diyAudio

diyAudio (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/)
-   Markaudio (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/markaudio/)
-   -   Need crossover/filter? (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/markaudio/228872-need-crossover-filter.html)

krips 28th January 2013 11:02 PM

Need crossover/filter?
 
Hi. I'm wonderin if the markaudio drivers need a filter (BSC?) or if they could be simply run as-is in a standard sealed/ported cab. Thanks :).

Kyle

cotdt 28th January 2013 11:42 PM

nope they don't need anything... though in some situations they do.

chrisb 28th January 2013 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by krips (Post 3346503)
Hi. I'm wonderin if the markaudio drivers need a filter (BSC?) or if they could be simply run as-is in a standard sealed/ported cab. Thanks :).

Kyle


well, which driver and enclosure?

Most of Mark's drivers have a degree of contour engineered into their FR, such that in many cases electronic BSC (passive or active EQ) may not be required. That's certainly been my experience with the Alpair7.3 in a back-loaded horn enclosure such as the FH3 or Maeshowe.

And a wide baffle/shallow wall mounted enclosure such as the Cornu horns that are currently quite popular will theoretically suffer far less from baffle step loss than say a 4 liter stand-mounted mini monitor situated a couple of feet from rear and side wall boundaries.

Of course if you're supporting FR drivers of any make/model with woofers, then it never hurts to HP the smaller driver, but that will generally be well below the BSL frequency .

In my own case (now 3 separate systems with Mark Audio drivers), I don't find the need for any such compensation:

- dual driver Castle Micro-tower CSS EL70
- 5.1 surround with Alpair7.2 (Pensils and vented center) and 6M (sealed surrounds)
- "man-cave" system with MAOP7 in MarKen7T - long/skinny room, very easily overloaded below lower mid-bass, so less is definitely more - and even after only about 6-8hrs break-in time on the MAOPs, I think it's fair to say they don't suffer from less of anything than the standard 7.2 /3 ;)

krips 29th January 2013 02:59 AM

I was thinking of using 5x sealed (or possibly vented) CHR-70s for a cheap-ish 5.1. It would be supported by my Tempest-X2 15", crossed at probably 100hz. :)

chrisb 29th January 2013 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by krips (Post 3346712)
I was thinking of using 5x sealed (or possibly vented) CHR-70s for a cheap-ish 5.1. It would be supported by my Tempest-X2 15", crossed at probably 100hz. :)

Sounds not too much different from my own 5.1 system ( Alpair 7 & 6M) mentioned above. If using a current technology HT receiver with something like the Audyssey MultEQ function, not only is the calibration for levels and distances automated, but XO points and EQ is as well. This makes things so simple that even an old fart like me can do a decent enough job - hell, it'll even stop to advise when one of the channels is out of phase.

In other words, I didn't find any BSC required. FWIW, I find most of the Alpairs and CH series to be "happier" in vented enclosures. My surrounds are teeny and sealed, but I'm of half a mind ;) to re-do them in a larger vented design.


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:18 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