cascading Q - 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 2nd September 2006, 06:29 PM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: sk
Send a message via AIM to ocool_15 Send a message via Yahoo to ocool_15
Default cascading Q

I understand that I can use 2 12db/oct butterworth High pass filters to make a 24dB/oct linkwitz-riley. I have a theory below but have never seen it done.

sealed .7 q box + butterworth active filter at same frequency
.707 *.707= .500

linkwitz should be .49 but above is my understanding.

I believe I could use 2 filters like above but not matching
smaller box *modified filter = same q?
.831*.60=.49


The main advantage I see is to use a smaller box but be able to get the same frequency response. I have never seen this done but am hoping it is possible.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd September 2006, 12:00 AM   #2
Ron E is offline Ron E  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Ron E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: USA, MN
Q is only defined for 2nd order systems.
__________________
Our species needs, and deserves, a citizenry with minds wide awake and a basic understanding of how the world works. --Carl Sagan
Armaments, universal debt, and planned obsolescence--those are the three pillars of Western prosperity. Aldous Huxley
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd September 2006, 05:00 AM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: sk
Send a message via AIM to ocool_15 Send a message via Yahoo to ocool_15
Perhaps I am using the term Q incorrectly but what I am intending to do is end up with a 24db/octave Linkwitz-Riley using the enclosure as part of the High pass.



here is an example website on a quick search that uses Q
4th order still refers to Q here


Often 4th order are referred to as 2 cascaded 2nd order filters like used here
Rod Elliott


At this point I think I have made a mistake. In short is there a way through an active filter I can use my sealed enclosure with a Q of ~.707(Butterworth) to end up with a 24dB/oct Linkwitz-Riley

To end up with a 24db/oct Linkwitz_Riley should I have built my sealed enclosure to a q of .49 and used a 12dB/oct HP linkwitz riley also?
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd September 2006, 12:38 PM   #4
Dag is offline Dag  Sweden
diyAudio Member
 
Dag's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Goteborg
I do't think you can do that because to get a real 4th order L-R filter you have to get the poles at the right places. But you can first do a "Linkwitz Transform" and then a 2nd order Butterworth. Best done with an active filter.

http://www.linkwitzlab.com/filters.htm#9
9 - 12 dB/oct highpass equalization ("Linkwitz Transform", Biquad)

D
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd September 2006, 12:57 PM   #5
diyAudio Member
 
john k...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: US
Default Re: cascading Q

Quote:
Originally posted by ocool_15
I understand that I can use 2 12db/oct butterworth High pass filters to make a 24dB/oct linkwitz-riley. I have a theory below but have never seen it done.

sealed .7 q box + butterworth active filter at same frequency
.707 *.707= .500

linkwitz should be .49 but above is my understanding.

I believe I could use 2 filters like above but not matching
smaller box *modified filter = same q?
.831*.60=.49


The main advantage I see is to use a smaller box but be able to get the same frequency response. I have never seen this done but am hoping it is possible.
(JPK) For and LR4 Q1 and Q2 = 0,707. If Q1 and Q2 are not equal but Q1 x Q2 = 0,5 the filter will not be a true LR4 but if they are not too far from 0,707 the difference for audio use will not be important. Even with Q1 =1,0 and Q2 = 0.5 there is only a fraction of a dB difference at worst.
__________________
John k.... Music and Design NaO Dipole Loudspeakers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd September 2006, 06:05 PM   #6
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
That we have pigeon-holed certain alignments, filters etc with names doesn't mean that the ones that don't coincide with the named ones aren't useful... the named ones are primarily an artifact of when all the math was done with pencil & paper... use what works and don't be afraid to explore....

dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com, frugal-phile.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi
p10-hifi forum here at diyA
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th September 2006, 08:52 PM   #7
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Planet Earth
Quote:
In short is there a way through an active filter I can use my sealed enclosure with a Q of ~.707(Butterworth) to end up with a 24dB/oct Linkwitz-Riley
Yes, that's the theory behind the so-called THX crossover used in most AV receivers and prepros. The speaker is designed with a sealed Q=.7 (B2) alignment and the receiver applies a B2 electrical filter to end up with an LR4 acoustical response. On the low end, an LR4 electrical filter is applied to the sub giving, in theory, a nice LR4 acoustical crossover between the sub and the main.

Linkwitz says if the box's Q is between .6 and .8, that's close enough to use a standard Q=.7 electrical filter. If it's outside that range or you want to shift the frequency of the poles, he recommends adding a Linkwitz Transform circuit in addition to the Q=.7 filter.

http://www.linkwitzlab.com/thor-eq.htm -- Other applications.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th November 2009, 11:30 PM   #8
cuibono is offline cuibono  United States
diyAudio Member
 
cuibono's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: City of Angles
I'd like to resurrect this thread. I've been using the computer to develop active crossovers. In particular, I've been using Cocko's Reaper and EQ, hooked up directly to my speaker/measurement system. It allows real time adjustment and accurate measurements to hit whatever acoustic target I want. It is by far the easiest way I've done it so far (still not perfect though).

One thing though, is that the LP/HP sections of the equalizers I've tried all use 2nd order filters. You have to adjust the Q factor to get the roll-off you want. So I have some questions wrt Q and cascading filters...

Quote:
Originally Posted by john k... View Post
(JPK) For and LR4 Q1 and Q2 = 0,707. If Q1 and Q2 are not equal but Q1 x Q2 = 0,5 the filter will not be a true LR4 but if they are not too far from 0,707 the difference for audio use will not be important. Even with Q1 =1,0 and Q2 = 0.5 there is only a fraction of a dB difference at worst.
Is this true for B4 (fourth order butterworth)? When simulating them, it seemed necessary to use different Q values to hit the target. When is this true? LR4 didn't.



Quote:
Originally Posted by planet10 View Post
That we have pigeon-holed certain alignments, filters etc with names doesn't mean that the ones that don't coincide with the named ones aren't useful... the named ones are primarily an artifact of when all the math was done with pencil & paper... use what works and don't be afraid to explore....

dave
I agree, particularly with DSP in the computer, you have really a ton of control over the acoustic response of the driver. BUT, if you don't use one of the 'named' alignments, you can't guess what the phase response will be beforehand, correct?
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th November 2009, 12:06 AM   #9
diyAudio Member
 
john k...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: US
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuibono View Post
I'd like to resurrect this thread. I've been using the computer to develop active crossovers. In particular, I've been using Cocko's Reaper and EQ, hooked up directly to my speaker/measurement system. It allows real time adjustment and accurate measurements to hit whatever acoustic target I want. It is by far the easiest way I've done it so far (still not perfect though).

One thing though, is that the LP/HP sections of the equalizers I've tried all use 2nd order filters. You have to adjust the Q factor to get the roll-off you want. So I have some questions wrt Q and cascading filters...



Is this true for B4 (fourth order butterworth)? When simulating them, it seemed necessary to use different Q values to hit the target. When is this true? LR4 didn't.





I agree, particularly with DSP in the computer, you have really a ton of control over the acoustic response of the driver. BUT, if you don't use one of the 'named' alignments, you can't guess what the phase response will be beforehand, correct?

All filters of order greater than 2 can be expressed as a cascade of 1st and 2nd order filters. Mathematically it is called factored form. A B3, for example is a 1st order cascaded with a Q = 1, 2nd order. A B4 is two 2nd order; a Q = 0.541 cascaded with a Q = 1.306. The produce of the Qs does indicate the amplitude at the corner frequency, but it is incorrect to refer to the produce as the Q of the filter. For example, 0.541 x 1.306 = 0.707, then amplitude is -3dB at Fc, but there are an infinited number of Q1 x Q2 products that yield 0.707, -3dB at fc, but all have different behavior above and below fc.
__________________
John k.... Music and Design NaO Dipole Loudspeakers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th November 2009, 01:04 AM   #10
cuibono is offline cuibono  United States
diyAudio Member
 
cuibono's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: City of Angles
Thanks John, that's exactly the info I was looking for. Is there any place on the internet that shows those values for various filter combinations?
  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
Cascading volumes on a 5C3 amp bereanbill Tubes / Valves 11 19th February 2013 05:26 PM
cascading power supplies SheldonD Power Supplies 2 15th July 2007 11:57 AM
Cascading in Crossovers? Gavinator68 Multi-Way 7 8th April 2004 07:14 PM
cascading ttl-counter Papageno Digital Source 0 4th December 2002 04:22 PM
Oversampling / Cascading hill Digital Source 0 21st November 2001 02:07 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:26 PM.


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