My point is that any reasonable XO is based on the actual acoustical output of the drivers, not the electrical filters alone. If you are aiming for, say, a LR8 acoustical XO (again, amplitude *and* phase) the electrical filters will be whatever it takes to shape the raw response of the drivers to that target and that will *never* be simple textbook XO filters.
Even with steep slopes your drivers need to have identical amplitude and phase response to about 2 octaves beyond either side the XO point when trying to use the simple 'electrical-only' approach. Amplitude may be easy to dial in, but phase is not.
Even with steep slopes your drivers need to have identical amplitude and phase response to about 2 octaves beyond either side the XO point when trying to use the simple 'electrical-only' approach. Amplitude may be easy to dial in, but phase is not.
Last edited:
KSTR,
All that is irrelevant for the part 1 of the test.
Only thing that matters is whether or not participants are able to identify the drivers from each other, in the same room/distance/set-up.
Part 2 is another story, but we're not there yet.
All that is irrelevant for the part 1 of the test.
Only thing that matters is whether or not participants are able to identify the drivers from each other, in the same room/distance/set-up.
Part 2 is another story, but we're not there yet.
I knew that of ribbons but this one looks particularly bad.
THD reaches between 2% and nearly 5% in peaks at 2.5, 3.5 and 4.5kHz at only 85dBspl/1m.
At no frequency does it appear as clean as a decent mid-priced dome.
Varies from person to person.
See for yourself and try the Klippel test: Listening Test
I passed at -45dB and failed at -48dB so I'd say for me 0.5% is just about audible but I can't say for sure if it is my ears or my speakers that were the limiting factor.
See for yourself and try the Klippel test: Listening Test
I passed at -45dB and failed at -48dB so I'd say for me 0.5% is just about audible but I can't say for sure if it is my ears or my speakers that were the limiting factor.
Read Geddes research. It is not that simple and has been covered elsewhere. This is not a topic for this thread
The Klippel test is pretty clear.... though the speakers/headphones used in the test still play a role.
Seems very simplistic and does not account for the way different orders can "mask" one another and what frequency the distortion is peaking etc. Again, refer Geddes paper. I dont want to pollute this thread discussing this here because its a can of worms 🙂
The playback level is one most important variable when it comes to the audibility of distortion with real music signals (read: multitone IMD, not single sine HD). If spreaker distortion is lower than the ear's own distortion at a given level (which is individual, of course), it's inaudible, as a rule of thumb.
Anybody ever listened to something like a flute (recorder) quartet live when you are close? Completely unlistenable because of high ear generated IMD, while the sources sure don't produce any IMD.
Don't underestimate what a room can cause (and hide) in our real world listening situations. (Not meaning to say you do, mentioning this as a general perspective 🙂)
I do agree listening level (SPL) beeing a big factor to deal with. With the klippel test we can control that, and its back to the differences we can actually hear/pick up.
I do agree listening level (SPL) beeing a big factor to deal with. With the klippel test we can control that, and its back to the differences we can actually hear/pick up.
Last edited:
May be, may be not but for the last nearly 30 years a speakers THD level has proven to be a so farpractically infallible predictor of how much I like it.
Regardless if I know THD levels before hearing it or after (most of the time it was after though).
Your preferences may be due to the driver's THD- even if research suggests otherwise- but it may be that other factors are also involved or involved instead, perhaps one or more other design features that correlate with or causally contribute to lower THD.
Slowly begin some preliminary testings...
So far, here's the contenders:
Beyma TPL-150
RAAL 70-20XR
Airborne RT-4001
Visaton TL16H
So two air motion, one ribbon and one compression. I believe we should throw at least one dome, shouldnt we?
So far, here's the contenders:
Beyma TPL-150
RAAL 70-20XR
Airborne RT-4001
Visaton TL16H
So two air motion, one ribbon and one compression. I believe we should throw at least one dome, shouldnt we?
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
The Visaton is very impressive. Out-of-the-box very flat FR.
Here is the EQ i had to make to get a super-flat FR:
8000hz -3.3db Q3.5 Peak
17000hz +2.6db Q1.4 High-shelf
14500hz -1.5db Q5.4 peak
Seems manageable from 3khz but personnaly i'd go from +/- 4khz
Very efficient, pretty decent off-axis response, beautiful construction, reasonnable price for what it is. A great surprise.
One of the best domes I know of, regardless of price :
SICA LP90.28/N92TW (Z009160) & LP110.28/380TW (Z009240)
1.1"/28mm, high power, low fs, low cost
that dome looks very good:
http://solen.ca/wp-content/uploads/n26cfra.pdf
I know nothing about this company but Chris from Solen say they are excellent.
http://solen.ca/wp-content/uploads/n26cfra.pdf
I know nothing about this company but Chris from Solen say they are excellent.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.