Can you think of a more challenging crossover than between a "full range" ESL dipole out in the room and a sealed box sub against a wall and at low frequencies some distance away?
Gimme a break!
Agree about "hoarding bits" and avoiding too many ill-considered A/D conversions.
Ben
It's not nearly as bad as you might think.
Subs are pretty much dipole by nature of wavelengths in play....or should I say omni-pole -
And I think the reason you used to hear all the crap about it not being good to put cone subs with electrostats...you know, the 'cones are too slow to keep up BS'...was because we didn't have the tools for proper delay / phase alignment....IOW, DSP
dont have a lot of experience here BUT it seems to me the "slow" comments are mostly related to the difference in transient responses between the two.
The subs often being no where near the same attributes as the very light panel diaphragm.
open baffle subs often getting things closer.
I suspect if you can tolerate a critically damped sealed alignment that would be a better match AND subs that use two apposing woofers to cancel reaction forces to the floor may take it even closer.
My comments are based on attempting to match a 4 micron ribbon (large) to woofers. Experimented with this for quite some time and came away with above thoughts.
The subs often being no where near the same attributes as the very light panel diaphragm.
open baffle subs often getting things closer.
I suspect if you can tolerate a critically damped sealed alignment that would be a better match AND subs that use two apposing woofers to cancel reaction forces to the floor may take it even closer.
My comments are based on attempting to match a 4 micron ribbon (large) to woofers. Experimented with this for quite some time and came away with above thoughts.
imo, basic error right there: "box sub against a wall".
rewind tape, ok boys, take 2...
I used to tell my guests, when i could see that they were amazed by the sound of the acoustats, that it was largely due to the low mass of the mylar diaphragm.
And you know, for all I know that still may be true ...particularly at higher frequencies.
But I have learned at sub frequencies, the inherent group delay of the low pass filter dominates timing issues, including impulse response as effected by mass.
PaulSpencer has a great post (#78) about this, in thread http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/13351-why-18s-slow-8.html
yep systems with time delay adjust I hear go a long way to making the blend believable with ribbons/planers/stats
For sure there is likley much confusion on what is meant by "fast". My own take is its mostly the decay were talking about. The ugly long decay of underdamped woofers , rigging boxes, and floor reactions/walls breathing etc.
For sure there is likley much confusion on what is meant by "fast". My own take is its mostly the decay were talking about. The ugly long decay of underdamped woofers , rigging boxes, and floor reactions/walls breathing etc.
Last edited:
I was quite surprised at the improvement in getting my subs time-aligned with my mains. Not possible to dial-in before DSP. BTW, I can't adjust it using a tape measure and the speed of sound from a textbook.
Reverberation time in a room is a wholly separate perceptual experience (and one which your hearing "understands") compared to bass-reflex boom. It may give you displeasure at the character of music (a lot of room photos in this website show hideously reverberant rooms), but isn't really a distortion in the sense of being separate from the music score.
B.
From anybody else would sound like a really odd question. Yes, of course.
But like things as totally gross as polarity, you'd be surprised how subtle it can be in a real room (as compared to a sim).
As a big fan of "classical" percussion music and gamelan percussion music, quite a big improvement ,maybe because so much of crispness straddles the XO region.
Using a good old Behringer DCX2496... how did I ever do without it before. Very inexpensive and I have no sense of any sonic shortcomings. Takes a while to learn to use it right.
I sure hope nobody says, "Good enough for my grandfather" again. My systems have always been absolutely great and couldn't be improved. Until I tried something new.
Ben
Ben
Last edited:
The only person who has said that Ben, is you.
Strawman.Thanks, that speaks volumes. I've owned several DCX2496. The digital section is very nice, the analog section not so much. If the stock unit it OK by you, that's a useful data point.
Yep, or "Q: What's the ideal amplifier? A: A wire with gain."
Transposed to OBs + "need for DSP" for instance, I'd say build the OB in such a way that its usually ascribed weaknesses are addressed in the build. Prefer that to DSP.
DSP isn't a panacea and has its own noise profile, I would prefer just doing simple crossover with a circuit, preferably a tubed one before the amps, and diagnose and treat the room with organic, acoustic treatments.
Ben, I prefer to put the subs physically in front of the mains.
For some this is not practical.
Also I do not like to use the room as part of the LF system, although I suppose that if one happened to have a room that worked out very nicely it would be a good thing, problem is many rooms don't work that way. For example the K-horn is very unhappy in all by the exactly proper room.
IF I could find a first class (aka transparent to MY ears) means to digitally delay the mains, I would jump on that in a hot second. But I'd use it to align a high tweeter above my horns first!
Any suggestions on solving this problem that are some levels up from the DCX2496 would be appreciated certainly. I'd settle for just the delay.
For some this is not practical.
Also I do not like to use the room as part of the LF system, although I suppose that if one happened to have a room that worked out very nicely it would be a good thing, problem is many rooms don't work that way. For example the K-horn is very unhappy in all by the exactly proper room.
IF I could find a first class (aka transparent to MY ears) means to digitally delay the mains, I would jump on that in a hot second. But I'd use it to align a high tweeter above my horns first!
Any suggestions on solving this problem that are some levels up from the DCX2496 would be appreciated certainly. I'd settle for just the delay.
Yes, but that's harder. DSP is the quick and easy band aid. I admit to putting band aids all over some of my systems.
I've done with Quad 57 panels. It's what worked best. Didn't have easy delay lines back then.
If you are running all your music off a computer, it's not too hard. Just break up the signal into a mains and subs and delay the mains. Many music players allow you to do that. Some soundcard drivers do, too.
Bear, is your your gear balanced or single-ended? I'm not very familiar with single-ended anymore other than some of the miniDSP devices.
I know of a number of balanced, pro-audio speaker management processors in the marketplace, that are several steps up from the SQ and functionality of the DCX2496.
Unfortunately they all are many steps up in price too...and IMHO cannot currently provide the FIR filter functionality that miniDSP can offer ..at any price!
You might want to get whatever miniDSP let's you adjust time, and also play around with FIR.
Maybe just use the miniDSP as digital in, digital splits out, if you have all the DACs you're wanting to use....
Hi Guys. Please check out my post, evaluate my understanding of amplifier/speaker
impedance and voltage interaction and determine how well my idea will work.
Thanks. http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/planars-exotics/300229-driving-quad-57s-first-watt-j2-amp.html
impedance and voltage interaction and determine how well my idea will work.
Thanks. http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/planars-exotics/300229-driving-quad-57s-first-watt-j2-amp.html
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.