Lowther speakers for Fisher X-202-B?

For those who have not heard the latest Lowther changes to the whizzer cone, it is a significant improvement over the old whizzer that had no stiffening gusset on the unsupported edge. The new whizzer has a completely different edge shape now, and is not subject to the "tizziness" that was related to the old whizzer shape. It has also significantly reduced the characteristic "shout" in a narrow band of frequencies in the upper midrange, so that the new Lowther versions are a dramatic improvement over the older series. Not perfect, mind you, but much improved. There is also a change in the suspension roll, which also improves the sound over the older series.

While I agree that the whizzer cone does impart some anomalies to the sound in the upper mids(now primarily a small response hump), due to the mechanical characteristics of the interaction of whizzer and main cones, it is still providing a pretty good sound up into the high frequencies(22kHz on axis), without resorting to a crossover and supertweeter.

Whether any particular listener likes the sound of the Lowthers is up to their personal tastes. I will say that virtually all of the available Lowther cabinet designs have serious flaws regarding the baffle-step compensation, and they either use an electronic baffle-step compensation network(which kills off 5db of efficiency in the system, and introduces filter problems), or they have a 5db dropoff in response below the baffle-step frequency of the cabinet being utilized. Either way, the performance that is expected from the driver is compromised, either by losing the direct-drive and high-efficiency benefits if you use a compensation filter, or by losing midbass and bass response if you don't(and use typical narrow cabinets).

Many of the typical Lowther problems that get attributed to the drivers, are really problems in the cabinet designs which were not properly addressed. IMHO.

Perhaps I made my post sound a bit to negative.

I use Lowthers, and like them very much.

I was just trying to point out that there have been changes in the last couple of years, and maybe some people hadn't heard the newer versions, which are better than the old.

However, the situation with the cabinets is still a problem in most cases. These problems can be overcome with some thought and application of known technology.

Both Fostex and Lowther are good drivers. Some will prefer the Fostex, and some will prefer the Lowther.

Personally, I found the Lowther drivers to be what I preferred.

Generally the Fostex drivers are a little bit less in sensitivity, with about 94db being typical for them, whereas the Lowther drivers have models going up to 99.5db sensitivity. This may be useful if the amp's power levels are quite low. The Fostex will be just fine with anything about 8 wpc and over.

I think that the Lowther has more detail and is a bit faster and more transparent, but they cost alot more than the Fostex.

There are proponents of both brands, and ultimately you would have to decide which you like, and which suits your budget and system best.

I'd like to add that the 1.3 bass-reflex box for the PM2C is not really the right design for Lowther drivers. The Lowther is designed to have the rear-wave loaded into a back-horn type enclosure, or a Voigt Pipe(Cain&Cain Abbey type).

Also, the PM2C is the "budget" Lowther, and has lower sensitivity around the same level as the Fostex, has ceramic magnets, and offers less detail, speed, and transparency than the higher Lowther models. But they are still good speakers. They would be probably more similar to the performance of the Fostex models.

Jtnicolosi, yes probably the Fostex would be a bit less revealing in ultimate detail, and may provide a bit more ease of listening for those who tire of deep detail in their systems.

El, yes some whizzers do exactly that. That's what happened in the older Lowther models with the old whizzer cone.

Now it is different.

While it is true that whizzers can have their downsides, they also have their good points. There is no doubt that the whizzer is much smaller in diameter than the main cone, thus improving high-frequency dispersion greatly, with the beaming frequency much higher than just the main cone alone.

In a speaker with such a wide range, a whizzer cone is an applicable technology which works for its intended purpose. Although the unsupported edge has been a problem for most whizzer designs, the new gusseted-edge Lowther whizzer has really worked that problem down to the bare minimum. Also, the new Lowther "shower head" phase plug keeps the whizzer loaded at all frequencies which it operates in, and assists noticeably in keeping it under control.

No, it's not perfect, but it is pretty darn good, and I'll take it over a crossover and tweeter for my uses. Trade-offs abound in all systems.