Jeff,
as soon as you have found the reflecting spots in you room, go and have a look at
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jun01/articles/qanda.htm#Anchor-19996
A calculator for designing your own Schroeder diffusors is here:
http://www.mhsoft.nl/Diffusor2.asp
Have fun,
Pit
as soon as you have found the reflecting spots in you room, go and have a look at
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jun01/articles/qanda.htm#Anchor-19996
A calculator for designing your own Schroeder diffusors is here:
http://www.mhsoft.nl/Diffusor2.asp
Have fun,
Pit
FE168EZ BIB - where to from here?
Thanks Dan, some good sounding drivers on the horizon, given it was your praise of the 168 that headed me in that direction I will indeed hang on. My original choice was between the 168 and FR8, 168 had the track record!
One question tho - I was of the understanding low QTS was better for BIBs (or any back loaded horn) but the Hemptones are twice th QTS of most Fostex, mid Q rather than low. But you are saying they still work well in a BIB?
Cheers,
Chris
Thanks Dan, some good sounding drivers on the horizon, given it was your praise of the 168 that headed me in that direction I will indeed hang on. My original choice was between the 168 and FR8, 168 had the track record!
One question tho - I was of the understanding low QTS was better for BIBs (or any back loaded horn) but the Hemptones are twice th QTS of most Fostex, mid Q rather than low. But you are saying they still work well in a BIB?
Cheers,
Chris
Wrong company. That's Hemp Acoustics you're thinking of. This is Tone Tubby, who are the ones with the real hemp cones now.
Mid Q & high Vas tend to push Vb up (i.e. demand a larger cabinet). Lower Q allows a reduced size for the same Vas. Like Dan, I'm very much looking forward to seeing these new TT drivers, which should cream anything from Hemp Acoustics, who currently seem to be busy adding kevlar (world's worst cone material) into the mix. I haven't got the specs yet for the new drivers, but chances are high they'll go into a pipe-horn easily enough. Hope so, because that should make a seriously impressive system for v. little cash.
Mid Q & high Vas tend to push Vb up (i.e. demand a larger cabinet). Lower Q allows a reduced size for the same Vas. Like Dan, I'm very much looking forward to seeing these new TT drivers, which should cream anything from Hemp Acoustics, who currently seem to be busy adding kevlar (world's worst cone material) into the mix. I haven't got the specs yet for the new drivers, but chances are high they'll go into a pipe-horn easily enough. Hope so, because that should make a seriously impressive system for v. little cash.
Scottmoose said:
Hello Scottmoose 🙂
Yes...I know about that Project, but I know nothing about it 😉
I don't know, how deep the bass goes...I don't know Z (driver)....and i could build the box a couple of inches taller.
My ceiling is just 98" high...i really would like to build those 87" tall "original" BIBs, but I guess there is no chance.
@ Scottmoose 
Hmmm....the "original" looks way better...not just because of the LF.
Oh man....it's tough....i have to drink...ooops...think about that a little longer 😉
Hmmm....the "original" looks way better...not just because of the LF.
Oh man....it's tough....i have to drink...ooops...think about that a little longer 😉
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
@ Scottmoose
Please do some sim for Ff165K in "regular" BIB with L=168"
P.S. With these big BIB problem is to hihg position of driver from the floor (over 50"); what's the solution? 🙄
Please do some sim for Ff165K in "regular" BIB with L=168"
P.S. With these big BIB problem is to hihg position of driver from the floor (over 50"); what's the solution? 🙄
There isn't one, aside from sitting further away from it of course... 😉
I'll see if I can get one done shortly. I've been trying not to do as many simulations as there's now plenty of data available for people to work with, and we wanted to give room for people to experiment. Pipe-horns aren't really about ultimate refinement after all... 😉
Guys -moving off topic briefly, as there's quite a lot of confusion around at the moment re hemp cones, here's a brief version of the score, as I understand it, for those interested.
The 'real' hemp cones, i.e. the ones which have the stellar reputation, are the Harrison ones. Easy way to determine if it's a 'genuine' hemp cone: is it green? If it is, you're OK. If it isn't, then it will have other substances in the mix, and is not the same as those cones beloved of guitarists in particular for their tonal qualities. A certain company that used to have these cones, no longer have them, apparantly for some rather unpleasent reasons, which it's not my place to go into. Their new cones have a completely different mix / structure, with kevlar & other substances in it. As ever, YMMV, but the message is, tread warily.
I'll see if I can get one done shortly. I've been trying not to do as many simulations as there's now plenty of data available for people to work with, and we wanted to give room for people to experiment. Pipe-horns aren't really about ultimate refinement after all... 😉
Guys -moving off topic briefly, as there's quite a lot of confusion around at the moment re hemp cones, here's a brief version of the score, as I understand it, for those interested.
The 'real' hemp cones, i.e. the ones which have the stellar reputation, are the Harrison ones. Easy way to determine if it's a 'genuine' hemp cone: is it green? If it is, you're OK. If it isn't, then it will have other substances in the mix, and is not the same as those cones beloved of guitarists in particular for their tonal qualities. A certain company that used to have these cones, no longer have them, apparantly for some rather unpleasent reasons, which it's not my place to go into. Their new cones have a completely different mix / structure, with kevlar & other substances in it. As ever, YMMV, but the message is, tread warily.
>>> Pipe-horns aren't really about ultimate refinement after all...
I am using a shortened BIB for the 165k and it sounds amazing. After building a Straight Pipe and trying three different drivers in them (all sounding very good) I realized how forgiving this type of cabinet is. The BIB also seems forgiving. From my limited building experience it seems ported boxes present the greatest challenge – designs can easily sound too bassy, boxy, bloated or thin.
I think if you get close with your BIB dimensions you will get very good results. I suggested some dimensions a while back to Scott for ‘generic’ BIBs and lost the information. Scott, if you saved my guesstimates can you please post them or send them back to me? They were for 4”, 6” and 8” BIBs based on averaging out many of the designs Scott and GM did. I think they were 60, 70 and 80” tall but I can’t remember now.
Thanks,
Godzilla
I am using a shortened BIB for the 165k and it sounds amazing. After building a Straight Pipe and trying three different drivers in them (all sounding very good) I realized how forgiving this type of cabinet is. The BIB also seems forgiving. From my limited building experience it seems ported boxes present the greatest challenge – designs can easily sound too bassy, boxy, bloated or thin.
I think if you get close with your BIB dimensions you will get very good results. I suggested some dimensions a while back to Scott for ‘generic’ BIBs and lost the information. Scott, if you saved my guesstimates can you please post them or send them back to me? They were for 4”, 6” and 8” BIBs based on averaging out many of the designs Scott and GM did. I think they were 60, 70 and 80” tall but I can’t remember now.
Thanks,
Godzilla
zek said:@ Scottmoose
Please do some sim for Ff165K in "regular" BIB with L=168"
P.S. With these big BIB problem is to hihg position of driver from the floor (over 50"); what's the solution? 🙄
Experiment with a tri-fold? For the FE206 with L of 174, that would be 58 tall, and with z of 35, the driver would be, roughly, 19 inches from the floor. If you made a nice base to elevate the entire enclosure, you should have no problem tailoring it to your listening area. Also, if a slanted base was made to toe the box up, you may capture a wider sweet spot if you are not sitting.
Also, I just wanted to ask those of you who may know this, there has been a lot of talk on the FF165, and I am highly considering them for a build soon. Does the limited x-max, .3mm, have any negative effect on the sound? I ask this because i sometimes listen to a bit "heavier" music, and occassionally get carried away with the knob turning. If there is a limitation, would a FE206 or 207 be more pleasing to my application?
Hi Guys!
Just a question to Scott and I think it was Dmason....
Did you end up trying the Supravox 165 in the BIB?
I got an idea for a driver that has very similar measurements to the 165 but much cheaper and couldn't remember the outcome.
I think the Fs was a bit high at 65Hz or something. Could that have been it?
Stroop
Just a question to Scott and I think it was Dmason....
Did you end up trying the Supravox 165 in the BIB?
I got an idea for a driver that has very similar measurements to the 165 but much cheaper and couldn't remember the outcome.
I think the Fs was a bit high at 65Hz or something. Could that have been it?
Stroop
Godzilla said:
No problem Jeff, I've got them lurking on my HDD somewhere. I dig them out & get the over to you.
zayne742 said:
Not as such -the cone is supported better than a simulation appears to suggest. Probably room interaction. However, if you have a large-ish space & a liking for rock, then an 8in will certainly be a better bet.
Re the Supravox, the 'problem' is that it has a mid Q and Vas which demand a large cabinet. There are dimensions on the Zilla pages. However, if you want more grunt in the LF from this unit, you'd need to boost Sl to ~200in^2 to more Vb.
Hmm that's big!
It basically sits in between the supravox 165 and the ff165k but is 200mm! Aparently sounds nice. You know what I'm like full of silly ideas but takes me forever to get anything done!
Thanks for indulging me,
Stroop
It basically sits in between the supravox 165 and the ff165k but is 200mm! Aparently sounds nice. You know what I'm like full of silly ideas but takes me forever to get anything done!
Thanks for indulging me,
Stroop
That's two of us. One day I'll tell you about my idea for a new engine I'd like to put in my 800 Vitesse.
Scottmoose said:
I got a bit ahead of myself, actually meant the FE166, not the 8 inch counter parts. My rock days have toned down a bit with age, and now enjoy enjoying music, after your raving Lorleena is on my list. I did notice that the 6 and the 8 in the FF series both list a .3mm while the FE is listing a .6mm and 1.3mm respectively. The home for these is not a large room by any means, but if the volume is pushed passed normal, meaning somebody left me home alone, I wanted to make sure the FF's can perform without being stressed too much. I have always liked low xmax speakers, but they have a tendency to bottom out or flop a bit. But i have never heard the FF series.