I like my tubes, I like my digital and I like my solid state amps. Only the tubes have ‘scary real’ vocals. But on well recorded material they all do very well.
Hope the 165k fits in the same hole as the 168S! I can’t wait to do a side by side comparison in my BIBs before the week ends.
Hope the 165k fits in the same hole as the 168S! I can’t wait to do a side by side comparison in my BIBs before the week ends.
I suspect you'll get deeper bass & a smoother / creamier midrange with the 165s Jeff, though never having heard the original 168s, I wouldn't like to say for certain. The 165s are lovely units though & much under-rated. Now, if only Fostex would make an FX160...
Zilla
I'll be curious as well. I think you'll like going away from a whizzer, as they do cause audible distortion.
However, I'd wait to compare until you have a few hundred hours on the 165s.
Enjoy!
I'll be curious as well. I think you'll like going away from a whizzer, as they do cause audible distortion.
However, I'd wait to compare until you have a few hundred hours on the 165s.
Enjoy!
Scottmoose said:
add to Dave's wish list:
FE128something or other: Sigma cone/ surround/ spider (pleated and ribbed and factory preconditioned for extra, long lasting pleasure!), wooden phase plug, die-cast frame, alnico magnet
FX120 is somewhat close to what I've got in mind, but sensitivity is a bit low for low watt SET amps.
Has anyone yet reported experience on direct comparisons of the FF( Kenaf/AL dome cap) series to similar sized units in the FE series in the same cabinets?
Don't you wish that some DIY geek at Fostex parent engineering division would read these forums?
chrisb said:
Chris,
would be nice - but the resulting driver would cost an arm and a leg and deny us the satisfaction to tweak something affordable into a tailormade driver that can
the factory stuff. Having said that...oh well, my pair of 206 are still on a shelf in my basement, awaiting surgery (and the day when I can afford the square mile of ply to build the Sachikos). Reason why I haven't had a go at it yet? I'm chicken...
PitHello...just one question, because there are sooooo many posts and I can't read them all.
Did anybody build the BIB with the FE103E?
Did anybody build the BIB with the FE103E?
larkinrulez said:
I built one pair with FE107E, which is a shielded version of 103.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=90973&highlight=
gychang
Looks like Dr Chang has become hooked on DIY speakers. Imagine my surprise...
Has anyone built BIB with FE126? I would think that might be hard to beat.
For those who cannot wait for genuine Tone Tubby hemp cones, I noticed the "Hemp Matrix" --whatever that is, are available from
www.solen.ca including a 4.5, 6.5, which looks sort of interesting, and an 8 inch coaxial, although no technical info exists on whether it even comes with a compression driver, etc., and no measurements exist for any of the drivers. The 4.5 clearly has been mounted on a cloned 4.5 Fostex flange, which makes it interesting for the smaller Fostex-based BIB's. I like that one.
For genuine HempTone cones, go to www.abrown.com click on Sales, for Tone Tubby real Hemp 8 inch wideband drivers. This run has copper shorting rings which seems to have pushed the high end UP, and I know for a fact that the cone is currently being redesigned, and improved. They are planning an Alnico version, as well as 8 inch higher Q "guitar" driver, with "insane" high frequency response, according to John Harrison. "Insane," is good, and is about as technical as these dyed-in-the-wool rockers from where else, Sonoma County, are likely to get. The point is, they get the point, and are moving fast to expand their line-up of REAL HempTone drivers.
Has anyone built BIB with FE126? I would think that might be hard to beat.
For those who cannot wait for genuine Tone Tubby hemp cones, I noticed the "Hemp Matrix" --whatever that is, are available from
www.solen.ca including a 4.5, 6.5, which looks sort of interesting, and an 8 inch coaxial, although no technical info exists on whether it even comes with a compression driver, etc., and no measurements exist for any of the drivers. The 4.5 clearly has been mounted on a cloned 4.5 Fostex flange, which makes it interesting for the smaller Fostex-based BIB's. I like that one.
For genuine HempTone cones, go to www.abrown.com click on Sales, for Tone Tubby real Hemp 8 inch wideband drivers. This run has copper shorting rings which seems to have pushed the high end UP, and I know for a fact that the cone is currently being redesigned, and improved. They are planning an Alnico version, as well as 8 inch higher Q "guitar" driver, with "insane" high frequency response, according to John Harrison. "Insane," is good, and is about as technical as these dyed-in-the-wool rockers from where else, Sonoma County, are likely to get. The point is, they get the point, and are moving fast to expand their line-up of REAL HempTone drivers.
Greets!
Speaking of Hemp drivers, what has become of the Adire connection? Are they doing the re-design and/or going to manufacture it in their 'new' plant?
GM
Speaking of Hemp drivers, what has become of the Adire connection? Are they doing the re-design and/or going to manufacture it in their 'new' plant?
GM
What is that big thing about the Hemp-drivers.
Are they really THAT good?
I coulg get this one in germany:
http://www.spectrumaudio.de/breit/hempFR810HQ.jpg
Are they really THAT good?
I coulg get this one in germany:
http://www.spectrumaudio.de/breit/hempFR810HQ.jpg
The Hemp drivers do sound nice. The coax has unique prospects for a BIB. From what I hear, the VAS and Q are both much (much, much in the case of VAS) lower than the fullrange models. A much smaller enclosure would be nice, but given the extra depth of the coax, I'm not sure a regular ol' BIB could be made. They will raise the possibility of a chambered BIB. 12" and 15" coax's evidentally exist too. I doubt they'll be BIBable for most.
They have were demo'd at THE show in Vegas by a new monitor maker:
http://theshowlasvegas.com/main/exhibitors_profile.php?gbID=387
Dick Olsher has a grainy pic on "enjoy the music" too. 100% hemp cabs sure take the hemp craze to a new level.
Larkinrulez: unless spectrum has some left on the shelf, that model has been supplanted by the new ones. My guess is Spectrum will be able to get whatever exists, but everything with Hemp Acoustics requires patience.
pj
They have were demo'd at THE show in Vegas by a new monitor maker:
http://theshowlasvegas.com/main/exhibitors_profile.php?gbID=387
Dick Olsher has a grainy pic on "enjoy the music" too. 100% hemp cabs sure take the hemp craze to a new level.
Larkinrulez: unless spectrum has some left on the shelf, that model has been supplanted by the new ones. My guess is Spectrum will be able to get whatever exists, but everything with Hemp Acoustics requires patience.
pj
GM said:
I'm pretty sure that Dan has moved to primamrily a design role. The new Chile plant was boxed up and shipped to Seattle, and -- as i understand it, remains somewhat in limbo.
dave
Greets!
Ah! That explains a lot and I see they've changed their website yet again. Thanks! I wonder if he still has his 'day' job........
GM
Ah! That explains a lot and I see they've changed their website yet again. Thanks! I wonder if he still has his 'day' job........
GM
Greets!
I've never 'done the math' to figure the exact gap required to continue an expansion into a corner, etc., but calcing the pipe's acoustic Xmax is an OK rule-of-thumb if the system is tuned low like this one is, or 8" minimum gap for ~134"^2.
Your layout is normally how I made them, then it was just a matter of tuning it via changing the gap to the wall or corner. I never perceived them as having a dipole-like presentation as some folks claim for the upward firing BIB though, so they probably sound different and should in theory measure different, but as to which may sound subjectively better is up to the individual.
GM
I've never 'done the math' to figure the exact gap required to continue an expansion into a corner, etc., but calcing the pipe's acoustic Xmax is an OK rule-of-thumb if the system is tuned low like this one is, or 8" minimum gap for ~134"^2.
Your layout is normally how I made them, then it was just a matter of tuning it via changing the gap to the wall or corner. I never perceived them as having a dipole-like presentation as some folks claim for the upward firing BIB though, so they probably sound different and should in theory measure different, but as to which may sound subjectively better is up to the individual.
GM