache. I'm with you on the digital Eq too -I'm increasingly wary of the passive circuits; they're just not precise enough, & I'm increasingly thinking they don't do the transient response any favours. At the very least, digital should allow for much finer / specific tailoring & adjustments.
Looks quite a nicely damped room anyway -the MLTLs look like they've got a similar narrow dip in the LF at about 45Hz[ish] that my last pair had -I've not quite figured where that comes from yet. Are the measurements taken for the speakers in the positions they're in in the picture, or were things swapped around a bit?
Interesting re the tweeter. Just to confirm, that's just a cap, no resistance or Eq applied?
Cheers
Scott
From the charts the tweeter looks to me to be adding just the right amount of tweet. Many systems measured in Stereophile show much more pronounced high frequencies... possibly why so many hi end speakers sound spitty and fatiguing in an effort to sound detailed. Here we see using full range drivers we get the detail without the spitty hash.
Thanks for posting the measurements. I'd like to do that for my room and see what it shows.
Godzilla
Thanks for posting the measurements. I'd like to do that for my room and see what it shows.
Godzilla
Bob,
I am not sure that dip is entirely caused by floor bounce. I have calculated a null near that frequency with many of my ML TL models in the second half of my worksheets where the geometry of the box and of the room is included. However, when I remove the room effects sometimes the dip is reduced but not completely gone. I believe some of this dip is caused floor bounce while the rest is caused by destructive combination of the driver and port output which is a function of the distance between the two sources. If it was purely floor bounce, you should see a series of dips at regular frequency intervals.
Looks good Bob... you have gotten pretty flat FR. Speaker sare nice.
The concrete floor and wall behind probably contributes to the bass extension.
dave
The concrete floor and wall behind probably contributes to the bass extension.
dave
I'm having difficulty logging into diyaudio from sbcglobal. I can ony take a peek here at work.
Scott: No resistor, no EQ. I was surprised at how well the 206 works in a simple BR, but then, the Qts is way higher than published.
Martin: You are probably right about some combing between the driver and port. Your model assumes the port and driver are acoustically colocated and combined nearfield measurements won't see it.
Godzilla: Moving the basket does not have nearly the effect of adjusting the fake plant on the left. 😉
Bob
Scott: No resistor, no EQ. I was surprised at how well the 206 works in a simple BR, but then, the Qts is way higher than published.
Martin: You are probably right about some combing between the driver and port. Your model assumes the port and driver are acoustically colocated and combined nearfield measurements won't see it.
Godzilla: Moving the basket does not have nearly the effect of adjusting the fake plant on the left. 😉
Bob
Bob Brines said:
So, would you say that the 206 does not need a tweeter while the 207 does? I was under the impression that the 206 needed a horn.
type said:
It's not as simple as that. Un EQ'd, the 206 is shrill and abrasive. EQ it and it still needs a tweet. But then, that's what I hear. YMMV.
The 206 works better in a horn than the 207 and vis versa for BR's. All the plot above is saying is that the 206 does a pretty fair job in a 35 l BR. Have you noticed a subtle shift away from horns to BVR's?
Bob
Do you normally listen to the 207e pictured with the tweeter or without? I was checking out your website and your FB-20 seems to be designed w/o the tweeter.
Hi Bob,
Taking this time to congratulate you on your systems, they look impressive and think they will sound superb. Your 207's with FT tweets look very particularly interesting. I get very little time to experiment these days, too busy in the factories.
I'm intrigued to read more on your opinions on using audio sources from your laptop and what you think of the latest reproduction quality compared to CD. We are all MAC in our studio so beginning to use our I-phones for the extra convenience.
I have a friend who works for EMI music. He's got particular issues relating to digital compression so sticks to CD, XRCD in particular.
Cheers,
Mark.
Taking this time to congratulate you on your systems, they look impressive and think they will sound superb. Your 207's with FT tweets look very particularly interesting. I get very little time to experiment these days, too busy in the factories.
I'm intrigued to read more on your opinions on using audio sources from your laptop and what you think of the latest reproduction quality compared to CD. We are all MAC in our studio so beginning to use our I-phones for the extra convenience.
I have a friend who works for EMI music. He's got particular issues relating to digital compression so sticks to CD, XRCD in particular.
Cheers,
Mark.
markaudio said:
with the size of today's HDs, no need to compress audio files at all.
Your iPhone shouln't be seeing anything smaller than Apple Lossless.
dave
Yeah, Q on the 206 is way higher than claimed. One thing I do find interesting is the apparant lack of gain of the FT17 tweeter, relative to the main drivers. Again, that's assuming Fostex's claimed sensitivity, which looks to be a little optimistic. Still, it's again the kind of smooth balance I like, so no complaints from me on that score. ;^)
Personally, I'm a convert to computer audio. Although I don't currently have such a system in place, my mate Ed has; Squeezebox running FLACs. Superb setup, so convenient & the sound... well, you won't hear me complaining, even on superb recordings listened to through his electrostatics & a Pass F4, which are the audio equivalent of distilled water.
Personally, I'm a convert to computer audio. Although I don't currently have such a system in place, my mate Ed has; Squeezebox running FLACs. Superb setup, so convenient & the sound... well, you won't hear me complaining, even on superb recordings listened to through his electrostatics & a Pass F4, which are the audio equivalent of distilled water.
Hi Scott,
I've got to catch up on all the new computer based sourcing. I've been talking to Dave (he being a MAC guy) on what to do with my new I-phone.
By the way Scott - can you drop me an email - thanks
Mark.
I've got to catch up on all the new computer based sourcing. I've been talking to Dave (he being a MAC guy) on what to do with my new I-phone.
By the way Scott - can you drop me an email - thanks
Mark.
type said:
I prefer the 207 with treeter to the 206 without. I like this 207/FT17H for casual listening/background, but for serious litening, it's the DX3's.
The FB-20 as advertised is w/o the tweet. However, I intend to offer a premium version with the FT17H. It's a simple matter of boring another hole in the baffle.
Bob
Re: 207,206?
As I said above, I much prefer the 207 to the 206. It is a much smoother sounding driver. With a little help on top, you can listen to these all day.
I'm seeing a lot of 340k MP3 now. It takes a lot of close listening to tell the difference between this and CD. But I won't buy anything that isn't at least 44.1 FLAC or better. I find that resampling to 48k smooths out the top on the 44.1k stuff. I've resampled to 96 then to 48k at the DAC, but I can't hear the difference. As far as compression goes, FLAC and lossless WMA are, well lossless. Sound just the same a WAV or CD. I store in these formats because it is virtually impossible to tag WAV. MAC formats should work the same.
Bob
markaudio said:
As I said above, I much prefer the 207 to the 206. It is a much smoother sounding driver. With a little help on top, you can listen to these all day.
I'm seeing a lot of 340k MP3 now. It takes a lot of close listening to tell the difference between this and CD. But I won't buy anything that isn't at least 44.1 FLAC or better. I find that resampling to 48k smooths out the top on the 44.1k stuff. I've resampled to 96 then to 48k at the DAC, but I can't hear the difference. As far as compression goes, FLAC and lossless WMA are, well lossless. Sound just the same a WAV or CD. I store in these formats because it is virtually impossible to tag WAV. MAC formats should work the same.
Bob
Scottmoose said:
I was surprised also. The FT17H is a perfect match for the FE207E without padding. I tried the FT7RP, but it was way too low on SPL. It looks to me that the ribbon is below 90dB/w/m.
Bob
>>> with the size of today's HDs, no need to compress audio files at all.
Agreed. I ripped my cds at 160mp3... then 256... then AGAIN as WAV to ensure the best sound. I only rip lossless. My 8mb iTouch has less than 500 songs on it but it's plenty. I pick and choose music to load from an external hd that has about 100gb of music on it (it's backed up of course on another external hd tucked away in my night table). Usually, i just drop in a cd and listen because things sound a bit fuller and because music on the new cds i get don't always make it to the iTouch right away.
Godzilla
Agreed. I ripped my cds at 160mp3... then 256... then AGAIN as WAV to ensure the best sound. I only rip lossless. My 8mb iTouch has less than 500 songs on it but it's plenty. I pick and choose music to load from an external hd that has about 100gb of music on it (it's backed up of course on another external hd tucked away in my night table). Usually, i just drop in a cd and listen because things sound a bit fuller and because music on the new cds i get don't always make it to the iTouch right away.
Godzilla
- Status
- Not open for further replies.