It's more of a start rather than a finish
I use chalk paint, it's very convenient to apply, it dries quickly, allows me to keep the intermediate stages more or less aesthetically pleasing so as not to annoy my wife
And very useful - it is very easy to sand. But it should be covered with varnish or oil, if left as a finish. It looks quite interesting (it's not so clear on the photo, but in person it looks like velvet).Once I realize what I'm building
the finish will most likely be some sort of spray paint.
Last edited:
My friend has HF1440 and I will try to take them for the measurements, but it may take some time.
If anyone else lives in Warsaw and owns any drivers, let me know, I'd be willing to test it. That's all I can help so far
Without a proper modelling of the drivers, these throat extensions really seem to be shooting in the dark.
The red curve is the calculated throat resistance of the T520-36-EXT-1.
The blue one is a more EXAR-400-like, i.e. a more or less simple cone attached.
I have no clue why has the EXT-1 so less output around 500 Hz. It's a bit smaller overall but that can hardly be responsible for such a difference.
Now if we try the blue one and it won't get better, I'll start believing in magic
- A simple conical extension definitely has a worse HF performance (starts to beam more abruptly). We can rely on this prediction, at least.
The red curve is the calculated throat resistance of the T520-36-EXT-1.
The blue one is a more EXAR-400-like, i.e. a more or less simple cone attached.
I have no clue why has the EXT-1 so less output around 500 Hz. It's a bit smaller overall but that can hardly be responsible for such a difference.
Now if we try the blue one and it won't get better, I'll start believing in magic
- A simple conical extension definitely has a worse HF performance (starts to beam more abruptly). We can rely on this prediction, at least.
Last edited:
I'll start believing in magic
I wonder if I might have made any mistake, but it's unlikely, it was just a waveguide change. Two times
It will be interesting to see how the short adapter works, I'll try to print and measure it this week.
I think the question was regarding a whole (multi-way) system, where the crossover in general causes an all-pass response, i.e. the phase becoming more or less nonlinearly dependent on frequency. That's quite a complicated topic, that comes down on how much is a phase distortion audible (probably not that much).
Any phase distortion coming from crossover can be "undone" with a FIR filter, and that's probably the best approach if a flat phase is desirable (which is a question).
Any phase distortion coming from crossover can be "undone" with a FIR filter, and that's probably the best approach if a flat phase is desirable (which is a question).
Last edited:
much flatter in passband, here he advocates no crossover for home use: https://community.klipsch.com/index...ar-phase-loudspeakers/page/7/#comment-2597374
No comment on that
There's always some crossover acoustically, as the transdurers simply have their passbands. Trying not to add any additional (electrical) LP and HP filters to preserve as much as possible the original phase responses of the drivers doesn't seem to me as a good approach in general. It can work but mostly it just won't. That's why crossovers exist in the first place.
There's always some crossover acoustically, as the transdurers simply have their passbands. Trying not to add any additional (electrical) LP and HP filters to preserve as much as possible the original phase responses of the drivers doesn't seem to me as a good approach in general. It can work but mostly it just won't. That's why crossovers exist in the first place.
Last edited:
