I built a Fostex recommended BLH for the 166esr driver about a year and half ago. I've used it with a 2a3 SET amp and have I've throughly enjoyed the speaker. It was my first adventure into fullrange speakers/horns and I must say I am hooked. I'm just wondering where one goes from here for improvement. I've been looking at the lowthers but people seem to have a love or hate response to them, so I'm not sure. Anyone with experience using the 166esr have any ideas on an upgrade path for me?
I like the 166esr's but seem to find a little bit missing on the top and bottom ends. I also find they lose some of their coherency on heavy rock but as I mostly listen to acoustic music I would never want to sacrifice the smooth midrange for more seperation.
Chad
I like the 166esr's but seem to find a little bit missing on the top and bottom ends. I also find they lose some of their coherency on heavy rock but as I mostly listen to acoustic music I would never want to sacrifice the smooth midrange for more seperation.
Chad
Not easily is the quick answer. The 166ES-R is one of the finest FR drivers around. Fostex know what they're doing. To get a signifiant upgrade, you'd have to shift to Lowthers or a multi-way horn system like the VOTT. Remember, no FR driver, however good it is, is ever going to be as good as a multi-way at rock or, say, big orchestral pieces: they just can't do the massive dynamic swings, though the better ones like the ES-R and Lowthers make a pretty fair fist of it.
Before changing drivers, you might want to try a different cabinet. Simple and quick would be to try a couple of BIB enclosures for them -see www.zillaspeak/bib.asp for ES-R dimensions. Beyond that; I'm currently working on a pair of ~8ft double horns for these, the standard 166, and the 168ESigma. Dave and I have done 3 big chamber, short horn cabinets (see the Spawn of Frugelhorn thread -Harvey, Iris and Bruce, Iris being the one for 6 1/2in drivers) and we're starting on long path, small chamber double horn fairly soon.
Scott
Before changing drivers, you might want to try a different cabinet. Simple and quick would be to try a couple of BIB enclosures for them -see www.zillaspeak/bib.asp for ES-R dimensions. Beyond that; I'm currently working on a pair of ~8ft double horns for these, the standard 166, and the 168ESigma. Dave and I have done 3 big chamber, short horn cabinets (see the Spawn of Frugelhorn thread -Harvey, Iris and Bruce, Iris being the one for 6 1/2in drivers) and we're starting on long path, small chamber double horn fairly soon.
Scott
double horn
one new technic solution would be the
POSAUNE specially made for Manger and Fostex 16 cm:
http://www.hm-moreart.de/7.htm
one new technic solution would be the
POSAUNE specially made for Manger and Fostex 16 cm:
http://www.hm-moreart.de/7.htm
Could try the 206ES-Rs, or the new 208 coming out next year. Or the top of the heap, as I understand, are the AER drivers.
I'd definitely be interested in how the double horns work out for the 166esr. I always liked the look of the Cain&Cain double horns.
Has anyone did a direct comparision between the 166esr and the 206esr? I was thinking of of the 206esr but wasn't sure if would be significant step up. Also the rumor of the 208esr sounds interesting. Maybe if I waited a 208esr and super tweeter would give me an improvemnent in the top and bottom ends?
I'd love to build a Lamhorn 1.8 type of enclosure for the an AER driver but have never found any DIY designs out there. HAs anyone out there ever tried to design such a cabnit? The AER I think at present is a little out of my price range but something I would definitely try and scrape the money together for if the right DIY design could be found.
Has anyone did a direct comparision between the 166esr and the 206esr? I was thinking of of the 206esr but wasn't sure if would be significant step up. Also the rumor of the 208esr sounds interesting. Maybe if I waited a 208esr and super tweeter would give me an improvemnent in the top and bottom ends?
I'd love to build a Lamhorn 1.8 type of enclosure for the an AER driver but have never found any DIY designs out there. HAs anyone out there ever tried to design such a cabnit? The AER I think at present is a little out of my price range but something I would definitely try and scrape the money together for if the right DIY design could be found.
Scott, Scott, Scott, what is wrong with you!
You know I am weak!
My 166ES-R BiB's are barely a few weeks old and now you have a new enclosure for me to build?
Everytime I walk into the hardware store they start to smile and ask
"how many sheets of ply today sir?"
So, how many will I need Scott?😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀
If you don't indulge yourself in this life, nobody else will 😉
Might take a little while guys as I've got a few things on at present, both in the audio world and elsewhere, but the design should hopefully appear before Christmas.
Re the ply, probably a total of 3 sheets of 4 x 8 for two cabinets. They'll be about 6ft tall with an 8ft pathlength, give or take.
Might take a little while guys as I've got a few things on at present, both in the audio world and elsewhere, but the design should hopefully appear before Christmas.
Re the ply, probably a total of 3 sheets of 4 x 8 for two cabinets. They'll be about 6ft tall with an 8ft pathlength, give or take.
Scott, I cannot believe you would let a doctorate get in the way of important things like hobbies
😉
Well, I am always up to a Christmas present.
Thanks Scott.
😉
Well, I am always up to a Christmas present.
Thanks Scott.
Hi all,
I have two 166esr sitting in their boxes and waiting for me to get off my back side and build those fostex BLH too.
I think an upgrade would be expensive... supravox, phy-hp, Aer, lowther, reps.
I've heard the lamhorn fed by 300B and it is great. To bad they don't sell the plans or something.
Myself, I'm thinking that if after some time I want to upgrade it will either be adding sub and super tweeter or if some new cabinet design comes out specifically for 166esr.
I'm also wandering if the DIATONE P-610MB might be an option too.
Or if fostex releases a limited edition version of the sigma series 168ez.
cheers
paba
I have two 166esr sitting in their boxes and waiting for me to get off my back side and build those fostex BLH too.
I think an upgrade would be expensive... supravox, phy-hp, Aer, lowther, reps.
I've heard the lamhorn fed by 300B and it is great. To bad they don't sell the plans or something.
Myself, I'm thinking that if after some time I want to upgrade it will either be adding sub and super tweeter or if some new cabinet design comes out specifically for 166esr.
I'm also wandering if the DIATONE P-610MB might be an option too.
Or if fostex releases a limited edition version of the sigma series 168ez.
cheers
paba
I also have been using the 166ESR in a back loaded horn. I added a sub similiar to the C & C Baily, using a Seas 10". Major improvement on the enjoyment factor. I am now investigating adding a supertweeter. Thinking of the Fostex T90A as offered by Madisound for their BK16 kit.
I have playing arround with full range drivers for 3-4 years and FE266ESR in the BLH is one of the best that I have heard.
Good Luck,
Bill
I have playing arround with full range drivers for 3-4 years and FE266ESR in the BLH is one of the best that I have heard.
Good Luck,
Bill
I've been researching the subwoofer idea. Anyone have any suggestions for a sub design that would intergrate well with a 166 esr BLH? The dipole subs seem to get a lot of positive responses but not sure easy it would be design one to fit in with the BLH. I'm not a bass freak so a quick and musical sub would be what I prefer.
I have the idea that only a horn load sub would integrate well, but I have no facts to support this theory.
But I also like the idea of powered sub that has an variable phase adjustment, so you can try to match the phase closely.
some horn sub ideas
www.billfitzmaurice.com
www.speakerplans.com/index.php?id=plans
cheers
paba
But I also like the idea of powered sub that has an variable phase adjustment, so you can try to match the phase closely.
some horn sub ideas
www.billfitzmaurice.com
www.speakerplans.com/index.php?id=plans
cheers
paba
Hi Boonedog,
If this helps at all, this is one of my future projects with the fostex fw167, coupled with a pair of metronomes. If you made it active with a T-amp and put caps in to specifically tune for bass or get a module... for what its worth I think it would be nice. Scottmoose did the measurements of course, simply because he rocks!
This is what he wrote;
Take line length to 170in, which will mean a cabinet ~85in tall.
Zdriver 34in
Sl=75in^2.
Stuff the entire first half of the line with 0.25lbs ft^3 of hollow-fibre damping material. That'll get you down to 30Hz at the very least.
I am after exactly the same bass as you.
If this helps at all, this is one of my future projects with the fostex fw167, coupled with a pair of metronomes. If you made it active with a T-amp and put caps in to specifically tune for bass or get a module... for what its worth I think it would be nice. Scottmoose did the measurements of course, simply because he rocks!
This is what he wrote;
Take line length to 170in, which will mean a cabinet ~85in tall.
Zdriver 34in
Sl=75in^2.
Stuff the entire first half of the line with 0.25lbs ft^3 of hollow-fibre damping material. That'll get you down to 30Hz at the very least.
I am after exactly the same bass as you.
free download
only a horn load sub would integrate well,
http://www.hm-moreart.de/95.htm
google translate would help,
free download an different measurements
only a horn load sub would integrate well,
http://www.hm-moreart.de/95.htm
google translate would help,
free download an different measurements
Attachments
Hi Boondog,
Follow this link for the sub that I built. More than adequate for my needs.
Bill
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=627919#post627919
Follow this link for the sub that I built. More than adequate for my needs.
Bill
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=627919#post627919
my experiences...
the 206es-r is an upgrade, yes, if you have a big room. the 166es-r will do in a smaller room, but the 206 really needs room to breathe. it has a completely different musical characteristic. it is really INTENSE.
the 166es-r? a little easier on the ears. a work of art. yes there are "different" drivers out there. better? hard to come by without multiplying the project price a few fistfuls of times.
the truely better stuff is nice. I am waiting till I bolster my bank account to even dream of playing with it.
diatone? should be really nice.
208es-r? save up alot of money. the supertweeters which they will most likely need are 700 a pop. the enclosures? think nessie or supremely built recommended enclosure.
I know this is probably redundant, and it is not meaning to undermine your past efforts with the 166 in the slightest, but have you thouroughly tuned the enclosure? what was the material of construction? was the construction process ideal?
I remember someone out there who built MDF recommended back horns for the es-r. others, trying to use it in an open baffle. I know I must come across as a meanie, but when they came back talking about problems I kinda chuckled. the lower fostex drivers are certainly easy to play with. to take them out of their paradigm. play with them, get great results. the higher end fostex drivers are a force to be reakoned with. they are high class back loaded horn drivers. nothing more, not a damn thing less. just cause they are cheap price wise does not mean that one cannot get a truely ridiculous amount of refinement out of them. refinement which claws at the heels, and frequently overtakes higher profile efforts. they not to be underestimated just because they are minimalist, underdamped, and "underbuilt." they are properly emphasized, not over emphasized. properly built, not overbuilt. etc. in many senses, I have found that regarding these drivers, a good starting point is to simply follow fostex's orthodoxy regarding them. build the best recommended enclosure you can for them. the recommended enclosures are well designed, and fostex has alot of R and D money to play with when designing them. not to say that you cannot do better, (I feel the abby is nicer than the recommended BLH for 166e, for instance) but it is more frequent to simply do different. fostex company has an orthodoxy about them. they operate within their own paradigm. they make things to work well in the japanese household and musical aesthetic. play with room placement endlessly. play with damping. play with wire. the es-r as an example is really hard to under amplify. not meaning power, but refinement.
the fostex company has an immense amount of resources at their disposal.
the few times I have heard it, I generally considered the fostex "room" at whichever show I was at to be the best room in the show from a sound standpoint. especially a cost standpoint. I put quotes around room because most of their associated equipment is not even available in the US. also, the senior fostex engineers seemed the most adept of any of the manufacturers at seemlessly turning the hotel room into a musical instrument, which is frequently one of the larger obsticles to all manufacturers. usually they had tricks up their sleeves to get their sound (like crazy cables, room EQ, damping, etc). the whole point to me was that the ingredients are there. and from this company they are cheap. It became my mission to unlock the mysteries of those ingredients' wider scale musical implimentation.
there is a chronic amount of misunderstanding and lack of patience with the american diy community manifesting itself as mdf recommended back horn enclosures, etc. i mean, whatever. people should do what they want for the sake of audio art. effort for the sake of effort should not be stifled. but these projects are expensive. especially expensive to REDO! I have certainly learned that lesson a few times.
in order to not sound like a compplete fanboy here, i will simply state the point of all this is that just because we do not have this specific paradigm available to us here does not mean that it is not worth studying and determining the worth of. with the absence of such, is it worth pursuing these projects? for my own purposes, yes. I feel like enough of a maniac to deal with this stuff. later, I might move to front horns, but for now, I enjoy being able to play with the many different sizes and formats of full range drivers as a means to musical enjoyment.
I find that alot of the fostex drivers are extremely discerning of amplifier quality. though strangely different from many other drivers, when poorly amplified, they do not even hint at their true capabilities. they simply scream at you to properly amplify them instead. this is caused by them being inherently underdamped perhaps - in many ways perfectly neutral. very uncommon ways at that. such that they do not anticipate poor amplification by initially limiting their inherent capabilities. this I feel is a design feature that is given for the japanese market, where superior amplification of tube and solid state is more readily available.
BIB for the 166es-r? trading compromises... it is a nice enclosure, in a big room. front mouth horn gives more of a monitor tone, bib, more low bass, less upper bass. bib has more ATTACHMENT of baffle front, which leads to its own distortion. the recommended back horn has a small baffle front, giving little of its own resonance.
I have used the 166es-r for almost two years now. tried it in a BUNCH of different enclosures. for musicality, I really liked the Walla Walla Wall - O - Sound. although, I shelved my pair for a while, I recently pulled them back out, stuck them in the BIBs i built for them which are now at a friend's house (who has a really nice room) and was dumbstruck. they really are a work of musical art in my opinion. they simply deliver music. they have immense clarity in some ranges, yes, they have less so in others, yes, but they have that clarity distributed in a proportional manner as to make them pleasing to listen to for long periods of time, among a whole host of other qualities that space, yes space prevents me from going into. as far as super tweeters go, I would recommend one if you are dying for it. I used the t90a, .47 cap. be careful about the attenuation of the tweeter. you might need to go transformer style to avoid colouration of the attenuated signal. it is a toughy. I ended up liking them without supertweeter with my current available resources (I do not have money for transformer type attenuators.
what will I end up building for them next (and probably finally)? the d-168 "super rare" swan type enclosure found on the "sound plaza IDA". google it. translate the website from japanese. there is lots of audio tidbits here. very interesting stuff.
the swan I feel will give me my desired sound from these drivers. especially, the zero point of baffle plane interests me. this makes up for the lesser quality basket and no brass ring availability. bass from swans can be quite heavy to say the least. especially musical and less colored than front exit as well. I have only heard the 108 version super swan - it is my favourite speaker to date, actually.
I will build the d-101s super swan for the fe108esII with rings and the whole deal and the d-168 with cain and cain style solid maple supra baffle, with t90a in a while. I have to finish school. speaking of...
see y'all
Clark
the 206es-r is an upgrade, yes, if you have a big room. the 166es-r will do in a smaller room, but the 206 really needs room to breathe. it has a completely different musical characteristic. it is really INTENSE.
the 166es-r? a little easier on the ears. a work of art. yes there are "different" drivers out there. better? hard to come by without multiplying the project price a few fistfuls of times.
the truely better stuff is nice. I am waiting till I bolster my bank account to even dream of playing with it.
diatone? should be really nice.
208es-r? save up alot of money. the supertweeters which they will most likely need are 700 a pop. the enclosures? think nessie or supremely built recommended enclosure.
I know this is probably redundant, and it is not meaning to undermine your past efforts with the 166 in the slightest, but have you thouroughly tuned the enclosure? what was the material of construction? was the construction process ideal?
I remember someone out there who built MDF recommended back horns for the es-r. others, trying to use it in an open baffle. I know I must come across as a meanie, but when they came back talking about problems I kinda chuckled. the lower fostex drivers are certainly easy to play with. to take them out of their paradigm. play with them, get great results. the higher end fostex drivers are a force to be reakoned with. they are high class back loaded horn drivers. nothing more, not a damn thing less. just cause they are cheap price wise does not mean that one cannot get a truely ridiculous amount of refinement out of them. refinement which claws at the heels, and frequently overtakes higher profile efforts. they not to be underestimated just because they are minimalist, underdamped, and "underbuilt." they are properly emphasized, not over emphasized. properly built, not overbuilt. etc. in many senses, I have found that regarding these drivers, a good starting point is to simply follow fostex's orthodoxy regarding them. build the best recommended enclosure you can for them. the recommended enclosures are well designed, and fostex has alot of R and D money to play with when designing them. not to say that you cannot do better, (I feel the abby is nicer than the recommended BLH for 166e, for instance) but it is more frequent to simply do different. fostex company has an orthodoxy about them. they operate within their own paradigm. they make things to work well in the japanese household and musical aesthetic. play with room placement endlessly. play with damping. play with wire. the es-r as an example is really hard to under amplify. not meaning power, but refinement.
the fostex company has an immense amount of resources at their disposal.
the few times I have heard it, I generally considered the fostex "room" at whichever show I was at to be the best room in the show from a sound standpoint. especially a cost standpoint. I put quotes around room because most of their associated equipment is not even available in the US. also, the senior fostex engineers seemed the most adept of any of the manufacturers at seemlessly turning the hotel room into a musical instrument, which is frequently one of the larger obsticles to all manufacturers. usually they had tricks up their sleeves to get their sound (like crazy cables, room EQ, damping, etc). the whole point to me was that the ingredients are there. and from this company they are cheap. It became my mission to unlock the mysteries of those ingredients' wider scale musical implimentation.
there is a chronic amount of misunderstanding and lack of patience with the american diy community manifesting itself as mdf recommended back horn enclosures, etc. i mean, whatever. people should do what they want for the sake of audio art. effort for the sake of effort should not be stifled. but these projects are expensive. especially expensive to REDO! I have certainly learned that lesson a few times.
in order to not sound like a compplete fanboy here, i will simply state the point of all this is that just because we do not have this specific paradigm available to us here does not mean that it is not worth studying and determining the worth of. with the absence of such, is it worth pursuing these projects? for my own purposes, yes. I feel like enough of a maniac to deal with this stuff. later, I might move to front horns, but for now, I enjoy being able to play with the many different sizes and formats of full range drivers as a means to musical enjoyment.
I find that alot of the fostex drivers are extremely discerning of amplifier quality. though strangely different from many other drivers, when poorly amplified, they do not even hint at their true capabilities. they simply scream at you to properly amplify them instead. this is caused by them being inherently underdamped perhaps - in many ways perfectly neutral. very uncommon ways at that. such that they do not anticipate poor amplification by initially limiting their inherent capabilities. this I feel is a design feature that is given for the japanese market, where superior amplification of tube and solid state is more readily available.
BIB for the 166es-r? trading compromises... it is a nice enclosure, in a big room. front mouth horn gives more of a monitor tone, bib, more low bass, less upper bass. bib has more ATTACHMENT of baffle front, which leads to its own distortion. the recommended back horn has a small baffle front, giving little of its own resonance.
I have used the 166es-r for almost two years now. tried it in a BUNCH of different enclosures. for musicality, I really liked the Walla Walla Wall - O - Sound. although, I shelved my pair for a while, I recently pulled them back out, stuck them in the BIBs i built for them which are now at a friend's house (who has a really nice room) and was dumbstruck. they really are a work of musical art in my opinion. they simply deliver music. they have immense clarity in some ranges, yes, they have less so in others, yes, but they have that clarity distributed in a proportional manner as to make them pleasing to listen to for long periods of time, among a whole host of other qualities that space, yes space prevents me from going into. as far as super tweeters go, I would recommend one if you are dying for it. I used the t90a, .47 cap. be careful about the attenuation of the tweeter. you might need to go transformer style to avoid colouration of the attenuated signal. it is a toughy. I ended up liking them without supertweeter with my current available resources (I do not have money for transformer type attenuators.
what will I end up building for them next (and probably finally)? the d-168 "super rare" swan type enclosure found on the "sound plaza IDA". google it. translate the website from japanese. there is lots of audio tidbits here. very interesting stuff.
the swan I feel will give me my desired sound from these drivers. especially, the zero point of baffle plane interests me. this makes up for the lesser quality basket and no brass ring availability. bass from swans can be quite heavy to say the least. especially musical and less colored than front exit as well. I have only heard the 108 version super swan - it is my favourite speaker to date, actually.
I will build the d-101s super swan for the fe108esII with rings and the whole deal and the d-168 with cain and cain style solid maple supra baffle, with t90a in a while. I have to finish school. speaking of...
see y'all
Clark
One additional thought that I didn't share before, are the Veravox drivers. They don't get much discussion, but I have the 7xs and love them. I had some of the 166ES-Rs on test OBs. (I realize, not the correct implementation, but wasn't listening for bass anyway, (had a small sub to help) just overall tone and enjoyment.) They weren't run in, I'll admit that. I did put some hours on them for a while, but they weren't all they way there. I also tried Lowthers, 168E Simga's. etc. In the end. I preferred the whizzerless drivers with the Veravoxs a clear winner, to my ears. By far, the best driver I've ever had / heard. For now, they sit in a box. I have a project under way, but a recent move has me short on space, so may need to rethink my boxes.
Anyway, I've heard the 5x and 7x are both amazing. Well worth a listen, in my opinion.
Anyway, I've heard the 5x and 7x are both amazing. Well worth a listen, in my opinion.
yeah, the veravox look intrigueing. where does one buy in the US?
I would love to hear more good OB systems. the few I have ghetto rigged stuck around alot longer than I thought they would...
Clark
I would love to hear more good OB systems. the few I have ghetto rigged stuck around alot longer than I thought they would...
Clark
- Status
- Not open for further replies.