Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Subwoofers
Home Forums Rules Articles Store Gallery Blogs Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

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 12th December 2011, 04:23 PM   #21
sreten is offline sreten  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brighton UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by head_unit View Post
It may kinda work, but it can't REALLY work.
You might as well EQ the in-room response.
Hi,

Nothing "really" works exactly as the theory suggests, that why its theory.
That doesn't mean though that it won't work well if you do it. SL specifically
goes for a very low new Q (around 0.5) when he implements his versions of
LT'd subwoofers, and there no reason it won't work as well as any other
powered EQ'd (and compressed / limited) subwoofer out there.

In fact the problem for amateur sub builds is the general lack of adaptive
power / excursion management built into some commercial subwoofers.

Personally here I'd go for a peaking 2nd order high pass filter, with some
ripple, such that it levels off the mild peak around 100Hz and boosts
the lower bass, and then stops the driver being overdriven for low bass,
so it would have to be 3rd order, for an eventual 5th order roll-off.

rgds, sreten.
__________________
There is nothing so practical as a really good theory - Ludwig Boltzmann
When your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail - Abraham Maslow

Last edited by sreten; 12th December 2011 at 04:29 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2011, 09:29 PM   #22
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Ha ha, that's very true, especially for speakers.

What I meant more exactly was that the time response won't be compensated as theory suggests, so you might as well just focus on the amplitude domain and EQ the room.

Hmmm, it's making me wonder what does happen to the time response-it's been a loooooong time since I looked at that.

Anyway, if the boxes are too boomy, my gut feeling is it should not be so much, and some judicious EQ should pretty much fix it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2011, 11:11 PM   #23
soren5 is offline soren5  Denmark
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Barcelona
Thanks for all the advice. I'll try with the small boxes and add some of this filling. Then I'll do some in-room EQ with the miniDSP and hope to get some good results
I'll let you know how it all works out.
Thanks again
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th December 2011, 11:34 PM   #24
sreten is offline sreten  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brighton UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by head_unit View Post
Ha ha, that's very true, especially for speakers.

What I meant more exactly was that the time response won't be compensated as theory suggests, so you might as well just focus
on the amplitude domain and EQ the room.

Hmmm, it's making me wonder what does happen to the time response-it's been a loooooong time since I looked at that.

Anyway, if the boxes are too boomy, my gut feeling is it should not be so much, and some judicious EQ should pretty much fix it.
Hi,

The time response and frequency response are completely interchangeable,
one determines the other and vice versa. So yes concentrate on the
ampltude domain, make that smooth and the time domain will follow.

rgds, sreten.
__________________
There is nothing so practical as a really good theory - Ludwig Boltzmann
When your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail - Abraham Maslow
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2011, 01:34 AM   #25
Ron E is offline Ron E  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Ron E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: USA, MN
Quote:
Originally Posted by soren5 View Post
Thanks for all the advice. I'll try with the small boxes and add some of this filling. Then I'll do some in-room EQ with the miniDSP and hope to get some good results
I'll let you know how it all works out.
Thanks again
You could try an amp with negative output impedance...
Otherwise Linkwitz transform is probably the easiest solution.
Aperiodic enclosures basically just act like a notch filter, so you throw away output. Since you have miniDSP, you are all set for EQ.
__________________
Our species needs, and deserves, a citizenry with minds wide awake and a basic understanding of how the world works. --Carl Sagan
Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge. --Carl Sagan
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th December 2011, 05:40 PM   #26
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Pallas . seems interesting u seem to have good idea. are u a hobbyist ? where are u from ?was just wondering
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
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
Measuring Qtc MCPete Multi-Way 5 13th May 2010 11:49 PM
QTC question? fazman Subwoofers 9 13th February 2006 03:19 AM
Qtc.... Oh Sh@@@t! Learnincurve Subwoofers 20 27th January 2005 08:01 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:40 AM.

Page generated in 0.26787 seconds (29.91% PHP - 70.09% MySQL) with 11 queries

Copyright ©1999-2012 diyAudio