2way with CA18RNX or ER18RNX - Page 3 - 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 31st July 2008, 04:45 PM   #21
Bricolo is offline Bricolo  France
diyAudio Member
 
Bricolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Grenoble, FR
Tiens, un deuxieme grenoblois

Where do you buy the SEAS for a fair price?
__________________
Just remember: in theory there's no difference between theory and practice. But in practice it usually is quite a bit difference... Bob Pease
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2008, 05:00 PM   #22
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Send a message via MSN to kaiser38
héhé

I'll order at the new distributor for france : website

70€ for one ER18RNX, 40€ for one 27TDFC. About 100€ for the two xover...

Very good price, same as germany !

For the problem with floorstanding cabiner, somebody proposes to me to reduces the width to compensate the height... Is it a good idea ?

thanks
__________________
Posted by a computer under Ubuntu Hardy Heron.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2008, 06:07 PM   #23
Jay_WJ is offline Jay_WJ  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Indiana
Quote:
For the problem with floorstanding cabiner, somebody proposes to me to reduces the width to compensate the height... Is it a good idea ?
The original cabinet width is 9", which is already relatively narrow for a 7" driver. Assuming you use a 1/2" roundover on side edges, You can reduce it to 8". But a 1" difference in width on a tall baffle mainly has an effect on responses above 1 kHz, not much on baffle step.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2008, 06:17 PM   #24
Jay_WJ is offline Jay_WJ  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Indiana
Quote:
Originally posted by sreten
A floorstander will afffect BSC which can be ameliorated by making it somewhat narrower, but more likely choose a c/o option for this.
Right. Solving the issue in a crossover is a more effective option.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2008, 06:56 PM   #25
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: alsace
Quote:
Originally posted by Jay_WJ


The original cabinet width is 9", which is already relatively narrow for a 7" driver. Assuming you use a 1/2" roundover on side edges, You can reduce it to 8". But a 1" difference in width on a tall baffle mainly has an effect on responses above 1 kHz, not much on baffle step.
My point of view is that if reducing the width doesn't precisely compensate the BS in its both "frequencies place" and level, I see no reason it doesn't really help. All is a mater of what does the speaker acousticaly "undergo" as amount of diffracted frequencies.
Assume a given speaker; an increased baffled version will shift BS at lower fr, a lowered baffled version will shift BS at higher fr. The BS spl loss will remain the same.
__________________
crazyhub
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2008, 07:41 PM   #26
Jay_WJ is offline Jay_WJ  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Indiana
Okay. Below are simulation results of the baffle step effects of different baffle sizes. BDS results are very accurate particularly for woofer simulations. As you can see, if we take into account a slight hump at 900 Hz on the original MD14 cab's baffle step, a relative difference in baffle step effect below 1 kHz between standmounting and floorstanding cabs is about 1.5 dB. This must be audible especially if the crossover has full BSC. Also, as shown in the sim, a 1" difference in width of a tall baffle has a minimal effect. The relative difference in baffle step compared to the MD14 response still remains about 1.5 dB.

Click the image to open in full size.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2008, 10:11 PM   #27
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: alsace
OK Kim,

The 900hz hump and the related 1800hz dip are directly due to the sizes of the baffle surrounding the woofer.
In your BS sim is the woofer placed as in the intended hole of the MD14 cab?
What would be the effect if you place the woofer close to the top of the baffle on the 8" width floorstanded version?

Thank you.
__________________
crazyhub
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2008, 10:19 PM   #28
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Send a message via MSN to kaiser38
Hello

Jay, thanks a lot for this simulation

So, the difference between 8" and 9" width is low ! lowest rather than the difference between floorstanding and MD14 enclosure...

Finally, what is the aim of BSC crossover design by John if I can build a different enclosure (less width) without (nearly) difference ?

Lastly, my cabinet will have 32" height, and 2" for spikes, not more !

Jay, I'm interested by your xover, but only if I can have it with 1750hz cut off point...

bye !
__________________
Posted by a computer under Ubuntu Hardy Heron.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2008, 10:28 PM   #29
Jay_WJ is offline Jay_WJ  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Indiana
Quote:
Originally posted by crazyhub
In your BS sim is the woofer placed as in the intended hole of the MD14 cab?
What would be the effect if you place the woofer close to the top of the baffle on the 8" width floorstanded version?

Thank you.
Yes, the woofer position is the same as used in the MD14 pre-cut baffle.

Moving the woofer a little upward does not have a notable effect below 1 kHz.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st July 2008, 10:36 PM   #30
Jay_WJ is offline Jay_WJ  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Indiana
Quote:
Originally posted by kaiser38
Finally, what is the aim of BSC crossover design by John if I can build a different enclosure (less width) without (nearly) difference ?

Lastly, my cabinet will have 32" height, and 2" for spikes, not more !

Jay, I'm interested by your xover, but only if I can have it with 1750hz cut off point...

bye !
The purpose of reduced BSC version is different. Note that the reduced BSC amount is greater than 1.5 dB.

I don't understand why you prefer a 1.75 kHz xover point. Using a 1.55 kHz xover point with the 27TDFC (or 27TBFC/G) tweeter helps reduce the system's harmonic distortions in the 1 k to 1.5 kHz range. If you're concerned about the tweeter's power handling issue, you may want to read my blog entries about this issue (Dec 10 and 11th):

http://www.geocities.com/woove99/Spkrbldg/jays_blog.htm
  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
SEAS ER18RNX / 27TBFCG MT 2-way: Listening impressions Jay_WJ Multi-Way 17 25th May 2008 09:03 PM
SR-71's Seas ER18RNX 7" woofer sold out at Madisound :( Other 2-way suggestions? buttfacelicker Multi-Way 39 17th April 2008 09:35 PM
ER18RNX in my Polks M10 License2ILL Multi-Way 4 10th March 2008 01:31 PM
interested in MTM w/810921 and ER18RNX natfin Multi-Way 5 7th January 2008 02:18 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:15 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