Do you mean to mount the drivers in a large wall? The OSMCs were designed as free-standing speakers, and great care was taken to get the dispersion of the OSCM right. I would consider it a problem if the baffle geometry was changed. Changing this to an in-wall speaker would make this a different speaker, and I guess you'd have to redesign the x-over from scratch.
The prototype filters for the miniDSP are somewhere in this thread, just use the search function. Note that the final tweaks were done with the passive filter only, so these are not included in the DSP parameters. However, please be aware that the sound quality of the miniDSP is quite limited. The OSMCs sounded a lot better when I changed from the miniDSP to passive filters (yes, the measured filter curves were identical).
I guess you could build an in-wall speaker using your DSP system using the same drivers as the OSMC, but you would have to work on the filters quite a bit.
Here are the minidsp configs again that I made for this project around 22/01/2019. The voltage xo transfers of the digital design did fit perfectly on the analog voltage transfer of the analog elliptical filter design at that time. See plot xo transfers (black curves are the analog transfers).
- It is possible to make a new miniDSP version which fits on the last version of the analog filter.
- also possible to make a new infinite baffle design for this speaker (flush mounting for studio), analog or digital.
But it takes some time to make these new designs.
My experience with miniDSP (4x10HD) audio performance is very well. I could make several desings successfully.
Attachments
Last edited:
I was not really referring to building them into the wall, more just mounting the completed speakers flush with the wall.
Sort of the same thing from a mid/high freq dispersion perspective, but maybe not totally.
Paul - Thanks for that. For this potential use, we are considering using the miniDSP-HD, one for each side for the crossovers and using the extra output for a sub to extend the low frequency. Maybe roll the sub in starting around 80hz.
Then when we tune the room, we'll fix any minor anomalies with additional DSP EQ.
It's not set in stone yet, just working on plans right now for a new control room for a studio. The studio owner, who already has main monitor speakers, just asked me about building new monitors. This project came to mind as it's a good form factor for his space.
gabo
Sort of the same thing from a mid/high freq dispersion perspective, but maybe not totally.
Paul - Thanks for that. For this potential use, we are considering using the miniDSP-HD, one for each side for the crossovers and using the extra output for a sub to extend the low frequency. Maybe roll the sub in starting around 80hz.
Then when we tune the room, we'll fix any minor anomalies with additional DSP EQ.
It's not set in stone yet, just working on plans right now for a new control room for a studio. The studio owner, who already has main monitor speakers, just asked me about building new monitors. This project came to mind as it's a good form factor for his space.
gabo
Gabo
I also expect it will be possible to only use some extra DSP EQ to compensate for the speaker placement against a wall. The speaker is designed to be flat in full space. Placing it on a floor and/or against a wall will always affect SPL on axis.
Success with your new monitor project!
Paul
Thanks very much Paul.
Yes, that's what I suspected and have done this many times in studios and other places and didn't even think about these things, and it all turned out great.
I just thought I would ask the "guru's" who spent a lot of time designing these things for their thoughts. Some times that can lead to unexpected answers that makes things better/easier for us.
Thanks again and hope you are safe during these crazy times. My wife and I are fine and self quarantined, so have plenty of "thought" time to devote to some of these things right now.
gabo
Yes, that's what I suspected and have done this many times in studios and other places and didn't even think about these things, and it all turned out great.
I just thought I would ask the "guru's" who spent a lot of time designing these things for their thoughts. Some times that can lead to unexpected answers that makes things better/easier for us.
Thanks again and hope you are safe during these crazy times. My wife and I are fine and self quarantined, so have plenty of "thought" time to devote to some of these things right now.
gabo
.
Because minidsp is a very lousy sounding device.
Try just to listen any loudspeaker with passive crossover with and without miniDSP. No interventions, no filters, miniDSP set to flat and letting the sound go through it on one speaker, while other plays without miniDSP in chain. The difference is drastic.
- This goes for minidsp 2x4 versions. NanoDigi is better but needs external DAC's which is now quite doable for normal amounts of money with Khadas Tone Board.
Try just to listen any loudspeaker with passive crossover with and without miniDSP. No interventions, no filters, miniDSP set to flat and letting the sound go through it on one speaker, while other plays without miniDSP in chain. The difference is drastic.
- This goes for minidsp 2x4 versions. NanoDigi is better but needs external DAC's which is now quite doable for normal amounts of money with Khadas Tone Board.
Last edited:
It is not the first time. Mbrenwa said it also but in other words. I just had more than one dsp to make side by side comparisons.
MiniDSP 2x4 that i tested this way made the sound of midrange so murky that i gave up on it. I used Visaton B200 wide range for this test with no passive crossover and B&C 6md38 midrange in a threeway. I had no problem with lows, but the mids with minidsp 2x4 were not clear and crisp as with passive crossover (or no crossover with FR).
I find it difficult to describe sound with words, but here I go: the miniDSP sounds flat, lifeless, dull and harsh. "S" sounds are like Nagini doing "szzzssshsz". Ok, that's exaggerated, but I guess you get where I am going. Listening fatigue sets in after a few minutes.
That said, the miniDSPs are handy as a development tool when you need to design a filter quickly. I also used one with good results as a filter for an active subwoofer.
Non HD. I have heard that those HD work a bit better but i can not comment before i listen to it.
Yes
Yes
Minidsp 2x4 has analog inputs so i'm guessing that AD conversion pooped the sound. Good AD convertors exist but cost easily 1000€ or more. What can you expect from a device such as 2x4 ? Not to mention questionable implementation of DA chips in it.
I wrote about the test conditions and i will not repeat myself. Go to post 988.
On the other hand, as Mbrennwa said, minidsp 2x4 is great tool when modeling and designing the crossover.
I wrote about the test conditions and i will not repeat myself. Go to post 988.
On the other hand, as Mbrennwa said, minidsp 2x4 is great tool when modeling and designing the crossover.
Last edited:
I have done blind listening tests using the MiniDSP, stock and modded DCX2496, other processors from BSS, Rane and Ashley, all carefully tailored with the same measured response curve, phase response, using the same crossover slopes and SPL feeding a B&C 8PS21 and Seas 27TDFC in a SEOS 8 waveguide which I'm very familiar with and none of the other listeners were able to hear a difference apart a little noise from some of the processors when no music was being played.
So, I'm very much interested in finding out how something that measures the same can sound so different. I'm interested in the science.
So, I'm very much interested in finding out how something that measures the same can sound so different. I'm interested in the science.