yeah, most probably!
It's nice when theory meets practice in our own experience
best,
graaf
Here you can find a method to achieve an approximation to an asymmetric 2nd/1st order acoustical crossover that behaves like a subtractive 2nd/1st oder crossover (what you hinted at with the last sentence).
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full-range/104958-transient-perfect-2nd-1st-order-crossover.html
John Watkinson's Legend speakers use a symmetric 2nd/2nd order subtractive crossover - just as a sidenote.
Regards
Charles
The thread you referenced (good info, thank you) endorses my point - to use this topology you need drivers that are well behaved at the crossover point, which also implies good behaviour well outside their passband too. I suspect John's Legends use very good drivers.
The following might increase your confidence:
http://www.resolutionmag.com/pdfs/DRAGONS/CROSSO~1.PDF
I can confirm that the Legend uses a classic omnidirectional setup with cone-shaped reflectors and a 15cm woofer paired with a fullrange driver. According to Watkinsons philosophy the drivers are mounted in tubes ("they don't build rectangular pressure vessels and submarines - so why are almost all speakers rectangular ?"). There are four poles in the corners over which a sock is pulled - giving the wole assembly a rectangular look ("people are used to rectangular speakers - so we made it LOOK like one !).
Regards
Charles
http://www.resolutionmag.com/pdfs/DRAGONS/CROSSO~1.PDF
I can confirm that the Legend uses a classic omnidirectional setup with cone-shaped reflectors and a 15cm woofer paired with a fullrange driver. According to Watkinsons philosophy the drivers are mounted in tubes ("they don't build rectangular pressure vessels and submarines - so why are almost all speakers rectangular ?"). There are four poles in the corners over which a sock is pulled - giving the wole assembly a rectangular look ("people are used to rectangular speakers - so we made it LOOK like one !).
Regards
Charles
I meant to say, the wider the bandwidth of the driver/speaker, making the xover points below 300 and above 3000, and as much a possible beyond those points the better.
I hope Watkinson is mounting his drivers NOT in the ends of a tube??
You folks should review the B&O AES article in JAES Anthology I, and the work that the late John Dunlavy did toward the same ends.
Digital xovers hold the promise of correcting some things that are difficult or impossible to do in the analog domain, but have yet to arrive imo at "fidelity". I'm hoping it will happen soon.
So, despite claims of all sorts the reality is that any speaker represents a range of compromises. As a DIYer you get to choose the compromises that you are willing to accept, and accept those that are less important to you. There is nothing that is going to "get it all."
Afaik, most wide range and full range speakers do not exhibit a flat or nearly flat phase response - what you do get is a continuous function. I think that is a good thing.
It seems to go back to the idea that I suggested, no matter how you want to measure or look at it - if you produce the sound from the same source (material & surface) the mind processes the sound as being "coherent" - that being of a single origin harmonically. The issue of stereo, or multi channel raises other problems and issues beyond the apparent harmonic continuity of the sound...
So, if ur really worried about getting this nearly as close as is possible without some sort of heavy digital processing, the choices are pretty narrow - the best one imo WRT this "phase" thing and the 'harmonic continuity" idea is going to be a largish ESL.
Btw, the "initial transient' (if there is one) goes to the tweeter in a "normal" speaker because it looks like a HF signal! Maybe this is another reason that speakers with "tweeters" don't usually sound "natural"?
_-_-bear
I hope Watkinson is mounting his drivers NOT in the ends of a tube??
You folks should review the B&O AES article in JAES Anthology I, and the work that the late John Dunlavy did toward the same ends.
Digital xovers hold the promise of correcting some things that are difficult or impossible to do in the analog domain, but have yet to arrive imo at "fidelity". I'm hoping it will happen soon.
So, despite claims of all sorts the reality is that any speaker represents a range of compromises. As a DIYer you get to choose the compromises that you are willing to accept, and accept those that are less important to you. There is nothing that is going to "get it all."
Afaik, most wide range and full range speakers do not exhibit a flat or nearly flat phase response - what you do get is a continuous function. I think that is a good thing.
It seems to go back to the idea that I suggested, no matter how you want to measure or look at it - if you produce the sound from the same source (material & surface) the mind processes the sound as being "coherent" - that being of a single origin harmonically. The issue of stereo, or multi channel raises other problems and issues beyond the apparent harmonic continuity of the sound...
So, if ur really worried about getting this nearly as close as is possible without some sort of heavy digital processing, the choices are pretty narrow - the best one imo WRT this "phase" thing and the 'harmonic continuity" idea is going to be a largish ESL.
Btw, the "initial transient' (if there is one) goes to the tweeter in a "normal" speaker because it looks like a HF signal! Maybe this is another reason that speakers with "tweeters" don't usually sound "natural"?
_-_-bear
I checked his website I see very little information and no pictures of what you describe - got a link??
_-_-bear
I checked his website I see very little information and no pictures of what you describe - got a link??
_-_-bear
No - but I have seen it from close-up !
Regards
Charles
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.