Mystery

[SpeakerHeadroom]

Could someone tell me why the RF-52 has a lower (34Hz) FR than RF-62 (38Hz)?

[colterphoto1]

yes that doesn't look right, maybe a typo?

[oldtimer]

I don't know about the current line, but.....the Forte II has a low of 32hz and the larger Chorus II has a low of 39hz, so why not?

[SpeakerHeadroom]

I don't know about the current line, but.....the Forte II has a low of 32hz and the larger Chorus II has a low of 39hz, so why not?

Perhaps the Chorus II is flatter in the 90-180 Hz range(?) and hence the implied quality goes with it.

[oldtimer]

Perhaps, but how does that answer your question, or does it?

[SpeakerHeadroom]

Well, some answers but they have not been substantiated. Quite often, it appears to be the practice to improve the low end extension of smaller drivers at the sacrifice of a hump in the 90-180Hz range.

[oldtimer]

This the best i can do. I went and found the instruction manual that came with my FII's. As mine were among the first built, the specs I have are for the Chorus and Forte models, not the II's...On the graph, the fortes are smoother over most of the 90 to 180 range than the chorus. At the end of said spectrum the forte's start rising a tad later but bump up about a .25db more, while the chorus rise a little earlier then hump down to the 200 mark. If anything the fortes are smoother most of the time, with the main difference between them in that range being where the peak is (about 25hz form each other). The fortes start rolling off at 38hz and the chorus at 42, but the chorus roll off much faster.

I think the combination of drivers and dimensions of the cabinet contribute to some being better at low end response than others. You certainly cannot conclude that the fortes achieve their low end because of a sacrifice in your stated range.