If you add a supertweeter, it should have a lowpassfilter on the FR, otherwise you have two speakers in the same passband with phase issues and so as result. So i surely would add an inductor on the FR to make that filter (if not more parts).
As would I, in this case at least (some units have a progressive enough mechanical rolloff not to need an electrical low-pass). That much more control means that much more potential sound quality, providing you do it right. The last five words there being the critical ones. 😉
I’m using alpair 10.3’s with T90a super tweeters and I like it. Just cutting the t90a’s low frequency with a resistor and using a volume control on it. The alpairs are in a Scottmoose designed box with a sock in the port
Adding a super tweeter to FR, I see three ways to do this
1/ Just treat FR strictly as a midbass and add
tweeter somewhere around 3.5/4khz
2/ cross higher up, make more use of FR but with possible C2C issues
3/ have FR crossoverless and live with beaming, the supertweet having little contribution and only above 10khz possibly in an Omni arrangement
1/ Just treat FR strictly as a midbass and add
tweeter somewhere around 3.5/4khz
2/ cross higher up, make more use of FR but with possible C2C issues
3/ have FR crossoverless and live with beaming, the supertweet having little contribution and only above 10khz possibly in an Omni arrangement
How most people i know do it is use the supertweeter at about 7 to 12kHz with a single cap as filter for the tweeter and an inductor on the FR (so a 1st order filter). But mostly on fullrange drivers that don't go up a lot (Lowter DX4 that cut of at 13Khz as example). C2C is not fully right, that is true, but if the tweeter mebrane and the FR membrane are aligned (the sound is still very coherent and no obvious phase issues are heared, even if the tweeter (like the fostex supertweeters that are used a lot for this) is laying on top of the cabinet.
Thanks for reply, I had an idea to place a mini amt on top front in an Omni arrangement and time aligning via distance from tweeter to lens and forward to listener
Has anyone ever experimented with a Karlson type aperture in front of one of those top mount horn supertweeters to try to improve dispersion?
It would be easy enough to make one out of a couple of small scraps of wood.
It would be easy enough to make one out of a couple of small scraps of wood.
Here is my experience with supertweeter vs. fullrange:
My fullranges are Alpair 7.3; Seas 6.5" & Seas 8". They are DSP controlled through a MiniDSP 2x4HD. I have several amplifiers so I can switch quickly, and I compared directly against my Spendor SP1/2R2, which have a supertweeter. And I find that:
All my FRs have more natural and better treble quality than the Spendor´s supertweeter.
FRs need a Fast/WAW to maintain high quality treble at louder listening levels
The passive filter in the Spendor create unfortunate phase rotation. In addition, we loose the "point source" concept at the worst possible high frequencies. In sum, this create unfortunate timing issues. It is quite easy to spot this through REW measurements.
My fullranges are Alpair 7.3; Seas 6.5" & Seas 8". They are DSP controlled through a MiniDSP 2x4HD. I have several amplifiers so I can switch quickly, and I compared directly against my Spendor SP1/2R2, which have a supertweeter. And I find that:
All my FRs have more natural and better treble quality than the Spendor´s supertweeter.
FRs need a Fast/WAW to maintain high quality treble at louder listening levels
The passive filter in the Spendor create unfortunate phase rotation. In addition, we loose the "point source" concept at the worst possible high frequencies. In sum, this create unfortunate timing issues. It is quite easy to spot this through REW measurements.
Hello, I tried this approach with a Jordan JX92S full range supplemented by a xt19 tweeter (not exactly a super tweeter, but the idea was to get more sparkle).
After a lot of experimentation and several months of listening, I ended up going for a classic 2 way crossover. The issue with the “parallel” approach was getting the phase aligned over a wide frequency overlap.
After a lot of experimentation and several months of listening, I ended up going for a classic 2 way crossover. The issue with the “parallel” approach was getting the phase aligned over a wide frequency overlap.
If one employs a 1st order Series XO between the FR and the super tweet at any frequency of choice most, if not all phase issues will be go and the system will be seamless, very coherent and very musical.
Worth trying, very easy to implement, but remember No Zobels or any other correction circuits. They'll destroy the magic.
Worth trying, very easy to implement, but remember No Zobels or any other correction circuits. They'll destroy the magic.
Change in frequency response off-axis. Even with a series crossover, the issue is not resolved because it can’t help with acoustic phase differences.
If the full-range has a well-controlled acoustic response in the overlap, it might be ok. The Jordan suffers resonant peaks, which no doubt cause rapid phase change. Other drivers may be better behaved. But I suspect it is a common problem.
If the full-range has a well-controlled acoustic response in the overlap, it might be ok. The Jordan suffers resonant peaks, which no doubt cause rapid phase change. Other drivers may be better behaved. But I suspect it is a common problem.
IIRC, you have experience with Fostex bullet tweeters, such as the T900A. If yes, please share your thoughts on Troy Crowe’s passive crossover.
And on his “lens” waveguide for improving the measured performance and perceived sound quality of the 900As.
Please describe the sound of the 900A or other such Fostex tweeters: Sound stage width/depth/height size, imaging, off-axis response, size of dispersion pattern vs. dome tweeters, smoothness, tonality. Free of brightness, hardness, “hashy” sounding, metallic or “pinging” sound, and/or other artifacts.
Obviously, I’m hoping that Troy’s crossover and lens can correct any such problems with these tweeters.
Also, any particular amplifiers which you might recommend you using with speakers using these tweeters?
Finally, if you are a movie fan like me then you are likely aware that the audio from lossy Dolby Digital on DVDs and even lossless DTS-MA on BDs or from streaming is not always the most pristine. So, while typically using these speakers for critical music listening, on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being best, how would you rate speakers using the T900A tweeters for reproducing typical movie quality sound?
I tried to include you in the multiquote but I couldn't get it to work with this old thread. But please see my last post here and share your thoughts on Troy's fixes for the T900A.
Also, please rate the T900A for movie sound use. Would another tweeter (s) sound much better for typical home theater sound?
TTBOMK I have no experience with the T900A and since I would have mounted it to a DIY horn to provide more LF loading, pattern control, presume his is a step-up in performance also.
As for HT, which has been my main audio goal since age 8, if not using prosound drivers in scaled down versions of cinema systems using available or DIY horns along with room treatment you're 'missing the boat' IME, i.e. it's not supposed to sound like a symphony hall presentation.
Regardless, most folks need a 'one size fits all' sound system, so HT normally is hifi + true subwoofer at best and maybe some surround speakers.
The other is listening level, which for most has to be the same, so will hardly ever/never give one any of a movie's 'excitement'/'drama'/etc., that it's designed to elicit.
In short, the 900's published/opinionated other's performance is wasted in a true HT app unless wanting it to do a well recorded video of a symphony or stage play.
As for HT, which has been my main audio goal since age 8, if not using prosound drivers in scaled down versions of cinema systems using available or DIY horns along with room treatment you're 'missing the boat' IME, i.e. it's not supposed to sound like a symphony hall presentation.
Regardless, most folks need a 'one size fits all' sound system, so HT normally is hifi + true subwoofer at best and maybe some surround speakers.
The other is listening level, which for most has to be the same, so will hardly ever/never give one any of a movie's 'excitement'/'drama'/etc., that it's designed to elicit.
In short, the 900's published/opinionated other's performance is wasted in a true HT app unless wanting it to do a well recorded video of a symphony or stage play.
So, you're saying that main speakers like these are a waste for DVD and BD movie sound playback, downmixed using JRiver to 3.1? https://josephcrowe.com/products/3d-cad-files-horn-no-1994-es450-biradial-for-jbl-2446-2-throat
If so, why? Because even the actual audio quality on a BD's lossless DTS-MA track is often as compressed as the audio on many CDs, and sometimes even with clipped peaks (overload distortion) and/or relatively high noise floor?
Again, for me and many others around the world it's about presentation, i.e. cone/dome HIFI Vs prosound H.E. woofers/large compression horns.
I was tactical comm for 22 years. Due to helicopters, C-130’s, generators, and other noisy **** I can’t hear anything up there. No air, no mythical ethereal sounds, just nuffin. Eh, OK. The way I look at it is my hearing is color blind. I’ve thought about putting super-tweeter looking things on top of my speakers as a joke. To see if frends and visitors can hear them. I can only hear back to my memories of sounds I heard as a child which aren’t much.