I only slightly get the reference, never owned a pair but, can you back up your claims where I implied anything that you suggested above...matter of fact don't waster our time and reply to that lol...Thats not even close to the impression that I have. You are correct though... if you had a nice dsp that had say 16 bands of parametric per 6channel plus another set of high and low pass for crossovers....you could essentially build X number of three ways, and only have to purchase driver and enclosure (materials) for each new setup for the next 10 years.....or you could build X amount of vintage crossovers....but with your active set up you can tweak settings X amount of times, no rebuild...on the fly even....You could also run room correction with the eq.....or you could stick with a passive xover and buy room correction software? but why?
Last edited:
I'm not here to put down Rew (room eq wizard) software, or anybody for using it. If you know what you want and where to go to get it, Rew is pretty potent medicine. All I'm saying is like the previous post: you can't just sit back at the computer and aim it for straight graphs. There are a lot of competitive factors in play with sound. Being able to hear sonic cues and recognizing what causes those cues are two different things. It takes practice and experience. Having software to quickly figure out the math or confirm a suspicion is different from pushing the easy button. The difference lies in what's between your ears. Tinkering and listening is how to do it.
Last edited:
I'd have to say no, camplo. Manipulating curves is something we've been doing since we had desktop computers (sorry, before that). REW does nothing more helpful according to what you've added (I thought you were going to say it manipulates based on excess group delay, and I was still going to disagree..). Active has nothing to do with it, equalisers have been around since forever.
I guess I can only speak for myself then....I don't find it very complicated to use an eq to voice a driver or for room correction. Theres no special magic. Its pretty straight forward... When you say Active has nothing to do with "it"....what exactly is "it" again?
Reading group delay, thats not complicated either...you just look at it...and interpret it...and do what you will lol.
Exactly...As long as you know what to read and how to read it, and what to do about it, you'll be fine....active eq doesn't create that....but it allows one to build a modular system. No less than what I said.... Eq is the most important feature of DSP...and yeah its been around forever...what is your point? That EQ isn't going to get you great sound?...thats a load of BS... whether passive or active you need eq to achieve great sound 9 times out of 10. 16 bands of parametric is per channel is nice to have....You can building a passive crossover to achieve the same but why lol.
So eq, the tool responsible for crafting the most important subjective aspect of sound quality... tell me again why it isn't "it"?
If the answer isn't all the obvious topics of design (polar, time distortions, enclosures, drivers etc etc) I don't see what you guys are trying to say.
If you are interested in tuning by ear...I'll see myself to the door...Ears lie, measurements don't...I may use my ears for the final 10% of tuning my house curve....the rest I can use measurements to get it 90% theres...I like a linear response with 1db per oct bass tilt or something silly like that...something like a B&K house curve....
Reading group delay, thats not complicated either...you just look at it...and interpret it...and do what you will lol.
Exactly...As long as you know what to read and how to read it, and what to do about it, you'll be fine....active eq doesn't create that....but it allows one to build a modular system. No less than what I said.... Eq is the most important feature of DSP...and yeah its been around forever...what is your point? That EQ isn't going to get you great sound?...thats a load of BS... whether passive or active you need eq to achieve great sound 9 times out of 10. 16 bands of parametric is per channel is nice to have....You can building a passive crossover to achieve the same but why lol.
So eq, the tool responsible for crafting the most important subjective aspect of sound quality... tell me again why it isn't "it"?
If the answer isn't all the obvious topics of design (polar, time distortions, enclosures, drivers etc etc) I don't see what you guys are trying to say.
If you are interested in tuning by ear...I'll see myself to the door...Ears lie, measurements don't...I may use my ears for the final 10% of tuning my house curve....the rest I can use measurements to get it 90% theres...I like a linear response with 1db per oct bass tilt or something silly like that...something like a B&K house curve....
Last edited:
I didn't say group delay, I said excess group delay. Anyone conversant on this sub-topic would see that as an important distinction. And please.. adjusting an equaliser is a simple task as you say, but knowing what to do with it is a different matter.
This is going nowhere, so I'm going to ask you to start a new thread on the topic. Link to it here if you wish. You've made your point in this thread sufficiently.
Has the thread Author made any new discoveries? EQ is just one part of the recipe. Sometimes loudspeaker design can be compared to a recipe...I once thought that for a 3 way, a 4" mid woofer is optimal. In some ways it true...Covering ~130hz-2.5khz with a 4" leaves many options for what to put above and below, the polar is very wide, XO kept away from center of midrange, wide area of spectrum without crossover, excursion stays low...you could use a 8" or a 18" beneath it...many options above it.
Your black Friday triangle speakers look like a winner for a HiFi setup. Something that won't be fatiguing to listen to. The woofers look a lot like the peerless you picked up. Big paper mids are considered by the vintage crowd as the roots you grow upon. They, as well as the silk dome tweeters, have a sonic signature that is difficult to beat at reasonable listening level.
I have not. I actually completely LOVE the way they sound right now. How does the updated crossover change the sound ???
Thanks Jeff. I can't wait for them to get here ! I'm really hoping they will get to replace my B&W DM630s !
Last edited:
Scott Sehlin came up with four different options to improve the stock crossover, ranging from simple to complex (the perfectionist version). The best summary of the different options is on Scott's website: Sehlin Sound Solutions - HiVi DIY 3.1 Modifications