# Fountek FR88 3" fullrange driver



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Disclaimer: This review is completely subjective, and will have no real data supporting any outlandish claims that may or may not be contained herewithin. These are just my initial impressions after connecting and listening to the drivers. Your results may vary. That being said, on with the review! 


Well, as you can see from my other tutorial thread ( http://www.diymobileaudio.com/forum/diyma-tutorials/62874-quick-easy-test-enclosures.html ) , I have finally been able to setup and listen to the Fountek FR88 drivers. I've been wanting to try them since I had seen the data provided by Zaph in his test, and his thoughts about them.
The test results and graphs can be found here: Zaph|Audio

*Make sure you click on the link at the top of the page for the Fountek FR88-EX, so that you're viewing the correct data.*

*Testing Environment:*
The drivers were installed into PVC test enclosures (appx 0.5 liter volume)which were sealed and placed on the dash of my 2003 Lancer aimed on axis to my drivers seat position, slightly lower than ear level. They were placed as close to the edges of the dash (A-Pillars) as possible to simulate the prospective mounting locations.


*Testing Equipment:*
The FR88's were powered by an Xtant 404m amplifier, bridged down to 2 channels, providing 100 watts @ 8ohms per driver. A second Xtant 404m amplifier was bridged to 2 channels providing 100 watts @ 8ohms per driver to a pair of Peerless SLS 8" midbasses which were installed in the doors. Gains were adjusted for L/R to provide audibly equal output from the drivers position. Signal and processing duties are handled by a Clarion DRZ-9255 source unit. The DRZ output gains for the FR88's and SLS drivers were adjusted by ear to match levels appropriately. Time alignment was used as well. Further tuning could be done in addition to really dial in this setup, however, since these are test enclosures (not permanently mounted) I wanted to just get a feel for how the drivers would be able to perform.


*Testing Material: *
The cd used for testing was the Focal "The Speed of Sound" Demo cd. (Search for "Focal Demo Discs" on the site...)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------



This will be a 2 part review. This first part will be my initial impressions about the drivers in the configuration listed above. In the second part of the review, I will move the test enclosures aiming them differently, and in different possible mounting locations. (For example- on the dash firing across the dash toward each other. Or in the kick panel area) The simple fact of the matter is, not everyone will be able to mount them in their optimal locations and compromises will ahve to be made in many cases. (Although, admittedly, the small size makes them a snap to get into tight areas)

Pics:
































































*Manufacturers FR Graph:*


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Part One:

Drivers on dash, mounted in the test enclosures, aimed on axis to the drivers seat position, lower headrest.

I started out with the FR88's crossed LPF 20K 12db slope, and HPF 315hz -12db slope.

Focal "The Spirit of Sound" cd


*"Dick Tracy"*- The snare rimshot and hihats were easily placed and sounded full and crisp. Piano at center/left sounded very natural as did the guitar at center right stage. It had that rounded jazzy sound and great pop.

*"Get Me Home"*- One thing to note about this familiar song is that the backbeat used on the snare on this track is hard for some mids to make sound right. One the FR88, it did not sound like a hollow "pop, but more full.

*"The Day"* starts out with a tambourine rattling and it sounded very clean and realistic. The hihats and crash have a nice crisp top end and are full bodied. Very nice.

*"Everything Must Change"* is a very nice track for testing the lower female vocal spectrum. The singer has very good range, and has a lot of presence in her voice. Her vocals really reach out and grab you on this track. There is a little reverb and you can really get a sense of space and depth in these vocals. The Founteks reproduced this quite well.

Finally,* "Raoui"* is another great female vocal track. The singer was locked right in the center of the stage and the vocals were delicate and powerful at the same time.The lower guitar notes were a bit nasal or hollow sounding, which may be due to the enclosures? Not bad, but could be slightly better. The squeak heard when the guitarist changes fret postions where very natural and realistic. You could also pick up the singer breathing in. This is a great recording.

Next I wanted to see how well the FR88's would be able to blend with the midbass in some tough tracks, so I popped in Dream Theater's 1999 release "Metropolis PT2: Scenes from a Memory"

Track 2 "Overture 1928" showed the FR88's keeping up very well with the good tom-tom and kick drum sections. The guitars came through clear and vibrant. During fast transitions and speedy kick drum sections, the blended flawlessly with the SLS's. They were a tad bright on the top end, but not harsh. A touch of EQ, and these would really shine.

Track 9 - The piano's at 1:16 and 2:32 sounded great, and the trippy guitar solos were executed very well. Clean and focused.

*Overall Impressions: *

The Fountek FR88 when mounted in this configuration is a very nice fullrange driver. They have no problems playing right up to 20K and beyond and sound quite natural doing it. If I had to characterize their sound, I would say they are a detailed, and more bright speaker. That is not to say that they are harsh, because they are certainly not. But they are not rounded and laid back like a DynAudio speaker might sound. These are accurate, crisp, clean, and full bodied without being too over the top, in your face. Mated with a good mid bass speaker, you can really be very satisfied in a 2-way setup. They dont require a tweeter for extra top end mounted on axis because they are fully capable of playing those high notes well. For a driver that runs about $25, you really cant go wrong here.
I highly recommend picking up a pair and trying them out for yourself, especially since it requires such a small investment.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

In these tests I just wanted to listen to some of the same material, but in different mounting locations/angles to see how the drivers would perform. Here are my notes...



Firing across the dash, facing each other:

The center image is less consistent. Tone is still quite good, however there is litle bit of top end loss. Its more noticeable in the left speaker than the right as it is further off axis to my listening position than the right side.
Still very good sound, but not as tonally balanced and accurately imaged as the on-axis configuration. Some additional tweaking, EQ and crossover adjustment would likely improve this setup a bit. But overall, not bad.




In Kicks close to on axis aiming to the driver:

Better imaging than above, butyou still lose some of the delicate top end info we had in the first configuration, on-axis. You would be better served pairing these up with a tweeter is you like that airy top end sound, on this setup and/or the previous one above. EQ may help to do enough though too. You lose a little stage height here, but that can be tuned up better.

I'd also note that when mounted in either of these two positions, especially the kicks, the midbass overpowered the mids when left at the same gain for the on-axis tests. Not a problem because you can always adjust the gains, but worth noting that you get less output for the same power when mounted off axis in either of these positions.


Some people (including myself initially) had questioned whether these drivers would be able to have enough output, or would be safe to run at a higher power level. I can say now after doing alot of listening and testing that they can get plenty loud, and whn put in a sealed enclosure they should be able to handle a decent amount of power. With the 100 watts I was supplying, I didnt nead anywhere near that to get them to my listening limits which are admittedly a bit spirited at times.


----------



## WLDock (Sep 27, 2005)

Great job so far sir. I am looking to run the driver myself with my 8" SLS and the Scan Illum tweet on the top end. Really want to get feedback on how well the 8" blends with the 3" in terms of tonality as well as output. I told myself I would wait for the Hustler Audio driver but these seem like a winner at the given price. 

Looking forward to your impressions.


----------



## johnson (May 1, 2007)

Same here.

My drivers should be shipping out today.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

WLDock said:


> Great job so far sir. I am looking to run the driver myself with my 8" SLS and the Scan Illum tweet on the top end. Really want to get feedback on how well the 8" blends with the 3" in terms of tonality as well as output. I told myself I would wait for the Hustler Audio driver but these seem like a winner at the given price.
> 
> Looking forward to your impressions.


Apparently I have a party to attend tonight, so I'll post my reviews tomorrow morning/afternoon. But I will say this Dock, they blend VERY well with the SLS8, and I'd venture to say that you won't need the tweeter at all depending on mounting location and aiming. On axis up top, definitely not needed. Stay tuned.


----------



## 240sxguy (May 28, 2009)

TEASE!

Damn I need to do this.


----------



## andy335touring (Jan 25, 2009)

Cool, subscribed !


----------



## acencsu (Aug 21, 2008)

wow this is crazy. I was actually just thinking about doing this as a cheap way to get great sound after I read Zaph's review. I give it a search and somebody has an install going the same day I think of it. Maybe it's a sign that I should do it. 

I'd love to know how they sound firing towards each other across the dash. My car spends a lot of time parked on the side of the road in a shady part of town and I don't need bright silver speakers drawing any more attention to it so a stealth install would be great for me.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Reviews up 

Thanks to 6spdcoupe for the assistance in editing the thread. (The EDIT timer had expired for me to add the review info in post #2 and #3. Anyways...enjoy and let me know if you have any questions.

-Steve


----------



## Weightless (May 5, 2005)

Nice review so far, but one question. Why the LPF at 20K 12db? Is the bump up in that area that noticeable?

Have you compared with and without the LPF?


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

Great review, Glad you like them.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Weightless said:


> Nice review so far, but one question. Why the LPF at 20K 12db? Is the bump up in that area that noticeable?
> 
> Have you compared with and without the LPF?


Good question Weightless. I meant to add that in as well.

I did try them run without crossove on the high end. I didnt notice much difference myself other than that they sounded a bit "tighter" when I crossed them at 20K instead of wide open. Another listener said he liked them better run above 20K on the top. I ended up setting them at 20K -6db in the end.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Here-I-Come said:


> Great review, Glad you like them.


Thanks.
Im glad you posted you initial impressions on them as well which were motivation for me to give them a try. 

Feel free to add any of your comments and experience when auditioning these to this thread as well bud.


----------



## Mless5 (Aug 21, 2006)

Thanks for a detailed review! I am looking to do 8" morel with these and was waiting for your review. 

So do you think these should be in an enclosure for the best result or?


----------



## andy335touring (Jan 25, 2009)

Thanks for taking the time to write the review, to say how cheap they are it's worth experimenting to see if they suit your system or not.

KISS, why have two speakers if you can do it with one ?

Sorry if i missed it but did you add any wadding to the enclosures ?

Any plans to try them in a different sized enclosures ? 

Do you think they would work firing up from the dash onto the screen ?(probobly not the best set up i guess ?)

Sorry for all the Q's !


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Mless5 said:


> Thanks for a detailed review! I am looking to do 8" morel with these and was waiting for your review.
> 
> So do you think these should be in an enclosure for the best result or?


Thanks Mless.
I would recommend an enclosure if possible, yes. They have a low power rating from Fountek and putting them in an enclosure should help with response and to allow more power handling. Madisound recommends a 0.75 liter sealed enclosure stuffed or a 1.5 liter enclosure vented.

I havent tested them IB but I would be cautious with the power applied as they've only got a 3mm xmax.

-Steve


----------



## bassfromspace (Jun 28, 2016)

The enclosure's a bit smaller than recommended. How'd that affect the low end?


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

andy335touring said:


> Thanks for taking the time to write the review, to say how cheap they are it's worth experimenting to see if they suit your system or not.
> 
> KISS, why have two speakers if you can do it with one ?
> 
> ...



Thanks for reading the review, and no problem on the questions. 

1. You'll have to expand on that question a bit. There is one driver per side for midrange frequencies and up (about 315hz-20Khz+) and one driver per side for midbass duties (250hz down to about 40hz). I have the midbasses crossed low on the HPF side because of no sub in the setup currently. They play very well and Im quite pleased with them.

2. No wadding added to the enclosures. There is about 2lbs of non hardening modeling clay inside at the base to add some mass and stability to the enclosures.

3. One thing I CAN do is remove the modeling clay to see a larger volume of air in the enclosure, or I can add more to decrease the volume to see its effects. Since they are recommended for 0.75 sealed and stuffed, and im pretty close to that number sans the modeling clay, I could try them with a bit more airspace seen to the drivers.

4. I was curious about trying them IB as well since they will be in the a-pillars and this is the simplest configuration from an installation standpoint. I may give this a try by simulating IB with these enclosures. I could drill some holes at the base/back of the enclosure and put some acoustic foam/OC foam over the holes to try and kill the back wave info. If/when I do this I will post my findings.

5. Im usually a little hesitant to install drivers that way because of the reflections and issues associated, but Im sure you could still have a nice sounding system this way. If you have dash mounts as factory locations, it would hurt to give it a shot


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

bassfromspace said:


> The enclosure's a bit smaller than recommended. How'd that affect the low end?


I ended up with a very slightly "nasally" sounding lower end. It only appeared on some tracks in certain areas (mentioned briefly in one of the sections) and I think a slightly larger volume would help with that. Perhaps I should take out the 2 lbs of clay and see what happens...

The reason I did that was for stability. They will be top heavy with the drivers in place and they wont stand up without a little weight. I could tape a bigger weight to the back of the enclosure though and remove the clay to let the drivers see a bit more air...but Im pretty sure that with a touch more airspace, that would be alleviated. So yeah, Id recommend keeping them close to the 0.75 liters listed.


----------



## acencsu (Aug 21, 2008)

Are you running a subwoofer at all or are you running the midbasses with no high-pass?


----------



## andy335touring (Jan 25, 2009)

Sorry about Q1. I was refering to the wide band replacing a mid and tweeter, less drivers so less potential set up/install issues(for me anyway as i'm not very experienced running active/TA/EQ/etc). I'd probobly run them with some SLS 8" like you if i could get them to fit.

I was reading your install thread and noticed you've already got some L4's, have you tried using these as wide bands ?

Like you say about Q5, firing them up at the screen isn't ideal but might give me a stealthy way to install them if works.

Thanks a lot for the info, top man !


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

acencsu said:


> Are you running a subwoofer at all or are you running the midbasses with no high-pass?


Currently, there is no sub installed. The SLS 8" midbasses are run to 40hz at -12db


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

andy335touring said:


> Sorry about Q1. I was refering to the wide band replacing a mid and tweeter, less drivers so less potential set up/install issues(for me anyway as i'm not very experienced running active/TA/EQ/etc). I'd probobly run them with some SLS 8" like you if i could get them to fit.
> 
> I was reading your install thread and noticed you've already got some L4's, have you tried using these as wide bands ?
> 
> ...


Yeah, I agree that one extended range driver is a much easier setup/tuning process and avoids some of the issues you can have with the extra pair of drivers.

I do have the L4's (mounted in som ebad kick panel enclosures currently), and I am planning on fabbing up the 4" enclosures this week to house those for testing as well. I want to test them in the same configuration up on the dash on axis and off axis and see what I get. I'll post a review for those as well if it would be helpful.

-Steve


----------



## fish (Jun 30, 2007)

Thanks Cap'n for the great review. I'm headin' over to Madisound right now!


----------



## acencsu (Aug 21, 2008)

captainobvious said:


> Currently, there is no sub installed. The SLS 8" midbasses are run to 40hz at -12db


I realize this is getting slightly off topic but how bad are you missing the sub-40hz content? I ask because I'm finally to a point where I can get a decent system together and running without a sub would definitely be a cost saver. My last car had 2 type r 12's with about 400 watts each and I missed the bass at first but after a year or two with the "top of the line" (read: Bose ...I wish there was a throwing up emoticon) stock stereo, I feel like I need a bit more bass but nothing like what I had before.


----------



## Mless5 (Aug 21, 2006)

acencsu said:


> read: Bose ...I wish there was a throwing up emoticon


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

acencsu said:


> I realize this is getting slightly off topic but how bad are you missing the sub-40hz content? I ask because I'm finally to a point where I can get a decent system together and running without a sub would definitely be a cost saver. My last car had 2 type r 12's with about 400 watts each and I missed the bass at first but after a year or two with the "top of the line" (read: Bose ...I wish there was a throwing up emoticon) stock stereo, I feel like I need a bit more bass but nothing like what I had before.


For parked listening, they sound good and have good punch. I guess it would all depend on your listening preferences.For some types of music, there isnt a whole lot of low frequency information, and the SLS 8 would be fine. For other types of music, you would want a sub to reinforce the lower notes and give the system a little more "impact" with sub bass and lower midbasss frequencies. The more power you can supply the SLS' the better off you'll be.
I would definitely give it a try first, with enough power, and see where you're at for your tastes. I could certainly live without a sub with this setup, but I'd prefer to give the system a little more bite on low kick drums and toms, and sub bass notes.

Once your on the road and driving, you'll want a sub Im sure. Especially if you're coming from a 2 12" setup


----------



## bertholomey (Dec 27, 2007)

Thanks for a great review!

I'll be playing with a set of these this coming weekend in my car. After reading this review - I'm looking forward to it even more.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

bertholomey said:


> Thanks for a great review!
> 
> I'll be playing with a set of these this coming weekend in my car. After reading this review - I'm looking forward to it even more.


Very cool Bertholomey. Be sure to post up your impressions after you get some listening time.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

I just want to clear something up. About the Fountek FR88-ex and the Hustler Audio X3 Fullrange units. Captainobvious i hope you don't mine. Seem like a good place for it.

They are both designed and built by Hustler Audio, but are total different drivers. The X3 is small and thinner and is more of a wide-band 3" Tweeter if you will, that plays very low, even more so with the X2. The new Trinity 3 and the FR88-ex is more closely related as they use the same basket, but different motors and cones. The FR88-ex is a aluminium cone where the New Trinity is a Titanium/Magnesium Blend cone with a upgraded motor.

Here are some photo of the X3:


























As you can see the X3 is a bit smaller.


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

Very nice review Capt. I'll be looking forward to hearing these on axis in Joey's (norcalsfinest) xB in the next couple of weeks. They sound like one hell of a driver from what you and Mark have said thus far.

So is the Fountek going to best the L4 for a permanent (or as permanent as anything is in our cars) spot in the Lancer??

Zach


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Boostedrex said:


> Very nice review Capt. I'll be looking forward to hearing these on axis in Joey's (norcalsfinest) xB in the next couple of weeks. They sound like one hell of a driver from what you and Mark have said thus far.
> 
> So is the Fountek going to best the L4 for a permanent (or as permanent as anything is in our cars) spot in the Lancer??
> 
> Zach


Thanks Zach.

Well its tough to say at this point. There are advantages and disadvantages for both.
I prefer the softer sound of the L4, and to me, they are more natural and realistic sounding drivers with the paper cone vs the aluminum. However, they will need a tweeter paired up for the very top end (for my tastes) which means Id have to squeeze the already large L4 AND a tweeter up top in the pillars/dash.
The FR88 offers terrific sound and extends plenty high enough to not need a seperate tweeter whatsoever, and is in a fantastic, compact package.
I think I'd be happy with either, but the problem is I'm very anal, and always chasing the "better" sound. I think the HAT is more suited to my tastes so Im unsure as of yet which direction I'll take. I know that they are slated to release a HAT L3pro around Christmas time which may end up being the perfect compromise. (Its supposed to compare to the L4 with an extended top end).
SO, what I MAY end up doing is running the FR88 until the release of the L3pro, see where it stands and how it sounds, and then possibly install that in the A-Pillars without having to do much in the way of modification/rebuilding of pillars.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

captainobvious said:


> Thanks Zach.
> 
> Well its tough to say at this point. There are advantages and disadvantages for both.
> I prefer the softer sound of the L4, and to me, they are more natural and realistic sounding drivers with the paper cone vs the aluminum. However, they will need a tweeter paired up for the very top end (for my tastes) which means Id have to squeeze the already large L4 AND a tweeter up top in the pillars/dash.
> ...


Well if that is the sound your after, that is what the new trinity will offer. I have the same taste in music. I tested the FR88-ex and loved the detail of the unit, but I want some warmth in the midrange and some smoothness up top. I like great detail, but with a little add warmth. 

After taking with the designer a bit, he tells me the same thing he want to make the driver a better and slightly warmer sounding and smoother up top, to take care of some the brightness the FR88-ex has in the high range. Now comes the new Trinity, The metal cones gives you the detail, the paper gives that warmth. What the New Trinity does is use the Titanium part of the mixture for the detail (stronger and lighter then Aluminium) then add the magnesium to the mix and you get the added warmth I was looking for (magnesium has different forms and can be made as soft metal and in this soft form when used on speakers it give the driver a warm sound). It will still be able to play as high as the FR88-ex, just with that added warmth I was looking for and sound smoother up top (not as bright).


----------



## Boostedrex (Apr 4, 2007)

Very cool bit of info there Mark. Do you happen to have a rough price point on those Trinity drivers?


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Here-I-Come said:


> Well if that is sound your after, that is what the new trinity will offer. I have the same taste in music. I tested the FR88-ex and loved the detail of the unit, but I want some warmth in the midrange and some smoothness up top. I like great detail, but with a little add warmth.
> 
> After taking with the designer a bit, he tells me the same thing he want to make the driver a better and slightly warmer sounding and smoother up top, to take care of some the brightness the FR88-ex has in the high range. Now comes the new Trinity, The metal cones gives you the detail, the paper gives that warmth. What the New Trinity does is use the Titanium part of the mixture for the detail (strong and lighter then Aluminium) then add the magnesium to the mix and you get the added warmth I was looking for (magnesium has different forms and can be made as soft metal and in the soft form when used on speakers it has a very warm sound to it). It will still be able to put as high as the FR88-ex, just with that added warmth I was looking for and sound smoother up top (not as bright).



Sounds very interesting Mark. I'd love to hear them when they are available.(Or are they already ?)

Also, as Zach inquired...whats pricing slated to be for the new Trinity's ?
Thanks


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

You guys have a PM


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

Boostedrex said:


> Very cool bit of info there Mark. Do you happen to have a rough price point on those Trinity drivers?


Cool blend the owner uses. High-end companies use a Magnesium coating on their metal dome tweeters to smooth the sound and to keep them for being so bright and fatiguing. 

If you remember the DLS UR subs, they had a Magnesium cone. You could dent them very else, They also had to warm rich bass sound that many loved. Kind of wish i wouldn't have sold the last ones I had last year.


----------



## thsiow10 (Nov 16, 2007)

Hi Cap,

I'm thinking use this A-pillar midrange pod ( for Focal BE pod) for this fountek FR88 ..
The dia & size almost same for this 2 driver ..

What do you think of the sound with the size of the pod?


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

thsiow10 said:


> Hi Cap,
> 
> I'm thinking use this A-pillar midrange pod ( for Focal BE pod) for this fountek FR88 ..
> The dia & size almost same for this 2 driver ..
> ...


Man does pod are very nice. Do you know what the volume of the pod is?


----------



## [email protected] (Jun 12, 2008)

hmm those drivers are sold out


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Sold out? Wow, that was fast. Im sure they'll restock them soon.

As far as those Focal pods go (gorgeous btw), you could try it, But I have a feeling you may end up with a peaky lower end because of the small size. 0.75 liters is the recommended volume and I was testing with about 0.5 liter volume in my review.
Doesnt hurt to try, but my guess would be that they will be too small.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

captainobvious said:


> Sold out? Wow, that was fast. Im sure they'll restock them soon.
> 
> As far as those Focal pods go (gorgeous btw), you could try it, But I have a feeling you may end up with a peaky lower end because of the small size. 0.75 liters is the recommended volume and I was testing with about 0.5 liter volume in my review.
> Doesnt hurt to try, but my guess would be that they will be too small.


you would be correct sir, it would work ok if crossover high.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

BeatsDownLow said:


> hmm those drivers are sold out


Don't worry guys more is on the way


----------



## thsiow10 (Nov 16, 2007)

Here-I-Come said:


> Man does pod are very nice. Do you know what the volume of the pod is?





Here-I-Come said:


> you would be correct sir, it would work ok if crossover high.


Not sure about the vol... it's custom made.

The crossover is 500hz @ 12db ...


----------



## thsiow10 (Nov 16, 2007)

How is the driver unit design? 
Same as Thiel CS2.4/Genesis Studio/Autophile PS 16 driver design?


Here is the Thiel CS2.4 Mid Tweeter design:









The CS2.4, MCS1, and PCS tweeter/midrange drivers are mounted coincidently and share the same voice coil. The mechanical crossover is implemented by the coupling suspension between the two diaphragms. By eliminating the high frequency electrical crossover network and the second driver magnet, the CS2.4 achieves a level of sonic performance normally reserved for more expensive speakers. The coincident driver mounting results in perfect time coherence between the tweeter and midrange drivers for improved imaging and clarity, regardless of listener position.


----------



## friction (Apr 24, 2008)

Hello captainobvious,

i would like to share some installs in Japanese competition cars.I hope you dont mind 

The nissan and toyota are using hustler audio 

The honda is using fountek 

The suzuki is using A New Brand we carry called Audible Physics.


----------



## WLDock (Sep 27, 2005)

Here-I-Come said:


> After taking with the designer a bit, he tells me the same thing he want to make the driver a better and slightly warmer sounding and smoother up top, to take care of some the brightness the FR88-ex has in the high range. Now comes the new Trinity, The metal cones gives you the detail, the paper gives that warmth. What the New Trinity does is use the Titanium part of the mixture for the detail (stronger and lighter then Aluminium) then add the magnesium to the mix and you get the added warmth I was looking for (magnesium has different forms and can be made as soft metal and in this soft form when used on speakers it give the driver a warm sound). It will still be able to play as high as the FR88-ex, just with that added warmth I was looking for and sound smoother up top (not as bright).





friction said:


> Hello captainobvious,
> i would like to share some installs in Japanese competition cars.I hope you dont mind
> The nissan and toyota are using hustler audio
> The honda is using fountek
> The suzuki is using audible physics.


OK, I have already convinced myself that I will need a tweeter with the FR88 or Trinity because of breakup and uneven response on the top end...I have seen the graphs of both. However, it seems these are very capable as stand alone mid/tweet drivers. 

So is it the case that these have a breakup node that is beyond 20K Hz? The only magnesium driver I am familiar with is the SEAS EXCEL and we all know about the breakup....but is it the case that the smaller driver pushes this much father up in the spectrum? Because all metal driver have it.

So Mark,
Put me high up on the Trinity list...and you had better get a group buy or discount going for the forum or we will talk about you. 

friction,
Do you have enclosure size and crossover points of those installs? Very nice by the way...Thanks for posting those.


----------



## Melodic Acoustic (Oct 10, 2005)

WLDock said:


> OK, I have already convinced myself that I will need a tweeter with the FR88 or Trinity because of breakup and uneven response on the top end...I have seen the graphs of both. However, it seems these are very capable as stand alone mid/tweet drivers.
> 
> So is it the case that these have a breakup node that is beyond 20K Hz? The only magnesium driver I am familiar with is the SEAS EXCEL and we all know about the breakup....but is it the case that the smaller driver pushes this much father up in the spectrum? Because all metal driver have it.
> 
> ...



I will work on the Group buy.

The Trinity is not all Magnesium, it is A Titanium/Magnesium Blend. The Excel use the Magnesium in very hard from, the Trinity if is use to add warmth. And the smaller cone does Help. No crazy cone break with these drivers.


----------



## slade1274 (Mar 25, 2008)

I'll be checking these out with Bertholomey this weekend along with some others.. Check out the posted frequency responses on some of the alternatives below as they may be "warmer". I think Jason is going to hook up with you on his trip to Philly next week, so I may be able to be talked into sending the others up for a test run.... unless I fall madly in love with them. 
Fountek (Meniscus has them in stock)
Fountek, FR88-EX - fr88 by: Fountek - Meniscus Audio Group, Inc.|
Mark Audio
Mark Audio, CHR-70C - chr70c by: Mark Audio - Meniscus Audio Group,
Fostex
Fostex FF85K 3" Full Range from Madisound

And just for grins: if they're good enough for Linkwitz, they should have some merit.
Aurasound NSW2-326-8A-120 2" Full Range with Solder Pads from Madisound


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

slade1274 said:


> I'll be checking these out with Bertholomey this weekend along with some others.. Check out the posted frequency responses on some of the alternatives below as they may be "warmer". I think Jason is going to hook up with you on his trip to Philly next week, so I may be able to be talked into sending the others up for a test run.... unless I fall madly in love with them.
> Fountek (Meniscus has them in stock)
> Fountek, FR88-EX - fr88 by: Fountek - Meniscus Audio Group, Inc.|
> Mark Audio
> ...


The FF85K has my interest as well as the Mark Audio driver. I wonder how much effect the copper coating will have on darkening the sound.
EDIT: It appears its just a copper colored anodizing. But it is an aluminum alloy...

I would like to sample the Mark Audio driver and that titanium/mag alloy driver from Hustler as well.
The FR88 with a slightly more natural "paper cone sound" would be tits.


----------



## slade1274 (Mar 25, 2008)

captainobvious said:


> The FF85K has my interest as well as the Mark Audio driver. I wonder how much effect the copper coating will have on darkening the sound.
> 
> I would like to sample the Mark Audio driver and that titanium/mag alloy driver from Hustler as well.
> The FR88 with a slightly more natural "paper cone sound" would be tits.


Mark audio has two versions of the full range; one at $36 each and one at $60. The cheaper one seemed like it showed a smoother response up top, so I went with that for the testing. I think the copper color is just an annodized finish to the cone as you can get gray or copper. I wonder as well if it has an effect on the sound.

I'm hoping the Fostex will bring the "paper cone sound" to the party, and the response shows up to 32k. Some folks here have used it in tweeterless systems with positive results.....


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

Yeah, it still sounds very good...dont get me wrong. I'd just love to hear what it might be able to do with a different cone. Its already damn good. But it could be even better


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

slade1274 said:


> I'll be checking these out with Bertholomey this weekend along with some others.. Check out the posted frequency responses on some of the alternatives below as they may be "warmer". I think Jason is going to hook up with you on his trip to Philly next week, so I may be able to be talked into sending the others up for a test run.... unless I fall madly in love with them.
> Fountek (Meniscus has them in stock)
> Fountek, FR88-EX - fr88 by: Fountek - Meniscus Audio Group, Inc.|
> Mark Audio
> ...


Slade, if you have the CHR-70C and the FF85K to send up with J, that would be SWEET. I'd love to check both of those out. If its possible, let me know. I'll prep two more sets of rings and setup the test enclosure with pigtailed speaker tabs inside to be able to easily swap out drivers to the next pair for testing.
Hmmmmm


----------



## slade1274 (Mar 25, 2008)

Sure, hit me on PM with your needed audition timeframe and the return proposal and we can work something out.


----------



## captainobvious (Mar 11, 2006)

slade1274 said:


> Sure, hit me on PM with your needed audition timeframe and the return proposal and we can work something out.


PM coming. Very kind of you to offer. 
I will be happy to take notes and post the reviews in a similar fashion for each of the drivers sent over as well for the other guys.


-Steve


----------



## friction (Apr 24, 2008)

WLDock said:


> friction,
> Do you have enclosure size and crossover points of those installs? Very nice by the way...Thanks for posting those.


The enclosures to my knowledge is 0.5l and crossover point ard 400-500hz hope the info helps


----------



## VTECnicalAccord (Oct 24, 2006)

Subscribing.


----------



## littlejuanito (Apr 29, 2010)

thsiow10 said:


> Hi Cap,
> 
> I'm thinking use this A-pillar midrange pod ( for Focal BE pod) for this fountek FR88 ..
> The dia & size almost same for this 2 driver ..
> ...


Does anyone know where I can find these pods?


----------



## mires (Mar 5, 2011)

littlejuanito said:


> Does anyone know where I can find these pods?


X2....anyone?


----------

