Please share your experiences wiith this driver, any comparsion to
lowther or other drivers would be helpful,iI plan on useing it on an
open baffle unless imput from others leads me in another direction.
I am currently useing a mono tannoy speaker but I hear the crossover
smear on the vocals which is my favorite part of the music.
Thanks much
JamesD
lowther or other drivers would be helpful,iI plan on useing it on an
open baffle unless imput from others leads me in another direction.
I am currently useing a mono tannoy speaker but I hear the crossover
smear on the vocals which is my favorite part of the music.
Thanks much
JamesD
I've heard good things about them... but never actually seen a pair in the flesh.
Thorsten uses this (or similar) on his open baffles.
dave
Thorsten uses this (or similar) on his open baffles.
dave
I have seen and heard the Supravox 215 Bicone. Unfortunately, the TQWT enclosure it was mounted in was a disaster. With the high Qts it is not going to be easy to design an enclosure that will work well so the open baffle makes sense. The pair I heard had a nice midrange and top end but no bass due to the enclosure design. Compared to my Fostex FE-164 ML TQWT they were not that much better at a significant higher price and in the ML TQWT enclosure the Fostex design blew them away. If the Supravox was in an open baffle with a sub it might have been better but that is an apples and oranges comparison.
I think asking for an opinion between the Supravox, the Fostex, and the Lowthers is not an easy question to answer. Because of the differences in Qts values the enclosure options for getting the best from Supravox or Fostex/Lowther are completely different.
If I were to rank the three choices, I would place any Lowther way ahead of the Supravox 215 Bicone. Even the PM6C in my opinion sounds better (also better then the Fostex drivers I have heard). I have not heard the Fostex FE-207E or FE-206E but my guess, based on the two Fostex drivers I have, is they are also better then the Supravox at a significantly lower cost. But again, the Lowther and the Fostex drivers will require a much different type of enclosure design then the Supravox.
Hope that helps,
I think asking for an opinion between the Supravox, the Fostex, and the Lowthers is not an easy question to answer. Because of the differences in Qts values the enclosure options for getting the best from Supravox or Fostex/Lowther are completely different.
If I were to rank the three choices, I would place any Lowther way ahead of the Supravox 215 Bicone. Even the PM6C in my opinion sounds better (also better then the Fostex drivers I have heard). I have not heard the Fostex FE-207E or FE-206E but my guess, based on the two Fostex drivers I have, is they are also better then the Supravox at a significantly lower cost. But again, the Lowther and the Fostex drivers will require a much different type of enclosure design then the Supravox.
Hope that helps,
Ifyou are looking for something that will sit on an open baffle you have to look at the Visaton B200 as well.
dave
dave
Most of the Supravox speakers Ive seen were open baffles.
The reason the 215RTF was preffered over the Signature Bicone was its lower qts and milder cone breakup. The one advantage the Supravox drivers have over the Fostex and Lowther drivers is much higher excursion limits, which is a help in open baffles.
The reason the 215RTF was preffered over the Signature Bicone was its lower qts and milder cone breakup. The one advantage the Supravox drivers have over the Fostex and Lowther drivers is much higher excursion limits, which is a help in open baffles.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.