why does a large fullrange speaker sound special?

kfa888 said:
No idea. Medium low to medium high :D Have not dug them out for a while. Have proper measuring equipment now so will do it some day. They have a really odd bell shaped cone.
Click to expand...

You should ask Dave Dlugos over at Planet_10 hifi about those drivers. Hes worked with tons of vintage ones, he may have the measurements you need already.
 
sfox52 said:
Thanks for that! ( when you are my age, 25kHz is but a memory...)
Click to expand...
:D

Many of Henry Kloss' less expensive speakers rolled-off soon after 15kHz and sometimes I wonder if he did that not just because it cost less to build a tweeter that did that, but because there was no reason to since so many people (especially guys over 30 or so) cannot hear much if anything above that point.
 
When ordered my FE207s, I was more than prepared to send them back. To be honest, I wasnt bat crazy about them at first, then I read that they had a long break-in period. About 300 hours has been put on them since, and they have transformed into an amazing speaker. Mine are about done at 14 or 15KHz, but I dont feel the need for a tweeter. My hearing is good only to 17KHz anyway.
 
whoaru99 said:
Huh?

Heard this saying once.....No highs, no lows; must be...a "full range" speaker. ;)
Click to expand...

Your mistaken the saying goes "No Highs" "No lows" must be a..... "Bose"
:D

BTW One of the best full range speakers I ever heard was a Altec 755 but they don't go low or high enough for me.
 
Last edited:
marc mc said:
It's a few things. Fullrangers have a realsim that is amazing and this makes them popular with people who have heard a lot of live acoustic music.
Click to expand...

Yep, that was the first thing I noticed when I got my Tekton model 8.1 speakers, which use the Fostex 207E (I think that's the number?). Only I described the level of realism as "eerie." :) Coherency? Amazing. Detail? Also amazing. Top-end airiness? Not so much, but everything in audio is a compromise unless you're incredibly rich!
 
BadassBob said:
When ordered my FE207s, I was more than prepared to send them back. To be honest, I wasnt bat crazy about them at first, then I read that they had a long break-in period. About 300 hours has been put on them since, and they have transformed into an amazing speaker.
Click to expand...

That's funny Bob, I had the exact same reaction. When my girlfriend got home from work her first comment was "it sounds like something is missing." Of course, I had a vastly different opinion of them after a few hours of listening.
 
Mr. Lin said:
That's funny Bob, I had the exact same reaction. When my girlfriend got home from work her first comment was "it sounds like something is missing." Of course, I had a vastly different opinion of them after a few hours of listening.
Click to expand...

I kept the shipping boxes the first 30 days I had my 8.1s. When my brother came over this past weekend, I finally got him to sit down and listen. His first reaction was that something was missing, but he was also standing up. I sat him down in the sweet spot, and he changed his tune pretty quick. Hes used to systems with the "smiley EQ"....cranked up bass with sizzling treble. The first thing he said was "theres too much midrange and not enough up high". Sure they dont have top end air, but everything else they do sounds, like you said, eerie. :yes:
 
BadassBob said:
When ordered my FE207s, I was more than prepared to send them back. To be honest, I wasnt bat crazy about them at first, then I read that they had a long break-in period. About 300 hours has been put on them since, and they have transformed into an amazing speaker. Mine are about done at 14 or 15KHz, but I dont feel the need for a tweeter. My hearing is good only to 17KHz anyway.
Click to expand...

I frankly prefer them to the Lowthers I've heard (in several different flavors of enclosures). Lowthers are capable of sounding scary-real, but they are awfully picky and most massmarket/pop music is painful to listen to on them ('specially in the form of redbook CDs). The FE207Es are reasonably well-balanced (some of the Fostex twincones tend towards shrillness) and are substantially more forgiving of so-so program material than their (far) higher priced cousins.

Just saying.

EDIT: Re: that PartsExpress 8" twincone with the pointy "phase plug"... Did you all look at the PDFs under the "Specifications" tab? Frequency response is certainly up-tilted as they say - fairly flat on axis from about 3kHz to 15 kHz; -10 dB at 500 Hz; -20 dB at 40 Hz. Might be a bit tizzy. Might be like an intra-cranial icepick; maybe it needs to be in a back-loaded horn a la Lowther. Anyone heard this driver yet? The price is certainly attractive - plus it has a "brushed aluminum raised logo" :-)
 
Last edited:
Altec Best said:
Your mistaken the saying goes "No Highs" "No lows" must be a..... "Bose"
:D
Click to expand...


Speaking of which I sometimes wonder why the full range fellas seldom stick up for Bose which makes several full range single driver and wide range single driver with woofer type speakers. Seems to me Bose was ahead of the curve on this thing.

Maybe the Bose fans are hearing and responding to the same things our single driver fans here are; coherancy, lack of a crossover in the midrange, nice imaging and so on. Mybe instead of making fun of Bose fans we should be learning from them?
 
mhardy6647 said:
EDIT: Re: that PartsExpress 8" twincone with the pointy "phase plug"... Did you all look at the PDFs under the "Specifications" tab? Frequency response is certainly up-tilted as they say - fairly flat on axis from about 3kHz to 15 kHz; -10 dB at 500 Hz; -20 dB at 40 Hz. Might be a bit tizzy. Might be like an intra-cranial icepick; maybe it needs to be in a back-loaded horn a la Lowther. Anyone heard this driver yet? The price is certainly attractive - plus it has a "brushed aluminum raised logo" :-)
Click to expand...



Yeah, the response on that thing looks scarey; a 14db rise from the lower to upper midrange.

Back horn loading generally works below 300hz or so; I don't think it would raise the sensitivity of enough of the range to balance the output. It might make for a nice "smiley face" response though.
 
Tom Brennan said:
Yeah, the response on that thing looks scarey; a 14db rise from the lower to upper midrange.

Back horn loading generally works below 300hz or so; I don't think it would raise the sensitivity of enough of the range to balance the output. It might make for a nice "smiley face" response though.
Click to expand...

The CTS drivers used in the original Bose 901 and also in Polk's original consumer loudspeaker, the Model Nine, are not bad sounding drivers. Not bad at all.
 
mhardy6647 said:
I frankly prefer them to the Lowthers I've heard (in several different flavors of enclosures). Lowthers are capable of sounding scary-real, but they are awfully picky and most massmarket/pop music is painful to listen to on them ('specially in the form of redbook CDs). The FE207Es are reasonably well-balanced (some of the Fostex twincones tend towards shrillness) and are substantially more forgiving of so-so program material than their (far) higher priced cousins. Just saying.
Click to expand...

Ive never heard Lowthers, but I have heard theyre very unforgiving, and require elaborate cabinets to make them sound right. When you do get the cab right, they supposedly sound amazing. Ive noticed with my FE207s that I always find myself listening to well mastered albums, because anything with tons of compression makes you run for cover. These speakers also seem to show any changes made in the system quite well.
 
Last edited:
Tom Brennan said:
Elaborate.
Click to expand...

Hell no. :D

OK, not a Bose bashing thread but any designs using "full range" drivers from them I have owned and heard (901 / 101) needed hammered to death by EQ to sound anywhere near full range and suffered from distortion and overall bad sound. The mutli way designs still can't seem to go high or low. for example an inexpensive vintage EPI speaker kills any comparable Bose example in similar configuration and cost a lot less. The Sub / sat HT stuff is only high and low and have no glorious mids I love. So in the end i find 99% of their product to use cheap drivers not implemented well and end in average sound at best. I personally would not look at Bose to learn anything but marketing. They have that nailed.
 
Tom Brennan said:
Speaking of which I sometimes wonder why the full range fellas seldom stick up for Bose which makes several full range single driver and wide range single driver with woofer type speakers. Seems to me Bose was ahead of the curve on this thing.

Maybe the Bose fans are hearing and responding to the same things our single driver fans here are; coherancy, lack of a crossover in the midrange, nice imaging and so on. Mybe instead of making fun of Bose fans we should be learning from them?
Click to expand...

C'mon now Tom I'm not making fun of any particular fans !! Just Bose in general,the company the masters of advertising I'm still laughing about that waveradio :D

That saying has been around for as long as I can remember.:yes: I didn't come up with it.
 
I'd love to try some big ol' full ranges in open baffles. Unfortunately my place is just not appropriate for it. Well, not without major reshuffling of my gear at the very least.

I dunno. I still might do it if I find drivers cheap enough :P
 
mhardy6647 said:
The CTS drivers used in the original Bose 901 and also in Polk's original consumer loudspeaker, the Model Nine, are not bad sounding drivers. Not bad at all.
Click to expand...

I believe this might be the same driver that my "Pioneer" A11EC80-02F is a copy of. I'm currently building Karlson K5 for them. :D

az
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom