Erik - yes, my quotes were to suggest that whatever the current holy grail may be, it's not only likely to be unattainable, but perhaps unnecessary?
But then I've never heard an "optimally equalized" system with correct amounts of acoustic and electronic treatment - unless you count a THX / IMAX certified cinema
But then I've never heard an "optimally equalized" system with correct amounts of acoustic and electronic treatment - unless you count a THX / IMAX certified cinema
As Jan wisely points out, you want to know both what your speaker is doing, and what your room is doing, so that you can separate the two.
Why would you want to know the difference? Because your ears and brain interpret direct, early arriving sound differently from reflected, late arriving sound. The very same frequency response can sound different depending on its direct/reflected ratio. That's why so many here have talked about FDW, gating and things like that.
Why would you want to know the difference? Because your ears and brain interpret direct, early arriving sound differently from reflected, late arriving sound. The very same frequency response can sound different depending on its direct/reflected ratio. That's why so many here have talked about FDW, gating and things like that.
The only thing I did wrong was eq my system flat at the listening position
I think a lot is to do with the directivity of the higher frequencies. They have less room reflections than the lower range so should naturally measure lower (at the listening position you're getting the midbass + midbass reflections, whereas you're only really getting the direct sound from the tweeter. If you boost the treble to be as loud as the midbass with its reflections you will end up with a thin bass / harsh treble system)
edit: Just noticed that Mitchba's post above said this better than I did here..
Rob.
What microphone and mic preamp are you using? Is it individually calibrated? Does it come with calibration file? Do you have any A or C weighted curves selected? What are you using for SPL reading?
Hi Adason,
I'd rather not get into an argument over the fine details of my measurement gear if you don't mind..
My point was that a flat loudspeaker should not measure flat at the listening position. If it does then it will sound bright with lean bass. The OP can try what he suggested and hear for himself.
edit: I'm halfway through building my latest project. When I do the measurements outside to setup the crossovers I'll take screenshots and then post them with measurements indoors for comparison. Hopefully this will show how the treble falls off at listening position indoors naturally, even though the speaker is flat outside.
Rob.
Last edited:
fine with me...
but I have completely different experience, I use calibrated microphones, behringer and minidsp, and I use REW and Holm, and I eq flat with either behringer ultracurve or minidsp, depends on which system, and I do not share your statement, on the contrary...
When I eq completely flat, I have great sound like in studio, I hear what sound engineer heard after final mix. Flat in the listening position sounds great to me. If only a tid bit heavy below 30Hz. See, forcefully eq flat at 20Hz is a little extreme, and typically it needs a lot of boost. This requires extra power and may cause over excursion on the woofers (even I use 4x 15"). Plus things start to rattle at 20Hz. So I have a tendency to manually roll of below 30Hz. In my opinion there no sacrifice, as most of the music information is 30-15000.
End of story, time to move on...
but I have completely different experience, I use calibrated microphones, behringer and minidsp, and I use REW and Holm, and I eq flat with either behringer ultracurve or minidsp, depends on which system, and I do not share your statement, on the contrary...
When I eq completely flat, I have great sound like in studio, I hear what sound engineer heard after final mix. Flat in the listening position sounds great to me. If only a tid bit heavy below 30Hz. See, forcefully eq flat at 20Hz is a little extreme, and typically it needs a lot of boost. This requires extra power and may cause over excursion on the woofers (even I use 4x 15"). Plus things start to rattle at 20Hz. So I have a tendency to manually roll of below 30Hz. In my opinion there no sacrifice, as most of the music information is 30-15000.
End of story, time to move on...
Who says you can't ?
dogmatic people?
I'm always doing my measurements and crossovers/EQ test with the mic at the listening position.
If you are aiming for a high quality home system, I can't conceive of anybody proceeding without buying something like a Behringer DCX2496LE all-singing all-dancing DSP and a mic.
Speaker manufacturers go to to vast efforts to sort out their passive crossovers through real-world testing and end up with lots of elements in the crossover. And the speaker might sound great in certain rooms but not in others.
You can do the same vast effort or you can buy a DSP crossover.
There are many kinds of shortcomings a system can have. DSPs might introduce some shortcomings you can fret about (which might never be verified in double-blind testing) but they fix a great many more.
Ben
Speaker manufacturers go to to vast efforts to sort out their passive crossovers through real-world testing and end up with lots of elements in the crossover. And the speaker might sound great in certain rooms but not in others.
You can do the same vast effort or you can buy a DSP crossover.
There are many kinds of shortcomings a system can have. DSPs might introduce some shortcomings you can fret about (which might never be verified in double-blind testing) but they fix a great many more.
Ben
Last edited:
Hi dipankar862,
See pages 8 - 16 in this link.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=E01DvO2nsH0C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
Peter
See pages 8 - 16 in this link.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=E01DvO2nsH0C&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
Peter
My opinion, based on what I've heard and used follows.
I prefer the sound of fewer parts in the playback chain. My last "production" loudspeaker was a Quad ESL63 which has no crossover.
Drivers selected for less distortion will require less attention in the crossover, particularly if they're operated within their "comfort zone".
My favorite designs are therefore simpler, with EQ in the crossover for horn responses, dipole 'dips', etc.
I have tried off the shelf Behringer crossovers and found they have high frequency interference that is cast over the midrange. Better units are available, but at high cost.
If you are looking to active crossovers, there are some running on PCs where all the filters may be applied in the digital realm.
I would not recommend 'digital' crossovers that reconvert signals from analog to digital.
http://teribil-audio.com/2013/10/pc-based-digital-active-crossovers-using-a-low-cost-hdmi-receiver/
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
I prefer the sound of fewer parts in the playback chain. My last "production" loudspeaker was a Quad ESL63 which has no crossover.
Drivers selected for less distortion will require less attention in the crossover, particularly if they're operated within their "comfort zone".
My favorite designs are therefore simpler, with EQ in the crossover for horn responses, dipole 'dips', etc.
I have tried off the shelf Behringer crossovers and found they have high frequency interference that is cast over the midrange. Better units are available, but at high cost.
If you are looking to active crossovers, there are some running on PCs where all the filters may be applied in the digital realm.
I would not recommend 'digital' crossovers that reconvert signals from analog to digital.
http://teribil-audio.com/2013/10/pc-based-digital-active-crossovers-using-a-low-cost-hdmi-receiver/
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Well, sometimes. Metal cone drivers can have very low distortion, but their primary breakup mode will be a serious problem with the crossover. You're talking 4th order filters and notches to attenuate that, and you still might get the odd-order peaks lower down in the range.
Chris
It may not have a crossover as such but it has a step-up transformer, a large tapped choke and an analogue delay line the signal has to negotiate its way through.
Basically all the components that would make up a passive crossover and probably more of them.
There are plenty of other threads that cover this subject. Please use the search tool.Both analog and digital active crossovers achieve about the same level of "high fidelity sound" (your words). The advantage of a digital active crossover is that it can be reconfigured adjusted very easily and you can get a large number of different signal processing "stages" in a single DSP unit. Since you will be building (e.g. developing, constructing) your speakers you will need to tune the crossover and may end up making many adjustments before arriving at the final configuration. This could be very difficult with an analog active crossover, because the configuration is more or less fixed once you build it and adjustment of each stage requires changing component values. When you know exactly what you need, and analog active crossover is great and has some advantages over DSP crossovers but for the DIYer DSP is really the way to go in my opinion. Also, a DSP unit can be used over and over again on completely different speaker projects just by reconfiguring it. It's worth investing in one like a miniDSP to have this flexibility now and in the future.
+1
A good analogue crossover can become rather complex with lots of wiring and suchlike. I have done several, and been happy with the results, but do caution you that there can be a lot of work invalved. Especially if you want level controls for each band and XO freq controls.
Options like minidsp allow you to avoid this build phase and go straight into wiring up amplifiers and speakers. The DIY is less on electronics and all about the speakers.
You need to choose your focus.
DsP does allow some things that analogue cannot offer such as delay tuning per driver. Very important if you want the perfect XO without building complex boxes to implement driver offsets.
A good analogue crossover can become rather complex with lots of wiring and suchlike. I have done several, and been happy with the results, but do caution you that there can be a lot of work invalved. Especially if you want level controls for each band and XO freq controls.
Options like minidsp allow you to avoid this build phase and go straight into wiring up amplifiers and speakers. The DIY is less on electronics and all about the speakers.
You need to choose your focus.
DsP does allow some things that analogue cannot offer such as delay tuning per driver. Very important if you want the perfect XO without building complex boxes to implement driver offsets.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.