small midrange shootout: Faital Pro 4FE32 and ScanSpeak 10F4424G00

[NyxOne]

Re: small midrange shootout: Faital Pro 4FE32 and ScanSpeak 10F4424G00

I'm not even going to dignify such an ignorant response to a valid criticism with an answer.

Lol!

You have 62 post and Charlie nearly have 2000. You can expect him to have so practical knowledge on the subject!

Chuck

[r-carpenter]

Re: small midrange shootout: Faital Pro 4FE32 and ScanSpeak 10F4424G00

I think there are couple of things going on here.
First of all, Charlie didn't level match the drivers while testing and that in itself invites arguments and speculation.
Second is the fact of blanket statements such as "Not even close". Interestingly these are coming from the designers who believe, there's some sort of unmeasurable magic to the loudspeaker components and you don't listen to squiggles.
I think, in fact two systems can be build using the drivers in question and they should perform very well and indeed very close in subjective listening tests.

[charlielaub]

Re: small midrange shootout: Faital Pro 4FE32 and ScanSpeak 10F4424G00

I think there are couple of things going on here.
First of all, Charlie didn't level match the drivers while testing and that in itself invites arguments and speculation.
Second is the fact of blanket statements such as "Not even close". Interestingly these are coming from the designers who believe, there's some sort of unmeasurable magic to the loudspeaker components and you don't listen to squiggles.
I think, in fact two systems can be build using the drivers in question and they should perform very well and indeed very close in subjective listening tests.

Hmmm, I can't agree with any of that.

As I mentioned before, while the driver SPLs are not exactly matched, I don't see how 2dB is not going to be the source of a 10x difference in distortion levels!

I would have been more than happy to use the 4FE32 (which I own) if they were even close to the Scan Speaks (which I don't own). Unfortunately, in my opinion, the tests show that (A) the comparison is not even close and (B) the distortion levels that I measured from the 4FE32 are just plain bad. And, yes, for emphasis it's not even close in the lower part of the passband where these drivers will be used. The 4FE32 distortion levels improve above 1.5kHz (sliding backwards at 3k), but that's only the upper third of its passband.

This next sentence is not really comprehensible to me. Squiggles? Unmeasurable magic?

I definitely can not agree with your last assertion. I would not touch a driver that has over 1% 3rd & 5th order distortion low in its passband. Would you? If this was a $5 buyout I could look the other way, but it's not.

Finally, I want to admit something here, for those who are trying to size up the Faital driver: I did only test one unit frmo the pair that I have on hand. Maybe it has a defect and the other one is better (hope so). So, should I retest using the other 4FE32, keeping the SPLs matched as closely as possible??? I'd be happy to do this tomorrow if it would answer some questions.

-Charlie

[Saturnus]

Re: small midrange shootout: Faital Pro 4FE32 and ScanSpeak 10F4424G00

FaitalPRO 4FE32 4" Neodymium Professional Full-Range Woofer 4 Ohm

Power Handling (RMS) 30 Watts

Pro. Full range. Woofer.

Not.

Home audio. Midrange.

See the difference.

Different applications.

As much as I like the Scan Speak driver (being Danish and all), it is entirely unfair to compare against a faital pro driver being used like a fish out of water for home audio midrange duty. It's not designed for it, and shouldn't be used for it.

I might also add that the faital driver is actually almost 3 times less expensive in 1000 unit prices (compared to Scan Speak 100 unit prices).

[charlielaub]

Re: small midrange shootout: Faital Pro 4FE32 and ScanSpeak 10F4424G00

Pro. Full range. Woofer.

Not.

Home audio. Midrange.

See the difference.

Different applicantions.

Dude, those are just marketing terms. Get over it.

[r-carpenter]

Re: small midrange shootout: Faital Pro 4FE32 and ScanSpeak 10F4424G00

Sorry Charlie, I didn't mean you then I was talking about unmeasurable magic.
Yes, I would certainly re-test them, SPL matching. Given that they are dedicated mids, I'd be looking to level out SPL around 2.5khz but you are getting a .... of diffraction there, so may be go to 5khz instead.
How far do you place the mic from DUT?

[Saturnus]

Re: small midrange shootout: Faital Pro 4FE32 and ScanSpeak 10F4424G00

Dude, those are just marketing terms. Get over it.

No. We are some people that actually design professional speakers. Scan Speak drivers are completely unsuited for the use the Faital driver is ideally suited for.

Stop making non-sense comparisons. Compare the Scan Speak against similarly priced home audio midranges. It'll still perform very well against almost any such driver.

[Pete Schumacher]

Re: small midrange shootout: Faital Pro 4FE32 and ScanSpeak 10F4424G00

Pro. Full range. Woofer.

Not.

Home audio. Midrange.

See the difference.

Different applications.

As much as I like the Scan Speak driver (being Danish and all), it is entirely unfair to compare against a faital pro driver being used like a fish out of water for home audio midrange duty. It's not designed for it, and shouldn't be used for it.

I might also add that the faital driver is actually almost 3 times less expensive in 1000 unit prices (compared to Scan Speak 100 unit prices).

As a "full range woofer" it would fail even faster than the Scan as a midrange in a pro monitor.

The comparison is still valid since the intended use for either one would be as a midrange driver in a home speaker. Or did you even bother to read the premise of the original post? The Faital comes in a very distant second place to the Scan as a midrange driver in a small home speaker.

And as a "full range woofer," you'd need a dozen or more of them in an array for any kind of "pro" application.

[Saturnus]

Re: small midrange shootout: Faital Pro 4FE32 and ScanSpeak 10F4424G00

Or did you even bother to read the premise of the original post? The Faital comes in a very distant second place to the Scan as a midrange driver in a small home speaker.

It is this premise I object to. If you compare something to something else. At least make sure they are related.

It would be much better to compare to for example a SB Acoustics SB12MNRX25-4 or AudioTechnology Flexunits 4 H 52 06 13. They're comparable in price and application.

[Beau]

Re: small midrange shootout: Faital Pro 4FE32 and ScanSpeak 10F4424G00

OK, from the under-educated department, what would be the practical differences between these two drivers if they were used in a two-driver center channel speaker (obviously two of the same drivers vs two of the other same drivers)? At movie listening sound levels, would the difference be that great?

[charlielaub]

Re: small midrange shootout: Faital Pro 4FE32 and ScanSpeak 10F4424G00

It is this premise I object to. If you compare something to something else. At least make sure they are related.

It would be much better to compare to for example a SB Acoustics SB12MNRX25-4 or AudioTechnology Flexunits 4 H 52 06 13. They're comparable in price and application.

A driver is a driver is a driver, meaning that no matter what the manufacturers' "advertised" application might be we are all free to consider it as a driver for use as we wish. You know, free will and all that.

I find it puzzling why you feel the need to p-i-ss all over this thread just because I intend to use what you claim is a "pro" driver in a home speaker. I am certainly NOT the first person around this forum to do that. Just because when I measure it up against a very similar driver that is marketed as a high end "home audio" driver doesn't invalidate the comparison.

[dcibel]

Re: small midrange shootout: Faital Pro 4FE32 and ScanSpeak 10F4424G00

Try Vifa TC9 or TG9 if you want a cheap alternative to the Scan 10F. They aren't as sensitive, but have excellent smooth response and low distortion. I'm 99% sure the TG9 is the same cone material minus the coating that the SS Discovery line has. The Scan-Speak 10F could easily be a full-range, I think many people would be perfectly happy with that driver and no tweeter.

[Beau]

Re: small midrange shootout: Faital Pro 4FE32 and ScanSpeak 10F4424G00

Try Vifa TC9 or TG9 if you want a cheap alternative to the Scan 10F. They aren't as sensitive, but have excellent smooth response and low distortion. I'm 99% sure the TG9 is the same cone material minus the coating that the SS Discovery line has. The Scan-Speak 10F could easily be a full-range, I think many people would be perfectly happy with that driver and no tweeter.

And are they not on sale now at PE?

[Pete Schumacher]

Re: small midrange shootout: Faital Pro 4FE32 and ScanSpeak 10F4424G00

It is this premise I object to. If you compare something to something else. At least make sure they are related.

It would be much better to compare to for example a SB Acoustics SB12MNRX25-4 or AudioTechnology Flexunits 4 H 52 06 13. They're comparable in price and application.

In your opinion. The Scan, last time I checked, is an audio transducer. The Faital is also an audio transducer. Both feature cones, voice coils, magnetic circuits, and are designed to reproduce sound in relation to a stimulus to their voice coils. That would make them pretty closely related. It's not like he's comparing wolves to apples, is it?

OK, from the under-educated department, what would be the practical differences between these two drivers if they were used in a two-driver center channel speaker (obviously two of the same drivers vs two of the other same drivers)? At movie listening sound levels, would the difference be that great?

The Scan would be subjectively (and objectively) cleaner, more transparent, more accurate, than the much lower quality pro driver.

And if a pro sound monitor were built with either driver and driven with 500W, both would produce plenty of smoke, but at least the Scan would sound better before it blew.

[craigk]

Re: small midrange shootout: Faital Pro 4FE32 and ScanSpeak 10F4424G00

i like this thread