In Reply to: RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b posted by Davey on June 29, 2016 at 07:28:16:
Dave, it sounds like you might have preferred the earlier "a" version of the LFT-8, with the original tweeter. Some were complaining that even with a maximum output connection the LFT-8a had too soft a high end. With my high-frequency hearing loss (that's what playing drums for fifty years will get ya, along with tinnitus) I barely need the tweeter at all!Satie, the LFT-8 midrange driver is around 42" tall. I don't recall how long the T-IV tweeter is---I'll see how the two line up when I get them set up next to each other. But your NEO 8 conversion appears to have advantages over the magnetic-planar driver, from what you and Guitar Slim say. Higher efficiency is nice, but I'm interested in the dynamic and low-volume resolution capabilities of the NEO line. By the way, I have my GR Research OB/Dipoles in W-frames at the moment, but have a pair of H-frames I need to build out soon to move them into. The H are much more robust, being CNC cut from 1.5" MDF! Comparing them to the T-IV bass panels is going to be very interesting. Whichever wins will be relieved of reproducing the bottom octave by a pair of Rythmik F15's.
Thanks to both of you, I really appreciate your advice!
Edits: 06/29/16
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - BDP24 18:15:52 06/29/16 (25)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - Satie 20:13:56 06/29/16 (24)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - Roger Gustavsson 01:44:39 06/30/16 (23)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - BDP24 05:09:46 06/30/16 (22)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - BDP24 06:52:46 06/30/16 (20)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - BDP24 07:09:32 06/30/16 (19)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - Davey 07:24:28 06/30/16 (18)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - BDP24 06:40:22 07/01/16 (14)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - Satie 11:39:27 07/01/16 (13)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - BDP24 03:38:39 07/02/16 (12)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - Satie 09:36:43 07/02/16 (11)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - BDP24 16:28:27 07/02/16 (10)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - Satie 00:14:24 07/03/16 (9)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - BDP24 03:18:40 07/03/16 (8)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - Satie 03:44:44 07/03/16 (7)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - BDP24 13:29:31 07/05/16 (6)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - Satie 21:00:18 07/05/16 (5)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - BDP24 16:11:14 07/07/16 (4)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - Satie 07:04:28 07/08/16 (3)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - BDP24 14:11:48 07/11/16 (2)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - Satie 19:20:39 07/11/16 (1)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - BDP24 01:53:05 07/13/16 (0)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - BDP24 07:54:37 06/30/16 (2)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - Satie 08:30:10 06/30/16 (1)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - BDP24 18:49:31 06/30/16 (0)
- RE: Active bi-amping of ET LFT-8b - Davey 06:12:20 06/30/16 (0)