So I've been messing around with a DEQX and a bunch of different drivers for a while trying to come up
with first the perfect 2 way, then I tried 3way because I just couldnt get a 2 way to sounds good.
I spent alot of time trying to get the woofer to play everything below 650hz open baffle.
But then....
Yesterday I thought well I can do a 4 way and just use the left channels for one speaker in mono
so I added a 10" midbass I had lying around. So its a 15" Eminence woofer running open baffle crossed at 140hz the 10" mid bass runnign open baffle with a pillow behind it to catch higher frequencies. Then at 650 crossed to a Kef LS50 Mid and at 2800 the Kef Coaxial Tweeter.
Immediately I can say wayyy more sense of space and clearer transients. The sub cleans up the midbass and the midbass cleans up the mids it all works very well. 24db butterworth crrossovers.
I think 4 way is the way to go now. Just cant get this level of resolution with a 2 way that Ive heard.
with first the perfect 2 way, then I tried 3way because I just couldnt get a 2 way to sounds good.
I spent alot of time trying to get the woofer to play everything below 650hz open baffle.
But then....
Yesterday I thought well I can do a 4 way and just use the left channels for one speaker in mono
so I added a 10" midbass I had lying around. So its a 15" Eminence woofer running open baffle crossed at 140hz the 10" mid bass runnign open baffle with a pillow behind it to catch higher frequencies. Then at 650 crossed to a Kef LS50 Mid and at 2800 the Kef Coaxial Tweeter.
Immediately I can say wayyy more sense of space and clearer transients. The sub cleans up the midbass and the midbass cleans up the mids it all works very well. 24db butterworth crrossovers.
I think 4 way is the way to go now. Just cant get this level of resolution with a 2 way that Ive heard.
It's always good to see people learning and growing. A 2-way can be excellent, if you have the technology, money and expertise to make it work. For the vast majority of builders, that's not the case, and is limited to a few pro companies.
Long ago, I recognized that my "ultimate" low-tech DIY speaker would be a 4-way. For very high quality sound, it's pretty hard to avoid that reality.
🙂
Same thing here....once i went to 4-way, i've never looked back.
Separating bass from upper-bass/lower-mids makes so much improvement .....
usually more difference than from many of the optimization items we commonly focus on.
It's a simply cleaner foundation, that lets the entire speaker sound more open....ime/imo.
I'd be interested in where you end up crossing between the 15" and 10".... see you said 140Hz now.
For me, playing with that handoff has proven to be a major SQ variable.
For various reasons, I've gravitated towards 100Hz. But if I could I'd probably move to 80Hz. Can't do that though, because almost none of my designs let the low-mid sections go that low.
I like your xover freq of 650 Hz from 10" low-mid to Kef mid. Many folks seem to run bigger cones too high imo....especially like in a 2-way 15" or even 12",etc.
Separating bass from upper-bass/lower-mids makes so much improvement .....
usually more difference than from many of the optimization items we commonly focus on.
It's a simply cleaner foundation, that lets the entire speaker sound more open....ime/imo.
I'd be interested in where you end up crossing between the 15" and 10".... see you said 140Hz now.
For me, playing with that handoff has proven to be a major SQ variable.
For various reasons, I've gravitated towards 100Hz. But if I could I'd probably move to 80Hz. Can't do that though, because almost none of my designs let the low-mid sections go that low.
I like your xover freq of 650 Hz from 10" low-mid to Kef mid. Many folks seem to run bigger cones too high imo....especially like in a 2-way 15" or even 12",etc.
@EliGuy
Hi!
I'm aiming for a 4-Way DEQX based implementation as well, but DEQX only supports 3-way... So I'd be interested in the DEQX configuration details you have chosen to achieve the 4-way implementation. I'd be very thankful if you would share.
Thanks and Regards,
Winfried
Hi!
I'm aiming for a 4-Way DEQX based implementation as well, but DEQX only supports 3-way... So I'd be interested in the DEQX configuration details you have chosen to achieve the 4-way implementation. I'd be very thankful if you would share.
Thanks and Regards,
Winfried
Well it should depends I assume, no ? Big Dunlavys were 1st order three ways with perfect step response...played loud and fast.
With 4 ways I suspect one need 24db slopes or more. If one uses LR24, this is not the best for the few I try to understand about phase and group delay ?! Am I wrong ?
So I assume 4 ways are ONLY manageable with FIR filters and electronic delays to get them seamlessly ?
Passive LR12 could be a trade-off with passive 4Ways--- see Troels Gravsen-- ... but ?
With 4 ways I suspect one need 24db slopes or more. If one uses LR24, this is not the best for the few I try to understand about phase and group delay ?! Am I wrong ?
So I assume 4 ways are ONLY manageable with FIR filters and electronic delays to get them seamlessly ?
Passive LR12 could be a trade-off with passive 4Ways--- see Troels Gravsen-- ... but ?
Your crossover frequencies are not too different from those of Revel Salon 2: 150Hz, 575Hz, and 2.3KHz.
Which Dunlavey's do you mean ? The SC-VI or the Duntech Soverigns ?
Both are 4-ways, i think.
Also don't think they get very loud, with a 90-91dB sensitivity and maybe a couple hundred watt handling capability best.
4-ways don't have to have 24dB or greater xovers, or have to have FIR.
But the design expertise required to use IIR above 1st or 2nd order grows immensely.
And finding drivers well behaved enough to use those shallow orders, and still have power handling, gets a lot tougher.
Hi Mark,
irrc they were 3 ways WMTMW, dunno if the big was a 3.5W or a 4W... my memory is not what it was... I re read Stereophile, remember they have few reviews about them
I heard them long time ago and can tell you it can plays very loud and fast in a big room without stress... at that time one would have sell his car to get a pair !
Smooth drivers became rare... but dunno for the filters I'm a noob here...
irrc they were 3 ways WMTMW, dunno if the big was a 3.5W or a 4W... my memory is not what it was... I re read Stereophile, remember they have few reviews about them
I heard them long time ago and can tell you it can plays very loud and fast in a big room without stress... at that time one would have sell his car to get a pair !
Smooth drivers became rare... but dunno for the filters I'm a noob here...
Hi diyiggy,
ok, you made me look it up ...🙂
Dunlavy Audio Labs Signature SC-VI loudspeaker Specifications | Stereophile.com
Sovereign - Duntech
Both 4-ways 😉 ....and neither that loud, Lol
ok, you made me look it up ...🙂
Dunlavy Audio Labs Signature SC-VI loudspeaker Specifications | Stereophile.com
Sovereign - Duntech
Both 4-ways 😉 ....and neither that loud, Lol
Last edited:
Bloody hell... this guy knew to make filters...
Well at least it was loud enough for me at playing a symphony 😉
Well at least it was loud enough for me at playing a symphony 😉
So here's some pics of my creepy monstrosity ;D
I've butchered a pair of GedLee Nathans in my experiments with waveguides. Sorry Earl!
First of all I have no expert knowledge in physics or audio design so Im just using my intuition here..
But I am a believer (from Earl Geddes) in the concept of constant directivity especially in my small
condo. But NOW I'm not sure having a waveguide is the best way to get that directivity.
Something about having several drivers that get upto say between 5-8 DI before dropping
off sounds good to my ears. And I think our ears are much more sensitive than most people think
even down around -20DB. So if you dont reach 10 DI until then I think its ok.
The other tweak that made a big difference was using an 18db crossover on the way up and then 24db on the way down so that each driver is climbing more towards a higher DI without as much shrill beaming.
But I think I got a decent spectrogram without using much delay. I will say that the KefLS50 is
superlative driver and I'm a big believer in using a coaxial above 700hz. I think our ears
are very sensitive to driver spacing up there. But I think that asking that little 5.5" to play cleanly
below 500hz is asking too much.
I think there's something about cone area that as you get down below 500hz there's
an exponential requirement for cone area to give resolution. Ex the 15" has 2 times the cone area
of the 10". Asking the Midbass to play below 150hz is shaking the cone too much to get
detail in the mid zone around 3-500hz.
I'm also a big believer so far in open baffle but only below 700hz where the ear is less sensitive to
localization. The nice thing about have the woofer playing below 140hz is that it allows
you to make a separate unit you can pull away from the main speaker to time align and also
prevent vibration from shaking the mids.
So my crazy idea is to create a plug and play bass/mid tower that you could rest a KefLS50
on top of and connect its crossover to the drivers inside. And then disconnect later if you move into a smaller space again.
The one thing I will say though I noticed is that this configuration is powerhungry so this
wouldnt be great for tubes!
So here's some pics:
I've butchered a pair of GedLee Nathans in my experiments with waveguides. Sorry Earl!
First of all I have no expert knowledge in physics or audio design so Im just using my intuition here..
But I am a believer (from Earl Geddes) in the concept of constant directivity especially in my small
condo. But NOW I'm not sure having a waveguide is the best way to get that directivity.
Something about having several drivers that get upto say between 5-8 DI before dropping
off sounds good to my ears. And I think our ears are much more sensitive than most people think
even down around -20DB. So if you dont reach 10 DI until then I think its ok.
The other tweak that made a big difference was using an 18db crossover on the way up and then 24db on the way down so that each driver is climbing more towards a higher DI without as much shrill beaming.
But I think I got a decent spectrogram without using much delay. I will say that the KefLS50 is
superlative driver and I'm a big believer in using a coaxial above 700hz. I think our ears
are very sensitive to driver spacing up there. But I think that asking that little 5.5" to play cleanly
below 500hz is asking too much.
I think there's something about cone area that as you get down below 500hz there's
an exponential requirement for cone area to give resolution. Ex the 15" has 2 times the cone area
of the 10". Asking the Midbass to play below 150hz is shaking the cone too much to get
detail in the mid zone around 3-500hz.
I'm also a big believer so far in open baffle but only below 700hz where the ear is less sensitive to
localization. The nice thing about have the woofer playing below 140hz is that it allows
you to make a separate unit you can pull away from the main speaker to time align and also
prevent vibration from shaking the mids.
So my crazy idea is to create a plug and play bass/mid tower that you could rest a KefLS50
on top of and connect its crossover to the drivers inside. And then disconnect later if you move into a smaller space again.
The one thing I will say though I noticed is that this configuration is powerhungry so this
wouldnt be great for tubes!
So here's some pics:
Attachments
It's nice to separate midbass for more dynamic snare drums and an own midrange for voice frequencies.
Speakers: Principles
Speakers: Principles
Well you cant do do active 4 way for left and right channels with one DEQX. So I was just
experimenting with one channel in mono to see how it sounded and I was definitely surprised.
I think I can attribute that real hifi sound to the midbass now. It fills in the gap between low woofer
and mids and adds a certain 'rightness'.
I suppose you could just make a passive xover for two of the speakers and have that as one DEQX channel. It would technically still be a 4 way . 🙂