yes I agree
the curcuit (framed in red) in post 711 ... I dont know how to calculate it
Try an Inductor around 0.6mH, resistor 6.8 - 8.2 ohm and cap 2.2 - 3.3 uF ... you may have to fiddle a bit
the curcuit (framed in red) in post 711 ... I dont know how to calculate it
Try an Inductor around 0.6mH, resistor 6.8 - 8.2 ohm and cap 2.2 - 3.3 uF ... you may have to fiddle a bit
It's late right now, Tinitus, and I just read your post...........Now is that filter framed in red on the positive series to the driver?........I will experiment with it in the morning.............Omni
Hi, good morning
as you clearly see, its in series with the woofer series filter inductor ... if you dont see all the connections in the drawing, it may help if you enlarge picture
Regarding the "shunt" resistor ... with bigger resistor the result was rise in impedanse, if I understand you correctly
It comes from the fact that a series inductor has a resulting rise in impedanse ... a paralel cap works the other way round and drags impedanse down again, also why RC works and why you get steeper slopes with paralel components ... the series component is the one that works, paralel components only help them work better
without the series inductor or the resistor, a paralel cap would short the signal at higher frequencies
"Downwards" (lowpass) its the same thing, only the cap and inductor have changed place and function
as you clearly see, its in series with the woofer series filter inductor ... if you dont see all the connections in the drawing, it may help if you enlarge picture
Regarding the "shunt" resistor ... with bigger resistor the result was rise in impedanse, if I understand you correctly
It comes from the fact that a series inductor has a resulting rise in impedanse ... a paralel cap works the other way round and drags impedanse down again, also why RC works and why you get steeper slopes with paralel components ... the series component is the one that works, paralel components only help them work better
without the series inductor or the resistor, a paralel cap would short the signal at higher frequencies
"Downwards" (lowpass) its the same thing, only the cap and inductor have changed place and function
A series "notch" is in paralel with the signal ... and a paralel "notch", well ... its in series with the signal ... just to get it straight
You can look at the components in a very simple way, to simplify things a bit
In a paralel "notch", the inductor is big and cap is small, thus the inductor determines lower working point of the notch, and the cap the upper
In a series notch, its the other way round ... cap is "big", and inductor is small
Bigger resistor means more attenuation
I seem to favour "broad" notches
Ofcourse you could attack the bump at 2khz with a "narrow" notch, but it would not be the right solution ... reminds me of why some digital equalizers not always sound the best ... when they correct a problem they do just that, correcting the summed curve and not the real problem ... it cannot determine if the problem comes from the woofer or the midrange ... to do that you would need seperate EQs on each driver, and seperate amps fore each driver ... but with a fullrange it may be a different matter
You can look at the components in a very simple way, to simplify things a bit
In a paralel "notch", the inductor is big and cap is small, thus the inductor determines lower working point of the notch, and the cap the upper
In a series notch, its the other way round ... cap is "big", and inductor is small
Bigger resistor means more attenuation
I seem to favour "broad" notches
Ofcourse you could attack the bump at 2khz with a "narrow" notch, but it would not be the right solution ... reminds me of why some digital equalizers not always sound the best ... when they correct a problem they do just that, correcting the summed curve and not the real problem ... it cannot determine if the problem comes from the woofer or the midrange ... to do that you would need seperate EQs on each driver, and seperate amps fore each driver ... but with a fullrange it may be a different matter
Hi Omni ,
I'll try to be succinct which is very difficult for me! Try to identify the problem yourself, as only YOU can hear
Frankie unless you have a local xo expert who can hear 'him' too.
(Tinitus, I'm trying not to confuse things!) Omni...
Re: "As you probably recall our trepidation pertaining to a zobel on the woofer based on the concern that impedance may be lowered too much, thus causing an excessive, and possibly damaging strain
on the amplifier"
....yes, I remember but I think that may have been before Sreten explained it and I re-read it in Vance's book. I'll try to find Sreten's page of advice on this. It was something like keep electrical phase < 35degrees if the *real* impedance is low ..from memory. Depends on the amp I expect. Minimum *real* Z preferably above 4 ohms for a 4-ohm 'terminal' amp, haha, terminal amp..kinda funny!
I don't see any major problems, but Frankie's problems ..might possibly?.. be these:
/ possibly a crossover that .might. be wobbling around its intended xo-point...probably the mid CA15 here my suggestion here is to *initially* eliminate ALL the resistors in series in the T and M circuits,
and replace them with dual-gang/stereo pot Lpads on each driver but just before a new mid Zobel. Connect both Lpads with enough wire to walk around your room, adjust for best sound, measure
with a DMM and replace with resistors. I confirmed this Lpad technique tonight with an xo 'guru'
/ trying to control the 12" ALU woofer breakup...a zobeled woofer imho could indeed help.
(reducing any increasing impedance with frequency might not hurt overall Z - in fact Vance D is an advocate, but check by simming anyway). Also use a notch filter as per Tinitus, but you could,
easily I expect, do one yourself in Bagby's PCD or Speaker Workshop. Just import the SLS frd into a 'woofer only network' (no M or T) with series notch network calculations from Vance D. I'll do one
for you if you wish as soon as I can.
I've done it again! hehe this post is getting looong...sorry Tinitus, and Omni.
/ the CA15 mid problem...seems easy to me? Just Zobel and Lpad it as above and notch filter it!
I'll try to find my previous filter but this site has now changed the page numbers!
Omni, Sreten has given us a lot of great advice. He (more or less) said once ..don't agonize about a perfectly flat simulated response..strive for what sounds good.. or words to that effect. Sorry if I have misquoted you Sreten, but my intention is good. Also, imho Tinitus' tweakings (and much respect Tinitus!) are an excellent
idea, but maybe only after the basic problems are corrected. Tinitus, I sincerely hope you don't mind my comments, because I'm really trying not to overload or confuse Omni! Thanks!
Omni, I went to 'audition' Andy's creations yesterday. Awesome! My comments are in his 'the Juke Lives' thread.
I'll try to be succinct which is very difficult for me! Try to identify the problem yourself, as only YOU can hear
Frankie unless you have a local xo expert who can hear 'him' too.
(Tinitus, I'm trying not to confuse things!) Omni...
Re: "As you probably recall our trepidation pertaining to a zobel on the woofer based on the concern that impedance may be lowered too much, thus causing an excessive, and possibly damaging strain
on the amplifier"
....yes, I remember but I think that may have been before Sreten explained it and I re-read it in Vance's book. I'll try to find Sreten's page of advice on this. It was something like keep electrical phase < 35degrees if the *real* impedance is low ..from memory. Depends on the amp I expect. Minimum *real* Z preferably above 4 ohms for a 4-ohm 'terminal' amp, haha, terminal amp..kinda funny!
I don't see any major problems, but Frankie's problems ..might possibly?.. be these:
/ possibly a crossover that .might. be wobbling around its intended xo-point...probably the mid CA15 here my suggestion here is to *initially* eliminate ALL the resistors in series in the T and M circuits,
and replace them with dual-gang/stereo pot Lpads on each driver but just before a new mid Zobel. Connect both Lpads with enough wire to walk around your room, adjust for best sound, measure
with a DMM and replace with resistors. I confirmed this Lpad technique tonight with an xo 'guru'
/ trying to control the 12" ALU woofer breakup...a zobeled woofer imho could indeed help.
(reducing any increasing impedance with frequency might not hurt overall Z - in fact Vance D is an advocate, but check by simming anyway). Also use a notch filter as per Tinitus, but you could,
easily I expect, do one yourself in Bagby's PCD or Speaker Workshop. Just import the SLS frd into a 'woofer only network' (no M or T) with series notch network calculations from Vance D. I'll do one
for you if you wish as soon as I can.
I've done it again! hehe this post is getting looong...sorry Tinitus, and Omni.
/ the CA15 mid problem...seems easy to me? Just Zobel and Lpad it as above and notch filter it!
I'll try to find my previous filter but this site has now changed the page numbers!
Omni, Sreten has given us a lot of great advice. He (more or less) said once ..don't agonize about a perfectly flat simulated response..strive for what sounds good.. or words to that effect. Sorry if I have misquoted you Sreten, but my intention is good. Also, imho Tinitus' tweakings (and much respect Tinitus!) are an excellent
idea, but maybe only after the basic problems are corrected. Tinitus, I sincerely hope you don't mind my comments, because I'm really trying not to overload or confuse Omni! Thanks!
Omni, I went to 'audition' Andy's creations yesterday. Awesome! My comments are in his 'the Juke Lives' thread.
Omni... I just saw this!
" The amazing thing is this: I am encouraged by the fact that even though Frankies' sound isn't quite spot on yet, he does sound very good as he is, without any response shaping circuitry....."
Arrgh! I'm so sorry! You're 'home-free' ...you don't really need any changes then!
" The amazing thing is this: I am encouraged by the fact that even though Frankies' sound isn't quite spot on yet, he does sound very good as he is, without any response shaping circuitry....."
Arrgh! I'm so sorry! You're 'home-free' ...you don't really need any changes then!
Grant, I read the technique with the Lpads that you described and now understand what you were describing in an earlier post............I think it definately has merit.........You know me, always striving for perfection.............I know I will probably never get Frankie perfect, but this soundstage imbalance he has is a little disconcerting............I believe it is imminently able to be remedied. Between what you and Tinitus describe as the approach to take, I believe it will happen...........This is a fun part of Frankies growth.................I hope you had a good time at Andys' and can't wait to read your post in the other thread............Omni
Tinitus.........This post is to you after having read your observation you posted in the other thread on my notch filter inquiry..........The picture you have posted is a parallel notch filter situated in series..........And like Cal waldon pointed out with his experience of the series notch, impedance gets problematically low.............All this time, I did not realize that you were shooting for a notch that covers a wider band than simply those nasty spikes..........So you propose a notch to cover 800-3000 Hz if I read you correctly..............How many db attenuation am I looking for?...............I have faith and trust in your observations and experience..........It appears I need to take yet again, another leap of faith, which I am willing to do.............My confusion is this: not knowing what component values to use, and maybe you can work me through this blindness. I guess that without being able to see this circuit on my simulator and the effect it has on my response curve has me in a state of grave uncertainty. Though I believe that the good sound qualities Frankie makes now is fairly representative of what we can see on the simulated response curve, I am still aware that it is merely a simulation.............However, my description of the soundstage imbalance appears to also be clearly represented on the response graph.............So there must be some validity to it, as you have also concurred with observations and were able to point out the imbalance possibilities..............Isn't this fun?..............Respectfully......................Omni
grantnsw said:
Hi,
I do not think I've been misquoted, you have to take sim results for what they are .....
In context consider the following, any 3 drivers in a 3-way :
Sim the results using stock PE L/R crossovers - Ok to awful
depending on how well the drivers are intrinsically are suited
to each other. Do it again but add L-pads on tweeter and
midrange, do it again with with zobels on the bass and midrange.
Compare all the above to your custom designed c/o, hopefully
the exercise will show the large amount of grief you have
avoided by simming, and that the "stock" approach is not
amenable to mindless tweaking, whilst well understood well
controlled c/o can be, but if it is relatively simple then there
will be a fair amount of interaction changing anything.
A perfect on-axis response is not good if this is critical to the
measurement axis, a far more important issue is the set of
axial responses, and the averaged in room response.
Are you designing for speakers "straight-ahead" or "toed-in" ? .....
At this point you can chuck your textbooks out of the window.
(The one's worth reading, you have already burnt your cookbooks...)
Tweaking and fine tuning by ear is probably the only way to
make the speaker sound more like a cohesive whole.
Actual measurements may help (RAR), but who cares if the sim
is not flat if it sound more "flat", or your personal taste means
you like a determinely downtilted or uptilted response.
(The classic BBC standmounters tilt 2 to 3 dB down bass to treble.)
Also note for reasons I do not really want to go into in any depth,
the response you settle on may only be applicable to the set of
drivers chosen, it works with them, i.e. not just personal taste.
🙂/sreten.
.sreten said:
and this, imo, is where people so often don't "get it".
Driver choice, at least from my perspective, is one of the paramount points of loudspeaker design.
Many people say, "I want to use this driver", with no idea how or if it might be COMBINED with other drivers.
Will said driver(s) need to be belted into submission with 55+ x-o components, or can it combine with just 1 or 2?
Me.... I choose drivers very carefully. I like to make the x-o part easy and just combine with a couple of x-o parts, the fewer the better (up to a point).
I rely on manufacturer's curves and measurements by the likes of Zaph and Mark K for an idea of how a driver will "fit", and I STILL don't use any sims, silly me !!
I have no idea if my creations sim or measure "flat". (but suspect they probably measure "reasonably" flat (whatever that means), since a few of my x-os have been measured by others in their own constructions).
Only those who have heard the results can attest to if my processes work or not.
In the final account, the EARS rule !!!
darn , where did that bottle of red disappear to !!!
Hi Omni, You can try and play with this one ... try I=0.5mH and cap=3.3uf ... no need to use too big inductor ... remember that too high DC might affect your bass controll ... it is after all in series with your signal
http://www.lautsprechershop.de/tools/index_en.htm
Try the "Frequency Response Leveller"
Whether you will use the standard paralel configuration or the one I have found to sound better, is all up to you
Once you have found the values, you may have to tweek resistor and cap by ear ... but once you have the inductor into your filter curcuit its an easy task
http://www.lautsprechershop.de/tools/index_en.htm
Try the "Frequency Response Leveller"
Whether you will use the standard paralel configuration or the one I have found to sound better, is all up to you
Once you have found the values, you may have to tweek resistor and cap by ear ... but once you have the inductor into your filter curcuit its an easy task
(in order of posting..lol)
Tinitus,
Re: (your post # 724) ..."I seem to favour "broad" notches Of course you could attack the bump at 2khz with a "narrow" notch, but it would not be the right solution"
I guess this makes sense because the notch would be operating beyond the passband ie, xo-point?
Omni,
Re: (your post # 727)..."I know I will probably never get Frankie perfect, but this soundstage imbalance he has is a little disconcerting............I believe it is imminently able to be remedied."
I believe you WILL get Frankie perfect! You have chosen an excellent yet difficult woofer to work with (due to break-up mode) and the CA15 'in box' peak/dip is a problem too...but imho both problems are fixable. The 'soundstage imbalance' you are now describing...is this the same thing as Frankie's voice
changing as you mentioned earlier?
I had another try at a CA15 filter for you, ..attached.., it could be rubbish but it may be of some use as a *starting point* for tweaking but only in context with a woofer filter etc. Just sim all changes and look carefully at the electrical phase and Z as per Sreten's advice. Also note that Andy G. doesn't really sim anything nor does Tinitus! If you like I'll try a 'SLS' filter for you too.
Another PC sig-gen for you at : www.audiotester.de
Sreten,
Great ideas on the 'exercise' there, thanks! ..The only concerns I would have here are the break-up mode of Omni's woofers and the CA15's problem, so I hope I have understood you correctly!
I might be confused..lol (as usual) but I'm not really sure how a stock crossover can handle an ALU driver in break-up mode? Maybe I missed your point ...sorry, if I've done it again! Yeah, as you mentioned previously about MP3'ing your test CD, if you still feel inclined to do so...would be great, thanks!
Andy,
I have heard your incredible speakers! I'm impressed that wide and flat response drivers (with smooth/flat response) and series crossovers give fantastic results, and also your amazing line-array Gumby's with bi-amped 'parallel-xo' subs I think. I miss the Gumby's! haha! ...............grant
Tinitus,
Re: (your post # 724) ..."I seem to favour "broad" notches Of course you could attack the bump at 2khz with a "narrow" notch, but it would not be the right solution"
I guess this makes sense because the notch would be operating beyond the passband ie, xo-point?
Omni,
Re: (your post # 727)..."I know I will probably never get Frankie perfect, but this soundstage imbalance he has is a little disconcerting............I believe it is imminently able to be remedied."
I believe you WILL get Frankie perfect! You have chosen an excellent yet difficult woofer to work with (due to break-up mode) and the CA15 'in box' peak/dip is a problem too...but imho both problems are fixable. The 'soundstage imbalance' you are now describing...is this the same thing as Frankie's voice
changing as you mentioned earlier?
I had another try at a CA15 filter for you, ..attached.., it could be rubbish but it may be of some use as a *starting point* for tweaking but only in context with a woofer filter etc. Just sim all changes and look carefully at the electrical phase and Z as per Sreten's advice. Also note that Andy G. doesn't really sim anything nor does Tinitus! If you like I'll try a 'SLS' filter for you too.
Another PC sig-gen for you at : www.audiotester.de
Sreten,
Great ideas on the 'exercise' there, thanks! ..The only concerns I would have here are the break-up mode of Omni's woofers and the CA15's problem, so I hope I have understood you correctly!
I might be confused..lol (as usual) but I'm not really sure how a stock crossover can handle an ALU driver in break-up mode? Maybe I missed your point ...sorry, if I've done it again! Yeah, as you mentioned previously about MP3'ing your test CD, if you still feel inclined to do so...would be great, thanks!
Andy,
I have heard your incredible speakers! I'm impressed that wide and flat response drivers (with smooth/flat response) and series crossovers give fantastic results, and also your amazing line-array Gumby's with bi-amped 'parallel-xo' subs I think. I miss the Gumby's! haha! ...............grant
Attachments
Grant, it looks like the dip below 2khz got even worse than before 
that is if I look at the right chart
Another thing is, I am not quite sure I would like to send all of my midrange signal through such components ... it might be better to stick with a series notch on midrange ... but some of it might be solved with changing the series resistors
But lets wait and see what Omni can achive with the woofer first
Sorry fore such negative response 😱
that is if I look at the right chartAnother thing is, I am not quite sure I would like to send all of my midrange signal through such components ... it might be better to stick with a series notch on midrange ... but some of it might be solved with changing the series resistors
But lets wait and see what Omni can achive with the woofer first
Sorry fore such negative response 😱
All you guys..........Thank you so very much for your continued support..........Sreten, you blew me away with your most gracious, and honest post.... I was touched... Many of the things you spoke of, I agree with, however lack the experience to put them into words..........Grant, yeah man, as Frankie has started breaking in a bit I have noticed distinct changes in his sound, and in many instances he appears to be sounding better as time passes........Imaging has become more prevalent, and I have made it a point to keep the speakers in the same location, and listen to him in the same location. So some sort of break in must be taking place..Soundstage imbalance, still exists and I am sometimes just relaxing and enjoying his sound, takin in the moments, and then other times I listen more critically...........As in a few of my earlier posts, I would like to here a little bit more in the upper end, to bring out the cymbals, and high hat, which seem to be a bit "back" in the sound stage...A little more presence. Also the singers voice is still a bit back as well, especially when accompanying guitars, and other instruments enter into the picture.............The guitars, especially sound a bit forward, especially during loud passages........Looking at the simulation graph, I can see these shortfalls , as they translate to the sound Frankie has been exhibiting.............They're gonna be remedied, I have total confidence, and as Sreten pointed out, I must understand the limitations...............I especially appreciated both Sretens' and Andy Graddons' assessment of driver choice, and the foresight which is required to make good choices..........Tinitus, I deeply appreciate the link you provided, and see a great deal of potential, here. I see a good direction you have provided and I think this will get us to the next level, or at least to a level at which then, will then be able to tweak by ear..............Once I get some concrete results with the tools, I will be making some other inquiries, as to some of the circuits we have discussed, including your personal favorite...........Also, I have ordered a test CD from Rives Audio to do some sound pressure testing, results of which, I will report when I get them.......I am grateful to you all....................Omni
there are 30 pages here........
what drivers are you using again, please?
I just looked at the Seas CA15RLY as shown on their web site. I'm amazed you are having difficulties with it !!
It looks like an ideal mid driver.
If it weren't for the prices we have to pay for Seas down here, I probably would have used it somewhere myself by now !
what drivers are you using again, please?
I just looked at the Seas CA15RLY as shown on their web site. I'm amazed you are having difficulties with it !!
It looks like an ideal mid driver.
If it weren't for the prices we have to pay for Seas down here, I probably would have used it somewhere myself by now !
Nah, I dont think Omni has any problems, he is just being very demanding and want the very last bit, and you dont get that in the first shot 😉
Hi Omni,
I had a go at a series notch filter on your woofers but it didn't improve it much, so I tried a parallel
one. After a little calculating and varying L/C ratios and R, I got about an 8dB spike reduction.
The black line is your SLS filter with 2R, the red curve is the parallel notch with no 2R.
This might sound better if it's used together with my previous CA15 filter, assuming the electrical phase still sims ok.
I had a go at a series notch filter on your woofers but it didn't improve it much, so I tried a parallel
one. After a little calculating and varying L/C ratios and R, I got about an 8dB spike reduction.
The black line is your SLS filter with 2R, the red curve is the parallel notch with no 2R.
This might sound better if it's used together with my previous CA15 filter, assuming the electrical phase still sims ok.
Attachments
Tinitus,
I put the graphs around the wrong way in my post #732. The one on the right is Omni's Ca15 in-box response with no filter. Why the peak/dip exists, I really don't know. The left graph is just my feeble
attempt to filter it a bit flatter and maybe incorporate this into the mids LP and HP filters, thereby hopefully reducing the CA15's Is it not advisable to put a parallel notch filter in the (series) signal path? I just could not get any improvement from my attempts at series notches.
Andy,
A few days ago there were 70 pages in this thread. Did you decide on a new bike or new speakers? My money is on new speakers!, lol.
Omni,
My red curve is higher from 150 to 500, so maybe (if you decide to use it) you could increase the 80uF cap to restore it? cheers, all
I put the graphs around the wrong way in my post #732. The one on the right is Omni's Ca15 in-box response with no filter. Why the peak/dip exists, I really don't know. The left graph is just my feeble
attempt to filter it a bit flatter and maybe incorporate this into the mids LP and HP filters, thereby hopefully reducing the CA15's Is it not advisable to put a parallel notch filter in the (series) signal path? I just could not get any improvement from my attempts at series notches.
Andy,
A few days ago there were 70 pages in this thread. Did you decide on a new bike or new speakers? My money is on new speakers!, lol.
Omni,
My red curve is higher from 150 to 500, so maybe (if you decide to use it) you could increase the 80uF cap to restore it? cheers, all
- Status
- Not open for further replies.