I've peeked-in on this project over the years, but I see the same basic mistake here as is made by many amateur speaker builders elsewhere. I don't have the time to peruse this entire thing, just in case this has been covered already. How many times has anyone here heard or read that "standard off the shelf crossovers can't work right" meme? The exact same mistake is being made here...a crossover compromised of standard, off the shelf filter alignments probably won't work well, it doesn't matter passive or active. The inherent response of the driver in the box must be accounted for or the desired result will not be achieved. All speaker drivers have a natural 2nd order high pass response, and a 4th order in box, and the cone break-up modes and natural roll-off at the top end...if those aren't taken into consideration, they will mess with the outcome. Stanley Linkwitz wrote much on the subject.
Mike
Mike
let me say that this is not totally true because of one rare exception: in the case of at least 4-way designs with drivers that are each pretty flat on on at least 3 octaves you may do something relevant just using standard filters. Since drivers mounted on a baffle are rarely flat over more than 3 octaves (often less) at least 4-ways are needed.
Pietro
Last edited:
And 4-ways present their own can of worms to deal with, and this is a 3-way crossover. Speaker building ain't trivial to get right no matter what you are trying to do. I just wanted to point out the mistake that I constantly see being made by others that caused me a lot of head aches in the past...the "perfect" crossover does not necessarily the perfect speaker make.
Mike
Info in the first post:
"The standard version of the crossover is very flexible and is likely to give you at least an
approximation of what you want, but this involves some practical trade-offs, and so can't be
everything to everyone.
Previously I have mentioned the options of altering the alignments of the filters in a manner
not supported by the standard version. To possibly make that task easier, here are a couple
of example MicroCap simulation circuits for the Linkwitz Riley filters showing custom values
and the resulting response and phase characteristics. As of this writing you can download the
Microcap 12 simulator and LTSpice for free.
If you are not prepared to spend time learning some LTSpice or MicroCap, DIY patron saint
Mike Rothacher has put together a filter calculator for these circuits, available for download.
Works like glue, and no rocket science involved."
Nothing there contradicts what I said. My point was that so many will not understand that using standard crossover alignments won't work correctly on their own in many if not most cases, and I wanted to point that out. I often use the Linkwitz bi-quad for realigning the response of mids and even tweeters to give them a 2nd order Butterworth instead of their natural response so it forms one half of a L-R 4th order for example, and everyone knows it can be used to extend the response of woofers to reach lower also.
Just my way of giving everyone a heads-up in case they weren't aware.
Mike
Just my way of giving everyone a heads-up in case they weren't aware.
Mike
do you mean Siegfried Linkwitz?
actually you can do most anything with actives than you can with passives and you don’t need to be concerned with voice coil impedance.
I'm correcting myself because it sounds idiot.
To improve my Liionidas open baffle, I'd like to change from passive to active crossover.
Which of Nelson's solution should I use if I have a single amp?
Would it be smarter to go active AND bi-amp (class D for bass helper) ?
Thanks
Does the 6-24 have enough 'drive' to split one of the outputs into 2 amps ( 2 X 2 channels) . I have 4 off 12" woofers and want to try them 2 per channel. They are 4 ohms so can't really parallel them unless I use my class d amp. So wondering if I could add a 'Y' splitter from the LF section of the XO to feed 2 X stereo amps?
The 6-24 has no "drive", it is unity gain. If your preamp will drive the amps, the 6-24 will not interfere.
I've lost somewhere when I am walking around for SB Satori 2way.
First-time,I tried 24db slope then It was good sound.then I tried 12db slope,ok I prefer this.
Then I tried 6db slope,oh I prefer this.More natural and relaxing.But then I feel a little bit noise from mid woofer. 4.7k hz cross is too high for mid woofer but I worry tweeter.
Then I swap tweeter to small full range 800hz xover. No twinkle on high frequency but much more natural and smooth.
May be I want larger woofer and make WAW.
First-time,I tried 24db slope then It was good sound.then I tried 12db slope,ok I prefer this.
Then I tried 6db slope,oh I prefer this.More natural and relaxing.But then I feel a little bit noise from mid woofer. 4.7k hz cross is too high for mid woofer but I worry tweeter.
Then I swap tweeter to small full range 800hz xover. No twinkle on high frequency but much more natural and smooth.
May be I want larger woofer and make WAW.
