Pro systems use a lot of EQ.
The mention of the Fostex 103 points out that the concept of using a full-range as a mid-tweeter is still valid, it just needs to reach down to ~200 Hz, without giving up performance that allows it to replace a dedicated tweeter. Said FR can also be used as an extended range mid, which puts us back to a 4-way, hopefully with XO at or above 5k on the top (and set by baffle width on the bottom)
dave
The mention of the Fostex 103 points out that the concept of using a full-range as a mid-tweeter is still valid, it just needs to reach down to ~200 Hz, without giving up performance that allows it to replace a dedicated tweeter. Said FR can also be used as an extended range mid, which puts us back to a 4-way, hopefully with XO at or above 5k on the top (and set by baffle width on the bottom)
dave
Moondog55 said:
I’m going to order the Peerless 832873 drivers you’ve recommended. I think they are fine choices. What enclosure volume would you recommend for the Peerless at the frequency range you’ve suggested?
As far as the tweeter’s go, it was 18 years ago when I purchased them, and I cant remember what brand they are. I do know they have an actual multi-meter resistance of around 5 Ohms. The only markings on the tweeter’s are via a sticker on the edge of the magnet, which read “Nom 6 Ohms”. It is a cartridge type tweeter if that means anything at all?
At what distance from the AV8 should the Peerless be mounted in order to avoid phase and combing issues I’ve read about?
901Fixer said:
I don’t know how large and wide Pro Audio style speakers avoid the issues with baffle step. From what I’m learning, they don’t?
I’ll listen to most anything other than Top 40 music on the radio. If I’m going to take the time to actually “listen” to music, then I like my collection of 70’s and early 80’s Rock and Roll, Delta Blues and some of the 90’s Grunge tunes as well.
Yes the 2.5 CF is what the tech at Pyle told me to go with over the phone. He said I could use 2.5 CF with a 4” X8” port or 2.5 CF sealed. So while waiting for the 15” drivers to arrive I cut down the cabinets and partitioned off 2.5 CF and installed a 4” X 8” piece of P.V.C. pipe in the bottom of the cabinets. He advised they might sound “boomy” if ported, but to try and see. Well I thought they did sound “boomy”, so I caped the pipe’s.
I went with Ted and others suggestion and ordered the Peerless 832873 drivers.
Can you tell me if it is possible to mount them in the upper portion of my cabinets and avoid the baffle step issues you’ve described? If so, at what distance from the 8” driver should they be placed?
I listen to some of that music quite regularly as well. A Pro Audio style of set up is good for Rock and Grunge and since your existing set-up is leaning that way then you are on a good inexpensive path.
What kinda wattage is your reciever putting out? What kinda crossover items do you have for the 8" already?
What kinda wattage is your reciever putting out? What kinda crossover items do you have for the 8" already?
901Fixer said:
The 1979 Pioneer SA 9500II specs claim 2 X 80 Watts @ 8 Ohms.
Here is a link to more info on this Integrated Amp: http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=107607
As for crossover items for the AV8 I have some misc inductors and caps, but none for the crossover freqs suggested to me.
I went with Ted and others suggestion and ordered the Peerless 832873 drivers.
Can you tell me if it is possible to mount them in the upper portion of my cabinets and avoid the baffle step issues you’ve described? If so, at what distance from the 8” driver should they be placed?
The general advice is to allow 2 octaves below the X frequency, so if crossing at 3K you need a tweeter with an Fs of around 750Hz to use a first order XO, but if you go with a second order XO then the choices are wider but an Fs of at least 1K - 1.3 K is needed.
As this is a budget project then I'd use any soft dome tweeter that fits inside the budget.
Bill I think you need to download a few free box programs and play with some volumes BUT, anything between 4 and 10 liters should work as a midrange compartment.
I'll try and give you some idea of the comb filter thing; just get the midrange and tweeter as close together as possible, Neo tweeters work well as they usually have small face plate dimensions, there was / is ? a small Neo tweeter from Vifa DN 26 that has flat sides that would match with the truncated frame of the Peerless mid, it isn't cheap though it has a good performance.
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=45_229_324&products_id=1078
Madisound still have some in stock
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/PDF/d26nc-55-06e.pdf
As you cab see nice and smooth and all the way to 35K and resonant at 1350, so an octave and a half below crossover.
Cheaper Peerless tweeter no where near as sweet
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/PDF/BC25SC55-04.pdf
baffle step is taken care of by the woofers
As this is a budget project then I'd use any soft dome tweeter that fits inside the budget.
Bill I think you need to download a few free box programs and play with some volumes BUT, anything between 4 and 10 liters should work as a midrange compartment.
I'll try and give you some idea of the comb filter thing; just get the midrange and tweeter as close together as possible, Neo tweeters work well as they usually have small face plate dimensions, there was / is ? a small Neo tweeter from Vifa DN 26 that has flat sides that would match with the truncated frame of the Peerless mid, it isn't cheap though it has a good performance.
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=45_229_324&products_id=1078
Madisound still have some in stock
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/PDF/d26nc-55-06e.pdf
As you cab see nice and smooth and all the way to 35K and resonant at 1350, so an octave and a half below crossover.
Cheaper Peerless tweeter no where near as sweet
http://www.madisound.com/catalog/PDF/BC25SC55-04.pdf
baffle step is taken care of by the woofers
OR you could go active and not have to worry quite as much about the crossover. With LR 24 db per octave active crossovers and an adjustable output buffer (such as Rod Elliott's), you don't have to concern yourself with speaker impedance or sensitivity plus you get a far better sound.
I've done it and, apart from the few electronic glitches, it works beautifully, isn't as hard as a passive crossover and has less likelihood of being unsuitable.
Frank
I've done it and, apart from the few electronic glitches, it works beautifully, isn't as hard as a passive crossover and has less likelihood of being unsuitable.
Frank
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.