I wonder if baffle step is not necessary with my design since the baffle is 19" x 19" rather than on a slim baffle? I never heard the TC9s any other way.
Almost certainly an error, but it's hard to tell for sure if they have the wrong wire gauge listed, or the DCR swapped. My guess would be that they just swapped the DCR by accident, and I built my crossovers based on this assumption.
No need to wonder! Just sim it:
Tolvan Data
You'll need your baffle size, loudspeaker position and size, and listening position. you'll get the response caused by your baffle, and you can even design a BSC filter to correct. You could also alter your baffle size and listening position to eliminate the need for BSC, but you'll find that gets a tad impractical.
The short answer is: yes, you should still consider BSC unless you're crossing over to a subwoofer at >500Hz.
DSP based EQ is probably overkill just for BSC. You could use a DCX2496, but it needs some significant modification to sounds half decent. I would suggest a simple active filter (using op-amps or tubes) between your preamp and power amp. A single dual op-amp and a few passives, and you'd have what you need for one channel. The other benefit to this is that you don't throw away power in a passive BSC filter. You can use the same program linked to above to design an active or passive filter. Just change the load impedance, (eg, 8 ohm for passive, 10k ohm for active) and nest it between two op-amps with unity gain.
Hope this helps! If you have the same baffle width as the german article suggests, or the same enclosure as the "Timbits" I linked to, then the filter in the German article works very well, as shown by my measurements and subjectively.
Regards,
Owen
Will you be using your computer to provide the music? If so, just use EQ from the app you'll be using. No need for miniDSP or adding passive components.
I'm using my speakers at work with a Raspberry Pi to my amp and speakers. At home it's flatscreen out to amp and speakers.
My nerd side would love an opamp BSC solution. Keep-it-simple voice is saying passive BSC.
My nerd side would love an opamp BSC solution. Keep-it-simple voice is saying passive BSC.
Well then, at work you just use the RPi for BSC and EQ.
You'll be using the same speakers at home? Those are a little small for TV / movie watching. I'd build a TABAQ or something similar to get some low end. TABAQs hardly need a BSC depending on driver used and enclosure positioning.
You'll be using the same speakers at home? Those are a little small for TV / movie watching. I'd build a TABAQ or something similar to get some low end. TABAQs hardly need a BSC depending on driver used and enclosure positioning.
Now I need to research BSC and EQ'ing with the RPi. lol
The TV speakers don't need to be big. They're just for watching TV in bed with my wife and daughter at bedtime. The flatscreen's built in speakers distort and crackle when watching Zootopia, Disney, etc so the outboard speakers will serve more like a sound bar but they don't need to be THX ready. [emoji6]
TABAQs are far from being THX specs, yet they are pleasing and a nice compact design. Probably the same footprint as the little boxes you wanted to build, just taller, putting the driver closer to ear level if used in a bedroom. They are perfect for placing next to a flat screen TV.
BSC and EQ, that will be together, not a separate thing. I'm sure your music player provides some kind of EQ on the RPi. Check out Volumio for the RPi. https://volumio.org/
BSC and EQ, that will be together, not a separate thing. I'm sure your music player provides some kind of EQ on the RPi. Check out Volumio for the RPi. https://volumio.org/
I use Volumio to control my RPi. Guess I need to dig a little deeper into its capabilities. Where can I find more info on the TABAQs?
Thanks for the tip. If I finish those in a low-key black, my wife would actually allow those in the bedroom. [emoji106]
yup! that looks similar to the notch filter used in manzanits. probably a good idea if the smart design of manzanitas saw it as a requirement.
This should probably be listed
Need help building open baffle/bass reflex hybrid
I built these a few weeks ago and have to say I'm really impressed. I have them set up in my upstairs shop, about 650 square feet and had them running while I was doing something in the other one. So I walked in, lights off at night, and was not expecting what I heard, to fill the room the way they do, and just completely disappear. I hadn't picked up on it before, but it was so obvious in the dark.
Need help building open baffle/bass reflex hybrid
I built these a few weeks ago and have to say I'm really impressed. I have them set up in my upstairs shop, about 650 square feet and had them running while I was doing something in the other one. So I walked in, lights off at night, and was not expecting what I heard, to fill the room the way they do, and just completely disappear. I hadn't picked up on it before, but it was so obvious in the dark.
Am planning a 2.1 FAST boombox system with with two TC9FD18-08's and a single DC160-4 woofer. Am planning on an active crossover (12dB slope) around 600Hz. Going by the above post, hopefully I won't be requiring any BSC filter. Also, am hoping that the higher sensitivity of the 4 ohm woofer should also be beneficial in avoiding the need for a BSC filter. The box dimensions are 18" x 8" x 12" (W x H x D) which will house all three drivers. The TC9FD's will each have a 1.5L sealed enclosure. The DC160-4 will have a 13L vented enclosure.
Would like to know the experience of others who have tried something like this and avoided a BSC filter by crossing their full range drivers above 500Hz.
Thanks
Last edited:
Uh ? Hi ! What ? 500 Hz ? Crazy !
there's a little 🙄 misunderstanding on how things work
If you look at all the designs, nobody does that and there is a reason, which is music, and sound in general. You can't "discorporate" a sound and its attributes ( one of which is the frequency range extension ) by partially assign the reproduction of it by different drivers. It'll have a different character depending on the driver and its positioning in space. No wonder why subwoofers ( dayton DC 160 is not a sub, but ok...) are better filtered below 100 Hz. Also 200 Hz might be ok but that's the very upper limit .
The fact that you talk about active filtering brings also possible manipulation of the sound according to your tastes ( EQ, notch filters) so that BSC becomes irrilevant in the contest. I guess that you know that when you have an active sub you can use the volume control of it and set it right.
there's a little 🙄 misunderstanding on how things work
If you look at all the designs, nobody does that and there is a reason, which is music, and sound in general. You can't "discorporate" a sound and its attributes ( one of which is the frequency range extension ) by partially assign the reproduction of it by different drivers. It'll have a different character depending on the driver and its positioning in space. No wonder why subwoofers ( dayton DC 160 is not a sub, but ok...) are better filtered below 100 Hz. Also 200 Hz might be ok but that's the very upper limit .
The fact that you talk about active filtering brings also possible manipulation of the sound according to your tastes ( EQ, notch filters) so that BSC becomes irrilevant in the contest. I guess that you know that when you have an active sub you can use the volume control of it and set it right.
I have read quite a few reviews on the TC9FD as well as the write up of various designs featured here. There have been reviews of crossing it anywhere from 500Hz at the low end to a helper woofer to about 6000Hz at the high end to a tweeter and even letting it run all the way to its highest frequencies without a tweeter.
The DC-160 has good reviews and has been used all the way up to 2500Hz and crossed over to a tweeter. Some have used it up to 500Hz-600Hz and crossed it to a mid range driver. Its low end is known to reach 30Hz in the right vented enclosure. So, effectively it can be used as a mini sub with the additional benefit of adding weight to the vocals and instruments.
What I am trying to achieve is the best out of both the drivers. A 400Hz-600Hz crossover should theoretically get the best of both the drivers without pushing them to their limits.
Nope !
Since you talk about ONE woofer, what are you "sending" to it ?
A mono signal ( L+R mixed ) and filtered 12 dB/octave....that works well below 100 Hz ( note: it works well when the F3 points of crossover sums flat).
The point is: stereo
Your logic fails in this, because of the two tracks that run binary.
It would work in a mono speaker,yes, at this point you can ditch one Vifa.
Or, use it as a midrange, one for each speaker, with its own woofer.
It's called multi-way speaker design
Since you talk about ONE woofer, what are you "sending" to it ?
A mono signal ( L+R mixed ) and filtered 12 dB/octave....that works well below 100 Hz ( note: it works well when the F3 points of crossover sums flat).
The point is: stereo
Your logic fails in this, because of the two tracks that run binary.
It would work in a mono speaker,yes, at this point you can ditch one Vifa.
Or, use it as a midrange, one for each speaker, with its own woofer.
It's called multi-way speaker design
- Status
- Not open for further replies.