Jay ,
I might need to reduce the tweeter level later on, The reason why I chose to increase it a bit , is that I was thinking in advance.
Thinking that the speaker have more BSC compared to than other 2 way speakers, The tweeter level should be raised a bit to equalize the tonal balance. But only when I finish the speaker, I would know for sure.
But anyway , The XO will be located outside the box, So there should be no difficulty in tweaking them, I think I'm gonna break them in for a while before evaluating the sound for tweaking.
I might need to reduce the tweeter level later on, The reason why I chose to increase it a bit , is that I was thinking in advance.
Thinking that the speaker have more BSC compared to than other 2 way speakers, The tweeter level should be raised a bit to equalize the tonal balance. But only when I finish the speaker, I would know for sure.
But anyway , The XO will be located outside the box, So there should be no difficulty in tweaking them, I think I'm gonna break them in for a while before evaluating the sound for tweaking.
It's the Holy day,
Nothing else to do in the house , So I went to do my DIY audio hobby. As of now , The box is ready for the top coats, The problem is, I ran out of spray paints.
I formerly plan to finish the box with painted paterns or art work, But I dont have time for that anymore, Besides I Cant wait to do my next project, A fullrange desk top PC speaker, to raplace the satelite speakers on my existing one, I'll probably use the fostex fx120.
Now that I can't continue finishing the box, I instead went on to make the speaker covers.
The covers were done in a matter of few hours , I never thought it would be that easy and fast, cause this is my first speaker covers, ever. I just followed the instruction from the web on how to make speaker covers.( sorry , I lost the link). I used contact adhesive for the grill cloth, since I also forgot to buy spray adhesive. The result is ok, but it would have been easer if I had the spray adhesive.
Below is the picture of the finished speaker covers.
Nothing else to do in the house , So I went to do my DIY audio hobby. As of now , The box is ready for the top coats, The problem is, I ran out of spray paints.
I formerly plan to finish the box with painted paterns or art work, But I dont have time for that anymore, Besides I Cant wait to do my next project, A fullrange desk top PC speaker, to raplace the satelite speakers on my existing one, I'll probably use the fostex fx120.
Now that I can't continue finishing the box, I instead went on to make the speaker covers.
The covers were done in a matter of few hours , I never thought it would be that easy and fast, cause this is my first speaker covers, ever. I just followed the instruction from the web on how to make speaker covers.( sorry , I lost the link). I used contact adhesive for the grill cloth, since I also forgot to buy spray adhesive. The result is ok, but it would have been easer if I had the spray adhesive.
Below is the picture of the finished speaker covers.
Attachments
Here is another pic.
Note , In order to improve the situation when the covers are in use, I cut the inner part of the cover with 45 degrees angle , Using a router with a V-grooving bit. And then covered the router tracks with pieces of felt.
This should reduce the negative effect of using speaker covers.
Note , In order to improve the situation when the covers are in use, I cut the inner part of the cover with 45 degrees angle , Using a router with a V-grooving bit. And then covered the router tracks with pieces of felt.
This should reduce the negative effect of using speaker covers.
Attachments
Hello to all,
I just would like you to know that I already finished this project few days ago, Only now I have the time to post , because I was busy listening and tweaking the sound.
For the tweeter, It turned out that the resistor value that Jay gave me is the best one, I tried resistors with lower and higher values , Even very small deviation from 2 ohms , would yield a very different sound, I first tried 1.5 ohms and the sound is too bright, and then 2.1 ohms, The sound is a little dull, and then 1.97 ohms, the sound is a little too bright, And finally 2 ohms, The sound is just right.
Below are the pics. Note: my wife chose the color (dove gray metalic satin finish). These speakers are intended to be used for our living room, Currently they are in my music room for evaluation.
I just would like you to know that I already finished this project few days ago, Only now I have the time to post , because I was busy listening and tweaking the sound.
For the tweeter, It turned out that the resistor value that Jay gave me is the best one, I tried resistors with lower and higher values , Even very small deviation from 2 ohms , would yield a very different sound, I first tried 1.5 ohms and the sound is too bright, and then 2.1 ohms, The sound is a little dull, and then 1.97 ohms, the sound is a little too bright, And finally 2 ohms, The sound is just right.
Below are the pics. Note: my wife chose the color (dove gray metalic satin finish). These speakers are intended to be used for our living room, Currently they are in my music room for evaluation.
Attachments
Hello Jay, Thank You.
First of all, The high and mid balance are the same as the B&W, Tonally, They sound the same from 500hz and above.
The difference are:
The B&W, Because of it's smaller baffle have more pinpoint imaging. The 2.5 way, though not the same class as the B&W in imaging is not far behind, The imaging is still very precise and stable though not as pinpoint.
The bass is much better in the 2.5 way, as expected, It goes deeper to just below 40hz, that I dont miss the subwoofer when listening to it, I tuned the box with pieces of polyfoams to make the bass sound to my taste, fast ,deep, musical and not boomy.
The 2.5 way could go much louder with and with out a sub, this too is expected.
The real differences between the 2 that I have no control of, are the sound of the materials used in they're drivers. Though they me be the same in mid to treble balance , The inherent characterestic differences between metal vs soft dome and paper/nomex vs woven kevlar persist.
The N805, Due to it's use of rigid class cones and domes have more inner details, air and have the "see through" transparency. Though the 2.5 way have very low coloration , distortion and have very detailed sound, they're not in the same class as the N805.
First of all, The high and mid balance are the same as the B&W, Tonally, They sound the same from 500hz and above.
The difference are:
The B&W, Because of it's smaller baffle have more pinpoint imaging. The 2.5 way, though not the same class as the B&W in imaging is not far behind, The imaging is still very precise and stable though not as pinpoint.
The bass is much better in the 2.5 way, as expected, It goes deeper to just below 40hz, that I dont miss the subwoofer when listening to it, I tuned the box with pieces of polyfoams to make the bass sound to my taste, fast ,deep, musical and not boomy.
The 2.5 way could go much louder with and with out a sub, this too is expected.
The real differences between the 2 that I have no control of, are the sound of the materials used in they're drivers. Though they me be the same in mid to treble balance , The inherent characterestic differences between metal vs soft dome and paper/nomex vs woven kevlar persist.
The N805, Due to it's use of rigid class cones and domes have more inner details, air and have the "see through" transparency. Though the 2.5 way have very low coloration , distortion and have very detailed sound, they're not in the same class as the N805.
Just an update,
After extended listening period , I still find the treble sounding restrained, even when I raise the level to the point the sound became to bright.
Yesterday I decided to remove the notch filter for the tweeter along with the 12 ohm resistor parallel the notch filter, The sound became more open and airy , But yet non fatiguing.
I think this design does not benefit from the use of a notch filter for the tweeter as Jay suggested. It sound better without it.
After extended listening period , I still find the treble sounding restrained, even when I raise the level to the point the sound became to bright.
Yesterday I decided to remove the notch filter for the tweeter along with the 12 ohm resistor parallel the notch filter, The sound became more open and airy , But yet non fatiguing.
I think this design does not benefit from the use of a notch filter for the tweeter as Jay suggested. It sound better without it.
Tweaking sound to one's taste is a great benefit of DIY'ing.
If you like it without the notch filter, go for it. I strongly suspect that you are used to treble with lots of "sparkle" or "air." People I know who worked with this tweeter all used a notch filter to tame its top end.
BTW, did you remove the 12 ohm shunt resistor, too? Or just the notch filter?
If you like it without the notch filter, go for it. I strongly suspect that you are used to treble with lots of "sparkle" or "air." People I know who worked with this tweeter all used a notch filter to tame its top end.
BTW, did you remove the 12 ohm shunt resistor, too? Or just the notch filter?
Yes indeed , I like speakers with airy and crisp high, And yes , I did removed the shunt resistor , The resulting graph still looked ok on speaker workshop.
Jay, You got mail.
Jay, You got mail.
Jay,
Thank you for the redesiged XO, Though the tweak is inexpensive and easy to do, I think I'm not going to do it, because I've been evaluating the sound for few days now and I think I'm satisfied, After the removal of the shunt resistor and the notch filter, All that is really needed to do, to make the sound to my liking, is to fine tune the value of the series resistor.
The cymbals are now shimmering and extended, without sounding bright nor unnatural. There are also no exessive sibilance on vocals. Overall, The sound is neither too bright nor too dull, Indicating that I'm at, or near the Ideal mid/treble balance( at least, to my ears). And most of all, there are no XO point integration problem on the sound.
Again, Many thanks to you and to all who helped me here. Coud'nt have done it without all your help.
Thank you for the redesiged XO, Though the tweak is inexpensive and easy to do, I think I'm not going to do it, because I've been evaluating the sound for few days now and I think I'm satisfied, After the removal of the shunt resistor and the notch filter, All that is really needed to do, to make the sound to my liking, is to fine tune the value of the series resistor.
The cymbals are now shimmering and extended, without sounding bright nor unnatural. There are also no exessive sibilance on vocals. Overall, The sound is neither too bright nor too dull, Indicating that I'm at, or near the Ideal mid/treble balance( at least, to my ears). And most of all, there are no XO point integration problem on the sound.
Again, Many thanks to you and to all who helped me here. Coud'nt have done it without all your help.
Hi.
I will steal this thread for asking do you know DIY-projects about speaker like ?System Audio Ranger. SA just for example, looking for nice and slim 2,5-way which has lot of cone area.
I know something about designing of speaker but it would be helpful if someone has done something alike.
I will steal this thread for asking do you know DIY-projects about speaker like ?System Audio Ranger. SA just for example, looking for nice and slim 2,5-way which has lot of cone area.
I know something about designing of speaker but it would be helpful if someone has done something alike.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Have you seen 2,5-way designs in internet?
I think it is quite clever desing. With 0,5-way you can compensate baffle step loss without dropping top SPL by resistors. Sounds fuller and maintain sensitivity.
I have thought over about narrow MTMM / MTMMM (1-2 in bottom as 0,5-way) design. With two midrange basses you can archieve sensitivity of ordinary tweeter (90 dB) and with one or two 0,5-way basses you can compensate baffle step loss.
Any thoughts?
I think it is quite clever desing. With 0,5-way you can compensate baffle step loss without dropping top SPL by resistors. Sounds fuller and maintain sensitivity.
I have thought over about narrow MTMM / MTMMM (1-2 in bottom as 0,5-way) design. With two midrange basses you can archieve sensitivity of ordinary tweeter (90 dB) and with one or two 0,5-way basses you can compensate baffle step loss.
Any thoughts?
Last edited:
Interesting discussion. My Basement Blasters are T-M-M-M using JBL 2445J's and 2226J's in a vertical column. The bottom two 2226J's are rolled off at 350 hz, primarily for baffle step correction and the top 2226J is run up to the xover at 700hz with a 4db peak boost between 350 and 700 hz to achieve a system efficiency of 101db/w/m.
With the bass ports at the bottom of the 5ft tall enclosure which is tuned to 25hz, an interesting effect occurs with music having significant LF content below 40 hz that the visible cone excursion of the bottom 2226J mostly in the bottom octave can be as much as double the top one even though they received identical signals below about 250 hz.
I suppose, since the cabinet has considerable damping material, the top woofer contributes less near the cabinet BR resonance than the bottom two, but this results in less doppler IM up to the 700hz xover to the HF driver. This seems to be a tradeoff I can live with, although I wasn't planning for this when designing the Basement Blasters.
With the bass ports at the bottom of the 5ft tall enclosure which is tuned to 25hz, an interesting effect occurs with music having significant LF content below 40 hz that the visible cone excursion of the bottom 2226J mostly in the bottom octave can be as much as double the top one even though they received identical signals below about 250 hz.
I suppose, since the cabinet has considerable damping material, the top woofer contributes less near the cabinet BR resonance than the bottom two, but this results in less doppler IM up to the 700hz xover to the HF driver. This seems to be a tradeoff I can live with, although I wasn't planning for this when designing the Basement Blasters.
Last edited:
A MTM+M would be interesting. I usually find 2.5 ways have way too much BSC and are boomy, so a two driver going to three at bass would give a reduced BSC lift
Taking care with the +M placement, can be done digitally to correct for floor bounce also. 😉
I took a 6.5" 2way design I came up with for my son and expanded upon it. This evolved into a MTM then high pass that somewhere between 100-150. Using same M drivers built a mltl which handles everything below. Original design was 87dB sen, but the tweeters which were spec'd at 89 were indeed 94. A welcome suprise! Disclaimer : had read a few places this tweet was under spec'd, viewed some csd's, etc prior to purchase, oh and prayed for the best 😉 This helped match the 87spec of the M's to 93dB when run in parallel to that of the tweeter if I were to consider MTM as an option. Big plus that it did and saved me from buying another AMT, they do get quite pricy to play with. This is run active minidsp. I have little music with content below 26.5, which is a good thing as the driver is unloaded just below this note. Suppose it's a three way with a twist? Bonus, have an extra minidsp/ amp channel per side free for all sorts of tweaking eg dedicated floor bounce compensation, flanking subs al a Geddes, splash tweeter up top, etc. A basic sealed two way built out to 5-6 active channels sounds like me 😀
You might consider converting this system into a (fully boundary coupled) 2.5 MMTMM by adding another 2226J on top. Roll off the bottom and top woofers at 350Hz and see what happens 😉