Sorry but I don't subscribe to this "consensus". It's pseudo-scientific bunkum propagated by people who want to sell you expensive cables.
Speaker cables have resistance, and a tiny bit of capacitance and inductance. That's it. The lumped component model is all you need to describe and characterise the effects of speaker cable.
Any speaker whether full range driver or multi-way system with a passive crossover has an impedance curve that is non-flat - typically dramatically non-flat.
This means that even a relatively small change in the resistance of the cables of say 0.1 ohm will have a measurable and audible effect on the frequency response due to the non-flat impedance curve interacting with the change in series resistance. This can indeed change the frequency response balance noticeably.
I've measured the effects of this. I've heard the effects. There's no need to invent any hocus pocus explanations like "silver sounds brighter". Bullcrap.
Silver has slightly lower resistance than copper all else being equal - so make your copper cable slightly thicker or slightly shorter to get the exact same resistance and it will sound the same.
Don't even get me started on oxygen free copper...
Last edited:
WTF ???? I am just getting into this DIY speaker building, and now go and tell me "music breathes" !!!!! I am going to the oxygen supply company right now!
My music will definitely breathe better, if I open a slow leak of medical grade oxygen into the listening room. I didn't even know my music was suffocating!
My music will definitely breathe better, if I open a slow leak of medical grade oxygen into the listening room. I didn't even know my music was suffocating!
First, I don't think in order to make the sound "bright", you don't have the "lift" the high frequency. For example, if you tune your speakers perfectly flat, the sound will be bright as it has something to do with recorded music and our hearing and cable is just like any other components.
Second, the "5%" is just a constant, but the conductivity is not uniform across all frequencies because of skin effect. Does anyone know if silver has less skin effect at high frequency vs. copper? My guess is silver has less skin effect at high freq. vs. copper. So in order for silver to sound brighter than copper, it does not have "lift the HF". All it has to do is to attenuate less HF vs. copper.
There are a lot of people in this forum have made claims that they have "measured everything in their life". Well maybe they can show some data with respect to skin effect of silver vs. copper.
Andy2 ... why not start a new thread about skin effect, and leave this one as I intended when I started it?
OK, sorry but I didn't start it. Some guy did and I just responded.
Sure, shall we have a summary so far?
1, ka=2 (beaming) rule: circumference of the midrange cone divided by wavelength of crossover frequency shall not exceed 2. This decides how high the midrange can play before beaming.
2, lobing rule: center-to-center distance between tweeter and midrange shall not exceed the wavelength of the crossover frequency.
3, power handling rule: At the tweeter's resonant frequency (Fs), it is at least -18dB down. (e.g. 3rd-order high pass when crossover frequency is twice the resonant frequency of the tweeter, or a lower-order crossover with a higher crossover point.)
4, distortion: no hard and fast rule here, but make sure neither the tweeter nor the midrange is pushed to play with excessive distortion.
These "rules" are rule-of-thumbs. Rules are meant to be, and are, broken all the time, with counterexamples abound, but a solid understanding of them is necessary and when you break them it must be for a good reason.
1, ka=2 (beaming) rule: circumference of the midrange cone divided by wavelength of crossover frequency shall not exceed 2. This decides how high the midrange can play before beaming.
2, lobing rule: center-to-center distance between tweeter and midrange shall not exceed the wavelength of the crossover frequency.
3, power handling rule: At the tweeter's resonant frequency (Fs), it is at least -18dB down. (e.g. 3rd-order high pass when crossover frequency is twice the resonant frequency of the tweeter, or a lower-order crossover with a higher crossover point.)
4, distortion: no hard and fast rule here, but make sure neither the tweeter nor the midrange is pushed to play with excessive distortion.
These "rules" are rule-of-thumbs. Rules are meant to be, and are, broken all the time, with counterexamples abound, but a solid understanding of them is necessary and when you break them it must be for a good reason.
Last edited:
half the wavelength if you want your main lobe to be 180degrees wide. A full wavelength would create a 90degree lobe with nulls at 45degrees off axis. Much less than half a wavelength will give no nulls and very little droop at 180degrees off axis
Yes! In fact my current project is a 1/2 wave CTC. What I intend to do is to actually try measuring phase at 90 degrees. If the (combined electrical/acoustic) crossover order/alignment preserves the phase relationship they should cancel out at 90 degrees (i.e. the baffle plane)
But that's not all I read an even better mini reference speaker design here that is 1/4 wavelength.
The list of rules is limits that should not be exceeded without good reason, but not guidelines for optimal results.
But that's not all I read an even better mini reference speaker design here that is 1/4 wavelength.
The list of rules is limits that should not be exceeded without good reason, but not guidelines for optimal results.
Don't take my post the wrong way. I'm not having a go at you, not at all.
I'm having a go at the nonsense about cables that floats around in the audiophile world and gets passed around and repeated by people that don't know any better as if it is proven fact when it's more or less just rubbish that expensive speaker cable companies would dearly like you to believe.
For audio frequencies, speaker cables are defined by their RLC properties, and primarily their resistance unless they're really long. (tens of metres)
One aspect of cables that does differ from one to another that has some actual science behind it is connector quality.
Some types of connectors like cheap banana plugs can suffer from point contact resistance effects, where the actual contact area is rather small consisting of a few small points and has a relatively high resistance comparable to the entire resistance of the cable.
This is bad because those points can heat up with relatively modest power levels and have very low thermal inertia, causing the resistance at that point to change both due to heating even within the cycle of a bass note. They're also sensitive to vibration.
The end result is that those poor connections can cause an intermittent connection, and depending on where the connection is in the circuit that can be audible. For example if you have spade connectors on the terminals of a woofer the poor connection that eventually results from oxidation, localised point heating and vibration will upset the frequency balance vs other drivers as you have effectively added a resistance in series with your woofer but not your tweeter. And that resistance doesn't even stay constant - it changes!
Over the years I've had a lot of subtle problems with intermittent connections in speaker connectors, spade terminals, etc to the point that I now no longer use any connectors inside a speaker on the drivers or crossover board (always soldered joints) and although I have banana sockets on the back of the speaker they are the screw type that can also clamp down tightly on bare multi-strand wire - which I prefer over banana plugs, and which should give a lower resistance more reliable connection provided you fit the wire properly and tighten correctly.
So if the cable is not introducing a change in frequency response, how is it making it sound bright ? Brightness is a frequency response phenomenon. Speaker cables can affect frequency response, but only due to their RLC properties and the interaction that has with the speaker impedance curve.
If you think it is something else, what in particular ?
If you do the numbers, you'll find that skin effect is not a factor at audio frequencies, especially if you use multicore cable - as you should. Skin effect on multi-core speaker cables in a home setting with at most a few metres of cable is a complete non-factor.
Feel free to take some measurements that prove or disprove skin effect as a factor. However it's already well proven that skin effect is not a factor, an RLC lumped component model of the cable is all that is needed to describe how it will affect the sound.
So show me the science - in what way will the cable "degrade" the sound, and by what means would you measure it ?Any component in the signal path will degrade the signal in one way or another. That's why cables of different material and quality sound different. It's basic science not opinion
Last edited:
I don't think, I think it is like I said that the woofer which is blocked too early sounds slow and muffled. The ear is very sensitive around 1khz and can detect the multiple source.
Then MTMs would sound slow and muffled because there are always 2 midranges playing 1kHz?
What you said in itself was not wrong. Without any tweeter a woofer crossed at 2k sounds slow and muffled compared to a woofer crossed at 4k. But a speaker is not a single driver but a system. It is not the woofer's responsibility to be bright or sparkle.
I think you might have heard certain marketing-speak that the crossover needs to be moved out of the human ear's most sensitive region. I can give counterexamples among the most expensive audiophile speakers, in one case at around 1.1kHz because that is exactly the middle of the overlapping regions of IID and ITD so as to confuse the brain and it has no choice but to form a phantom image.
Of course, if the crossover region sounds bad (due to subpar implementation), it'd better be moved out of the frequency range where the human ear is the most sensitive. But the human ear cannot hear absolute phase (in a valid scientific test), at least none of those gradual phase changes in any proper crossover design.
What you said in itself was not wrong. Without any tweeter a woofer crossed at 2k sounds slow and muffled compared to a woofer crossed at 4k. But a speaker is not a single driver but a system. It is not the woofer's responsibility to be bright or sparkle.
I think you might have heard certain marketing-speak that the crossover needs to be moved out of the human ear's most sensitive region. I can give counterexamples among the most expensive audiophile speakers, in one case at around 1.1kHz because that is exactly the middle of the overlapping regions of IID and ITD so as to confuse the brain and it has no choice but to form a phantom image.
Of course, if the crossover region sounds bad (due to subpar implementation), it'd better be moved out of the frequency range where the human ear is the most sensitive. But the human ear cannot hear absolute phase (in a valid scientific test), at least none of those gradual phase changes in any proper crossover design.
If anyone asks, what should be my crossover frequency? So long as the midrange is a traditional cone or dome, just look into the 4 points I listed at the top of this page. I will hold out my neck and make the strong claim that they are sufficient because no extra pseudo-science would be necessary. (If the question is just determining the crossover frequency, not how to make a good speaker in general, which would have involved a lot more.)
Wife gone last weekend so had a chance to do a “marathon” test of the “slow muffled sound” at 1k cross thing.
System is seal box 8 inch aluminum cone woofer. Cone is flat to about 1k with smooth transition to modal beyond that. Baffle is 10 inch wide. Tweeters are offset and as close to woofer as possible. Tweeters are 2 versions of a ribbon under development. One 3 inches long and the other 4 inches long. The 3 inch version crossed at 1khz 12db shows distortion under 1% to 102 db. The 4 inch gets to about 105 db at 1%. Both are below 0.5% at 90 db to 1k. Woofer show comparable distortions until about 2k where they start to come undone but not really bad. These ribbons are flat down to 200 hz with no peak so crossover is super easy to get right.
Played with crossovers at 3, 2, and 1k and even went to 750 Hz on the 4 inch.
Result… 3 khz was ok but no magic really and overall tonality changes with head moves were apparent. 2k was better. A cleaner sounding midrange (I assume because cone breakup suppressed more) but still not what I would call great and still a rather small listen window. 1 K was noticeably better than the others. Voice was more convincing, imaging was solid, and micro detail was better, noticeably better. AND the listening window was no contest, its huge.
As for the 750 hz cross on the 4 in. Voice seemed a bit more believable than at 1khz. That's about it.
Even went ahead and tried 6 db filters. Response of drivers allows in this case although cannot drive much above 95db. At the low 1 khz cross it was interesting. At 2 or 3 k it was not good at all BUT at 1 k it could pull it off well and I see what the fuss is about with 6 db. Im not sure it was “better” than 12 BUT it was different in a good way.
Conclusion from this super scientific test… I in no way heard a muffled slow sounding bottom end from the lower crossovers as compared to higher. In fact it was better IMO.
BTW just as a note....
there is about 7 inches between driver centers. At 3k cross thats 2 wave lengths, at 2k cross its 1 wave length, at 1 k cross thats 1/2 wave length, at 750hz cross its about 3/8 wave length.
I mention this because once I got down to about 1/2 wave length ( 1k hz cross) is when the image was stabil with larger head moves.
System is seal box 8 inch aluminum cone woofer. Cone is flat to about 1k with smooth transition to modal beyond that. Baffle is 10 inch wide. Tweeters are offset and as close to woofer as possible. Tweeters are 2 versions of a ribbon under development. One 3 inches long and the other 4 inches long. The 3 inch version crossed at 1khz 12db shows distortion under 1% to 102 db. The 4 inch gets to about 105 db at 1%. Both are below 0.5% at 90 db to 1k. Woofer show comparable distortions until about 2k where they start to come undone but not really bad. These ribbons are flat down to 200 hz with no peak so crossover is super easy to get right.
Played with crossovers at 3, 2, and 1k and even went to 750 Hz on the 4 inch.
Result… 3 khz was ok but no magic really and overall tonality changes with head moves were apparent. 2k was better. A cleaner sounding midrange (I assume because cone breakup suppressed more) but still not what I would call great and still a rather small listen window. 1 K was noticeably better than the others. Voice was more convincing, imaging was solid, and micro detail was better, noticeably better. AND the listening window was no contest, its huge.
As for the 750 hz cross on the 4 in. Voice seemed a bit more believable than at 1khz. That's about it.
Even went ahead and tried 6 db filters. Response of drivers allows in this case although cannot drive much above 95db. At the low 1 khz cross it was interesting. At 2 or 3 k it was not good at all BUT at 1 k it could pull it off well and I see what the fuss is about with 6 db. Im not sure it was “better” than 12 BUT it was different in a good way.
Conclusion from this super scientific test
… I in no way heard a muffled slow sounding bottom end from the lower crossovers as compared to higher. In fact it was better IMO.BTW just as a note....
there is about 7 inches between driver centers. At 3k cross thats 2 wave lengths, at 2k cross its 1 wave length, at 1 k cross thats 1/2 wave length, at 750hz cross its about 3/8 wave length.
I mention this because once I got down to about 1/2 wave length ( 1k hz cross) is when the image was stabil with larger head moves.
Last edited:
Cyber, MTMs sound slow and muffled, yes, but they can take more power and are a little more sensitive. For this reason of the dual sound source and more because you have one compression chamber for two diaphragms, this profoundly constricts the bass and augment the suspension too stiff, each driver is pulling on the other in synchronization.
I built them and a semi-mtm is better when you remove some midrange from one of the woofers. However they cant compare to single, or 2 ways. Look at the NRC measurements of dyn*****, nothing against those speakers, but look at how much money you have to pay to get an ok frequency and THD! like the C2, but there are lot of options for this price.
The best speaker is obviously a point source but it cannot be because of the materials and problems of beaming and modulations etc.
In an effort to build a 'better' speaker than the typical mainstream you have to realize how music works.
There is no ideal xo frequency. You have to gradually listen to the woofer with increasing gradually the 1st and 2nd order filter and let it sound as high as possible without the sound to be harsh or beamy. Start without a xo on the woofer, the high frequency will sound bad, you start with a very gradual taming filter until you cannot hear the bad high frequency. The tweeter supplement the missing frequency response.
In typical music, all the auditory details etc are in the 120 - 1200 hz (depends a lot on the music too) but this is a fact for music looking at the Foobar Spectrum.
You will see a lot of speakers frequency where the discussion focus on the 10khz - 20khz bla bla, this is just plain useless:
The real detail and sound is around 250-1000, this is most critical and important.
Also bass response is a joke, most music has almost no content below 50hz, except SACD and vinyl. Response below 50hz is not a concern. On the other formats the engineers remove those frequencies. I have records and SACDs and it is different especially in the bass.
High pitch instruments are around 1.5 to 2khz sopranos etc. Violins have much content at 3khz and imaging is critical there, over 5 kHz is only spatial cues about the room and over 8k it is just not important.
If you keep this in mind you will be able to build a better speaker and focus on the real frequencies, if you cross in 1.5 - 2khz you smear the female voice, under that is a disaster and over at 3.3khz you hit string instruments. The xo frequency and the areas around it is a weak point of the speakers.
I built them and a semi-mtm is better when you remove some midrange from one of the woofers. However they cant compare to single, or 2 ways. Look at the NRC measurements of dyn*****, nothing against those speakers, but look at how much money you have to pay to get an ok frequency and THD! like the C2, but there are lot of options for this price.
The best speaker is obviously a point source but it cannot be because of the materials and problems of beaming and modulations etc.
In an effort to build a 'better' speaker than the typical mainstream you have to realize how music works.
There is no ideal xo frequency. You have to gradually listen to the woofer with increasing gradually the 1st and 2nd order filter and let it sound as high as possible without the sound to be harsh or beamy. Start without a xo on the woofer, the high frequency will sound bad, you start with a very gradual taming filter until you cannot hear the bad high frequency. The tweeter supplement the missing frequency response.
In typical music, all the auditory details etc are in the 120 - 1200 hz (depends a lot on the music too) but this is a fact for music looking at the Foobar Spectrum.
You will see a lot of speakers frequency where the discussion focus on the 10khz - 20khz bla bla, this is just plain useless:
The real detail and sound is around 250-1000, this is most critical and important.
Also bass response is a joke, most music has almost no content below 50hz, except SACD and vinyl. Response below 50hz is not a concern. On the other formats the engineers remove those frequencies. I have records and SACDs and it is different especially in the bass.
High pitch instruments are around 1.5 to 2khz sopranos etc. Violins have much content at 3khz and imaging is critical there, over 5 kHz is only spatial cues about the room and over 8k it is just not important.
If you keep this in mind you will be able to build a better speaker and focus on the real frequencies, if you cross in 1.5 - 2khz you smear the female voice, under that is a disaster and over at 3.3khz you hit string instruments. The xo frequency and the areas around it is a weak point of the speakers.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.