Those Sachiko's look great Alan, its interesting to hear that a couple of watts will drive them to good listening levels. Glad you found a setup you like!
Just a quick update on my little Lotus build, tomorrow they get closed up, next day they get a listen, here's a pic. I hope the insulation isn't too much.
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa160/birdy81260/Lotusinprogress.jpg
Ian
Just a quick update on my little Lotus build, tomorrow they get closed up, next day they get a listen, here's a pic. I hope the insulation isn't too much.
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa160/birdy81260/Lotusinprogress.jpg
Ian
Madison/Sachiko Improvements
Hello Pada.
The panels were made from a couple of pieces of wood that were laying around my friend's shop. As these panels were to be used temporarily no effort was made to make them look like a finished product. After using them we noticed a slight improvement in transparency & detail ---{we don't know if this improvement was a result of the cabinet now having a greater stiffness on the front panel or if the addition of the front panel made the driver see an increase in the size of the rear chamber behind the driver}--- this issue could be resolved by running more listening tests using other materials such as cork, rubber (like you mentioned) or other materials in lieu of wood we originally used. One thing I forgot to mention in my original post was these black panels had a layer of felt applied to their backs!
Hello Alistair.
Thanks for your kind words. I also think they look quite nice. According to CarderSound's website the Madisons aka Sachiko are made entirely from natural solid woods and maple wood-plys. When I had mine made I had Jeff Carder special order Rosewood Veneer for the entire outside of my speakers! I had to wait a couple of extra weeks but I fiqured if I was having a speaker custom made it should look exactly how I wanted it to, no? Fact is these are the ONLY Rosewood pair that CarderSound has made. They're still featured on their website under Custom Finishes just scroll to the bottom of the page on this link:
http://tinyurl.com/Rosewood-Madisons
Thetubeguy1954
paba said:
Hello Pada.
The panels were made from a couple of pieces of wood that were laying around my friend's shop. As these panels were to be used temporarily no effort was made to make them look like a finished product. After using them we noticed a slight improvement in transparency & detail ---{we don't know if this improvement was a result of the cabinet now having a greater stiffness on the front panel or if the addition of the front panel made the driver see an increase in the size of the rear chamber behind the driver}--- this issue could be resolved by running more listening tests using other materials such as cork, rubber (like you mentioned) or other materials in lieu of wood we originally used. One thing I forgot to mention in my original post was these black panels had a layer of felt applied to their backs!
Alistair72 said:
Hello Alistair.
Thanks for your kind words. I also think they look quite nice. According to CarderSound's website the Madisons aka Sachiko are made entirely from natural solid woods and maple wood-plys. When I had mine made I had Jeff Carder special order Rosewood Veneer for the entire outside of my speakers! I had to wait a couple of extra weeks but I fiqured if I was having a speaker custom made it should look exactly how I wanted it to, no? Fact is these are the ONLY Rosewood pair that CarderSound has made. They're still featured on their website under Custom Finishes just scroll to the bottom of the page on this link:
http://tinyurl.com/Rosewood-Madisons
Thetubeguy1954
Curly Woods said:
Hello Curly!
Actually the speakers come with two sets of "outrigger" feet. Oner set for the front and one set fro the rear of the cabinets. I simply removed the rear set of feet. That said the effect is exactly the same as you described in that it tilted/ leaned the speaker's front plane back slightly & raised up the focal plane at the listening position.
Tyimo said:
Ahh! I see!
Thanks!
He lean the loudspeaker against the rear wall. I thought He did something with the driver (speaker).
Greets:
Tyimo
Hello Tyimo!
Actually the speakers don't touch the rear wall at all! I toe the cabinets in a bit, so when measured at the floor, the sides of the cabinets closest to the stereo are 12 inches from the rear wall and the side of the cabinets closest the room's side walls are 18 inches from the rear wall. When measured from the top of the speaker cabinet the sides of the cabinets closest to the stereo are now 6 inches from the rear wall and the side of the cabinets closest the room's side walls are now 12 inches from the rear wall. Thus from the floor to the top of the cabinet the speaker leans backwards 6 inches!
Thetubeguy1954
Some Lotus build pics:
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa160/birdy81260/Lotusbuild2.jpg
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa160/birdy81260/Lotusbuild3.jpg
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa160/birdy81260/Lotusbuild6.jpg
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa160/birdy81260/Lotusbuild5.jpg
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa160/birdy81260/Lotusbuild4.jpg
The missus has better hearing than me, she was close to tears with the sound, and absolutely loves the look of them. We have only ever had bookshelf size speakers in the past. The bass output is good, deep and clean. The sound delivery is razor sharp, precise, and the overall freq resp sounds very good to me, not that I would really know, these are just my impressions. Never going to get high SPL (especially so on bass-heavy tracks) but the quality seems very good, probably better than my ears. A quote from the missus on a chat forum: "Bloody Brilliant...like being at a live concert... can hear each instrument ......voice quality.....I is in heaven...... I love me man."
Many thanks to Scott and Dave and all the others that led to this design.
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa160/birdy81260/Lotusbuild2.jpg
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa160/birdy81260/Lotusbuild3.jpg
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa160/birdy81260/Lotusbuild6.jpg
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa160/birdy81260/Lotusbuild5.jpg
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa160/birdy81260/Lotusbuild4.jpg
The missus has better hearing than me, she was close to tears with the sound, and absolutely loves the look of them. We have only ever had bookshelf size speakers in the past. The bass output is good, deep and clean. The sound delivery is razor sharp, precise, and the overall freq resp sounds very good to me, not that I would really know, these are just my impressions. Never going to get high SPL (especially so on bass-heavy tracks) but the quality seems very good, probably better than my ears. A quote from the missus on a chat forum: "Bloody Brilliant...like being at a live concert... can hear each instrument ......voice quality.....I is in heaven...... I love me man."
Many thanks to Scott and Dave and all the others that led to this design.
Rob Dingen said:
Hello Rob!
Please forgive my delay in responding to your question. I wasn't sure if I should answer your question! The reason for this is because in another audio forum I was "attacked" by a couple of the members who felt I was a shill when I couldn't say enough good things about an unknown driver treatment my friend developed over a period of 10 years and is just now making available to the public.
I was quite shocked at their attitude because I readily admitted from the very beginning that I knew the developer of this treatment and he was my friend. Plus I made it clear I had this treatment done to two different drivers ---{a Fostex FE206E & FE206ES-R}--- I owned. I also admitted that while I didn't pay the $150 in cash per pair that Mike charges, I did trade a pair of NOS Bendix 6900 tubes which anyone with a smidget of tube knowledge knows more than covers the $300 anyone else would have paid to have 2 pairs of drivers treated! That said I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have about the driver shootout but, please understand that I don't want to be considered a shill, I don't wish to hurt Mike's fledgling business and I don't wish to offend anyone here!
What follows below only hold true when comparing a treated FE206E vs a stock Lowther DX4 vs a treated FE206ES-R. I cannot say how the results would have turned out if the Fostex drivers wre untreated. Below I'll attempt to talk about the shootout without talking about the treatement, but understand the sonic qualities I'll attribute to the two Fostex drivers wouldn't be correct for an untreated Fostex driver.
I can say first we played the Lowther, then the treated FE206E and finally the treated FE206ES-R was played. In the end the FE206E came in third place but not by a lot! It came in just behind the Lowther DX4 which came in second! When it comes to choosing between the treated FE206E and the stock Lowther in the Madison/Sachiko cabinet it would be a matter of which set of pluses and minuses an individual prefered. I would have been hard pressed to pick one over the other and could understand where one might actually prefer either of the two sonic presentations over the other.
The Lowther had better treble extention than the treated FE206E did and it seemed a bit lighter on it's feet. Sometimes this worked out to the Lowthers benefit but other times it worked against it! For example if the pianist was playing a song that required them to go into the lower registers it was immediately noticable that the treated FE206E had better bass extention and thus allowed one to hear/feel the weight that these lower registers carry when played. Now the Lowther that had previously seemed so light on it's feet was shown to be unable to portray the weight of the lower piano registers with any real authority.
Install the treated FE206ES-R and it's a different game entirely. Now the better bass extention that FE206E had that allowed one to hear and feel the weight the lower piano registers was revealed as muddy and blurred! Bass with the treated FE206ES-R went lower, cleaner and with more authority and detail than the treated FE206E. The same bass was non-existant with the Lowther. With the treated FE206ES-R one could sense the piano's sounding board resonating. The treated FE206ES-R isn't a one trick pony either. If it's treble extention wasn't the equal of the Lowther DX4 it was darned close. We decided the Fostex FE206ES-R came in first place overall.
The Lowther DX4 has a lightness on it's feet that I find hard to describe. I know neither Fostex seemed to have this trait whatever it is. Perhaps it's a somewhat cleaner midrange? If that's the case it wasn't readily noticable to anyone of us. Consider that a pair of Lowther DX4 is $2.2K. That's 11.5X the cost of a pair of stock Fostex FE206E and 6.5X the cost of a treated pair of FE206E drivers. It's also 4.8X the cost of a pair of stock Fostex FE206ES-R and 3.6X the cost of a treated pair of FE206ES-R drivers and you'll understand why I'm using a treated pair of Fostex FE206ES-Rs in my cabinets. Sonically I believe they're better than the DX4 are and they cost me less than a 3rd of what a pair of Lowther DX4s would have.
Any questions? Comments?
Thetubeguy1954
Usual Lowther traits then. The reason they don't have the LF gain is that the Sachiko wasn't designed for them and the combination doesn't work all that well.
For the rest, the liveliness you mention is fairly characteristic of Lowthers; I suspect it's largely due to the basic balance & response characteristics of the driver. I admire Lowthers, but personally, I couldn't live with them; the response just isn't neutral enough for me. EX3 test by Troel Gravesen makes for an interesting read: http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Lowther.htm
The ES-R in practice should give slightly more bass gain than the regular 206 in this cabinet, & may sound a little more recessed in the lower mids due to a hole in its response 400Hz - 700Hz.
For the rest, the liveliness you mention is fairly characteristic of Lowthers; I suspect it's largely due to the basic balance & response characteristics of the driver. I admire Lowthers, but personally, I couldn't live with them; the response just isn't neutral enough for me. EX3 test by Troel Gravesen makes for an interesting read: http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/Lowther.htm
The ES-R in practice should give slightly more bass gain than the regular 206 in this cabinet, & may sound a little more recessed in the lower mids due to a hole in its response 400Hz - 700Hz.
Rob Dingen said:
Hello Rob!
I'd be delighted to tell you about this driver treatment. That said I'd like to make a couple of points clear before I talk about Mike's treatment, ok?
First I want to make it 100% clear to everyone that I am not a part of Mike's company nor do I recieve any financial remuneration from Mike. Although I am Mike's friend, with regards to this treatment I should be regarded as an extremely satisfied client!
Second The reason I'm sharing this info is due to a few reasons:
a) It seems to ameliorate ---{or reduce to virtually unnoticeable levels}--- the traits that fullrange drivers with whizzers are known for i.e., "the Lowther Shout" but, amazingly enough it does this with no noticable tradeoffs anywhere else! So it essentially removes what's wrong without any tradeoffs in the areas fullrange drivers are loved for! This in itself is an amazing feat.
b) I believe it's the sonic bargin of the century! There's absolutely NOTHING I know of anywhere, be it a tweak, treatment or component you can buy for $500 and maybe up to $1000 that will give you this much sonic improvement. Yet this driver treatment is only $150pr!
c) I love the audio hobby and I readily share what I learn. I want others to get as much enjoyment from their audio systems as I'm getting from mine. I honestly believe in my heart of hearts that once people hear from other people they trust what this treatment does, virtually everyone will want their drivers treated.
d) It's a no lose situation for any who's interested because when they receive their drivers back from Mike if they don't believe they're everything Mike said they'll be, they can return the drivers back to Mike and he'll replace the drivers with new untreated ones and refund their $150 they paid to have the drivers treated.
e) Yes I'd love to see Mike's business prosper but, no more than I'd love to see others benefit from this incredible tweak.
==============================================
I should tell you that Mike is a master cabinet refinisher who works with many exotic chemical solutions and over a period of about ten years or so he has developed a treatment that unlike C37 or damar lacquer, doesn't sit on top of the cone. Now because these 2 treatments sit on top of the cone, after they dry when you apply additional coats the C37 or damar lacquer gets thicker & thicker ---{ that's why C37 & damar lacquer shinier & shinier with each additional coat you add }--- which in turn makes the cones weight get heavier & heavier.
Mike R' informed me his 5-step process on the other hand absorbs into the cone and any excess will evaporate, so it adds very little additional weight to the cone itself. That's a very important point when working with single fullrange drivers with extremely lightweight cones. We absolutely don't want to be adding additional weight to these drivers as it will also change their sonic characteristics in ways that are detrimental.
Mike R said the one of the main problem when using a Fostex FE206E, or any other single fullrange driver with a whizzer for that matter, are the reflections that bounce back and forth between the whizzers back and the cones front. This is one of the areas that's addressed and removed or reduced to negligible levels in Mike's 5-step process. I don't have the slightest idea what the 5 solutions consist of, nor is Mike R sharing all that info with me. I do know he went through at least a thousand dollars worth of drivers and solutions before coming up & being satisfied with this final formula he's now using!
Here's what the treatment does sonically, besides turning white Fostex drivers black after this tweak brought my pair of FE206E drivers, up to a level of performance that closely rivals and in some ways betters, any stock $2K+ Lowther I've heard. The bass became tighter and went deeper, the highs were extended without being etched and the famous "Lowther Shout" was virtually eliminated or reduced to levels where I couldn't detect them. The absolutely amazing part is this is all accomplished while providing even greater levels of transparency & detail. The midrange didn't suffer in any way I could detect. In fact it's even better now than it was before, being much more full-bodied and realistic sounding.
It seems that Mike R has somehow found a way to do the impossible, i.e., remove or reduce to negligible levels virtually all the shortcomings of single fullrange drivers with a whizzers without affecting all the great traits that make us desire these types of drivers in the first place! I'm now hearing things on recording I've owned since I was a teenager and I've played on numerous audio systems since then, that I never heard before. Best thing I can say is I no longer feel the need for a subwoofer or a tweeter and I haven't been able to stop listening to CD after CD since this tweak was done. These days typical listening sessions are 4-5hrs plus!
I absolutely cannot believe such an inexpensive tweak could raise the level of sonic performance of a pair of pair of drivers to this level. If anyone is using a single fullrange driver with a whizzer I whole-heartedly recommend having this tweak done. If it improved a Fostex FE206E to such levels could you imagine how a Lowther would sound with this tweak? If you have Lowthers or AERs etc you can rid yourself of their deficits while increasing their salient points. One person sent Mike a pair of Hawthorne Silver drivers for treatment and the results he got were the same. Fact is he's a member of diyAudio and he posted his impression of Mike's treatment which you can read here: http://tinyurl.com/diyAudio1 To me this is a no-brainer to anyone trying to get the best from their audio system. Best part is just how much of an increase in sonic quality a little $150pr investment gets you! IMO this will be the best money you've ever spent on audio.
While I haven't personally compared Mike's treatment to C37 or dammar but Mike has and of course he believes his treatment is better for the reasons stated above. Mike asked that I not post his email address in a public forum but, I just realized rock4016 already posted it in his review of Mike's treatment. So if you'd like to know more you can feel free to email Mike R directly at theturk57@aol.com and he'll answer the questions you might have about his incredible tweak!
Thetubeguy1954
thetubeguy1954 said:
Your description of improvements sounds very similar to personal reviews i have seen from customers with FE206eN (and FE206eSReN). The phase plugs that are part of this treatment also deal with the resonance inside the whizzer cone. Mike might want to try some -- expert woodworker he should be able to whip some up easily..
I expect there are a whole bunch of potential receipes that go a long way to sorting the issaues inherent in the stock drivers -- from all accounts Steve Deckard's is another.
Both Damar & C37 sink in the cone... the damar trifoil ring i put on FE12x goes right thru the cone and it becomes almost transparent where the damar is. Additional coats will be prevented from going thru the cone by earlier coats (how quickly the space is filled up depends on how much you dilute the dopant). I would not use damar on an entire cone, at the dilutions usually used it stiffens things up and exacerbates any resonance modes. C37 works well on some drivers, and not so good on others (Fostex).
Unless you go nuts, it takes lots of coats to significantly increase the mass (ie the guys that are putting 5+ coats of C37 on a cone (max i've used is 2 -- and this thinned)). The cones that like C37 show no visual signs of being coated when i'm done (that step)
Soaking in or sitting on top both have pluses and minuses and balancing them is part of the art of treating a cone.
dave