john k... said:
I tried just about every approach I could think of; passive and active speaker systems with phase correction by pre processing (LS3/5a and my NaO system); 2-way, FIR LR4 systems from scratch where each individual driver's acoustic output was switchable between linear phase or minimum phase; LR4 IIR with FIR correction to the system or individual drivers; individual LR2 FIR switchable between minimum phase and linear phase (tweeter revered polarity for min phase normal polarity for Lin phase); ....
The bottom line was that there were times, with certain passages, where sometimes it was though there was a difference, but there was never any consensus on which system was which or which sounded better. It was all pretty random. The only times they was some consistency was with bass response. There was some agreement that bass hade better impact when low frequency phase was linearized. But that is not crossover related.
I will say that for a given passage of music there might be a preference for one over the other due to some subtle difference. But for another piece the preference might be reversed. And when it comes down to comparing a 3-way using a B&O type crossover compared to the same 3-way with LR4 crossovers, as I have tried to point out, there are far bigger differences than just phase response. In fact, in previous posts I linked to my old B&O like TP 3-way, original with passive crossover, then revised with digital crossover. Today that system sounds better than it ever did, since I redesigned it with straight LR4 crossover. It doesn't reproduce a square wave for crap anymore, but it sounds good with music. 🙂
