ok not that i'm intimately familiar with mini dsp but i'm pretty sure they have delay functions built in that could help.
the other thing i'm wondering is have you experimented with the relative phase of low to mid high?
in the days of old when crossovers didn't have phase selection it was almost standard practice to "invert" the mid with respect to the low in order to smooth the response across the crossover region.i'm probably wrong but not knowing how steep your filters are you could be getting phase cancellation between your sub and mid high box.(which can be worse or better depending on the distance between the two)
the other thing i'm wondering is have you experimented with the relative phase of low to mid high?
in the days of old when crossovers didn't have phase selection it was almost standard practice to "invert" the mid with respect to the low in order to smooth the response across the crossover region.i'm probably wrong but not knowing how steep your filters are you could be getting phase cancellation between your sub and mid high box.(which can be worse or better depending on the distance between the two)
Last edited:
heres my setup.
and i have previously set it up like this,
my aim is to end up with 6 subs perside, and to have as many tops needed to work with it. when i finally end up with enough, they will get stacked like my first pic, but obviously 6 instead of 4.
do the karlson style have good projection? it looks like the curtains would hinder output?
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
and i have previously set it up like this,
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
my aim is to end up with 6 subs perside, and to have as many tops needed to work with it. when i finally end up with enough, they will get stacked like my first pic, but obviously 6 instead of 4.
do the karlson style have good projection? it looks like the curtains would hinder output?
i delayed the tops, i didnt collect the time, but it was estimating approx 1.5m of delay.
the crossover filter is approx 80 @12db/oct on bass, and about 120hz@12db/oct on the tops.
any higher on the bass and it sounds a bit hollow, and any lower on the tops and it starts getting to excursion limits.
the crossover filter is approx 80 @12db/oct on bass, and about 120hz@12db/oct on the tops.
any higher on the bass and it sounds a bit hollow, and any lower on the tops and it starts getting to excursion limits.
As the bass are THs, I suggest using a higher-order filter if possible. 48db/oct if possible. You can then run them a little higher before they start to sound "hollow".
Another idea - use something like HolmImpulse to measure the effect of using delay in the x-over region. It should be to difficult to find the best setting.
imo i felt they sounded better with a softer slope on the XO.
in other news, i stumbled upon FreeSpeakerPlans site and quite like the MT130 cab. in triples, i can get flat from 90-300hz at 108db@1w. in singles, the lowest response was at 100hz, which was at approx 100db@1w but picked up to 105db(200hz) so if i knock the 200hz down on the EQ i could end up with reasonably flat response and still be louder than i am now on the same power.
which is what im looking for.
i know the MT130 is a FLH rather than scoop/TH but the FLH will also help with upper mids too. so kills a couple birds with one stone, and are reasonable sized too.
in other news, i stumbled upon FreeSpeakerPlans site and quite like the MT130 cab. in triples, i can get flat from 90-300hz at 108db@1w. in singles, the lowest response was at 100hz, which was at approx 100db@1w but picked up to 105db(200hz) so if i knock the 200hz down on the EQ i could end up with reasonably flat response and still be louder than i am now on the same power.
which is what im looking for.
i know the MT130 is a FLH rather than scoop/TH but the FLH will also help with upper mids too. so kills a couple birds with one stone, and are reasonable sized too.
i like it. not too big, but has good response when simmed with my Delta12a.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
that looks real good - how deep will they be with the back chamber?
the little Karlson would be somewhat less sensitive and about 13.5" deep if wings aren't inset - the only response curves I have are with mic on the ground outdoors so the plots weren't ever on axis. There was no damping material at all in the box.
the little Karlson would be somewhat less sensitive and about 13.5" deep if wings aren't inset - the only response curves I have are with mic on the ground outdoors so the plots weren't ever on axis. There was no damping material at all in the box.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Last edited:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
TBH, the Karlson scares me. it looks very sensitive as far as adjustment is concerned and i have no knowledge on the theory of it. lol
i like the shape of the MT130 as its a trap shape, with what seems to be somewhat simple construction, i should also be able to cluster stack them too which is good for me and what i aim for in future.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.