1st days impressions:
I wish I can test equipment. I think somethings wrong, it seems kinda quiet, I think the new crossovers may be making the efficiency lower, I don't know it sounds alright but its like theirs something missing, its definitely clear and I can hear all sorts of subtleties but I was expecting more. **thinks to self**: "this demo song sucks, why did I even add it to my test CD? lets take a look at my notes.. ladada 'Panning and Imedgeing', hmm, this song sucks at panning i wonder what the difference would be if I turned it to mo..."
SWEET ARCTIC MONKEYS! I'VE BEEN RUNNING MONO!!!
Umm - I'll get back to you guys I have some listening to do..
I wish I can test equipment. I think somethings wrong, it seems kinda quiet, I think the new crossovers may be making the efficiency lower, I don't know it sounds alright but its like theirs something missing, its definitely clear and I can hear all sorts of subtleties but I was expecting more. **thinks to self**: "this demo song sucks, why did I even add it to my test CD? lets take a look at my notes.. ladada 'Panning and Imedgeing', hmm, this song sucks at panning i wonder what the difference would be if I turned it to mo..."
SWEET ARCTIC MONKEYS! I'VE BEEN RUNNING MONO!!! Umm - I'll get back to you guys I have some listening to do..
Speakers done, they sound great! Its hard to believe I could affourd sound like this! thanks allot to Jay as well as sreten.
Sreten, Do you still think that removing the c10 would help, and axactly what would I hear differently from increasing system impedance?
Jay, I overlayed the two response curves in photoshop, the 7-something uf definitely looks more "flat". But then again that would just lessen the high mids right? hmmm, well 'm not going to touch these again until more people build them or I have another DIY person over to listen. For now I am really pleased, Heres my listening notes - Post#9.
Sreten, Do you still think that removing the c10 would help, and axactly what would I hear differently from increasing system impedance?
Jay, I overlayed the two response curves in photoshop, the 7-something uf definitely looks more "flat". But then again that would just lessen the high mids right? hmmm, well 'm not going to touch these again until more people build them or I have another DIY person over to listen. For now I am really pleased, Heres my listening notes - Post#9.
Raptor,
Glad to hear that you enjoy the speakers!
First off these speakers need some power to play loud. This is due to the RS midwoofer, which is not a high sensitivity driver. The system sensitivity is about 82 dB / 2.83 v.
Below are fine tuning options you may want to consider. But before changing anything, you should spend some time on listening to your favorite music in order to get familiar with the sound characteristic of the current XO and know exactly what you need to change if you want to.
1. First, in case you feel the speakers are a bit too bright, too much detailed, or fatiguing. That is, they seem to produce more treble (> 2kHz) than bass and midrange. There are three options to choose from:
1) Change R10 value of 6 Ohms to a smaller value (e.g., 5 or 4.7 ohms). This will decrease the level of overall treble (i.e., both lower (between 2 kHz and 5 kHz) and upper (above 5 kHz) treble ranges). But the lower treble will be a bit more attenuated than the upper treble. Note that this lower treble region tends to be more obtrusive than the upper treble to human ears.
2) Change R9 value of 6 Ohms to a larger value (e.g., 7 or 8 Ohms). This will, again, decrease the level of overall treble (i.e., both lower and upper treble ranges). But the upper treble will be relatively more attenuated than the lower treble. This will make treble less "airy."
3) Change C6 value 8.2 uF to a smaller value (e.g., 7.5 or 6.8 uF). This will decrease ONly the lower treble level, including upper midrange (i.e., between 1 kHz and 4 kHz), without changing the upper treble. Sound will be less forward and more laidback. But if you like classical music and enjoy the "forward yet beautiful presence" of musical instruments like strings and winds, DO NOT touch this.
2. Second, in case you feel the speakers are too warm, less lively, or less detailed. That is, they seem to produce more bass and midrange than treble. There are again three options:
1) Change R10 value of 6 Ohms to a larger value (e.g., 7 or 8 ohms). This will increase the level of overall treble (i.e., both lower (between 2 kHz and 5 kHz) and upper (above 5 kHz) treble ranges). But the lower treble will be a bit more emphasized than the upper treble.
2) Change R9 value of 6 Ohms to a smaller value (e.g., 5 or 4.7 Ohms). This will increase the level of overall treble (i.e., both lower and upper treble ranges). But the upper treble will be relatively more emphasized than the lower treble. This will make the speakers produce more "airy" treble.
3) Change C6 value 8.2 uF to a larger value (e.g., 9 uF). This will increase ONly the lower treble level, including upper midrange (i.e., between 1 kHz and 4 kHz), without changing the upper treble. Sound will be more forward without producing too much detail.
Glad to hear that you enjoy the speakers!
First off these speakers need some power to play loud. This is due to the RS midwoofer, which is not a high sensitivity driver. The system sensitivity is about 82 dB / 2.83 v.
Below are fine tuning options you may want to consider. But before changing anything, you should spend some time on listening to your favorite music in order to get familiar with the sound characteristic of the current XO and know exactly what you need to change if you want to.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
1. First, in case you feel the speakers are a bit too bright, too much detailed, or fatiguing. That is, they seem to produce more treble (> 2kHz) than bass and midrange. There are three options to choose from:
1) Change R10 value of 6 Ohms to a smaller value (e.g., 5 or 4.7 ohms). This will decrease the level of overall treble (i.e., both lower (between 2 kHz and 5 kHz) and upper (above 5 kHz) treble ranges). But the lower treble will be a bit more attenuated than the upper treble. Note that this lower treble region tends to be more obtrusive than the upper treble to human ears.
2) Change R9 value of 6 Ohms to a larger value (e.g., 7 or 8 Ohms). This will, again, decrease the level of overall treble (i.e., both lower and upper treble ranges). But the upper treble will be relatively more attenuated than the lower treble. This will make treble less "airy."
3) Change C6 value 8.2 uF to a smaller value (e.g., 7.5 or 6.8 uF). This will decrease ONly the lower treble level, including upper midrange (i.e., between 1 kHz and 4 kHz), without changing the upper treble. Sound will be less forward and more laidback. But if you like classical music and enjoy the "forward yet beautiful presence" of musical instruments like strings and winds, DO NOT touch this.
2. Second, in case you feel the speakers are too warm, less lively, or less detailed. That is, they seem to produce more bass and midrange than treble. There are again three options:
1) Change R10 value of 6 Ohms to a larger value (e.g., 7 or 8 ohms). This will increase the level of overall treble (i.e., both lower (between 2 kHz and 5 kHz) and upper (above 5 kHz) treble ranges). But the lower treble will be a bit more emphasized than the upper treble.
2) Change R9 value of 6 Ohms to a smaller value (e.g., 5 or 4.7 Ohms). This will increase the level of overall treble (i.e., both lower and upper treble ranges). But the upper treble will be relatively more emphasized than the lower treble. This will make the speakers produce more "airy" treble.
3) Change C6 value 8.2 uF to a larger value (e.g., 9 uF). This will increase ONly the lower treble level, including upper midrange (i.e., between 1 kHz and 4 kHz), without changing the upper treble. Sound will be more forward without producing too much detail.
Raptor, you probably mean "removing R10," not "C10." Right?
Do NOT ever try to remove R10. What Sreten meant by saying this is "remove R10 and change other component values accordingly." If you just remove R10 and do not change other component values, the XO will be totally ruined!
I actually tried to remove R10 and change other components accordingly, but I didn't like it for some reason, so decided to leave it as is.
--Jay
Jay_WJ said:
Hi,
Absolutely. Do NOT simply remove R10 (even though it will
not harm anything). If R10 is removed, R9, C6 and L7 would
need to be rescaled to get back to the target response.
Which would be slightly different as R10 reduces the effect of
the minimal changes of the tweeters impedance with frequency.
Jay did not like the look of the high value inductor this would
cause, but as I pointed out, due the higher impedances its
DCR can be higher, so overal size of L7 might not change much.
Also note as designed the treble end is not a difficult load.
Why do it ?
Amplifier performance is a subtle issue, but generally they struggle
at high frequencies the most. IMO it might be worth doing for say
a multi-channel AV amplifier that is not particularly load tolerant.
Basically distortion is more related to output current than voltage swing.
(Until you hit the clipping points .... where it all goes hideously wrong .... )
It would reduce distortion, whether you would be able to tell ........
/sreten.Hi,
I note from your other thread the fronts are damaged somewhat.
So presumably you will be going for the felt idea ?
One way of doing this is to profile the felt to fit your speaker grilles.
Note if using grilles make sure there is enough room for the bass/mid
driver at full excursion, this has caught me out on one occasion.
/sreten.
I note from your other thread the fronts are damaged somewhat.
So presumably you will be going for the felt idea ?
One way of doing this is to profile the felt to fit your speaker grilles.
Note if using grilles make sure there is enough room for the bass/mid
driver at full excursion, this has caught me out on one occasion.
/sreten.OKEY, no worries, the R-10 will be safe.
Hi srenten, thanks for the advice. I bet getting the 3 layer sonic barrier in the back will fix some problems, right now theres only stuffing(ran out of cash) and 1/2" 1 layer Sonic Barrier stuff on the sides.
The fronts damage is only to the paint layer, I will probably re-sand and repaint them chrome to match the chrome in the sands sooner or later. I'm talking to a DIY guy from ohio and he might help me flush mount the two drivers. At that point ill be able to compare these to the Modulas.
Thanks for the heads up on the grill, a woofer I had suffered some dam edge from a metal grill before I bought it. The way the grills are molded is handy because the inside is curved so their is almost a full inch clearance for the Dayton. I have to give KLH props, there boxes are pretty nice.
These are my amps specs (the 7100), how does this look?:
http://www.fmtunerinfo.com/oldp8-61-71amps.gif
http://www.fmtunerinfo.com/old-specs-amps.gif
do amps with insufficient power suffer at higher volume levels, or is there quality lost across the entire gamut regurdless?
Ohh yeah, if you guys have never heard The Decemberists I'm listening to them for the first time on these speakers, there is allot going on, the CD very well recorded. You should check em out.
Hi srenten, thanks for the advice. I bet getting the 3 layer sonic barrier in the back will fix some problems, right now theres only stuffing(ran out of cash) and 1/2" 1 layer Sonic Barrier stuff on the sides.
The fronts damage is only to the paint layer, I will probably re-sand and repaint them chrome to match the chrome in the sands sooner or later. I'm talking to a DIY guy from ohio and he might help me flush mount the two drivers. At that point ill be able to compare these to the Modulas.
Thanks for the heads up on the grill, a woofer I had suffered some dam edge from a metal grill before I bought it. The way the grills are molded is handy because the inside is curved so their is almost a full inch clearance for the Dayton. I have to give KLH props, there boxes are pretty nice.
These are my amps specs (the 7100), how does this look?:
http://www.fmtunerinfo.com/oldp8-61-71amps.gif
http://www.fmtunerinfo.com/old-specs-amps.gif
do amps with insufficient power suffer at higher volume levels, or is there quality lost across the entire gamut regurdless?
Ohh yeah, if you guys have never heard The Decemberists I'm listening to them for the first time on these speakers, there is allot going on, the CD very well recorded. You should check em out.
Old generation amps usually have very solid build quality and excellent performance. I know this because I have a 25 yr old Onkyo amp. Back then it was Onkyo's flagship inte amp. It still works fine and sounds fantastic.
Do all controls and switches, including volume, tone, and balance, work without noise? If not, Caig DeoxIT will do a magic for you: http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=341-202
Do all controls and switches, including volume, tone, and balance, work without noise? If not, Caig DeoxIT will do a magic for you: http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=341-202
sreten said:Absolutely. Do NOT simply remove R10 (even though it will
not harm anything). If R10 is removed, R9, C6 and L7 would
need to be rescaled to get back to the target response.
Which would be slightly different as R10 reduces the effect of
the minimal changes of the tweeters impedance with frequency.
Jay did not like the look of the high value inductor this would
cause, but as I pointed out, due the higher impedances its
DCR can be higher, so overal size of L7 might not change much.
Also note as designed the treble end is not a difficult load.
Why do it ?
Amplifier performance is a subtle issue, but generally they struggle
at high frequencies the most. IMO it might be worth doing for say
a multi-channel AV amplifier that is not particularly load tolerant.
Basically distortion is more related to output current than voltage swing.
(Until you hit the clipping points .... where it all goes hideously wrong .... )
It would reduce distortion, whether you would be able to tell ........
I agree with you about amplifier performance.
In my case, even with R10 the minimum impedance in the tweeter region was 6.7 Ohms, which is high enough for any usable amps. And in addition to the large value inductor, the R9 value was too large for easy tweaking---I can use two resistors in series, but I don't like this idea (parts count is still the same). Also as you said, there is minor change of the curve due to the uneven impedance of the tweeter. In the end, I learned that using an attenuation circuit in different manners (i.e., using a single resistor before the xover and after the xover, and two-resistor L-pad) all result in a bit different response curves even after rescaling. Somehow I liked the curve from using the current two-resistor L-pad the most. That's why I ended up having the current form of XO.
I spent a lot of time tweaking the XO. Every bit of the current XO is not without consideration, albeit in simulations.
--Jay
Hey Jay, Ive been enjoying these throughly. I was wondering, what should we call these little guys? "The Dayton/Seas-but-not-Jon-Marshs-ModulaMT" dosnt have a very good ring to it "Mini-me-Modulas" are kinda funny, but it dosnt give you much credit. I would just call em "Raptors" because they are small, quick sounding, and can overwhelm larger beasts -haha, like an old Curwin-Vega, also I am fond of them but its your design. I'll just need a title for when I compare them at events
I made another revision of my design. For some of you who already built the previous design, do not worry much. The revision is really minor (a little more BSC and very minor response shaping). Note: this update will also replace the XO schematics in my previous posts. So the previous designs are gone for good.
Predicted FR and phase alignment:
Note that the above XO was designed for a sealed cabinet (PE .38 cu ft box).
If anyone wants to build this in a vented box (e.g., using prebuilt PE .75 cu ft cabinet or one of a similar size), the XO will need a bit less amount of BSC due to a larger baffle. In that case, use the following version:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Predicted FR and phase alignment:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Note that the above XO was designed for a sealed cabinet (PE .38 cu ft box).
If anyone wants to build this in a vented box (e.g., using prebuilt PE .75 cu ft cabinet or one of a similar size), the XO will need a bit less amount of BSC due to a larger baffle. In that case, use the following version:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.