Go Back   Home > Forums > >
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

Fostex FT17H - hurts my ears
Fostex FT17H - hurts my ears
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 16th June 2004, 05:31 PM   #11
Saurav is offline Saurav
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oregon, USA
Wow, I'm using the FT17H down to about 6kHz. It's not the best tweeter I've heard, but I think it does OK. I've been thinking of trying a different tweeter for a while now, and maybe it is time to start looking at that again. I have a 2nd order electrical filter on it, if that makes any difference.

Quote:
OK, first, I'd strongly suggest a coat or two of dammar varnish.
Were you referring to the tweeter or the Eminence woofer?
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2004, 05:49 PM   #12
5th element is offline 5th element  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
5th element's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: England
I believe he was refering to the woofer.
__________________
What the hell are you screamin' for? Every five minutes there's a bomb or somethin'! I'm leavin! bzzzz! Now with website! www.5een.co.uk under construction.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2004, 09:39 PM   #13
Saurav is offline Saurav
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Oregon, USA
Thanks.

Has anyone ever damar'd a tweeter? I tried it once on a phenolic diaphragm, can't say I really heard a difference. The varnish just sort of dried on the diaphragm, there didn't seem to be anything for it to soak into. Maybe it was already doped with something. Anyway, I couldn't find an easy way to take the FT17H apart. If I decide to try a different tweeter, I'll probably try tweaks to this tweeter first. I decided not to try any tweaks on my PR170M0 (added duct seal to the basket legs, but that's all), the chances of ending up with something worse than what I have now seem very high.
  Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2004, 11:33 PM   #14
Greg B is offline Greg B  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
Of course I was referring to the Beta12LT woofer.

But sure, I've dammared a tweeter.

I found that a couple very thin coats of dammar on focal Ti tweeters removes 90% of the 'edge' they have. It didn't change FR significantly within my measurement capabilities at the time. I presume it took down the ~17khz breakup peak down a bit. It's very easy to do with a fine brush. I tested first on some cheap Dayton PE Ti tweeters. Those are very good BTW.

I still think the problem here is mostly the Eminence's breakup region, combined with mismatched levels. NO way is 2db attenuation enough.

There may be some baffle step issues as well.

GB
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th June 2004, 04:55 AM   #15
Dozuki is offline Dozuki
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Naptown
I'd also consider that the FT17's FR extends almost to 50K. Using this in loud situations can cause some uncomfort. I'm not saying that this is the original problem, but I have run some Piezo's in some monitors that went to 30K, and noticed that they took some 'getting used to'. I wouldn't say they hurt my ears, but were a bit uncomfortable at first at loud levels and i know that it was due to the extended frequency. I use Beta 12LTs in my monitors (different ones) with 94 db Motorla horn tweets. I choose the 94 db as they seemed more natural to my ear with the 12LTs at higher listening levels. The Beta's don't have an x-over, and the tweets just a simple 1st order (don't remeber at what point) so having an adjustable L-pad for different listening levels might be a good idea. I use an active eq set at a +3db hump at 400Hz, a -3 db hump at 1.25K Hz and a +2 db hump around 8K Hz. This adjustment is not from measurement, but by ear, and I've alway been complimented about the sound when I take the system out. I know that I tend to want less high end when I listen to loud levels and don't mind having the high end be a little more present when listening to more 'normal levels'. I guess this is why I don't use my 12LT Monitors at home system

-D.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd August 2004, 02:30 PM   #16
cyteen is offline cyteen  England
diyAudio Member
 
cyteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: S.E
I've shellac'd the whizzer on my beta12lta and have to say that the integration with the FT17h is much better.

I'm a little slow to do the same to the main cone as the shellac may be a little hard. Greb B talks of using amber shellac which is a little softer, and then on small cones.

I just have some commercial Rustins Button polish which says it contains pure shellac. It has worked well with the tweeter, does any one know if its worth the risk with the main cone?
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd August 2004, 05:57 PM   #17
Greg B is offline Greg B  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
My preferred doping scheme for a large wideband is shellac on the whizzer and dustcap, and dammar on the main cone.

Shellac on the main cone of a big driver can dry too hard, and make it ring like a bell.

This stuff has a lot to do with personal preference. It's tough to beat experimentation...

GB
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd August 2004, 09:20 PM   #18
cyteen is offline cyteen  England
diyAudio Member
 
cyteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: S.E
My first experiment was with the shellac and the whizzer and after a couple of coats had dried I was quite sure that it would not have been good to continue on with the main cone. But it good to have confirmation.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd August 2004, 11:19 PM   #19
John Sheerin is offline John Sheerin  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: California
My measurements showed the FT17H started to roll off above 10k. It was a smooth roll off, though - no nasty resonant spikes I could. Stored energy also looked good in the 5k-10k range, better than most 1" compression drivers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd August 2004, 03:42 AM   #20
moving_electron is offline moving_electron  United States
diyAudio Member
 
moving_electron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Where the rain does fall but the trees grow tall
Quote:
Originally posted by John Sheerin
My measurements showed the FT17H started to roll off above 10k.
That's weird if it was an on axis measurement, given it's specs. Fit's the specs for 30 degree off axis though.


http://www.madisound.com/ft17h.pdf
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Fostex FT17H - hurts my earsHide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Where to find Fostex FT17H in or near the UK? bigwill Multi-Way 12 14th June 2008 06:00 PM
JVC Car Stereo, Intelligent EQ, Hurts Ears voicetek Car Audio 0 15th July 2007 08:02 PM
FS: Fostex FT17H Illusus Swap Meet 2 6th March 2005 10:46 PM
Fostex FT17H with Audax PR170M0 - will this work? Saurav Multi-Way 22 14th April 2004 09:56 PM
New Project Beta 12LTA Fostex FT17H in a TQWT MIKET Multi-Way 27 23rd March 2004 04:14 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:30 AM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 15.00%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2019 diyAudio
Wiki