Anyone ever had any experience with this Fountek driver?

[altoncustomtech 773]

I was scrolling through PE's website last night and ran across a driver that I found interesting.  The Fountek FR135EX 5" Full Range driver.  First of all, I'm surprised that anyone could get the upper extension to consider it a full range with a cone that large and I'm sure beaming would be a major issue if used off axis.  When I look at them though I see one thing they could do that a 3" couldn't which is lower end extension.  The only real problem I have with the 3" full ranges that I'm using now is the fact that lower/deeper vocals and other such information is pretty anemic.  That requires the midbass drivers to reach up a little more than is optimal to bridge the gap keeping things sounding natural but also causing a small shift in the sound stage/image due to the distance between their placements.

 

My thoughts are that if the FR135EX was placed properly on axis to prevent beaming and it could ACTUALLY (being the key factor) reach the upper registers without any more issue than the 3" drivers can do then it would/should have a little more body and realism to the lower end that the 3" lack and make a nearly perfect point source driver.  Perhaps?

 

I just don't have the experience with a great number of drivers on the market be it DIY/raw drivers or commercial/retail brands to even have a clue how to compare this driver and it's perspective performance in such an application.

 

So, anyone got any opinions, experience with it, etc?  If they weren't $99 a piece I'd have done bought them to find out for myself, but at that price that's REALLY hard to justify doing.

[///M5 2,833]

Those will be a huge hot mess in a car. Even 4" FR's have a super teeny sweet spot. I move my head 6" in my office and the sound is annoyingly bad compared to when I have it where it should be. Using w4-1337's in ported enclosures with a sub crossed in on the low end. Expect to also need rather heavy eq on an FR of larger size.

Has to be a way to help your install though. Although by nature 3" drivers are anemic.

[altoncustomtech 773]

They certainly are and I'm not looking for miracle answers either.  I was just hoping to begin discussion about the subject since I'm fairly certain once the SLS's get installed the anemic bottom end of the full ranges and the troubled top end of those in midbass duty will only compound that issue.

 

I do have to say that it's not real bad, not bad at all.  I only notice it when the music information in that range is heavy in certain songs, otherwise the MLI's and FR88's blend quite seemlessly the rest of the time.  I was just wondering if something with a little more cone area could help without ruining what the full ranges can do on the top end.  I assumed 5" was a huge stretch to do much good in a full range application, though I would have thought 3-1/2" or 4" would still be alright as long as the drivers were actually on axis.

 

Thanks for the reply Sean, I know you'll always shoot the answers straight, lol.

[Impious 1,476]

Eliminate a lot of your troubles by eliminating the "full range", run a tweeter on top like you are supposed to and then you can adjust your midrange driver to fit your FR goals with much less grief.

[altoncustomtech 773]

Okay, but I thought the purpose of using the full range/dedicated midbass combo was to alleviate issues that can be associated to using separate tweeter/mid on the high side by essentially having a point source driver for the majority of the musical information we hear.

 

To me, and in my own opinion, the full ranges are giving me pretty much exactly what I wanted in my truck.  A nice, wide, and stable sound stage and image that sounds great on pretty much everything I play on it.  I don't have a loss of "sizzle" on the top end that bothers many others, at least not enough to bother me or to miss it.  The midrange is spot on for my listening tastes and the output is more than adequate for my listening needs/habits.  Like I said the only issue I have is that on the occasional song that focuses on it, the blend between the midbass and the full range can be noticed.  Otherwise, on the rest of the music I play on it, I don't notice anything.  

 

I'm having more fun playing with this setup than I have any other so it's no big deal.

[///M5 2,833]

More of an enclosure might help the low end of the 3 as well.

With the 5" you will miss the sparkle. The 4's in my office give me plenty, but sitting position is critical.

[altoncustomtech 773]

Yeah, I've wondered on more than one occasion if the old Logitech pods were hurting response or not.  I figured I would get my answer when I get the fiberglass sail panel pods built.  I have to remember that since these aren't permanently installed, nor the final drivers I planned on using/trying that my results will change in the future anyway.  Again, the most fun I've had playing with speakers in quite some time.

 

I'm not surprised that the 5" would have issues with the high end.  The spec sheet graph shows a fairly level response out to 20khz, but I know it doesn't work that way in use.  How much more critical than the three inches is it really, at least in my application?  Sitting in the drivers seat with the drivers directly on axis with me there's not typically any situations where I wouldn't be inside the sweet spot.

[Impious 1,476]

Okay, but I thought the purpose of using the full range/dedicated midbass combo was to alleviate issues that can be associated to using separate tweeter/mid on the high side by essentially having a point source driver for the majority of the musical information we hear.

And in return you give yourself another dozen headaches to deal with that create inaccuracies in the reproduction. Poor power response, small sweet spot, worse frequency response, generally diminished top end response, aiming now becomes a major concern on the install, intentionally running the driver through the break-up region increases distortion and worsens frequency response, limited choices in driver selection, etc etc etc. There's no free lunch. The "issues" of having non-point source drivers can for the most part be dealt with electronically and with proper tuning...many of the issues that arise from using a single "full range" driver can't be fixed, electronically or otherwise. There are FAR more advantages to running a tweeter than Not. Sure, you could use a full range and get a system that sounds acceptable...does not mean it won't or couldn't sound and perform better with a tweeter

Sorry, I just don't understand the whole full range fad. I fail to see one legitimate example of where it performs better on the whole. I can drive my car with only 3 tires....but it sure as hell drives better with 4.

[j-roadtatts 1,129]

If the midrange is on axis and mounted with a tweeter, a 4" or 5" should work stellar with the appropriate processing? 

[Impious 1,476]

See below.

[Impious 1,476]

If the midrange is on axis and mounted with a tweeter, a 4" or 5" should work stellar with the appropriate processing?

Sorry, I COMPLETELY missed the "with a tweeter" part when I posted my response last night. My fault. Yes, with moderate processing and tuning and proper speaker installation a 4" to 5" mid with a tweeter would work wonderfully. Really if you cross the midrange driver below beaming as you should then the aiming of the mid isn't that important or critical...which is yet another advantage of using the tweeter on top. Plus the amount of FR smoothing and anomalies that would need to be worked out would be less with the mid/tweet combo than trying to run a driver full range.

[///M5 2,833]

Sorry, I just don't understand the whole full range fad. I fail to see one legitimate example of where it performs better on the whole. I can drive my car with only 3 tires....but it sure as hell drives better with 4.

The fad stems from doing a 2 way. A 2 way with an FR is a huge improvement to a 2 way with a 7 & tweet. Yes lots of factors and sure a tweeter helps, but there is quite the jump from simple 2 way processing to 3.

[///M5 2,833]

F

If the midrange is on axis and mounted with a tweeter, a 4" or 5" should work stellar with the appropriate processing?

If that portion of the front stage only needs to play nice from 300Hz+ I'd much prefer a single 3" driver to a 5" and a tweet. The caveat of course being a car with a dash where this can actually work. Physical limitation cannot be overcome.

[Impious 1,476]

Sorry, I just don't understand the whole full range fad. I fail to see one legitimate example of where it performs better on the whole. I can drive my car with only 3 tires....but it sure as hell drives better with 4.

The fad stems from doing a 2 way. A 2 way with an FR is a huge improvement to a 2 way with a 7 & tweet. Yes lots of factors and sure a tweeter helps, but there is quite the jump from simple 2 way processing to 3.

Really with some basic knowledge it shouldn't be terrible to accomplish a 3-way. You have another crossover point to select, but if one applies the logic of crossing as high as you can while avoiding the cone break-up node on the mid and cutting it off below beaming, that will work itself out rather trivially. Aside from that you set TA just like you would for any other speaker set, and then smooth the FR which will likely be far LESS of a chore with the 3-way set than trying to rangle in the FR of a full range, cone break up, beaming and all. Installation will be much more smooth as aiming of the midrange isn't all that critical and it's not hard to nail the aiming of a tweeter due to their small size. Plus you can locate the drivers in a better location than throwing the widebander on the dash and dealing with the FR issues of the associated reflections. Stick the midrange somewhere away from the a-pillar/windshield and stick the tweet in the sail panel.

I really think nailing a 3-way for a novice would be far easier than a widebander

[///M5 2,833]

In a car with a decent dash it is WAY easier with the widebander. WAY.

[95Honda 486]

I bought a case (like 16 or 24 or something stupid like that) of the first 4.5"  full range Adire CSS drivers (Like FR125s or something, I can't remember the model) back in 03' or 04'.  I used them mostly for home audio, but I did play with a few pairs in an automtive environment.

 

A few things of note-

 

Even being 4.5" or so in diameter, they still beam, alot, especially where they are touted for having a good top end.  They did not sound very good off axis at all.  I added tweeters to most of the installs.

 

They don't play very loud, at all.  A 4.5" driver (even with the 1/2" or so of stroke) doesn't have a lot of output, especially if you are driving.  I blew one actually, fried the voicecoil.

 

They sound really good on-axis at moderate levels, especially if the aren't being overdriven. 

 

They don't have much bottom end unless you put them in a very well designed enclosure.  They suck in a car door.

 

I did buy a pair of the Dayton Neo 8" fullranges, they are still in the box, but I think I won't even entertain putting these in a car, they simply will not work off-axis in the slightest up on top...

[altoncustomtech 773]

I certainly don't have the knowledge or experience you do Impious so I don't feel I have any ground to stand on to debate.  It know may not be ideal, or perfect, but it's been easier to setup and tweak than anything else I've played with over the years.  Very little EQ work to get them sounding smooth as glass, at least in my opinion.  Of course it's all about perspective as well, and I'll again readily admit I don't have the experience and ear time with anything better than cheap/average component sets in factory locaitons.  

 

 

I'd love to start experimenting with trying different DIY/raw drivers ran active to build my own 2 and 3 way speaker systems but I just don't have the knowledge for looking at specifications on drivers and knowing if/how they will work well with one another.  I also don't have the money to just throw at drivers to really do that much experimentation either.  The full ranges have been a simple and, at least to me, successful experiment though, and cheap. 

[Aaron Clinton 2,372]

Alton, sorry I didn't see this topic earlier.  In the SSAsportwagen, or my P5 haha, I have the Fountek FR89's fiberglassed into the A-pillars.  I can't remember if it was Sean or Brad that first got me going in FR direction a few years ago.  Anyway, as previously stated, they are very axis sensitive.  With a Draconia @ 8ohms for power, they sound fantastic, but don't get super loud.  They also don't have the super high high crisp sheen that some people like, but honestly my ears don't like very bright highs.  So with the Founteks, AA Carbons and Icon, it is a warm sounding install for the most part. 

[altoncustomtech 773]

Alton, sorry I didn't see this topic earlier.  In the SSAsportwagen, or my P5 haha, I have the Fountek FR89's fiberglassed into the A-pillars.  I can't remember if it was Sean or Brad that first got me going in FR direction a few years ago.  Anyway, as previously stated, they are very axis sensitive.  With a Draconia @ 8ohms for power, they sound fantastic, but don't get super loud.  They also don't have the super high high crisp sheen that some people like, but honestly my ears don't like very bright highs.  So with the Founteks, AA Carbons and Icon, it is a warm sounding install for the most part.

 

Thanks Aaron.  Yeah I'm in the same position right now with the FR88's, MLI65's, and XCON.  Quite honestly the FR's give me all the output I ask of them without an ounce of distortion.  If anything I can find the output limitations of the Focal Solid 2 that's powering them before they run out of steam themselves.  I don't find them the least bit output challenged, at least not for my ears.  I'm also with you on the bright highs, the FR's do an excellent job of covering the far end of the spectrum to my ears as well.

 

AA Carbons are something I would love to play with for sure though, lol.  

 

I started the thread though looking for anyone who had heard the FR135EX's specifically to get an understanding of exactly what their response was like in real world use.  If they were only say $30 or $40 a piece, or close, I'd have bought them to see for myself.  I'm trying to broaden my horizons and get some experience with more drivers to get a better understanding of how their T/S parameters, FR graphs, and other data translate into the real world.  It's a damn slow process though, lol.  I do like the discussion so far though, both sides of the topics at hand are enlightening.

[Impious 1,476]

If you are willing to spend $60-$80 on another pair of full range drivers, why not spend the same amount on a pair of tweeters to play with to compare full range to a tweeter? Even if you only have 4 channels to play with, replace the midbass with the tweeter for a while, readjust the crossover slopes and give it a listen? Or even go with a tweeter on a simple cap to highpass and coil to lowpass the midrange and run the, active? Or even a predesigned textbook xover from PE just to experiment with a 3-way instead of full range?

Making a system that sounds listenable isn't that challenging. Get the TA set and kill a couple of the annoying peaks and most people will be happy. Especially when you have nothing to actually compare it to or don't have much experience with an actual high quality reproduction. That's where I think the fallacy is here.

[edouble101 314]

I certainly don't have the knowledge or experience you do Impious so I don't feel I have any ground to stand on to debate.  It know may not be ideal, or perfect, but it's been easier to setup and tweak than anything else I've played with over the years.  Very little EQ work to get them sounding smooth as glass, at least in my opinion.  Of course it's all about perspective as well, and I'll again readily admit I don't have the experience and ear time with anything better than cheap/average component sets in factory locaitons.  

 

 

I'd love to start experimenting with trying different DIY/raw drivers ran active to build my own 2 and 3 way speaker systems but I just don't have the knowledge for looking at specifications on drivers and knowing if/how they will work well with one another.  I also don't have the money to just throw at drivers to really do that much experimentation either.  The full ranges have been a simple and, at least to me, successful experiment though, and cheap. 

 

 

I scooped up a few sets of mids and tweeters slightly used or on sale. I built a baffle that I can demo these drivers on and I compare notes. The audible differences between mids is drastic. Tweeters not so much. I have yet to hear a midrange that doesn't need a tweeter. A tweeterless system lacks "air" or "atmosphere" IMO. It is a personal preference and I recommend that you buy a few drivers and test them yourself. If you are careful enough with the speakers you could even return them to parts express afterwards. 

 

BTW I also recommend you buy drivers based on installation limitations than t/s specs. Hearing is believing, specs don't make a sound.

Edited November 12, 2014 by edouble101

[j-roadtatts 1,129]

Can't say that i miss tweeters in my current install. Both full rangers are on axis with the drivers seat. There is little to none missing from the FR. Maybe the top octave being a tad weak. Honestly not noticeable with the music I listen to, as theres so little information that high.

 

I had a truck about 10 years ago with 10" woofers and 1" tweeters installed. Hands down I would do the full range route, if doing a two way that has a 10-12" mid. On the other hand I don't see the return being great enough with a 7" midbass, to have a dedicated midrange and tweeter.  The extra equipment and mounting of a 3-way with a small midbass seems like so little gained from the extra effort. With a large midbass reaching upwards of 300-500hz, I can see the advantage of a true 3-way. Maybe I am missing a facet or two.

[///M5 2,833]

The complexity reduction is huge. I've heard a shit ton of piss poor 3 way front stages but never a bad fr setup. Limitations there are but worrying about 10k+ in a car isn't worthwhile