Fertin project - calling all open baffle experts

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Peter,
wow, took a long time to follow my invitation. Welcome! :)

The man behind BlackForest Audio is Volker Kühn, former head of audioplan. He is the distributor for Germany and i bought my Fertins from him.

woofer open baffle: please look at the pixes i posted. Yes, open baffle similar to Linkwitz. After having heard preliminary open baffle woofers, i would not dream ofcombining anything else with the Fertin open baffle.

:idea: Heck, Linkwitz, any idea how to manoever him to joining our forum?

Amp: i predict the 45 PP makes it. The Fertin loves a good PP in open baffle mode, i prefer it to SET amps. I have Manfred Huber's 46 PP driving the Fertins.
 
Fertins

Bernhard,

I actually signed up in February, but was busy getting a review turntable out the door, etc., etc., and one thing leads to another. Now I'm looking to find new ways to spend money on audio, other than just making 'tables.

Do I understand that you are bi-amping the speakers? In your estimation, can my puny 2 watts carry the freight if I do a passive series cross between the woofer(s) and the Fertins? at about 100Hz? I don't have a problem with 2 watts and the 16" Fane/TADs crossed at 1k8, BTW.

Is there any reason to be talking to BlackForest rather than Fertin?

Peter C
 
dice45 said:
Peter,
Amp: i predict the 45 PP makes it. The Fertin loves a good PP in open baffle mode, i prefer it to SET amps. I have Manfred Huber's 46 PP driving the Fertins.

Why do you prefer PP to SET with the Fertins?
What is better about the sound in your opinion?
The extra power/headroom for better bass?
If so, can't a 300B SET give you similarly enough power?

Also, (appoligize if I already asked this) - have you heard
the Phy-HP KM30 and how would you compare the sound
to your Fertins?

thanks, -Brad-
 
P-Ps

My experience is that the 45 P-Ps have more meat in the lower registers, presence if you will, than either a capacitor coupled or direct coupled 45 SET. This might be a plus with an "FR" speaker, with or without a woofer.

Not everyone agrees about the differences between my amps, though. Many have expressed a preference (that I don't necessarily share) for the direct coupled Loftin-Whites on the the same set up. The Loftin-Whites have a certain finesse that can't be ignored, though, and I do run them with Cunningham globes rather than the Silvertone 45 STs that the P-Ps seem to prefer.

YMMV.

Peter C
 
Re: P-Ps

reverendclark said:
My experience is that the 45 P-Ps have more meat in the lower registers, presence if you will, than either a capacitor coupled or direct coupled 45 SET. This might be a plus with an "FR" speaker, with or without a woofer.
Peter C

Thanks for that insight because now that you mention it, there does seem to be something synergistic with flea power pp and open baffle. Maybe the midrange is so palpable and the bass on the light side that open baffle doesn't need the midrange thickness of SET and does need the extra tautness of pp for the bass?

Brian
 
I'm a huge believer in Keeping It Simple, Stupid. My "A" speaks right now are big co-axials with series crossovers. The Fertins won't replace them, they'll go in another room, but I don't want complex. They're too damn hard to tune.

I'm far more likely to do Bernhard's suggestion in his drawings from a few days ago, referring to the Great Linkwitz for Guidance. Best of all worlds, I'd like to not use a woofer at all, but that's not likely to provide the best performance. The 16" Fanes I'm using now have meaningful output at 20 Hz, reflex loaded into 7.5 cuft. I'd sure hate to give that up. Sounds like the plan would be to use Bernhard's setup with a pair of 4 ohm 100dB woofers in series to get them to match dBs and do a series crossover.

Peter C
 
frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
Paid Member
Peter Daniel said:
In your drawing the Fertin's baffle stands directly on the subs' enclosure. Two 18' woofers generate a lot of vibrations which certainly affect the mid/highs driver.. Aren't you concerned about it?

One thing Bernhard could do to (dramatically IMO) improve the bottom is to load the 2 woofers push-push which eliminates the majority of the vibration from the physical movement of the drivers.

dave
 
Catch-all post

Catch-all since my last post here:

Peter C,
Point is: noone managed to contact Michel Fertin directly. One has to get in contact to Michel Prin or BlackForest.
I admit i did not try it so far. Black Forest does so few to promote them that i considered to visit the Fertin factory personally as soon as i know where to seek them. I pondered to ask Fertin if he wants a new distributor and suggest myself for that.

But before i do that my speaker has to work, i have to have a list of possible customers and so on. And before i have to get a hand on a health problem i have. Before any entrepreneurial activities.

Brad,
Peter C hit it: the open baffle sounds best if the midrange is not too fat and there is some control in the bass. Which are PP strengthes.

I know the link you posted. Too complex for my taste.

Brad & Peter Daniel,
I intentionally avoid to have the FR and the woofers on the same baffle; i am convinced the woofers will misuse the FR diaphragm as baffle. I wanted to have as much baffle as possible between woofer and FR and to be able to add holes to the lower edge of the FR baffle in case the woofers disturb the FR alltoomuch.

I chose my baffle for space reasons: I wanted to stay within a given width and foot print; moreover i wanted to have both woofer's diaphragm area working. So a compound pushpush orientation was not desirable. I have observed that vibrations are not that dramatic in an open baffle (there is no pressure building up). I have used the Beymas playing ear-deafening level and they did not wander around by vibration; in fact the basket had almost no vibrations.
What was important to me: to mount one magnet up and one diaphragm up. BTW, otherwise i would not have kept my foot print spec. The thind is space-optimized to the max.

No, i am not concerned about vibrations. There is hardly any free baffle for the woofers, there is a central bracing incredibly stiffening the woofer socket .

Let's face it folks: an ultimate setup would need 4 baffles, not two. I do not have space for that. Besides that, this baby eventualy could become a product, a 4 baffle setup? C'mon! I haven't got Yamamura reputation.

Groups purchase: well, i am getting used to it. But if i do it, there must be some benefit in for me. Means: i do it contacting Fertin directly and have got the chance to eventually establish a business relation.
Ok, count me in for coming crimes.
Anyone speaking French fluently among those who are interested? No? :sigh: then i have to de-rust my French
 
frugal-phile™
Joined 2001
Paid Member
Re: Catch-all post

dice45 said:
moreover i wanted to have both woofer's diaphragm area working. So a compound pushpush orientation was not desirable

You are thinking isobarik when i say push-push. A push-push uses all the driver area and cancels the drivers newtonian motion (like a PP cancels even order harmonics).

Perhaps the pictures of this push-push concept will help.

dave
 
breaking in observation

All the action here seems to happen while I'm sleeping!

About 100 hrs now and I notice that as they run in, the motor assembly is building up a residual magnetism which is improving things much. Now even before I switch on the power supply, the speakers pay music at reduced level. With the power on, my 45 pp amp is sounding much more powerful than at the beginning, soundstage is getting to be gigantic. BAss is creeping downward and midrange dynamics becoming more explosive.

These drivers are so resolving, every change of supporting gear can be clearly heard. Setting VTA in my Thorens 125 has become a snap. They are proving to be an excellent tool as well as transducer of music. With tt I had expected the groove noise to become prominent because of the high levels of mid and treble energy, but it wasn't so. Stylus glides just as quietly as in my other system. Weird, this hifi.

Brian Cherry
 
Bernhard,

Hope you feel better, I spent most of last winter with the flu and never felt lousier.

I don't know how many participants could be gotten together for any kind of group buy, assuming that there was one to be had. As I said I've already tried contacting Fertin's agent. If and when he ever gets back to me, I can ask him myself about quantity discounts. The Fertins do seem to be the best choice of the three FC drivers of which I am aware (PHY and Supravox.)

As an aside, I am less concerned about vibration from the woofers. I've never done anything quite like what you sketched, but it's generally large expanses of cabinet panels that are hard to tame, not smaller ones. I certainly am not trying to make my ears bleed with this set up. I like to rock and roll as well as the next guy, but I'd sure miss any hearing I'd ruin this late in life. A properly constucted cabinet of that size shouldn't have resonance difficulties at any sane listening level.

Do I assume correctly the the wings on your implentation are fixed? maybe using piano hinges to give a good, consitent attachment for the whole length, and maybe some added portability? I would actually be far more concerned about what stray resonances the baffle panels would pick up from the woofers, directly or indirectly, than from the woofer cabinets themselves. Maybe some judiciously applied battens on the back side?

Peter C
 
baffle size in context

In situ and with best placement close to the wall (so far) 80 x 200cm baffle isn't that intrusive.
Brian
 

Attachments

  • fertin.jpg
    fertin.jpg
    62 KB · Views: 1,722
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.