so im interested in each speaker having a dedicated sub on it. the mid/uppers will be handled by jordan JX53's...so im thinking JX125s or JX150s, but will they be big/deep enough for a dedicated sub?
also, would a dipole sub with those drivers still on the same speaker as the JX53 be a good idea?
if i wanted to do dipole on each speaker and wanted it a little cheaper, would other drivers work fine or would it be noticably better to stick with the same manufacturer
and finally, the crossover...i know NOTHING about crossovers, any diy websites would be appreciated. since it would be a stereo receiver, a crossover to the subs would have to be in the speaker...and could a crossover like this also change the watts that are given to each component? because a dipole sub would definitely need more watts than a JX53
and also...is this a stupid idea? its it alot worse than having the dedicated sub channel from the receiver? i would assume not, since there must be a crossover in there too
also, would a dipole sub with those drivers still on the same speaker as the JX53 be a good idea?
if i wanted to do dipole on each speaker and wanted it a little cheaper, would other drivers work fine or would it be noticably better to stick with the same manufacturer
and finally, the crossover...i know NOTHING about crossovers, any diy websites would be appreciated. since it would be a stereo receiver, a crossover to the subs would have to be in the speaker...and could a crossover like this also change the watts that are given to each component? because a dipole sub would definitely need more watts than a JX53
and also...is this a stupid idea? its it alot worse than having the dedicated sub channel from the receiver? i would assume not, since there must be a crossover in there too
Well, that is a bunch of questions _grin_
But you've gotta start somewhere _big grin_
let me catch only part of this _grin_
nope, certainly not.
I am not familiar with those drivers so let me just speak in general terms about bi-amping and point you to a couple of links.
First, bi-amping is done just about in just about as many ways as you can skin a cat.
Second, bi-amping the bass is something that is often done by enthusiasts of "full-range drivers". I think that a better term would be " wide band augmented drivers"
Check out these links for Bi-amping basics
http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm
http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/general/messages/57210.html
The most common way of bi-amping is an "active line-level crossover" this enables gain matching without power loss that may well occur with a "passive line level"
Generally, two of the more common active crossovers/approaches are marchand at http://www.marchandelec.com
Do a search for Behringer DCX 2496 for a digital unit that is used by a number of folks here at DIYAUDIO
I suggest you learn as much as you can about active line level crossovers because that will be at the heart of what you will be doing.
Regards
Ken L
But you've gotta start somewhere _big grin_
let me catch only part of this _grin_
Shpoop said:
nope, certainly not.
I am not familiar with those drivers so let me just speak in general terms about bi-amping and point you to a couple of links.
First, bi-amping is done just about in just about as many ways as you can skin a cat.
Second, bi-amping the bass is something that is often done by enthusiasts of "full-range drivers". I think that a better term would be " wide band augmented drivers"
Check out these links for Bi-amping basics
http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm
http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/general/messages/57210.html
The most common way of bi-amping is an "active line-level crossover" this enables gain matching without power loss that may well occur with a "passive line level"
Generally, two of the more common active crossovers/approaches are marchand at http://www.marchandelec.com
Do a search for Behringer DCX 2496 for a digital unit that is used by a number of folks here at DIYAUDIO
I suggest you learn as much as you can about active line level crossovers because that will be at the heart of what you will be doing.
Regards
Ken L
If you don´t have experience with crossovers a Behringer indeed might be a sensible and cheaper solution.
Have a look here for example for a setup with Behringer, dipole subs and a small fullranger (fostex ff85k).
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=408080&highlight=#post408080
Have a look here for example for a setup with Behringer, dipole subs and a small fullranger (fostex ff85k).
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=408080&highlight=#post408080
thanks alot, big help...keep the replies comin!
and yea, that seems alot like what i would want to do...but i cant tell, did he have to use seperate amps for the fostex and the dipole subs within each unit?
and yea, that seems alot like what i would want to do...but i cant tell, did he have to use seperate amps for the fostex and the dipole subs within each unit?
hmm both of those crossovers say left/right-they are two way...but i had planned on maybe hiding the crossover in the speaker, so are there any "one ways" i guess ud call them, with the same features?
also, those are hella expensive, any cheaper ones?
also, those are hella expensive, any cheaper ones?
Yes, one stereo amp for both Fostex and the other for the dipole subs.
BTW: If your Xover is active there is not much sense in putting them in the speaker enclosure. Or are you going to put the power amps there too?
Rudolf
that was originally my plan, but im starting to see that it wont be very feasible...i would need twice as many amps, twice as many xovers...and the speaker would be twice as big
oh and anyone have a pics of bi-amped systems like this?
also, any more ideas on cheaper but good sounding xovers...i dont need many features
oh and anyone have a pics of bi-amped systems like this?
also, any more ideas on cheaper but good sounding xovers...i dont need many features
- Status
- Not open for further replies.