OK this is some zen koan right?😕
What is k then? As far as I know all of this design is blind as I forgot to design any eyes onto it. None of it is real so far, I have not started building it yet!
I said in the original post this is not a simple horn, therefore I'm unsure how accurate the predicted response is. That is in fact the main thing I was looking for comment on!
I also fail to see why any of this matters for use with a tube amp. The amp would prefer to see a larger impedance as it would then produce lower distortion. What has flare rate to do with that?
Anyone?
What is k then? As far as I know all of this design is blind as I forgot to design any eyes onto it. None of it is real so far, I have not started building it yet!
I said in the original post this is not a simple horn, therefore I'm unsure how accurate the predicted response is. That is in fact the main thing I was looking for comment on!
I also fail to see why any of this matters for use with a tube amp. The amp would prefer to see a larger impedance as it would then produce lower distortion. What has flare rate to do with that?
Anyone?
k is the flarerate.
your comment shows you don´t understand fundamental connections,
i am sorry to waste the time to answer to help,
good luck, scotti would help you.
your comment shows you don´t understand fundamental connections,
i am sorry to waste the time to answer to help,
good luck, scotti would help you.
Hello to you sir!
OK, this is some zen koan right?
As far as I know all of the horn is blind as I forgot to design any eyes into my snail. None of it is real for that matter as I've not built it yet!
I fail to see why you need a fully completed cogniscent speaker system to estimate it's bass response or how easily a tube amp would drive it!?
In my firt post I said this was no simple horn and was unsure how accurately hornresp would deal with that. It's one thing I was hoping someone familiar with the program could comment on.
OK, this is some zen koan right?
As far as I know all of the horn is blind as I forgot to design any eyes into my snail. None of it is real for that matter as I've not built it yet!
I fail to see why you need a fully completed cogniscent speaker system to estimate it's bass response or how easily a tube amp would drive it!?
In my firt post I said this was no simple horn and was unsure how accurately hornresp would deal with that. It's one thing I was hoping someone familiar with the program could comment on.
Frankly, given what it is you state you want, I would be more inclined to run the 166 sealed, or loading a short midrange (front) horn, with supporting woofers crossed in at a suitable point.
The aspect ratio of the terminus is a bit high; you may get away with it, but YMMV as always. I'm not a big fan of MDF, but it should do the job in this case if you decided to go ahead & try it. I probably wouldn't bother with a BR; the 166 isn't ideal for that type of box -not if you want lots of bass anyway.
Horst -do me a favour & stop bastardizing my name will you? It's rather tedious, and makes you look childish, as do your insults to the OP.
Last edited:
Sorry for the double post. Something funny going on there.😕
Thank you Scottmoose for the info (and support). To be honest I'm not at all set on the 166 if there is something else that will do the job better but only fostex seems able to achieve over 90dB efficiencies. One thing I'd really like to avoid is a crossover though, there is something about avoiding phase disturbances that appeals to me, the main reason I'm aiming for single driver.
I was intrigued by the Nagaoka style spawns for a while but the Hiro seems to have the worst extension of the lot and the other fostex drivers seem to fall off at the top end. FE126 claims 83-25k Hz but the chart shows a sharp fall at 14k 😕 I'd love to put it in a saburo and have over 90dB from 42Hz up to 25kHz but I find it difficult to belive this is possible from a driver with Fs of 83Hz. I'd love to be proved wrong though. I even tried a revised Hiro with a bit smoother path / continuous expansion (see attached). Not sure if this defeats the point of the Nagaoka design though. As you can see I'm can't bring myself to totally follow someone elses design😱
Really what i'm looking for is a proper full range (40-20k), high efficiency (in the 90s) and not the entire size of my living room. Any ideas?
Thank you Scottmoose for the info (and support). To be honest I'm not at all set on the 166 if there is something else that will do the job better but only fostex seems able to achieve over 90dB efficiencies. One thing I'd really like to avoid is a crossover though, there is something about avoiding phase disturbances that appeals to me, the main reason I'm aiming for single driver.
I was intrigued by the Nagaoka style spawns for a while but the Hiro seems to have the worst extension of the lot and the other fostex drivers seem to fall off at the top end. FE126 claims 83-25k Hz but the chart shows a sharp fall at 14k 😕 I'd love to put it in a saburo and have over 90dB from 42Hz up to 25kHz but I find it difficult to belive this is possible from a driver with Fs of 83Hz. I'd love to be proved wrong though. I even tried a revised Hiro with a bit smoother path / continuous expansion (see attached). Not sure if this defeats the point of the Nagaoka design though. As you can see I'm can't bring myself to totally follow someone elses design😱
Really what i'm looking for is a proper full range (40-20k), high efficiency (in the 90s) and not the entire size of my living room. Any ideas?
Attachments
Oh you have my empathy, hearing that you've spent hours simming. I've done the same and it is ridiculously labor-intensive. So here's my two cents.
If you want the flattest response in the smallest enclosure, theoretically, MLTL would be the way to go. To fully flatten the response (considering baffle step), you'd most likely need either (a) a second driver (which you've said could be a budget breaker), or (b) a circuit which would sacrifice a bit of (perhaps a very tolerable amount of) efficiency.
But the horn has other advantages. Your sim shows a bandwidth of roughly a couple octaves. Those octaves will potentially sound very dynamic, airy and exciting.
So the trade-off is MLTL (more compact, potentially flatter, potentially deeper bass) vs. backhorn (bigger, more efficient, very likely less flat and/or less extended in the bass, but coupling to more air which some find exciting.)
Have you heard any Fostex backhorns? Personally I think they sound great, on acoustic, jazz, small ensembles, female vocal, some choral, ancient and medieval music. For large orchestral, rock, pop and dance, they wouldn't be my first choice though (nor my second or third).
Also, you say you want drivers that can handle anything you throw at them. For that, I'd choose the Mark Audio's over the Fostex but your efficiency goal would be sacrificed (unless you use multiples). I would always recommend the Mark Audio's (over the Fostex) to people who want "one driver that can do it all," especially those who want very extended treble.
If you want the flattest response in the smallest enclosure, theoretically, MLTL would be the way to go. To fully flatten the response (considering baffle step), you'd most likely need either (a) a second driver (which you've said could be a budget breaker), or (b) a circuit which would sacrifice a bit of (perhaps a very tolerable amount of) efficiency.
But the horn has other advantages. Your sim shows a bandwidth of roughly a couple octaves. Those octaves will potentially sound very dynamic, airy and exciting.
So the trade-off is MLTL (more compact, potentially flatter, potentially deeper bass) vs. backhorn (bigger, more efficient, very likely less flat and/or less extended in the bass, but coupling to more air which some find exciting.)
Have you heard any Fostex backhorns? Personally I think they sound great, on acoustic, jazz, small ensembles, female vocal, some choral, ancient and medieval music. For large orchestral, rock, pop and dance, they wouldn't be my first choice though (nor my second or third).
Also, you say you want drivers that can handle anything you throw at them. For that, I'd choose the Mark Audio's over the Fostex but your efficiency goal would be sacrificed (unless you use multiples). I would always recommend the Mark Audio's (over the Fostex) to people who want "one driver that can do it all," especially those who want very extended treble.
StoneT, i had the Hiro/166ES-R for a while. Sound stage height and dynamic jump factor was great. Would have liked a wider sweet spot, prob more my room boarding on being too small for them. Arranged ~3/4 into the room on the short wall/listening position by the wall behind me produced a bad standing wave. Still think about a smaller double mouth blh or rear firing version in the room for the things they did so well.
StoneT:
if you've got the floor space to accommodate them, another series of enclosures to consider for Fostex drivers would be
Woden Design | Fostex
more recent and very excellent designs by Scott
I've personally built the Valiant FE126En ( aka Maeshowe for Mark Audio drivers with different chamber volumes), and to use the vernacular, they "slam"- even with as "little" as 12-15w of PP pentode (in my case Tubelab SimplePP with JJEL84). IINM, also on his get-to list is a version for the FE166E.
The double rear firing mouths delivers huge soundstage dimension, while the single small front firing driver images like crazy.
if you've got the floor space to accommodate them, another series of enclosures to consider for Fostex drivers would be
Woden Design | Fostex
more recent and very excellent designs by Scott
I've personally built the Valiant FE126En ( aka Maeshowe for Mark Audio drivers with different chamber volumes), and to use the vernacular, they "slam"- even with as "little" as 12-15w of PP pentode (in my case Tubelab SimplePP with JJEL84). IINM, also on his get-to list is a version for the FE166E.
The double rear firing mouths delivers huge soundstage dimension, while the single small front firing driver images like crazy.
Last edited:
Good stuff, thanks guys.
rjbond3rd - "For large orchestral, rock, pop and dance, they wouldn't be my first choice though (nor my second or third)" In what way do they fall down? Is it addressable with phase plugs or EnABL?
I'm really leaning towards the saburo / mikasa just at the moment or maybe my snail horn contour worked into a similar double mouth design.
What I'd really like to know is how my contour is likely to perform (see attached).
I'm not sure about double markaudio drivers, that's a little beyond me, but I can get 2 CSS FR125s or FE126En for little more than the single 166. Would these be useable? I dont see how I can get higher efficiency without rewiring the output stage of my amp though.
rjbond3rd - "For large orchestral, rock, pop and dance, they wouldn't be my first choice though (nor my second or third)" In what way do they fall down? Is it addressable with phase plugs or EnABL?
I'm really leaning towards the saburo / mikasa just at the moment or maybe my snail horn contour worked into a similar double mouth design.
What I'd really like to know is how my contour is likely to perform (see attached).
I'm not sure about double markaudio drivers, that's a little beyond me, but I can get 2 CSS FR125s or FE126En for little more than the single 166. Would these be useable? I dont see how I can get higher efficiency without rewiring the output stage of my amp though.
Attachments
Last edited:
Sorry chrisb, missed your post. I had come accross these before but as you say, they need floorspace. Whatever I end up with is going in two 300mm deep alcoves either side of my fireplace so rear firing is not a good option. Also they will be either in the top halfs of the alcove (the snails) or toward the edges (spawns) as the rest of the space is to be filled with bookshelves. I'm unable to push for more if you catch my drift.🙁
Probably not too badly; at least the graph looks promising, & the different expansion contours are not necessarily a bad thing either.
Generally speaking, I don't advise trying to smooth out a manifold style horn; in a lot the bends are functional, including these. Typically, you'll end up raising the upper corner frequency, which may not be such a good move.
Generally speaking, I don't advise trying to smooth out a manifold style horn; in a lot the bends are functional, including these. Typically, you'll end up raising the upper corner frequency, which may not be such a good move.
Pretty much what I thought. Part of the reason for using a smoother contour for the snails where I don't want to lowwer the upper corner.
I've used both the FE126E and the FE206E(similar to the 166 only 8") the 126s were a bit lacking in the top end but had the best mid range I've ever heard. The 206s had 95% of the mid range magic and top end sparkel as well, I would expect the 166 to be the same. The Fs of the drive is not a determining factor in how low it can play in a horn. Exactly how much Floor space do you have to use or rather do you want to use? Perhaps I could help you design something to meet your needs instead of just recommending someone elses design that met their needs.
I was under the impression that was what the gentleman was doing (& what this thread is about) -he is designing his own cabinet.
Oh I know, I was just encouraging him to continue to do so despite others continual suggestions to try this or that design. And it looks like you have been quite helpful to him in this manner as well. I'm sorry if I sounded like I was being contrary.
No big deal. Likewise, I hope he continues, although I have my doubts about whether a 166 will ever completely satisfy the requirements. Likewise, although purely IMO suggestions of existing boxes are generally useful -gives an idea of what is already around, & helpful for people who don't want to design something from scratch.
Oh and BTW I do believe personally that the FE166E is definitely a good choice for the design parameters you have enumerated. Another sound choice judging only by the specs are the similarily priced Dayton Full range drivers available from Parts Express. And don't forget when designing a RLH in hornresp to set the Vrc and Lrc to 0 and then select combined response from the tools menu after hitting calculate this will show you the response of the horn combined with the wave from the front of the driver. If the horn mouth is on the floor the driver is at aprox. 40"(100cm) and your ears are 8' back set the path difference to -10.
Then we disagree. From my POV, there's a limit to its practical value, so I'd rather use drivers that were intended for the purpose if at all possible. Still, different strokes for different folks.
Where do you feel it falls short? Have you looked at my sim? Is it faulty somehow? Or do you not feel that 115db(corner loaded) is suffecient? What do you feel would be a better driver? If I'm not mistaked this is exactly the sort of application the Fostex drivers were designed for. I have had personal experience with the FE206E in this sort of application and it more than excelled. All of the other drivers that have been mentioned have much higher Qs which makes for ill defined bass IMH.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.