I have this mic
http://www.sharkoon.com/pix/illus/hires/sharkoon_desktop_microphone_1.jpg
Used to use it for skype, don't bother any more. Will this do, or will I need something a little more professional? It's only a cheapy one...
http://www.sharkoon.com/pix/illus/hires/sharkoon_desktop_microphone_1.jpg
Used to use it for skype, don't bother any more. Will this do, or will I need something a little more professional? It's only a cheapy one...
I just stumbled across this - it's an SPL meter, decent frequency range, but plugs straight into the PC. Would holmimpuse etc work with this?
Browse for Products | CPC
Browse for Products | CPC
Nah you could probably get one of the lower end measurement mics for half that price. That probably uses it's own software that you have to install or something.
What are you wanting to take a look at measurement wise exactly? Oh yeah I also meant to ask, what filters you were using with foobar2000?
What are you wanting to take a look at measurement wise exactly? Oh yeah I also meant to ask, what filters you were using with foobar2000?
I've been curious for a while about my in room bass response, and now people are asking for measurements of the 'screaminess' of the speakers at higher volumes.
On foobar, usually I use nothing - I have a USB soundcard thingy, which only outputs L/R. I have a 5.1 soundcard on my PC aswell. I use foobar with that, but noise levels are nowhere near as good as on the USB one. So, for now I use passive crossovers at the speaker end. 2nd order on the FR, 1st order on the woofers, 2nd order LP on the sub, set somewhere low.
Edit - I expect my dad's scope would be better for finding the nasties, not a SPL meter.
On foobar, usually I use nothing - I have a USB soundcard thingy, which only outputs L/R. I have a 5.1 soundcard on my PC aswell. I use foobar with that, but noise levels are nowhere near as good as on the USB one. So, for now I use passive crossovers at the speaker end. 2nd order on the FR, 1st order on the woofers, 2nd order LP on the sub, set somewhere low.
Edit - I expect my dad's scope would be better for finding the nasties, not a SPL meter.
If you attached a tweeter in circuit with the Visiton, then yes, you should be able to play louder, before the distortion makes your eyes bleed and the sides of your skull to collapse! You have just suppressed the resonance nodes from the Visiton and replaced them with those of the tweeter, which hopefully has resonance nodes out where dogs thrive. Those nodes are still there and eventually you will once again hear them and then you will need to disperse them.
Bud
Seperate amp, just a quick test, as I'd only get one side running like that. The tweeters were from a pair of Mission 760is, still in box, with the passive XO still connected for protection purposes more than anything.
The thing is, though, I don't know if I want to add a tweeter - that would defeat the whole Full-Range idea. It would become a wideband midrange driver instead.
The thing is, though, I don't know if I want to add a tweeter - that would defeat the whole Full-Range idea. It would become a wideband midrange driver instead.
Well I wouldn't get too caught up in categories of drivers. The drivers that will crossover best with low order xovers will resemble full range drivers because they need to cover a wider range of frequencies through the xover region. And if your main gripe is distortion I really can't think of a better way to reduce it than splitting it and sending it to the drivers that can handle those frequencies most efficiently.
Last edited:
And the high mids dont "rip your ears off"
Nice idea, but I'm not looking for a build.
I think we may have gone a little OT by talking about microphones.
Anyway, I'm still curious - why is it mainly paper cones that do it? We know that various cone treatments fix it, which suggests it's the cone itself that is creating the nasties. But why is this? Surely, the paper fibres aren't rubbing together.........
I think we may have gone a little OT by talking about microphones.
Anyway, I'm still curious - why is it mainly paper cones that do it? We know that various cone treatments fix it, which suggests it's the cone itself that is creating the nasties. But why is this? Surely, the paper fibres aren't rubbing together.........
I don't think it is always paper, but i've not met a paper cone i haven't been able to improve with a seal coat to bond the top layer of fibres together... and that is going back >30 years and on a lot more than FRs. The journey to the drivers i presently sell started with efforts to cure the FE127eN of its shreiky bits.
I now have at least a dozen sets of speakers that are just fine at higher volumes... as long as i don't run the amp out of power.
dave
I now have at least a dozen sets of speakers that are just fine at higher volumes... as long as i don't run the amp out of power.
dave
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.