Hi Jimmy154,
Interesting stuff you bring up but I think maybe you should start your own thread as this is way off topic from the title of the thread. You are welcome to design your own speaker and improve upon this design as you see fit in a new thread.
Not sure what you are referring to when you say “annoying rising top end response”? The raw driver may have that, but in this speaker with this crossover, the response is anything but rising. I usually voice my speakers to have a downward tilt to the highs - the so-called Harman house curve which has been found to work well with all genres of music and not sound fatiguing based on countless hours of trained listener feedback and also matches my own preferences. It’s because of good measurements that we can design great sounding speakers based on theory and science. Our ears are important but in the end, the measurements provide quantitative means of consistently attaining and optimizing the system. Factory FRDs are fine but they neglect the effect of the baffle step loss and diffraction of the particular cabinet that the driver is mounted in. It also won’t account for the acoustic offset between the drivers which is critical for designing the XO accurately.
There is about a -5dB drop from 100Hz to 15kHz.
Interesting stuff you bring up but I think maybe you should start your own thread as this is way off topic from the title of the thread. You are welcome to design your own speaker and improve upon this design as you see fit in a new thread.
Not sure what you are referring to when you say “annoying rising top end response”? The raw driver may have that, but in this speaker with this crossover, the response is anything but rising. I usually voice my speakers to have a downward tilt to the highs - the so-called Harman house curve which has been found to work well with all genres of music and not sound fatiguing based on countless hours of trained listener feedback and also matches my own preferences. It’s because of good measurements that we can design great sounding speakers based on theory and science. Our ears are important but in the end, the measurements provide quantitative means of consistently attaining and optimizing the system. Factory FRDs are fine but they neglect the effect of the baffle step loss and diffraction of the particular cabinet that the driver is mounted in. It also won’t account for the acoustic offset between the drivers which is critical for designing the XO accurately.
There is about a -5dB drop from 100Hz to 15kHz.
Last edited:
I liked the 301.
and its skinny brother also.
But that was over 25 years ago, long before I was as jaded and opinionated as I am now.
bose acoustimass cubes ?
Coming from 15" vega 3-ways, I always thought the acoustimas had no midbass.
Sort of similar to 4-5" 2-ways trying to cross at 80-100hz to a subwoofer, when you sit over 10' away.............
https://nyet.org/bose/
and its skinny brother also.
But that was over 25 years ago, long before I was as jaded and opinionated as I am now.
bose acoustimass cubes ?
Coming from 15" vega 3-ways, I always thought the acoustimas had no midbass.
Sort of similar to 4-5" 2-ways trying to cross at 80-100hz to a subwoofer, when you sit over 10' away.............
https://nyet.org/bose/
No, just curious. You joined 2005 and started one thread. Yet you are trashing someone else's design.
@adason
"No, just curious. You joined 2005 and started one thread. Yet you are trashing someone else's design."
It happens I react different then I mean, I'm sorry if this is the case.
It is completely not my intention to trash XRK's design. On the contrary, I have always liked designs like his and explains my visit here. The more so because it is phase pure. I guess I know what to expect and I'm positive it will be fine.
As far as I know however, the discussion was whether or not the woofer could be improved, given the fact that it already represents a good compromise. Now, if you read my lines and don't agree on content or tone, please let me know and I'll rethink / work on it.
I have respect for the patience and time XRK takes to help out the many interested here. He must be a friendly person.
Fyi: I recently got the 10F's but I'm not sure about the woofer for my application. It is simpler to just copy a design where lots of time has already been invested, so if I find a couple of older Omnes Audio W8 Alu (rebranded but similar to) for cheap, I might. On the other hand, I need a more sensitive system and at the same time I'd like to get rid of the resistors for the 10F. I'm not sure if XRK is really in search of a different woofer that (subjectively) even better suits his needs. I thought he was, but I doubt it by now. So I stopped bothering him about that.
I realize there are trade offs always. Often you cannot say that one woofer is better than the other, it's just different. I don't care much about the lowest octave. I care more about dynamics, low distortion (which is already quite good for the Dayton), small size enclosure, sensitivity. Which means bass reflex or additional sub(s); which does not fit in XRK's concept and that's just fine.
Btw, I do cad design. I worked with a major loudspeaker manufacturer in Germany.
"No, just curious. You joined 2005 and started one thread. Yet you are trashing someone else's design."
It happens I react different then I mean, I'm sorry if this is the case.
It is completely not my intention to trash XRK's design. On the contrary, I have always liked designs like his and explains my visit here. The more so because it is phase pure. I guess I know what to expect and I'm positive it will be fine.
As far as I know however, the discussion was whether or not the woofer could be improved, given the fact that it already represents a good compromise. Now, if you read my lines and don't agree on content or tone, please let me know and I'll rethink / work on it.
I have respect for the patience and time XRK takes to help out the many interested here. He must be a friendly person.
Fyi: I recently got the 10F's but I'm not sure about the woofer for my application. It is simpler to just copy a design where lots of time has already been invested, so if I find a couple of older Omnes Audio W8 Alu (rebranded but similar to) for cheap, I might. On the other hand, I need a more sensitive system and at the same time I'd like to get rid of the resistors for the 10F. I'm not sure if XRK is really in search of a different woofer that (subjectively) even better suits his needs. I thought he was, but I doubt it by now. So I stopped bothering him about that.
I realize there are trade offs always. Often you cannot say that one woofer is better than the other, it's just different. I don't care much about the lowest octave. I care more about dynamics, low distortion (which is already quite good for the Dayton), small size enclosure, sensitivity. Which means bass reflex or additional sub(s); which does not fit in XRK's concept and that's just fine.
Btw, I do cad design. I worked with a major loudspeaker manufacturer in Germany.
I understand wanting a "better driver".
Stiffening ribs, copper cap, shorting rings help, and measurably help.
However, the 225 works for this 6db alignment best.
Otherwise you'd need much more stuff to make an 8" measurable 6db roll off.
I've looked.
Short of zobels ckt, you'd need a flat Z curve, so a copper cap woofer could work.
But in this design I think the even is baffle step.
So, for a 2-way crossing to a 3" full range, this may be one of the best options out there.
Also, If the 3" is above the woof, the level may be higher, maybe not back 10' away.
I also prefer eq adding bass and treble, so seeing -5db at 10khz, I know I would want to boost the hf for my preference.
Dynamics ?
Well, at least you have good alignment, that helps with the sharpness of highs lining up with lows such as a snare drum, wood block.
Slam, dynamics, you may want for more drivers (maybe 6db crossed say 200hz to another 225) or driver size (different design).
Myself, I think compression drivers help for dynamics, as with low qts woofers.
I'm into punch, so 10-15' away (room 13' x 26' with openings on either end), I need a 12" per side, still not my double 15's, but not bad either.
Just my opinion.
Stiffening ribs, copper cap, shorting rings help, and measurably help.
However, the 225 works for this 6db alignment best.
Otherwise you'd need much more stuff to make an 8" measurable 6db roll off.
I've looked.
Short of zobels ckt, you'd need a flat Z curve, so a copper cap woofer could work.
But in this design I think the even is baffle step.
So, for a 2-way crossing to a 3" full range, this may be one of the best options out there.
Also, If the 3" is above the woof, the level may be higher, maybe not back 10' away.
I also prefer eq adding bass and treble, so seeing -5db at 10khz, I know I would want to boost the hf for my preference.
Dynamics ?
Well, at least you have good alignment, that helps with the sharpness of highs lining up with lows such as a snare drum, wood block.
Slam, dynamics, you may want for more drivers (maybe 6db crossed say 200hz to another 225) or driver size (different design).
Myself, I think compression drivers help for dynamics, as with low qts woofers.
I'm into punch, so 10-15' away (room 13' x 26' with openings on either end), I need a 12" per side, still not my double 15's, but not bad either.
Just my opinion.
Last edited:
good idea with the small slots.
I had a 4 x 12 slot loaded sub.
It had a vertical standing wave of probably 250hz.
resonance wasn't audible much crossing 80hz @ 18db / octave.
I had a 4 x 12 slot loaded sub.
It had a vertical standing wave of probably 250hz.
resonance wasn't audible much crossing 80hz @ 18db / octave.
"Slam, dynamics, you may want for more drivers (maybe 6db crossed say 200hz to another 225) or driver size (different design)."
I was thinking about a 10" but it narrows choice for a suitable driver even more.
Perhaps best is indeed to just copy XRK's design (with supertweeter facing upwards or backwards). Who knows I find the Dayton / Omnes Audio at a giveaway price like the 10F's; that might help to forget about 'wanting a better woofer' and would sound even better.
To XRK: the XSD woofer looks promising for sure; unfortunately not for sale here yet as far as I know.
Question about your 225 / 10F design: you said distance between the drivers should be respected. I haven't read the 193 pages, so perhaps you repeat yourself, but what nasty thing happens if closer together? You would suspect less lobing, especially with flat filtering.
Thanks.
I was thinking about a 10" but it narrows choice for a suitable driver even more.
Perhaps best is indeed to just copy XRK's design (with supertweeter facing upwards or backwards). Who knows I find the Dayton / Omnes Audio at a giveaway price like the 10F's; that might help to forget about 'wanting a better woofer' and would sound even better.
To XRK: the XSD woofer looks promising for sure; unfortunately not for sale here yet as far as I know.
Question about your 225 / 10F design: you said distance between the drivers should be respected. I haven't read the 193 pages, so perhaps you repeat yourself, but what nasty thing happens if closer together? You would suspect less lobing, especially with flat filtering.
Thanks.
It will work with closer distances for sure and ideally it should be a coaxial with the 10F sunken back 3in behind to get the correct time delay. If you change the driver spacing or the baffle width, the XO as published, won’t be ideal anymore and you will need to do your own. If you are using DSP and active drivers then all is good and you can do as you wish.
The closer together, the vertical polar will be more uniform (less lobing) but the time alignment will be worse. I don’t find the lobing to be an issue. You can simulate that all in Vituix CAD or Akabak. There is a need for a rear chamber so that was part of the reason it’s a bit wider plus the need to get some extra time delay with woofer on top.
The closer together, the vertical polar will be more uniform (less lobing) but the time alignment will be worse. I don’t find the lobing to be an issue. You can simulate that all in Vituix CAD or Akabak. There is a need for a rear chamber so that was part of the reason it’s a bit wider plus the need to get some extra time delay with woofer on top.
How do you guys feel about this statement:?
"When coupled with the Audax TW010E1 tweeter, the sound quality improved tremendously. Gone is the brittleness in the treble. That’s the difference between a real tweeter and treble derived from cone breakup."
What really annoys me in the treble is . . . well a lot of things . . but specifically when I can hear "lispy" women make the "Ssssss" sound when they talk.
And it's even more enhanced with most tweeters.
The XT25 you get no extra "Sssss" or any extra tweeter noises/sounds/distortion.
I can't really say this about any dome tweeters.
"When coupled with the Audax TW010E1 tweeter, the sound quality improved tremendously. Gone is the brittleness in the treble. That’s the difference between a real tweeter and treble derived from cone breakup."
What really annoys me in the treble is . . . well a lot of things . . but specifically when I can hear "lispy" women make the "Ssssss" sound when they talk.
And it's even more enhanced with most tweeters.
The XT25 you get no extra "Sssss" or any extra tweeter noises/sounds/distortion.
I can't really say this about any dome tweeters.
The "sss" lives between 5kHz to 10kHz.
Unfortunately, it's also where many people say, "oh, this speaker has great clarity!"
Myself, I can't stand it! An emphasis in the 5kHz to 10kHz really hurt my ears.
Unfortunately, it's also where many people say, "oh, this speaker has great clarity!"
Myself, I can't stand it! An emphasis in the 5kHz to 10kHz really hurt my ears.
Hi Jimmy,
I didn’t hear any sibbilance (lispy sssss…) in the SS 10F. It actually has very well controlled breakup. Are you hearing it in your speaker? What is your full range driver?
I didn’t hear any sibbilance (lispy sssss…) in the SS 10F. It actually has very well controlled breakup. Are you hearing it in your speaker? What is your full range driver?
No I have the TC9
I built TC9 computer speakers (pics attached) to see how they sound and I needed speakers
I hear a lot of "Ssssss" in this video:
My TB 25 mm tweeters connected to my TV have a lot of "ssss"
So do the TC9
I'm going to go listen to some Vifa XT25 and 2 Hivi AMT drivers I have to see how they sound
And maybe some other drivers
I think the TC9 will sound best for TV and voices. I mean, that's what it was made for right?
The AMT driver and Dayton RS52AN-8 I have before were great (pic attached) , but had cross-overs at all the wrong places and the RS52 was crossed at 800 Hz (and 4KHz) I believe
I built TC9 computer speakers (pics attached) to see how they sound and I needed speakers
I hear a lot of "Ssssss" in this video:
My TB 25 mm tweeters connected to my TV have a lot of "ssss"
So do the TC9
I'm going to go listen to some Vifa XT25 and 2 Hivi AMT drivers I have to see how they sound
And maybe some other drivers
I think the TC9 will sound best for TV and voices. I mean, that's what it was made for right?
The AMT driver and Dayton RS52AN-8 I have before were great (pic attached) , but had cross-overs at all the wrong places and the RS52 was crossed at 800 Hz (and 4KHz) I believe
Attachments
hmm... maybe it's the video the problem, and not the speaker?
The TC9 is one of the most neutral driver out there (especially for $12)... which some people call boring.
Now, feel free to watch badly recorded YT videos, but please do not assume a driver's performance from watching a crappy YT video. I mean... really?
Get some nice songs (hint: not from YouTube and not mp3) and enjoy.
Also, if I may.. plugging in random drivers into an existing cabinet and design is not going to work... Read some more, learn, and have fun with DIYAudio the right way.
The TC9 is one of the most neutral driver out there (especially for $12)... which some people call boring.
Now, feel free to watch badly recorded YT videos, but please do not assume a driver's performance from watching a crappy YT video. I mean... really?
Get some nice songs (hint: not from YouTube and not mp3) and enjoy.
Also, if I may.. plugging in random drivers into an existing cabinet and design is not going to work... Read some more, learn, and have fun with DIYAudio the right way.
TC9 or any 3.5in 8ohm driver in a small box like that will have a lot of baffle step compensation needed to not sound fatiguing.
Try 1mH air core plus 6.8ohm in parallel to start. Might even need 8.2ohm. That will tame the highs above 800Hz and maybe the sssss sibilance will not be as apparent.
Try 1mH air core plus 6.8ohm in parallel to start. Might even need 8.2ohm. That will tame the highs above 800Hz and maybe the sssss sibilance will not be as apparent.
@norman bates, @xrk971
"I also prefer eq adding bass and treble, so seeing -5db at 10khz, I know I would want to boost the hf for my preference."
Why would you want to boost hf in this case? What's your expectation of adding a supertweeter to boost hf?
What are your thoughts on the position of the supertweeter (like a cheap and small AMT facing upwards) in the attachment? How would you filter it?
What is your distance between the 10F and the top of the enclosure?
In the drawing I used the same distance that you use (vertically) between 10F and 225, while the offset is 3" (divided over an angled baffle and a protruding ring for the woofer).
Do you have experience with a variovent to lower the impedance peak of the woofer?
Thank you.
"I also prefer eq adding bass and treble, so seeing -5db at 10khz, I know I would want to boost the hf for my preference."
Why would you want to boost hf in this case? What's your expectation of adding a supertweeter to boost hf?
What are your thoughts on the position of the supertweeter (like a cheap and small AMT facing upwards) in the attachment? How would you filter it?
What is your distance between the 10F and the top of the enclosure?
In the drawing I used the same distance that you use (vertically) between 10F and 225, while the offset is 3" (divided over an angled baffle and a protruding ring for the woofer).
Do you have experience with a variovent to lower the impedance peak of the woofer?
Thank you.
Attachments
hmm..
10k pole, single cap, aiming up or back ?
Couldn't tell you on alignment (spacing), but it may be so high that it doesn't do much.
ghosting in a dome or amt forward may add some horizontal dispersion if you need more sparkle in a wider listening area.
post 2024 calls for a 3" offset for the seas.
I think a cap pushes the tweeter forward in time forcing it to go back further than acoustic centers, but idk.
post 2025 "If you put both drivers on a plane baffle, the voice coil of the Dayton (woofer!) is about 5cm = 2in behind the voice coil of the Scan Speak (horizontal distance). I have attached a more the less true to scale drawing: You say, that you put the speaker upside down, and that the woofer is on ear height. At a listening distance of 1,5m = 59in = 4,9ft, the woofer's (!) acoustical center will still be 1,6” behind."
post 2079 "Still I have to say, that outdoors it sounds way better with the offset, compared to no offset and the listening height = woofer axis. I assume that holds true for indoors too. I go with the offset. It sounds way more transparent and true 3D like."
If you look at the 2nd picture, ideally the 2 peaks will both hit top at the same time.
So the woof needs to be a squeek further back.
Now how much of this is audible on music, not just on hitting a wood block, jingling keys, audience clapping, rain, or the sharp leading edge transient of a scnare drum ? I couldn't tell you.
I always thought 6db helped intelligibility, but my 2 way with acoustic 24db slope is very intelligible, so I have to rethink my preferences.
And remember, this is just my opinion.
I have not built this, but I have immense respect for xrk's baby here.
It as a 6db time/phase design, even with baffle step.................
10k pole, single cap, aiming up or back ?
Couldn't tell you on alignment (spacing), but it may be so high that it doesn't do much.
ghosting in a dome or amt forward may add some horizontal dispersion if you need more sparkle in a wider listening area.
post 2024 calls for a 3" offset for the seas.
I think a cap pushes the tweeter forward in time forcing it to go back further than acoustic centers, but idk.
post 2025 "If you put both drivers on a plane baffle, the voice coil of the Dayton (woofer!) is about 5cm = 2in behind the voice coil of the Scan Speak (horizontal distance). I have attached a more the less true to scale drawing: You say, that you put the speaker upside down, and that the woofer is on ear height. At a listening distance of 1,5m = 59in = 4,9ft, the woofer's (!) acoustical center will still be 1,6” behind."
post 2079 "Still I have to say, that outdoors it sounds way better with the offset, compared to no offset and the listening height = woofer axis. I assume that holds true for indoors too. I go with the offset. It sounds way more transparent and true 3D like."
If you look at the 2nd picture, ideally the 2 peaks will both hit top at the same time.
So the woof needs to be a squeek further back.
Now how much of this is audible on music, not just on hitting a wood block, jingling keys, audience clapping, rain, or the sharp leading edge transient of a scnare drum ? I couldn't tell you.
I always thought 6db helped intelligibility, but my 2 way with acoustic 24db slope is very intelligible, so I have to rethink my preferences.
And remember, this is just my opinion.
I have not built this, but I have immense respect for xrk's baby here.
It as a 6db time/phase design, even with baffle step.................
Attachments
Last edited:
https://sound-au.com/ptd.htm
(on if 1st order is phase coherent) "It is phase coherent in that all signals at all frequencies are 90° out of phase. I know that you have seen web sites that say that there is no phase shift through a 1st order crossover, but this is simply untrue! At crossover, the high pass section is leading - the signal appears to emerge from the filter 45° before the input. This would not seem possible, but is normal behaviour with all filters when a 'steady state' signal is applied - you don't have to really understand it, so I suggest that you just live with it.
The low pass filter has a lagging response, so the signal emerges 45° after the input. This is easier to comprehend, but may still seem a little strange (which I suppose it is for a filter that many claim has no delays)."
post 2222 "as the woofer is slower, as you said. The point is, that the highest points of the slopes need to be together, and this means, that the woofer needs to start earlier!"
(on if 1st order is phase coherent) "It is phase coherent in that all signals at all frequencies are 90° out of phase. I know that you have seen web sites that say that there is no phase shift through a 1st order crossover, but this is simply untrue! At crossover, the high pass section is leading - the signal appears to emerge from the filter 45° before the input. This would not seem possible, but is normal behaviour with all filters when a 'steady state' signal is applied - you don't have to really understand it, so I suggest that you just live with it.
The low pass filter has a lagging response, so the signal emerges 45° after the input. This is easier to comprehend, but may still seem a little strange (which I suppose it is for a filter that many claim has no delays)."
post 2222 "as the woofer is slower, as you said. The point is, that the highest points of the slopes need to be together, and this means, that the woofer needs to start earlier!"