If you go active xo (my base line thinking), you can use the very cost effective gainclones (refer the Solid State forum).
I’m just about to start a (number of) speaker projects, starting with modest components in a passive 2 way as quick training wheels, and by end of year, the real goal of a Linkwitz Phoenix based/ thylantar type updated active 3-way using eg ribbons & PHL.
(At this stage, am thinking of Linkwitz 4th order for them, but by then maybe series xo).
The advantages/ costs of AXO are well known.
For PXO, Speaker Workshop can be used.
But PLLXO:
Searching Passive AND line AND level AND crossovers
Didn’t yield much
What is it? Cost/ benefits? How to model? What speakers use it?
TIA
I’m just about to start a (number of) speaker projects, starting with modest components in a passive 2 way as quick training wheels, and by end of year, the real goal of a Linkwitz Phoenix based/ thylantar type updated active 3-way using eg ribbons & PHL.
(At this stage, am thinking of Linkwitz 4th order for them, but by then maybe series xo).
The advantages/ costs of AXO are well known.
For PXO, Speaker Workshop can be used.
But PLLXO:
Searching Passive AND line AND level AND crossovers
Didn’t yield much
What is it? Cost/ benefits? How to model? What speakers use it?
TIA
Marchand & Linkwitz claim
Marchand claim for their kit:
http://www.marchandelec.com/xm46.htm
"noise generated by the crossover is much lover than for the electronic crossovers"
and in a Maggie:
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/mug/messages/12885.html
"clear improvement in resolution"
and the one and only Linkwitz at
http://www.linkwitzlab.com/proto.htm
"The disadvantages of this solution are
1) a high insertion loss, and
2) the exact transfer function can only be approximated"
I wonder what that means?
Marchand claim for their kit:
http://www.marchandelec.com/xm46.htm
"noise generated by the crossover is much lover than for the electronic crossovers"
and in a Maggie:
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/mug/messages/12885.html
"clear improvement in resolution"
and the one and only Linkwitz at
http://www.linkwitzlab.com/proto.htm
"The disadvantages of this solution are
1) a high insertion loss, and
2) the exact transfer function can only be approximated"
I wonder what that means?
Look here PLLXO for the basics.
I don't get the calculations. 1 / 2*Pi*F*R1=C1
Going for 1st order- F=2300hz, 5K=R1
What size is C1 expected to be?
2*3.14*2300*5000= 72220000
1 / 72220000= 1.3846579894765992799778454721684e-8
C1 is 1.3846579894765992799778454721684e-8
How does that convert into nF or uF? Am I not calculating this correctly?
Thannks,
Vince
That's capacitance in farads. Move the decimal point nine places to convert from farads to nanofarads. Your calculation is correct and yields a result 13.8 nF.
That's an OLD thread you replied to. 🙂
Dave.
That's an OLD thread you replied to. 🙂
Dave.
Thanks Dave!
Old thread, but yielded results. I'm sure someone else will need it eventually!
Thanks!
Vince
Old thread, but yielded results. I'm sure someone else will need it eventually!
Thanks!
Vince
Sorry. I spoke too soon. Which way do you move the decimal point?
I tried moving it both direction and converting it to nF, but the numbers in the examples don't match.
Still don't understand how you get 13.8 nF from 1.3846579894765992799778454721684e-8 Farads. Are you converting the Farads to a real number first, then to nF?
Don't mean to be thick, I'm just not good at math.
I tried moving it both direction and converting it to nF, but the numbers in the examples don't match.
Still don't understand how you get 13.8 nF from 1.3846579894765992799778454721684e-8 Farads. Are you converting the Farads to a real number first, then to nF?
Don't mean to be thick, I'm just not good at math.
a nF is 1 x 10^-9 farads. so 1.38x10^-8 F = 13.8 x10^0 nF = 13.8 nF
The advantages of PLLXO are, simplicity, cost, and no added active devices.
Disadvantages are limited set of slopes and -- in the case of the low pass, insertion loss. In the case of a 2nd order HP, one has to be very concerned with the input impedance of the power amplifier (usually needs to be 50k or greater)
In the simpliest HP case, with as an example your gainclone, a 1st order PLLXO can be executed simply by appropriately decreasing the size of the unput coupling capacitor.
dave
The advantages of PLLXO are, simplicity, cost, and no added active devices.
Disadvantages are limited set of slopes and -- in the case of the low pass, insertion loss. In the case of a 2nd order HP, one has to be very concerned with the input impedance of the power amplifier (usually needs to be 50k or greater)
In the simpliest HP case, with as an example your gainclone, a 1st order PLLXO can be executed simply by appropriately decreasing the size of the unput coupling capacitor.
dave
On a 2 way, 2nd order passive XO, to adjust levels where would you place a pot?
I was thinking 5k at the outputs of the passive XO. Yes/No?
The amps are 22k and 100k at the input.
Thanks,
vince
I was thinking 5k at the outputs of the passive XO. Yes/No?
The amps are 22k and 100k at the input.
Thanks,
vince
You need to have a gain control on at least one of the power amplifiers (the one that needs turning down to be at the right level)
dave
dave
I see this audio transformer is used a lot on the 41Hz forum to go some way to resolving the insertion loss issue;
Neutrik nte-4
Neutrik - Audio - Transformers - NTE4
To calculate PLLXO values I have an Excel spreadsheet someone kindly gave me, no math required! Just pop in the amp input impedance and the crossover value, and out come first and second order LP and HP values. So easy! Mail me if you want a copy.
I wish the spreadsheet would do other calculations like BSC circuits and the like.
Neutrik nte-4
Neutrik - Audio - Transformers - NTE4
To calculate PLLXO values I have an Excel spreadsheet someone kindly gave me, no math required! Just pop in the amp input impedance and the crossover value, and out come first and second order LP and HP values. So easy! Mail me if you want a copy.
I wish the spreadsheet would do other calculations like BSC circuits and the like.
Hello,
I would be very interested in this spreadsheet!!
If you want you can attach it in a message (see "manage attachments" in the reply page), inside a zip file, so anyone can have it?
I would be very interested in this spreadsheet!!
If you want you can attach it in a message (see "manage attachments" in the reply page), inside a zip file, so anyone can have it?
You are very welcome all.
I wonder is there a resource page on DIY audio where items such as this spreadsheet could be listed. It is hard to get started in this hobby when you have to roam through hundreds of threads to accidentally find basic things such as this.
One for the mods!?
Sean
I wonder is there a resource page on DIY audio where items such as this spreadsheet could be listed. It is hard to get started in this hobby when you have to roam through hundreds of threads to accidentally find basic things such as this.
One for the mods!?
Sean
Is there any way to measure amplifier's input impedance?
I was thinking to implant some basic PLLXO into my HT receiver, right before volume control chip - no way of knowing what's the input impedance of that chip?
I was thinking to implant some basic PLLXO into my HT receiver, right before volume control chip - no way of knowing what's the input impedance of that chip?
It is hard to get started in this hobby when you have to roam through hundreds of threads to accidentally find basic things such as this.
The easiest thing to do is create a Wiki titled "DIY Tools" or "DIY Worksheets"
and just start posting based on topics.
Vince
Is there any way to measure amplifier's input impedance?
I was thinking to implant some basic PLLXO into my HT receiver, right before volume control chip - no way of knowing what's the input impedance of that chip?
http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-InputOutputImpedance.htm
Dave.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
- Home
- Loudspeakers
- Multi-Way
- PLLXO (v AXO v PXO) benefits/ Model?