Widerange drivers and EQ - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Full Range

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 3rd November 2004, 09:30 PM   #1
morbo is offline morbo  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Guelph, Ontario
Default Widerange drivers and EQ

Has anyone used widerange/fullrange drivers with parametric room/FR correction EQs? Does anyone else even think this is a good idea? I am considering EQing a set of the CSS 4.5" drivers used on axis, in the nearfield, using something like the Behringer Ultracurve. It seems to me that this should result in a system with very few weaknesses relative to its price.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2004, 10:43 PM   #2
The one and only
 
Nelson Pass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
I have, and I wasn't as happy with that approach as with
passive parts doing some broad EQ. It seemed to several
listeners that something got lost, even though the response
was very flat.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2004, 10:53 PM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
rcavictim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Next to an open wormhole NW of Toronto
Default Ultragraph

Morbo,

I'm looking right now at potentially purchasing a Behringer Ultragraph Pro FBQ6200 for room EQ. Parts Express sells this unit but one has to pay off the federales at the border with many pesos to get them to let stuff in. Free trade my *ss! Where were you gonna buy yours?
__________________
"There are more worlds than the one you can hold in your hand." Albert Hosteen, Navajo spiritual elder and code-breaker, X-Files TV Series.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2004, 11:06 PM   #4
morbo is offline morbo  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Guelph, Ontario
Nelson - thanks for your feedback. I had expected a certain amount of quality degradation inserting any active component in line with a fullrange driver, but I had hoped that the benefits of improved FR would offset those. Clearly in your trials that was not the case. If you don't mind me asking, what kind of hardware did you use for the EQing? And did you have it 'auto-eq' or make adjustments manually?

rcavictim - I have not decided yet, as its a fair investment for me. Probably somewhere in Canada, lots of proaudio shops carry the behringer stuff. If from the US, certainly from somehwere that will ship USPS rather than UPS, for the reasons you mentioned above. That seems to rule out parts-express. I refuse to pay ridiculous brokerage charges to UPS, USPS, Fedex, and Purolator somehow get stuff across the border without charging me $30 a pop each time.

BTW, do you really need the crossover on the FBQ6200, or is there any other reason you'd rather have it than the: http://www.behringer.com/DEQ2496/index.cfm?lang=ENG ?
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2004, 11:34 PM   #5
diyAudio Member
 
rcavictim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Next to an open wormhole NW of Toronto
Quote:
Originally posted by morbo


rcavictim - I have not decided yet, as its a fair investment for me. Probably somewhere in Canada, lots of proaudio shops carry the behringer stuff. If from the US, certainly from somehwere that will ship USPS rather than UPS, for the reasons you mentioned above. That seems to rule out parts-express. I refuse to pay ridiculous brokerage charges to UPS, USPS, Fedex, and Purolator somehow get stuff across the border without charging me $30 a pop each time.
UPS only robs you for $30?. I seem to recall the robery program started closer to $50 for an empty package and went up from there if there was actually stuff in the package.

Quote:
Originally posted by morbo


BTW, do you really need the crossover on the FBQ6200, or is there any other reason you'd rather have it than the: http://www.behringer.com/DEQ2496/index.cfm?lang=ENG ?
Yikes. I didn't know about this sweetheart. I only saw the Behringer products listed at PE. PE has a full 24 bit 96 KHz digital EQ as well but I am put off by coverting the precious analog sound into digital and back. Digital is still so new I'm sure that better stuff and new standards will be available by the time I can save enough to buy one of todays models. That is a LOT of coin for me too.

I also heard that Behringer has NO factory support for their products in North America. How are you gonna fix a full blown digital magic box yourself if something goes wrong???? At least with a box full of lots of identical op amps one has a chance of DIY repair I'm thinking. Note to self, never buy a car that I cannot service myself!

No, in answer to your question, I do not need the summed bass subwoofer crossover ouput channel which comes with the unit I was looking at.

I think I'd like to learn more about the digital one you pointed to, if only for academic interest.
__________________
"There are more worlds than the one you can hold in your hand." Albert Hosteen, Navajo spiritual elder and code-breaker, X-Files TV Series.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th November 2004, 12:52 AM   #6
MJK is offline MJK  United States
Account disabled at member's request
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Clifton Park, NY
In the gallery on my site, there is one person using the UltraCurve, in place of my passive circuit, with a Fostex FE-206E ML TL. You might try sending him an e-mail asking for some feedback about how it is working out in his system.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th November 2004, 01:44 AM   #7
Ken L is offline Ken L  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: deep south
Default I'm not Nelson, but I have some comments

Quote:
Originally posted by morbo
.....had expected a certain amount of quality degradation inserting any active component in line with a fullrange driver, but I had hoped that the benefits of improved FR would offset those......

Unlikely - adding another step to the signal chain requires a good bit more off setting benefit to make it worth it. Even then you're talking a good bit more expense and complexity.

The Ultracurve still puts another ADC/DAC step in the chain.

I have posted often about the benefits of digital crossovers - in that case, you have the additional benefits from bi-amping (which are considerable) to help offset the loss. Ability to do digital delay was another consideration with my particular configuration.

Keeping in mind that passive components are not perfect and impart their own signature - IMHO, only when you're doing a lot more than just EQ does it become feasible to add another ADC/DAC link in the chain.

OTOH, I believe Thorsten was at one time a proponent of the Ultracurve - IIRC, his thinking was the The Ultracurve and the DCX2496 were only suitable for "high resolution" if highly modified. I don't know what his current thinking on the matter is _grin_

Nor do I know what my thinking on it will be in a year or two _bigger grin_

Regards

Ken L
__________________
No longer powered by Linux - not enough apps and cross platform integration - but maybe one day
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th November 2004, 04:21 PM   #8
The one and only
 
Nelson Pass's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Quote:
Originally posted by morbo
Nelson - thanks for your feedback. I had expected a certain amount of quality degradation inserting any active component in line with a fullrange driver, but I had hoped that the benefits of improved FR would offset those. Clearly in your trials that was not the case. If you don't mind me asking, what kind of hardware did you use for the EQing? And did you have it 'auto-eq' or make adjustments manually?
I used a well-known brand name, but I don't wish to mention
it. The settings were manual. Frankly, I was surprised at the
result, particularly since fairly gentle corrections were applied.

You can see an example of this in the Kleinhorn article, but I
have repeated the results in other systems, and I have used
a different equalizer also.
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th November 2004, 04:35 PM   #9
diyAudio Member
 
Zero Cool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: MN
Quote:
Originally posted by Nelson Pass


I used a well-known brand name, but I don't wish to mention
it. The settings were manual. Frankly, I was surprised at the
result, particularly since fairly gentle corrections were applied.

You can see an example of this in the Kleinhorn article, but I
have repeated the results in other systems, and I have used
a different equalizer also.

Im curious what did you use to measure the response of the system???

For years i used an conventional 31 band spectrum Analyzer and was NEVER happy with the results i got. I have used many brands, Ivie, Audio Control, Goldline etc etc.

Then i switched to a PC based system using the SIA Soft SMAART software and noticed many things immediatly.

1- my eq corrections were much much smaller.
2- i achived flatter response overall.
3- the sound was much better!

the SMAART software really shows a much better window into whats going on where as a conventional 31 band type analyzer just isnt as accurate.

I could never go back to a conventional analyzer ever again.


Zero
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th November 2004, 05:52 PM   #10
MEXXX is offline MEXXX  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Send a message via AIM to MEXXX Send a message via MSN to MEXXX Send a message via Yahoo to MEXXX
I just finished a pair of OB's using 4" Hornsonic drivers with wizzers that are going to be used as my PC speakers. I did a quick response check using my piece of crap 31 band Audiocontrol and the response looked really nice except for a very fatiguing peak in the midrange from 1k-2.5k centered at 1.6k (going by the limited bands of the RTA anyways).

Point of that rambling? Well, since the speakers are going to be used on my PC I plan on actively EQ'ing them using my SB Audigy and KX Drivers. The only things I plan on trying to EQ are baffle step, that "lowther shout" in the midrange, and maby some highs.

I'll be sure to let you know how my active EQ setup turns out.

MEXXX
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FS: Tang Band W2-852SH pair of Widerange Drivers omarmipi Swap Meet 1 11th October 2007 07:09 PM
Suprabaffle for widerange + tweeter? fred76 Full Range 3 3rd May 2007 07:57 AM
What to do with Foster widerange drivers? Spasticteapot Multi-Way 5 22nd October 2006 12:58 AM
Two new widerange drivers at madisound morbo Full Range 8 22nd December 2004 10:26 PM
Anyone used Aurasound 3" NS3 widerange? morbo Multi-Way 15 19th October 2004 01:07 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:28 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2