We typically XO 240-350 Hz. We tried 160, that worked, but ended up preferring the higher XO. For the low XOs we use PLLXO, got higher XOs we have had some success with 1st order series XO.
dave
If you have EQ why are you using passive BSC?
BTW, we haven't used BSC at all for the uFonken or uFonkenSET.
dave
None on either of mine. Of course, they're placed on a desktop, and (very) close to a wall, so plenty of boundary reinforcement.
As for BSC on the Fonkens we have established that I'm a sissy who doesn't like 'honest' speakers.
Honestly? Because it was recommended above. And I learn how to calculate values, learn a little more about electronics, speaker design, etc. And I have sources that don't have EQ. Maybe for no good reason I think that hardware 'processing' = better than software processing.
But maybe I won't need the BSC when I get the 3116 amp today.
Dave, Don't worry about the email. I think I've picked a project with a 4" speaker to do after the Lance.
Since I'm getting happier with them I'll trying pushing them back close to the wall.
It's in my living room but i'm trying to get that workbench set to get to work on the Lance speakers. Prolly tomorrow, maybe tonight. I have to switch back to high level inputs on the sub, so more cable to bother with. Otherwise it would be easy peasy.
I'm really impressed with this bench for $129.
I'm really impressed with this bench for $129.
op, if youu dont like them, you dont like them. A fullrange is a huge compromise and maybe you dont like the fullrange compromise.
I sure dont either 🙂.
you absolutely need two subwoofer xo quite high to release the stress from the driver, which must make it sound bad due to too much bass work
I sure dont either 🙂.
you absolutely need two subwoofer xo quite high to release the stress from the driver, which must make it sound bad due to too much bass work
Last edited:
The good ones have are no less compromised than typical multiways, just a different set of compromises. FF85wk is not really a FR, used by itself 7 ocatves at best and the lower ones somewhat limited in terms of impact, A superb mid-tweeter thou.
We are talking here about using it in a 2-way system.
dave
Let's take this a bit further. Your.speakers are closer tobeing single driver FR than thee (granted execution on yours is superb).
Your speaker is a 2-way with 9 octave capability (by the specs). The near FR covering 7 octaves or so (40-5k), the (helper) tweeter the top 2 octaves.
In an FF85 2-way, the FF85 typically handles 5 1/2 - 6 octaves (240/350 to 20k) and the helper woofer the rest (in the OP's case he is only aiming at a 8 1/2 octave system, some of ours go 9 1/2).
Which is a more equable sharing of bandwidth? Which has an XO where ithe ear is less sensitive? Which has more consistent change in directivity (ie done right, no change in directivity at the XO)? Which one has less of the bass modulating the midrange/lower treble?
There is nothing wrong with the concept, we are just helping the OP improve his execution of it. I find your comment far too generalistic, out of context, and out to lunch.
I have heard your speakers, they are good, but a well executed FF85wk FAST can go head-to-head (beither driven by a 5w < $100 ampmind you)
dave
sorry, I hadnt read the whole thread at all.
But I have never heard any fullrange that was really truly satisfying in the highs. Maybe the ff85 is.
But I have never heard any fullrange that was really truly satisfying in the highs. Maybe the ff85 is.
When we 1st heard the FF85k we had been worrying about the price we would have to sell them for after doing our thing to them. Then we heard them and realized that they rivalled good $200 tweeters. The FF85wk is better yet.
dave
Kinda late to the party. We've covered that ground and I'm up to liking them, and a new better, more musical amp is sitting in a box in my living room. And then I'm just tweaking them for the sake of learning and getting them really dialed in. I have the wood for a new set of boxes for them, and I have project planned for some 4" FR speakers. Now you are caught up.
And with their help I went from asking advice on new speakers to an enjoyable set of speakers.
OK, at the risk of the incredibly obvious, over the last few years I think it's fair to say that digital audio has matured somewhat, and we DIYers have been treated to an embarrassment of affordable riches - miniDSP among them:
Welcome to the world of miniDSP | MiniDSP
And yes, the Decapos are a very well executed minimalistic design. Nothing that a DIYer couldn't approach for far less cost, of course.
Last edited:
Hi have the minidsp and it is not transparent enough to put in a serious main system. Only if you use the digital input, not the analog.
As for the decapo, really Chris?
I wish I could find a excellent 8 inch fullrange with a well executed phase plug with a clean natural roll off at 5khz. Im thinking to try the supravox.
I personnaly have never heard a driver sounding even close to the decapo midbass. Its a whole other league from MA or fostex or coral ime and basically everything I have heard so far in my life. The decapo redefines what hifi means in term of transparency. Its such a natural sounding driver and the way they image is crazy. I had never experienced anything close to that previously and I have heard a good bunch of speakers.
Last edited: