Beyond the Ariel - Page 510 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

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 5th April 2009, 01:03 AM   #5091
Sheldon is offline Sheldon  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: San Diego
Default Re: Sheldon DEQX question

Quote:
Originally posted by Overkill Audio
(1) With the DEQX the lower in frequency any signal manipulation is implemented the more demanding it is on the DEQX software.
For example the latest HD version running at 96KHz can not cope with a 80Hz crossover point using Linear Phase filters, you have to drop to 48Khz where there is no problem.

(2) The main IO manager page where yo set the basic levels between drivers is a "blanket" DSP ie there are no more or less calculations required to set the low mid driver at +5dB than there is to set +1dB or -2dB etc.
The software has better resolution at slightly higher frequencies due to the programe priorities of Latency Vs resolution.

Basically you can run out of computing power if you set it up the wrong way.
I don't want to stray too far off the track in this thread, so I'll end with my comments here (happy to carry on in a new thread).

I have a DEQX myself and have spent the last couple of years playing from time to time. I'd say I'm half way to knowing it well. Yes, I agree that you want to set up your amps so that you are not using the dynamic range of the QX to correct for overall level from amp/driver to driver. In other words, the the relative sensitivity at the amp levels should be set up so that the amplitude range is minimized across all drivers when the output is measured. If that's all you are saying, then I agree. The only thing that matters is the total range of correction from highest amplitude to lowest that you want to flatten.

In my system, which include a CD horn, I use an analog filter in the amp to compensate the 6dB roll off about about 5kHz. I also use an analog filter to boost the low end roll off. And I adjust amp sensitivity so that the overall amplitude window is minimized. That way, my total correction span is about 6dB for the QX, and I can preserve the dynamic range for resolving the signal.

BTW, I also set it up so that no amp is allowed to clip at full volume on the QX.

Sheldon
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009, 01:35 AM   #5092
soongsc is offline soongsc  Taiwan
diyAudio Member
 
soongsc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Taiwan
Quote:
Originally posted by panomaniac
...Having heard Gary's system, I can certainly say it's one of the cleanest I've ever heard in over 30 years. Quite amazing. No exotic/expensive drivers, either.
Is there any place where pic can be found?
__________________
Hear the real thing!
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009, 01:38 AM   #5093
soongsc is offline soongsc  Taiwan
diyAudio Member
 
soongsc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Taiwan
Quote:
Originally posted by mige0



Lynn, do you have any reliable data on that?

My experiments and own measurments - a pretty long time ago - didnt show any significant improvement for that kind of "inverse horn" shape.

Also I haven't heard of a Nautilus DIY fan community comparable to the Carlson coupler idea for example (but also haven't searched for to be honest) which for sure would exist if there is *anything* of interest on this principle (besides the cool shape).


Michael
How long was the internal reverse horn length your experiments were on?
__________________
Hear the real thing!
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009, 03:39 AM   #5094
Pano is offline Pano  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
Pano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Milliways
Blog Entries: 4
Quote:
Originally posted by soongsc
Is there any place where pic can be found?
I'll send you some. Pretty, it is not! But Gary is rebuilding for better looks.

Funny, I think the woofer is the weakest part of the system, but the rest is so good that tiny flaws stick out.
With the rebuild and new stuffing scheme, will be interesting to hear.
__________________
Take the Speaker Voltage Test!
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009, 03:44 AM   #5095
Pano is offline Pano  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
Pano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Milliways
Blog Entries: 4
Quote:
Originally posted by john k...
The eq is designed using SoundEasy's Digital Equalizer.

Thanks John. Very cool. I'll have to give it a try.
__________________
Take the Speaker Voltage Test!
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009, 06:29 AM   #5096
soongsc is offline soongsc  Taiwan
diyAudio Member
 
soongsc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Taiwan
Quote:
Originally posted by panomaniac


I'll send you some. Pretty, it is not! But Gary is rebuilding for better looks.

Funny, I think the woofer is the weakest part of the system, but the rest is so good that tiny flaws stick out.
With the rebuild and new stuffing scheme, will be interesting to hear.
The fun in audio systems is that once you really get significant improvements, the little flaws become obvious, and sometimes annoying. The good thing is that it's easier to pinpoint and vocus improvement on.
Just a day or two ago, a manufacturer was telling me they had not been able to find qualified power cables for an active speaker, and were wondering whether it made a difference if they used a different one at a lower rating. We plugged them in and just swapped them around, and they convinced themselves it made a difference. I didn't even have to argue the issue.
__________________
Hear the real thing!
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009, 06:45 AM   #5097
mige0 is offline mige0  Austria
diyAudio Member
 
mige0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Austria, at a beautiful place right in the heart of the Alps.
Quote:
Originally posted by john k...



Vented and TL's are certainly MP. Horns, well I'm not an expert on horns by any means. But from what little I have read the phase velocity can be frequency dependent in a horn which would imply departure from MP at the mouth if the response at the throat is MP. How significant this is, I don't know. Perhaps Earl can address this.


Thanks John!

To make it even more clear we could completely substitute any dampening measures for closed, vented, TL enclosures by more sophisticated EQing like provided by SoundEasy, Accourate, AudioLense, DEQX or even a complex analogue correction network !?!

I should have started earlier with playing around with PC XO's I guess..



Michael
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009, 06:54 AM   #5098
mige0 is offline mige0  Austria
diyAudio Member
 
mige0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Austria, at a beautiful place right in the heart of the Alps.
Quote:
Originally posted by gedlee


John

I don't think that I disagree with you as much as I'd say that MP applied to a three dimensional problem is not meaningful. Here is why. Lets say that the axial response is MP and that we correct it to be flat, whatever that takes. And lets say that the off axis responses are also MP and correctable to flat. These are both points that you made that I don't disagree with. But the problem is that these two corrections are not the same. There is no single correction that can make BOTH points flat at the same time even if both points are MP individually. So in a three dimensional problem even if any given point is MP they are not MP with respect to each other. I think that this is more a failure of the concept of MP application to 3-D fields than anything else.

Quote:
Originally posted by john k...
Hi Earl,

I don't disagree that the MP corrections would be different under certain conditions. I just don't consider that the issue because it is more of a limitation of the design being directional. Take the post I just made above where I looked at the dipole impulse response both on and 30 degrees off axis. Both cases use the same EQ function and the impulse off axis is just about as good as on axis. It would actually be better if I lowered the crossover point. The reason it is as good as it is, and why if would improve with a lower x-o point, is because the dipole response for the bandpass I chose is almost CD. The lower x-o point would yield even better CD. The magnitude changes off axis for the dipole by a scale factor, but the shape of the response (the transfer function), which is what matters for the MP, does not. The point being that if the response is truly CD then only a single eq is required for the entire 3-d space. You of all people should appreciate that. If the system response is MP (i.e. and transient perfect x-o is used) then a single Eq function will correct the response in both amplitude and time over the entire CD window. Sort of another reason why CD should be a design goal.

A perfect on axis correction made for a min phase system that's *not* constant directivity would show frequency response irregularities when measured off axis OK.

For the off axis measurements - would we see decay on CSD or not, as the underlying effect is basically "only" comb filter effects?

Michael
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009, 07:04 AM   #5099
mige0 is offline mige0  Austria
diyAudio Member
 
mige0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Austria, at a beautiful place right in the heart of the Alps.
Quote:
Originally posted by panomaniac



Still got the results? Care to share? (Maybe in a new thread or a web page?) I'd love to see them.

Thanks for your interest not much more to say about than I already did.

It's not been a "scientific" research by any means, just one of my investigations in how much I'd been able to minimise resonance's *without* dampening by trying different enclosure approaches that claim to do so.

No result showing up that's been worth to spend more time on.



Michael





Quote:
Originally posted by soongsc

How long was the internal reverse horn length your experiments were on?

3 meters roughly.

Michael
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th April 2009, 01:47 PM   #5100
Telstar is offline Telstar  Italy
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Italy
Default Re: Re: Link for battery supply

Quote:
Originally posted by Telstar


Sure, I replied to your email.
Waiting for the photos (I have no MB limit but if over 20mb, split them)
Got the pictures last night from Derek.

Overkill Angel pictures (reduced a bit):
Click the image to open in full size.

Side view:
Click the image to open in full size.

Angels full setup at the London 2006 show:
Click the image to open in full size.

Prey and Encore in another post.
__________________
"The total harmonic distortion is not a measure of the degree of distastefulness to the listener and it is recommended that its use should be discontinued." D. Masa, 1938
  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



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:28 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