|
|
|||||||
| 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: Apr 2004
Location: MN
|
Low pass filter, either series or parallel, for 3 identical drivers connected in series.
If so, please advise how. Thanks! |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: MN
|
I am attaching an example schematic about the configuration I was trying to describe.
and by PCD 7 I meant Passive Crossover Designer (spreadsheet) version 7 by FRD Consortium. |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
just another
diyAudio Moderator
|
Hi Percy, I haven't got PCD handy (new pc) but from memory you can do two woofers, but I'm not sure about three.
Do you have real measurements taken on the baffle? What I did for my MTM was take the impedance measurement for both woofers in box, and also the freq response for both (on axis with the tweeter) and then used this as a single driver in PCD (and later speaker workshop). It worked a treat. ie measure with all three running. The diagram you have posted looks like it was done in speaker workshop. The crossover modeller in SW is really powerful (and in some respects more accurate than PCD) The area I found it more accurate was when modelling notch filters due to being able to put in the DCR of the coils. Where PCD is great though for being able to quickly increase or decrease caps or coils values and see an immediate effect on the Frequency response, Speaker Workshop is a bit of a pain in that regard. Tony. |
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: MN
|
I have on-baffle measurements but of only one driver by itself, not with all 3 wired in series like that. Is it ok to do measurements with all 3 drivers wired in series, regardless of which application I use to model the crossover ? Would it work fine ?
Yes its in Speaker Workshop and I am getting a hang of it, its just that like you mentioned the ease with which you can see the response shaping instantly in PCD. |
|
|
|
|
#5 | ||
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
|
For simplicity, use the single driver measurement for all three. For something more accurate, do three separate measurements. Before you go to that extent it may be worth idealising your measurement environment with regards to reflections.
Quote:
Quote:
Here is the response of your crossover (in black) compared to the old response (red). |
||
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
just another
diyAudio Moderator
|
IMO yes it is fine to measure all three running at once, the only tricky part is where do you place the mic?
For me the decision was fairly easy since I have an MTM configuration. I took all measurements on axis with the tweeter. If you want to measure all three together then you should place the mic in the position that would be on axis with your ears when seated listening. Measurements of all speakers in the system can (and should be) done without moving anything. Also the impulse response (assuming you are using impluse) should be locked so that all drivers start at the same time zero. If you do this, then all offsets (X Y and Z plane) can safely be ignored. I figure why complicate things by having to simulate the offsets and the resulting interactions if you can measure the actual response in the first place However taking individual measurements will allow you to experiment with what the effect would be if you moved things around... As well as doing the measurements with the raw drivers, do one with the crossover in place as well (again without moving anything). Then compare the result of the simulated response with the actual measured response. This is a good sanity check, and should tell you if your measurements are working correctly or not. Here is what I posted on my MTM thread with respect to the above: the original graph is attached. Quote:
Tony. |
|
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Need accurate FR graph of Fostex FE126e for PCD please? | mayhem13 | Full Range | 2 | 16th April 2010 11:11 PM |
| How to model dual VC drivers in MTM configuration? | dhieber | Multi-Way | 0 | 14th November 2009 12:19 AM |
| PCD crossover attempt | enigmaticEntity. | Multi-Way | 3 | 13th November 2009 11:32 AM |
| Proceed PCD CD Player | SRMcGee | Swap Meet | 3 | 6th November 2007 01:15 PM |
| pcd design | pete.a | Parts | 0 | 28th February 2004 03:55 PM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |
| Page generated in 0.11146 seconds (83.08% PHP - 16.92% MySQL) with 11 queries |