[shooter]

I love my Lowther DX4 open baffel 150hz to 10k In the Basszilla.

[TerryO]

I've heard the Hemp 4.5 drivers, at Dave's during the Vancouver Island Meet this Summer, and I thought they sounded OK. Not as good as some seem to think, but pleasant. I happen to think that my "Hi-Tweek Black Box Speakers" with highly modified Radio Shack 40-1197's sound better. The 8 inch Hemps, at least with OB loading, aren't much IMHO, and are outclassed by the Visaton B200. When

Were these the Omega Speaker Systems version of the 4-1/2" and 8" hemp drivers or were they the untweaked stock units?

Raj

Raj,
I assumed that they were stock units. Like I said the 4.5 inch driver was OK, and I'm sure that Louis has done some mods that may have improved them to some extent. As a matter of fact, Omega speakers are pretty nice for what they are, as they have incorporated many of the types of tweaks that Dave (and others) pioneered. Although Omega has the courage to actually utilize tweaks to their drivers, they are a commercial concern and are generally playing catch-up given the restraints of retail marketing. 

As for the larger Hemp driver, it was so totally outclassed by the Visiton that I wouldn't bother with them. Too bad, as I had expected them to be much better than they were, but it may be that Hemp Acoustic isn't going to be around much longer anyway.

Best Regards,
TerryO

[TerryO]

Have you listened to the 4-1/2" hemps?

Yes. I have 2 pair.

dave

Have you compared the Omega drivers with the std. Hemp Acoustics drivers in either the 4.5" or 8" sizes?

 

Just to clarify my previous post and in answer to this one. I believe that the Hemp drivers that Omega uses and Hemp Acoustic drivers are not the same drivers and, in fact, are manufactured by distinctly different companies. It seems that there is, intentionally, some "misinformation" being put out regarding this. My advice is to avoid mistakenly lumping them into the same family and to do your own investigation before purchasing drivers with a hemp cone.

Best Regards,
TerryO

[DaveC113]

Yes, I've heard that they are made by tonetubby and hemp acoustic  , I'm not sure... it doesn't really matter. The Omega drivers don't look like the HA drivers, the surround is different on the 4.5", and the whizzer is different on the 8"... I'm interested if you've heard them compared to the Omega drivers because I haven't had the opportunity to hear very many single driver systems yet, but I own the 4.5" Omega XRS and have had a chance to hear the 8" Maxhemps so they are what I'm most familiar with. I also think it should be clarified whose 8" driver you are commenting on as they are not the same drivers (as you mentioned). I think the Maxhemps are amazing, if you get the chance to hear them, I think you'll be surprised     

[opnly bafld]

Last year I heard the (ToneTubby) Max Hemps at RMAF and did not feel they were clearly outclassed by the Visaton's (which I own and have used for over 1.5 years). Louis now uses a newer version of the 8" ToneTubby driver which (of course) is supposed to be markedly better.

Louis only uses ToneTubby drivers.

Lin

[Kevin Haskins]

My favorite full range driver is the Fostex 108 Sigma.   Of course it sounds better with tweeter and a good crossover.... oh... then its even better if you use it as a midrange and have a good bass driver or two to really make it full bandwidth.   While your at it you may as well add a sub because there isn't any 3-way system that really can nail the first octave.   May as well add a super tweeter too... that way the family dog can enjoy it along with you.    What the hell... may as well horn load the entire system while your at it.    Everyone knows you need at least hit 120db to really enjoy a system.   

[JLM]

As Kevin points out, there are trade offs, and there is no perfect speaker.  No single driver can compete against a decent subwoofer for bass extension, the wide dispersion at high frequencies of a separate tweeter, or the ultimate spls; but they do provide coherence, imaging, and active drive advantages that better satisfy the real world wants of many listeners.

Some commercial designs use extended range drivers simply as extended midrange drivers, reportedly to very good effect.  But this takes us to a different thread and the need for definitions.

[rajacat]

My favorite full range driver is the Fostex 108 Sigma.   Of course it sounds better with tweeter and a good crossover.... oh... then its even better if you use it as a midrange and have a good bass driver or two to really make it full bandwidth.   While your at it you may as well add a sub because there isn't any 3-way system that really can nail the first octave.   May as well add a super tweeter too... that way the family dog can enjoy it along with you.    What the hell... may as well horn load the entire system while your at it.    Everyone knows you need at least hit 120db to really enjoy a system.   

Of course, after you add all those drivers to the mix and the attendant crossovers which require more wire, capacitors, etc., the essence and immediacy of the music might get lost in the mix.

[doug s.]

i suspect that if you use active x-overs & separate amplification for each driver, then the "essence & immediacy" of the music won't get lost, but will, in fact be enhanced.

my new (to me) deqx is supposed to show up sometime next week; i am looking forward to trying this myself, w/fostex fe103's, pioneer pt-r7 ribbons, flat from 5khz-100khz; & my old standby's - my vmps larger subwoofers.   aa

anyone have any suggestions for the mid/high x-over point?  i was thinking ~12khz might be a good place to start.

doug s.

My favorite full range driver is the Fostex 108 Sigma.   Of course it sounds better with tweeter and a good crossover.... oh... then its even better if you use it as a midrange and have a good bass driver or two to really make it full bandwidth.   While your at it you may as well add a sub because there isn't any 3-way system that really can nail the first octave.   May as well add a super tweeter too... that way the family dog can enjoy it along with you.    What the hell... may as well horn load the entire system while your at it.    Everyone knows you need at least hit 120db to really enjoy a system.   

Of course, after you add all those drivers to the mix and the attendant crossovers which require more wire, capacitors, etc., the essence and immediacy of the music might get lost in the mix.

[TerryO]

Last year I heard the (ToneTubby) Max Hemps at RMAF and did not feel they were clearly outclassed by the Visaton's (which I own and have used for over 1.5 years). Louis now uses a newer version of the 8" ToneTubby driver which (of course) is supposed to be markedly better.

Louis only uses ToneTubby drivers.

Lin

It seems that perhaps Louis has also been getting feedback on the Hemptone/Hemp Acoustic confusion. From another website:


September 18th, 2007
We have been asked by another company that uses Hemp cone drivers to make it clear that they are not associated in any way with Perry Pecker or Hemp Acoustics.

Omega Speaker Systems are not associated in any way with Perry Pecker or Hemp Acoustics.

www.omegaloudspeakers.com

It does seem that something's amiss.
Best Regards,
TerryO

[rajacat]

TerryO

Louis doesn't frequent his forum very often but it would be great if he would explain, without disclosing any secret tweaks, how his drivers differ from the stock ToneTubby drivers. Awhile ago I talked to him on the phone and I got the impression that there are substantial differences, including a bigger motor, to the extent that he filed a patent to protect his unique design.

--Raj

[TerryO]

i suspect that if you use active x-overs & separate amplification for each driver, then the "essence & immediacy" of the music won't get lost, but will, in fact be enhanced.

my new (to me) deqx is supposed to show up sometime next week; i am looking forward to trying this myself, w/fostex fe103's, pioneer pt-r7 ribbons, flat from 5khz-100khz; & my old standby's - my vmps larger subwoofers.   aa

anyone have any suggestions for the mid/high x-over point?  i was thinking ~12khz might be a good place to start.

doug s.

Doug,
I agree with your suspection (it's a brand new word that's being premiered on this forum!),. The use of active crossovers and separate amplifiers should, if done methodically and with care, offer superior results. I believe that Kevin was pointing out how the reasoning can take us from a really nice situation with a splendid widerange driver like the 108 Sigma and then by "Improving" it, you somehow end up auditioning your speaker at Dr. Frankenstein's house. The old adage applies here, that: "If a little's good, then too much is even better!"

As long as I'm doing quotes, Dr. Franz-Josef Pfister once related:

"True happiness is only achieved when a compromise occurs between one's talents and one's ambitions".

I suspect that the good Doctor wasn't specifically referring to loudspeakers, but it is good advice.

Best Regards,
TerryO

[TerryO]

TerryO

Louis doesn't frequent his forum very often but it would be great if he would explain, without disclosing any secret tweaks, how his drivers differ from the stock ToneTubby drivers. Awhile ago I talked to him on the phone and I got the impression that there are substantial differences, including a bigger motor, to the extent that he filed a patent to protect his unique design.

--Raj

Raj,

While it's just a matter of opinion, when does a "tweak" end and a "major (or minor) redesign" begin?

Hypothetical rant follows:

" It's basically a Radio Shack 1197 4 inch driver, with a larger frame to allow for the 10 inch curvilinear "Whisperlight Densomax" cone. We also changed to leaf spring spiders (all three of them) coupled with a new 47 pound neo "MagnaFlux" magnet structure. We believe that the improvements will eliminate the previously noted weaknesses of the driver, while retaining the universally acknowledged strengths"

Best Regards,
TerryO

[rajacat]

TerryO,

I agree. This was more than just tweaking the stock ToneTubbys. If my memory serves me, Louis mentioned that considerable time, like years, was spent on this redesign and there were some legal issues ie., fights over proprietary design issues thus the patent. Then again, I only have partial information which probably doesn't give an accurate representation of what actually happened.  So take all this as speculation.

--Raj

[TerryO]

I have really been partial to the Lowther drivers for a few years. I have used a few of the Fostex drivers and they are a great value and solid performers. However, they are bettered by the Lowthers in performance but at a much higher price. So of my Lowther collection I would rank them as follows, my favorites to least favorite (but only slightly).

1) DX4
2) DX3
3) PM6C (best performance per dollar)
4) PM2C and PM2A
5) DX2 and PM6A

But even the lowest Lowther is still a cut above the Fostex drivers I have heard and used. If my wife made me sell a few, the DX2 and PM6A would be the first to grudgingly be put on the block.

Martin,
I've heard a number of Lowther-based speakers over the years and while they did some things well, there always seemed to be areas that they needed to improve. I haven't heard yours, and they may be very good, but up until now I've only heard one Lowther speaker design that actually seems to realize the vaunted superiority of the Lowther driver with no noticeable weaknesses. Using (4) EX3 drivers, Lew Hardy of Vivaldi Audio has, what I consider the best Lowther-based loudspeaker available. It is an unusual application (at least among fullrange types), but I can state that it works.

When the World finally acknowledges my genius (and good looks!) and the money starts coming in, I'll probably buy a pair. They really are special.

Website: www.vivaldiaudio.com

Best Regards,
TerryO

[MJK]

I've heard a number of Lowther-based speakers over the years and while they did some things well, there always seemed to be areas that they needed to improve.

TerryO,

I think that it is obvious that I am well outside of the mainstream Lowther owner. If you read the posts on the various forums you will see Lowther owners struggling to solve similar problems with their systems. I believe my approach does solve these issues, unfortunately it is so politically incorrect that the purists reject it right out of the gate. I am the black sheep of the full range driver world even with the dealers. But the few Lowther owners who have tried my approach seem very happy. To each his own, I am very satisfied.

Martin

[TerryO]

I've heard a number of Lowther-based speakers over the years and while they did some things well, there always seemed to be areas that they needed to improve.

TerryO,

I think that it is obvious that I am well outside of the mainstream Lowther owner. If you read the posts on the various forums you will see Lowther owners struggling to solve similar problems with their systems. I believe my approach does solve these issues, unfortunately it is so politically incorrect that the purists reject it right out of the gate. I am the black sheep of the full range driver world even with the dealers. But the few Lowther owners who have tried my approach seem very happy. To each his own, I am very satisfied.

Martin

Martin,
You're correct in assuming that you're outside the "mainstream". If you've seen, or are familiar with, Lew Hardy's speakers, I think you'll recognize a kindred spirit. It tends to be a drawback, as the Lowther purists distain anything between them and their beloved Lowthers and those that don't have "that" problem, turn up their noses at the mention of Lowther. Too bad, as I think that both of you are on the right track.

Best Regards,
TerryO

[JLM]

Rajacat,

I just picked up a Behringer DEQ2496 and mike in the hopes of tweaking the room response, but primarily to replace the baffle step and zobel circuit (in the digital realm when I get a DAC).  As you say, it has bugged me that my chip (not digital BTW) based monoblocks don't quite have a direct connection to the single drivers with the baffle step/zobel circuit in the path. 

I probably won't get to it for a while as work is a bit hectic, we're in the middle of some landscaping work, and I'm running Dad one or two days a week to doctor's appointments.  Plus I need balanced to RCA adapters and to study how to use this thing.

[MJK]

TerryO,

Who is Lew Hardy? I have never heard that name before.

Martin

[TerryO]

TerryO,

Who is Lew Hardy? I have never heard that name before.

Martin

Hi Martin,
Lew is a Northwest Audiophile that has been on a quest for the Ultimate Hi-Eff loudspeaker to allow him use of some of the fine tube gear that many here in the NW are enamored with. He is, by trade, a custom cabinet maker whose work is absolutely top notch. His experiments with Lowther drivers led him to design and use a modified Academy cabinet, which uses two Lowther EX3 drivers per side. He has modified them with custom wooden phase plugs that he designed. He has also, horror of horrors, used a Visiton bullet tweeter and what he calls a VAPS, which is crossover/ EQ / network. I believe that Dan Wiggins had a hand in the testing and design of the VAPS circuit.
Lew recently hosted (with Doc Bottlehead and the Pacific Northwest Audio Society) "The Central Sound DIY Meet" on Vashon Island. At one point during the meet, someone asked Lew how his speakers deal with bass, as everyone is aware that is one of the Lowther's shortcomings. Well, he may have anticipated this as he happened to have a drum solo CD that he loaded and played through his speakers. I might add that he turned up the volume to insure that there was no mistaking that these do bass:^) The speakers themselves were, I'd guess about 12 to 15 feet out in the room (Eagle's Club dance hall) and a good 10 feet from either wall, so there was no corner loading, etc. Sounded very solid to me, and as I'm partial to Classical Music, I like a coherent, lucid midrange supported by a fair amount of well integrated bass. These speakers accomplish that by a wide margin, IMHO.
For more information, reviews, etc., his website is: www.vivaldiaudio.com

Best Regards,
TerryO