|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
| 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 |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Washington State, USA
|
Greetings.
I'm in the beginning planning stages of a relatively low-cost, simple, sealed 2-way project (supplemented by external subwoofer), tentatively using a Peerless 850439 midwoofer and either a Peerless 811815 or Vifa XT25T dual-concentric tweeter with a serial type crossover based on one of several circuits available on the web. I'm wanting to incorporate a simple baffle step compensation filter based on John Murphy's paper here. The calculations are straightforward enough, leading to 8 ohm values for both resistors and approximately 1 uF for the inductor, based on the baffle dimensions I have in mind. I'm left with a couple of questions however: - Is it an accepted practice just to plunk a filter like this in line with an existing crossover? Or is the simple circuit shown above merely a theoretical representation, and the compensation should be "built in" by adjusting the values of the main crossover? - If a filter like this can just be dropped in front of the rest of the crossover, what kind of power are those resistors going to see? It looks like it might be substantial, even though much of the lower bass is going to run through the inductor rather than being shunted through the resistors. By the way, I'm aware that room loading and other factor will enter into the equation, but I'm trying to keep things simple for the purposes of this rather basic question. You may expect more complex questions later... Thanks in advance for any advice; and of course other opinions on my proposed project are welcome. |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Moderator
|
Unless you have drivers with a constant impedance vs. frequency, this circuit will not do what you want it to do. It's normally easier to do a passive (or even active) R-C circuit at line level (i.e., between pre and power amp), or to adjust topology and values in the speaker xover to get you the desired transfer function.
__________________
"...we stumble and get up, we are sad, confident, insecure, feel loneliness and joy and love. There is nothing more; but I want nothing more.” - Christopher Hitchens 1949-2011 |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Washington State, USA
|
SY, thanks for the reply; that makes sense. I guess I have more research ahead of me in the crossover department.
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
diyAudio Moderator
|
"antisuck.com." What a domain name! Made my day, thanks.
__________________
"...we stumble and get up, we are sad, confident, insecure, feel loneliness and joy and love. There is nothing more; but I want nothing more.” - Christopher Hitchens 1949-2011 |
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
|
Actually the resistor in parallel with the inductor will form a baffle step compensation of sorts. IE short at low frequencies and "R" at high frequencies.
If you are going to build a set of speakers from scratch, you probably want to get together some sort of measurement software so you aren't blind. textbook crossovers rarely work properly for real world drivers Also, the xt25 is a touchy driver, it doesn't like to play low (think Sd of a 3/4" tweet). It's a great tweet but harder than some (IE ss 9500) to get working well. Sheldon |
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Washington State, USA
|
SY, glad you found my domain name as amusing as I did when I registered it; I should probably do something with it some day.
stokessd: with regard to the compensation thingy, that's the theory. I think SY makes a good point that the response won't be as predictable as one might hope due to driver impedance irregularities. Measurement software is definitely in my future; I haven't ordered any parts yet, I'm just trying to get a feel for ways I might tweak things once I get started. Thanks for the advice about the xt25 - being that I am a beginner, I'll probably go with the Peerless tweeter since I've heard they are not too bad and they don't cost much. |
|
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
diyAudio Moderator
|
Quote:
__________________
"...we stumble and get up, we are sad, confident, insecure, feel loneliness and joy and love. There is nothing more; but I want nothing more.” - Christopher Hitchens 1949-2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Viña del Mar, Torreon
|
Serial type crossover are very impedance dependent. So you may run into trouble trying to add a pasive step compensation circuit.
|
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| When to use baffle step compensation? | tmblack | Multi-Way | 28 | 6th December 2008 01:39 PM |
| JX92S and baffle step compensation | neil_kaye | Full Range | 12 | 6th December 2006 01:20 PM |
| Baffle step compensation formula? | bart_dood | Full Range | 4 | 8th July 2006 11:50 AM |
| Baffle Step Compensation | Khron | Multi-Way | 4 | 16th April 2006 09:23 PM |
| Baffle step compensation in an active X/O | sunil | Multi-Way | 0 | 26th October 2003 09:47 AM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |
| Page generated in 0.08934 seconds (85.44% PHP - 14.56% MySQL) with 10 queries |