If you raised the xo to ~130Hz you could just use a sealed mid box, adding a 12dB/oct high pass to it to give you your 24dB acoustic slope. The sub is close enough not to worry about the higher xo point.
Don't forget that the 2226's are flat right up to 1200 on axis, and start to beam around 800. More than good enough to cross that little bit higher.
It would also give your mids a bit more output to keep up with those jbl's.
Nice project btw
Rob
Don't forget that the 2226's are flat right up to 1200 on axis, and start to beam around 800. More than good enough to cross that little bit higher.
It would also give your mids a bit more output to keep up with those jbl's.
Nice project btw
Rob
RobWells said:If you raised the xo to ~130Hz you could just use a sealed mid box, adding a 12dB/oct high pass to it to give you your 24dB acoustic slope. The sub is close enough not to worry about the higher xo point.
Don't forget that the 2226's are flat right up to 1200 on axis, and start to beam around 800. More than good enough to cross that little bit higher.
It would also give your mids a bit more output to keep up with those jbl's.
Nice project btw
Rob
Hi Rob,
I initially planned to use sealed boxes for the midrange. However, after running some simulations I found out that the mid would start falling off at around 200Hz, this is a little high in my opinion. I really did not want to crossover the sub this high as it would cause problems with the stereo imaging etc.
Hence, I went along with the vented mid option.
Active Filters
Since I will use an Active filter for the sub and a highpass filter for midrange, I have started thinking about the possibility of going all Active. Is there anyone out there who have tried transferring Lynn Olsens Ariel filter into an Active design. I realise Olsen spent 6 months tweaking the filters, I am in no way as experienced or patient, so starting from scratch is not something I aspire. Just wanted to know if anyone has used a filter such as the DCX2496 and replaced it with the existing Ariel filters?
I read a post earlier avbout a guy who had transferred the minimalist filter into an Active design, however I don't put much faith into the minimalist filter to be honest.
Since I will use an Active filter for the sub and a highpass filter for midrange, I have started thinking about the possibility of going all Active. Is there anyone out there who have tried transferring Lynn Olsens Ariel filter into an Active design. I realise Olsen spent 6 months tweaking the filters, I am in no way as experienced or patient, so starting from scratch is not something I aspire. Just wanted to know if anyone has used a filter such as the DCX2496 and replaced it with the existing Ariel filters?
I read a post earlier avbout a guy who had transferred the minimalist filter into an Active design, however I don't put much faith into the minimalist filter to be honest.
Ninfendo said:
By using a digital connection you avoid the ADC, but if your crossover upconverts to 96kHz sampling you're going thru a sample rate convertor and an algorythm that can be just as compromised. I'll never understand why people want to convert 44k sampling to 96. Why not just do a linear conversion to 88k and lose the interpolation?
audiobomber said:
As you can probably understand, the Petit Filou is intended to become a reference speaker. I'm playing with the idea of sending a digital signal from the CD-Player into the crossover and from there without converting it to analog onto a digital Amplifier (I have started another thread on the subject).
D2Audio have some interesting products which combine digital crossover with digital amplifier. Does anyone have any experience with these?
Re: bad, better, best
I've been pleased with the results of using the dcx between my lexicon processor and my scanspeak speakers. I'd like to try other types, but money is an issue. I wouldn't say the dcx is of 'poor' quality. Indeed I tried the ultracurve deq in between my pre and power and could not hear any difference when it was inserted into the link, adjusted flat.
Maybe it's just 'good' as opposed to brilliant ?
Rob
salas said:
I've been pleased with the results of using the dcx between my lexicon processor and my scanspeak speakers. I'd like to try other types, but money is an issue. I wouldn't say the dcx is of 'poor' quality. Indeed I tried the ultracurve deq in between my pre and power and could not hear any difference when it was inserted into the link, adjusted flat.
Maybe it's just 'good' as opposed to brilliant ?
Rob
Ninfendo said:
You have to be careful... even thou the BR may get you a lower F3 it is unlikely to get you lower F10... the aperiodic box gives you a bit lower response than sealed, with less back pressure, but with transient response similar to -- some say better -- than sealed.
And in your case it is close to free to play with stuffing the vent to see what sounds best.
dave
Ninfendo said:
I think you may find that what you lost to get the extended bass response in terms of group delay, and a 4th order roll-off at the bottom means that a higher XO is actually required to get a seemless transition...
I guess i should quit hammering the point... once you try it you can make up your own mind.
dave
planet10/ hasn't had a BR he doesn't like better with a stuffed port (lastest Tannoy D50s)
Ninfendo said:
No -- designed the place myself... with the hifi in mind... main living area is divided into 5 "rooms" on 3 levels but all (except the bath) are all open to each other. the ceiling goes from 7 ft to 17 ft in the main room, open at the top to the next room which goes from 12 ft to 8 ft (and has a floor 4 ft above the main room). If i do say so myself the room is awesome... it is really hard to put something in it that doesn't sound good (my current Fostex horns being an exception -- but i got screws today to let me play with the compression chamber size)
dave
RobWells said:
Hi Rob,
I'm sorry if I wasn't clear before. The Plan is currently to use two linkwitz for the sub at 80 Hz, this will thus yield a 24 dB/octave falloff.
The midrange is currently tuned to around 75 Hz so they falloff naturally with 12 dB/octave. I will on top of this add another linkwitz highpass filter at 80 Hz. The combined falloff will thus be 24 dB/octave for the midrange. This filter will make it much easier for the poor Vifas to keep up with the JBLs
Hence, both the sub and mid yield a falloff of 24 dB/octave at 80Hz, that's the whole point with my vented midrange.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.