I've been holding back but now you're talking about wasting real money.
If you're trying to design something new totally from scratch you'll need to be able to perform live acoustical measurements.
Without actual measurements of the drivers in the enclosure your crossover design will be an absolute guess.
No math formula and numbers from published T/S parameters and/or graphs can replace this.
There are lots of DIY microphone schematics and free or inexpensive computer programs available for this process.
Either that, or try to find someone that has already built something using the drivers you are considering.
I don't mean to rain on your parade.
If you're trying to design something new totally from scratch you'll need to be able to perform live acoustical measurements.
Without actual measurements of the drivers in the enclosure your crossover design will be an absolute guess.
No math formula and numbers from published T/S parameters and/or graphs can replace this.
There are lots of DIY microphone schematics and free or inexpensive computer programs available for this process.
Either that, or try to find someone that has already built something using the drivers you are considering.
I don't mean to rain on your parade.
Not a problem, this is a casual quest at best, if not a fool's one. It's why I'm leaning toward cheaper drivers.
RDV
RDV
Timn8ter said:
When you take those measurements, do you do it with a crossover in place, or do you measure the sound of each speaker independantly with no crossover?
TIA
RDV
I'm also considering building a DIY electronic crossover which I've done before. It would need to be frequency adjustable though, which I haven't done.
RDV
RDV
How does anyone think that a coating of Dammar would affect the cheap GW woofers I'm using now?
I know. I'm like a mad scientist who doesn't know what he's doing.
I do have a #(around 100) of successful DIY electronics builds under my belt. I don't always proceed logically but I'm damned tenacious.
RDV
I know. I'm like a mad scientist who doesn't know what he's doing.
I do have a #(around 100) of successful DIY electronics builds under my belt. I don't always proceed logically but I'm damned tenacious.
RDV
RDV said:
Check out "active filter 2" at www.delta-audio.com you can copy it directly, some may have spare boards (I got enough for my purposes and was offered another pair), or you could make the circuit using multi-turn potentiometers in place of the resistor arrays.
I'm with Timin8er - unless you can measure the response accurately you'll end up with something euphonic, but not necessarily accurate. Leave a few dollars in your budget for a measurement mike and preamp.
RDV said:
The common process is to measure the drivers independently, capturing the data in files that can be fed to a simulation program that will assist you in designing a crossover. Next would be to build the crossover, connect it to the drivers in the enclosure and measure again. The final step, and hopefully the best, is listening.
If you have an electronic crossover that you can adjust as you're measuring and give you the values of the components involved, you can have excellent results in a short period of time. It also gives you the option of real-time "tweaking".
As for dammar, it's even more speculative unless you can get some pretty sophisticated measurements. The idea is to identify cone resonances, what part of the cone is producing them, and taming them with some type of treatment.
Nady CX-22SW 2-Way Stereo Crossover(w/ sub out)
Considering buying this which would be a dirt cheap solution to all my little crossover problems. I play live music as well so if my speaker designing ever gets up to speed and I can learn to measure, I can use this putting together a PA.
I don't think this would be a waste of money as I could try drivers and find the good sounding cross points.
I'm going to be building an LM1875 stereo amp soon which would work great for the highs and use my LM3886 stereo amp for the lows and my LM4780(paralleled) for the sub.
Hmm...
RDV
Considering buying this which would be a dirt cheap solution to all my little crossover problems. I play live music as well so if my speaker designing ever gets up to speed and I can learn to measure, I can use this putting together a PA.
I don't think this would be a waste of money as I could try drivers and find the good sounding cross points.
I'm going to be building an LM1875 stereo amp soon which would work great for the highs and use my LM3886 stereo amp for the lows and my LM4780(paralleled) for the sub.
Hmm...
RDV
the advice .
The advice the 2 , above , contributers have given is basically correct for if you want to design and assemble accurate loudspeaker systems . As it seems you are determined to buy components and assemble , I have recommended to you a bass driver that I know will work with a simple cross-over I can list for you , so that you will have something listenable whilst you are thinking about how seriously you want to pursue the subject of loudspeaker design . I realize from earlier in this thread and from your web site that you have some technical experience , thus I think you will be able to understand loudspeaker design , BUT , you have not realized the limits of what can be done with passive crossovers and the electro-mechanical limits of bass and treble drivers used in Home Audio . As you are an electric musician , you will have been exposed to P.A. Systems . These use heavy duty drivers and usually active crossovers and multple amplifiers , AND , most people at live gigs do not hear the less than ideal frequency response of these speaker systems -{I have worked for years with in Live Sound , etc ..} . With home Hi-Fi one's hearing can detect response errors as one gets used to better quality components , etc ... To date you have been using an unbalanced speaker , but you have heard the small improvements you have made to it , thus I think you will be able to hear additional real improvements , BUT , I cannot in the limits of this forum , nor in the time I have , explain every aspect and reason for every thing I say , thus why I recommend you obtain the book I listed , and in it you will find References to other books , etc ... , which after study you will come to understand the limits of what can and what cannot be done with Hi-Fi drivers {and Lo-Fi drivers !} ; crossovers ; cabinets ; subwoofers , etc ... I will put a few specifics in the next post .
The advice the 2 , above , contributers have given is basically correct for if you want to design and assemble accurate loudspeaker systems . As it seems you are determined to buy components and assemble , I have recommended to you a bass driver that I know will work with a simple cross-over I can list for you , so that you will have something listenable whilst you are thinking about how seriously you want to pursue the subject of loudspeaker design . I realize from earlier in this thread and from your web site that you have some technical experience , thus I think you will be able to understand loudspeaker design , BUT , you have not realized the limits of what can be done with passive crossovers and the electro-mechanical limits of bass and treble drivers used in Home Audio . As you are an electric musician , you will have been exposed to P.A. Systems . These use heavy duty drivers and usually active crossovers and multple amplifiers , AND , most people at live gigs do not hear the less than ideal frequency response of these speaker systems -{I have worked for years with in Live Sound , etc ..} . With home Hi-Fi one's hearing can detect response errors as one gets used to better quality components , etc ... To date you have been using an unbalanced speaker , but you have heard the small improvements you have made to it , thus I think you will be able to hear additional real improvements , BUT , I cannot in the limits of this forum , nor in the time I have , explain every aspect and reason for every thing I say , thus why I recommend you obtain the book I listed , and in it you will find References to other books , etc ... , which after study you will come to understand the limits of what can and what cannot be done with Hi-Fi drivers {and Lo-Fi drivers !} ; crossovers ; cabinets ; subwoofers , etc ... I will put a few specifics in the next post .
the bass drivers .
That Dayton metal coned driver is useable to only 1.6kHz . Look at the large hole in its response centred on 2kHz and the very ragged response higher up . There are no basic treble drivers that can be crossed over at approximately 1.7kHz . Both this Dayton driver and the previous one you linked are only suitable for use for bass and low-mids , and will need a mid-range driver for higher frequencies - same as with your Goldwood , {even though the Daytons are better quality for bass} . ____ Yes , you may be crossing your Audax tweeter at 3k , but with the abysmal response of the Goldwood in the octave below you will not be hearing the effect of this too low crossover to the tweeter - it is good you seem to not have played it very loud , or you would have damaged the tweeter . To cross at 3k , that tweeter will need a 4th order electrical filter , or some form of notch filter to control its behavior at its Fs {of 1.235kHz - see the detailed data , not simply the brief specification}, for safe high volume playing . The crossover does not stop the tweeter from receiving everything below its nominal turn-over , eg:- 3k in your application . Experienced users of that tweeter cross it over at 3.5k or higher , and with a suitable slope to allow it to give its best sound , and to prevent it from being damaged when playing loud . This can be done if it is used with the SEAS bass driver , and the extra money spent on the SEAS is money you will not have to spend on a large number of passive components to make a complicated crossover with , and which you cannot do without making several measurements . ___ If your inductor is .53mH , it can be used with that specific SEAS model , and it will not need a Zobel for the simple , OK sounding crossover . For the tweeter you will need 2 resistors and 1 capacitor . You can try more sophisticated crossovers yourself when you have heard this workable one , and learnt how to design further .
That Dayton metal coned driver is useable to only 1.6kHz . Look at the large hole in its response centred on 2kHz and the very ragged response higher up . There are no basic treble drivers that can be crossed over at approximately 1.7kHz . Both this Dayton driver and the previous one you linked are only suitable for use for bass and low-mids , and will need a mid-range driver for higher frequencies - same as with your Goldwood , {even though the Daytons are better quality for bass} . ____ Yes , you may be crossing your Audax tweeter at 3k , but with the abysmal response of the Goldwood in the octave below you will not be hearing the effect of this too low crossover to the tweeter - it is good you seem to not have played it very loud , or you would have damaged the tweeter . To cross at 3k , that tweeter will need a 4th order electrical filter , or some form of notch filter to control its behavior at its Fs {of 1.235kHz - see the detailed data , not simply the brief specification}, for safe high volume playing . The crossover does not stop the tweeter from receiving everything below its nominal turn-over , eg:- 3k in your application . Experienced users of that tweeter cross it over at 3.5k or higher , and with a suitable slope to allow it to give its best sound , and to prevent it from being damaged when playing loud . This can be done if it is used with the SEAS bass driver , and the extra money spent on the SEAS is money you will not have to spend on a large number of passive components to make a complicated crossover with , and which you cannot do without making several measurements . ___ If your inductor is .53mH , it can be used with that specific SEAS model , and it will not need a Zobel for the simple , OK sounding crossover . For the tweeter you will need 2 resistors and 1 capacitor . You can try more sophisticated crossovers yourself when you have heard this workable one , and learnt how to design further .
Re: the bass drivers .
I could do with the tweeter values now as the resistors are needed to pad down the driver and keep from damaging it I would imagine.
It's not a big deal to buy another inductor for the woofers either since I don't know what the value of the ones I have for certain.
Thanks much for your help.
RDV
I'll bite. What are the values you'd recommend for the SEAS and my Audax tweeter?alan-1-b said:
I could do with the tweeter values now as the resistors are needed to pad down the driver and keep from damaging it I would imagine.
It's not a big deal to buy another inductor for the woofers either since I don't know what the value of the ones I have for certain.
Thanks much for your help.
RDV
Since I'm skint right now, I just clipped the extra cap of the crossover which should take it back to 3500hz. I also taped over the little vent holes with 3 layers of black gaffers tape. Seems like the bass is less boomy that way.
I could really use those resistor values for the pad though.
RDV
I could really use those resistor values for the pad though.
RDV
suspicious L-pad calculator .!?.
Hi RDV , I'm a bit suspicious of that L-pad calculator . It seems he has programmed it to calculate with regard to dBV -> Volts , and not dBW -> Watts . Watts is the way we hear the sound pressure level , thus I calculate with regard to Watts . He has no email address for me to ask him , so I'll check some other way , but for now for you to try :- First , your Audax is specified as 8ohm Nominal - this is simply an average Impedance - the driver's impedance varies over its bandwidth - look at the plot on the spec. sheet , and look at the tabulated data on the relevant linked page Parts Express have had measured for a sample of that driver . Two areas we are concerned with - first is the impedance in the crossover region - tabulated is a minimum of 6.34ohm in the close to x-over area , so we use that as the impedance to derive a x-over from usually , but first here we use it when calculating the L-pad values . ___ Second is the impedance Maximum at the driver's Fs - tabulated data gives 13.09ohm at 1k223 and 12.99ohm at 1k259 - Fs is between those frequencies and at 1k235 , so let's assume 13.1ohm there . ___ This specific L-pad is also required to reduce the magnitude of the impedance peak so as to damp {engineering term} the resonance that will occur when the driver is fed frequencies close around that Fs . It is fortunate with your tweeter that this Zmax is only about double the Zmin {13.1ohm & 6.34ohm} - some tweeters have much larger Zmax at their Fs and thus require an LCR parallel notch circuit to adequately damp . Technically such should be used for yours also if you want to play it very loud , but I can't calculate the LCR without the specific tweeter samples to measure , and for moderate volume levels in this case a suitable parallel resistor will suffice as we are using a series resistor to attenuate level of the tweeter . ___ After all that theory { ! } , try 6.8ohm in 10watt{as resistor must stay cool} and in non-inductive if you are buying , but you can use a standard 10watt wire-wound resistor to try the pad first , if you have one in 6.8ohm already . I chose 6.8ohm simply as its the nearest E series resistor readily available in 10watt , and its very close to whatever may be ideal . ___ So 6.8 in parallel with the tweeter and then 3.3ohm in Series with that parallel pair - 10watt and should be non-inductive here as it is in series with a treble driver ! ___ 3ohm is OK if no 3.3 . Try this pair and post if it attenuates OK , or too much with your Goldwood . The SEAS is more efficient than the G'wood , but your comment will give me an idea if we are in the right area . ___ And , you can reconnect the 1uF cap. in parallel with the 5u6 because you have a 6.6ohm tweeter circuit and not 8ohm . If 3.3ohm drops too much , try 2.7ohm . Use cheap resistors till you get it right by ear , you can buy high quality resistors later when you've got the final design right .
Hi RDV , I'm a bit suspicious of that L-pad calculator . It seems he has programmed it to calculate with regard to dBV -> Volts , and not dBW -> Watts . Watts is the way we hear the sound pressure level , thus I calculate with regard to Watts . He has no email address for me to ask him , so I'll check some other way , but for now for you to try :- First , your Audax is specified as 8ohm Nominal - this is simply an average Impedance - the driver's impedance varies over its bandwidth - look at the plot on the spec. sheet , and look at the tabulated data on the relevant linked page Parts Express have had measured for a sample of that driver . Two areas we are concerned with - first is the impedance in the crossover region - tabulated is a minimum of 6.34ohm in the close to x-over area , so we use that as the impedance to derive a x-over from usually , but first here we use it when calculating the L-pad values . ___ Second is the impedance Maximum at the driver's Fs - tabulated data gives 13.09ohm at 1k223 and 12.99ohm at 1k259 - Fs is between those frequencies and at 1k235 , so let's assume 13.1ohm there . ___ This specific L-pad is also required to reduce the magnitude of the impedance peak so as to damp {engineering term} the resonance that will occur when the driver is fed frequencies close around that Fs . It is fortunate with your tweeter that this Zmax is only about double the Zmin {13.1ohm & 6.34ohm} - some tweeters have much larger Zmax at their Fs and thus require an LCR parallel notch circuit to adequately damp . Technically such should be used for yours also if you want to play it very loud , but I can't calculate the LCR without the specific tweeter samples to measure , and for moderate volume levels in this case a suitable parallel resistor will suffice as we are using a series resistor to attenuate level of the tweeter . ___ After all that theory { ! } , try 6.8ohm in 10watt{as resistor must stay cool} and in non-inductive if you are buying , but you can use a standard 10watt wire-wound resistor to try the pad first , if you have one in 6.8ohm already . I chose 6.8ohm simply as its the nearest E series resistor readily available in 10watt , and its very close to whatever may be ideal . ___ So 6.8 in parallel with the tweeter and then 3.3ohm in Series with that parallel pair - 10watt and should be non-inductive here as it is in series with a treble driver ! ___ 3ohm is OK if no 3.3 . Try this pair and post if it attenuates OK , or too much with your Goldwood . The SEAS is more efficient than the G'wood , but your comment will give me an idea if we are in the right area . ___ And , you can reconnect the 1uF cap. in parallel with the 5u6 because you have a 6.6ohm tweeter circuit and not 8ohm . If 3.3ohm drops too much , try 2.7ohm . Use cheap resistors till you get it right by ear , you can buy high quality resistors later when you've got the final design right .
Cabinets - sealed and vented/ported .
Ideally the cabinet should be designed after the drivers have been chosen , but as you have a cabinets :- ___ For any given driver , it will tolerate a greater range of cabinet volumes around the specific designer's ideal one if for sealed box {Acoustic Suspension} , than it will for a ported enclosure , to give reasonably balanced bass response . ___ Now you have heard this with the Goldwood , as you report sound after you taped over the ports . ___ That taping coverts the enclosure to a "damped" port , because the tape can move and pulses with the bass frequencies in the area of the port . It is not yet a sealed enclosure , but towards one enough for you to hear part effect . There is a type of enclosure design , named Aperiodic Loading , which uses a resistively damped port . Yours is not a true Aperiodic because it has not been tuned to the driver {unless by co-incidence here !} . ___ Some drivers work better in sealed , some better in ported , and some can be got to work OK in either . The Goldwood , owing to its high Qt is really only suited to sealed to give its best . The SEAS CA18RLY , on paper spec. , can be got to work in either , but studying data from a measured sample , it will give better in sealed {and perhaps in Aperiodic} than in ported as this sample's Qt is greater than .5 - {SEAS spec. of .45 is their design target - there is always variation in sample's Qt and some other parameters} . For Theory , a Qt of around .45 would suggest to me could work OK in Aperiodic as well as sealed . Ideally - based on hearing the bass sound of drivers in cabinets - for vented , driver Qt should be no greater than .4 . Design theory that gives ported alignments for drivers is simply derived from application of Filter Theory and was not from listening to examples . ______ A driver that will work in your cabinets , ported , as well as give suitable midrange response , will likely be an expensive one , and possibly a low efficiency one , if there are any suitable ! ___ Why ? , well , driver design is not easy , and despite what Dayton and some other brand names seem to imply , a driver that will give very good bass response and very good midrange response will be very expensive to manufacture . Most drivers suitable for both bass and midrange have some trade-off between the two . That SEAS model will give quite good bass for most Pop and Rock music , and for most music that sounds OK on popular Radio programmes , and it will give quite good midrange response up to where it can be crossed to the Audax . "Quite good" - not "perfect" - but you cannot afford to buy pefect {nor can I !} , and you can fine-tune both the cabinet {or a new built one} and the crossover , to get better from that SEAS later - it is not money wasted ! , there are less good drivers in loudspeakers that get OK reviews !! .
Ideally the cabinet should be designed after the drivers have been chosen , but as you have a cabinets :- ___ For any given driver , it will tolerate a greater range of cabinet volumes around the specific designer's ideal one if for sealed box {Acoustic Suspension} , than it will for a ported enclosure , to give reasonably balanced bass response . ___ Now you have heard this with the Goldwood , as you report sound after you taped over the ports . ___ That taping coverts the enclosure to a "damped" port , because the tape can move and pulses with the bass frequencies in the area of the port . It is not yet a sealed enclosure , but towards one enough for you to hear part effect . There is a type of enclosure design , named Aperiodic Loading , which uses a resistively damped port . Yours is not a true Aperiodic because it has not been tuned to the driver {unless by co-incidence here !} . ___ Some drivers work better in sealed , some better in ported , and some can be got to work OK in either . The Goldwood , owing to its high Qt is really only suited to sealed to give its best . The SEAS CA18RLY , on paper spec. , can be got to work in either , but studying data from a measured sample , it will give better in sealed {and perhaps in Aperiodic} than in ported as this sample's Qt is greater than .5 - {SEAS spec. of .45 is their design target - there is always variation in sample's Qt and some other parameters} . For Theory , a Qt of around .45 would suggest to me could work OK in Aperiodic as well as sealed . Ideally - based on hearing the bass sound of drivers in cabinets - for vented , driver Qt should be no greater than .4 . Design theory that gives ported alignments for drivers is simply derived from application of Filter Theory and was not from listening to examples . ______ A driver that will work in your cabinets , ported , as well as give suitable midrange response , will likely be an expensive one , and possibly a low efficiency one , if there are any suitable ! ___ Why ? , well , driver design is not easy , and despite what Dayton and some other brand names seem to imply , a driver that will give very good bass response and very good midrange response will be very expensive to manufacture . Most drivers suitable for both bass and midrange have some trade-off between the two . That SEAS model will give quite good bass for most Pop and Rock music , and for most music that sounds OK on popular Radio programmes , and it will give quite good midrange response up to where it can be crossed to the Audax . "Quite good" - not "perfect" - but you cannot afford to buy pefect {nor can I !} , and you can fine-tune both the cabinet {or a new built one} and the crossover , to get better from that SEAS later - it is not money wasted ! , there are less good drivers in loudspeakers that get OK reviews !! .
Satellites and Subwoofers .
As you said you wanted a ported loudspeaker , consider the following :- The part of the bass range that comes out of a tuned port is in opposite polarity to that which comes out of the cone - not a problem in a driver in a tuned box {study the theory} , but when a sub-woofer is added - which you have - which polarity is to be used ? ___ Unless a high-pass filter is used in the feed to the ported enclosure , one portion , or other , of its bass response will be in opposite polarity to the bass from the subwoofer , thus there will be a lumpy response . OK , so the sub has been low-pass filtered , but which polarity to use it in ? - each gives a different sound effect {try it and listen , with the satellites' polarity not changed}. Knowlegeable major manufactures of satellites make them sealed , OR , if a bi-purpose speaker , the satellite may be ported so can be used without a sub and still give some bass and it is advised the ports are to be blocked {usually with foam plugs sold by the manufacturer}when the satellites are used with the subwoofer . {Yes , some manufacturers don't bother , but have you heard the sound of their products !} . Thus why I think you will be quite happy with that SEAS driver - for use with subwoofer , and for use without sub - in a sealed enclosure , BUT , if you will only accept a driver that can be used in a ported enclosure , then do state this , but I do not know of any , except more expensive ones , that will also cross well to your Audax .
As you said you wanted a ported loudspeaker , consider the following :- The part of the bass range that comes out of a tuned port is in opposite polarity to that which comes out of the cone - not a problem in a driver in a tuned box {study the theory} , but when a sub-woofer is added - which you have - which polarity is to be used ? ___ Unless a high-pass filter is used in the feed to the ported enclosure , one portion , or other , of its bass response will be in opposite polarity to the bass from the subwoofer , thus there will be a lumpy response . OK , so the sub has been low-pass filtered , but which polarity to use it in ? - each gives a different sound effect {try it and listen , with the satellites' polarity not changed}. Knowlegeable major manufactures of satellites make them sealed , OR , if a bi-purpose speaker , the satellite may be ported so can be used without a sub and still give some bass and it is advised the ports are to be blocked {usually with foam plugs sold by the manufacturer}when the satellites are used with the subwoofer . {Yes , some manufacturers don't bother , but have you heard the sound of their products !} . Thus why I think you will be quite happy with that SEAS driver - for use with subwoofer , and for use without sub - in a sealed enclosure , BUT , if you will only accept a driver that can be used in a ported enclosure , then do state this , but I do not know of any , except more expensive ones , that will also cross well to your Audax .
Your Cabinets .
Lets find out what is likely , and what is possible with your cabinets :- open one and measure its INTERNAL dimensions :- height ; width ; depth , and allow for the thickness of the panel you removed when opening . Post the measurements in this thread . _____ Also , the ports , a "Sanyo" branded box , or any similar manufacturer/re-brander , will not have bothered to tune the ports to the original drivers if it was a low price product , so we don't know what frequency the cabinet is tuned too {and at a guess it will be tuned too high} , and we do not know , yet , what range of frequencies it can be reasonably well tuned to , to give practical results , so :- the ports , are they simple holes cut through the baffle ? , or , do they have tubes attached which vent into the cabinet ? . ___ If you want to consider its potential as a ported cabinet , then measure the diameter of the ports , and their length , and post also . Alternately , they can be sealed over permanantly , or effectively sealed as tempory - later unsealable . Post the type of port - simple baffle hole , or tubes {or rectangular shaped equivalents of either type ?} ? _____ Given the Internal dimensions , I can at least tell you how much bass extension , and the type of bass response , you can expect to get with that SEAS driver .
Lets find out what is likely , and what is possible with your cabinets :- open one and measure its INTERNAL dimensions :- height ; width ; depth , and allow for the thickness of the panel you removed when opening . Post the measurements in this thread . _____ Also , the ports , a "Sanyo" branded box , or any similar manufacturer/re-brander , will not have bothered to tune the ports to the original drivers if it was a low price product , so we don't know what frequency the cabinet is tuned too {and at a guess it will be tuned too high} , and we do not know , yet , what range of frequencies it can be reasonably well tuned to , to give practical results , so :- the ports , are they simple holes cut through the baffle ? , or , do they have tubes attached which vent into the cabinet ? . ___ If you want to consider its potential as a ported cabinet , then measure the diameter of the ports , and their length , and post also . Alternately , they can be sealed over permanantly , or effectively sealed as tempory - later unsealable . Post the type of port - simple baffle hole , or tubes {or rectangular shaped equivalents of either type ?} ? _____ Given the Internal dimensions , I can at least tell you how much bass extension , and the type of bass response , you can expect to get with that SEAS driver .
Alan, your posts are very hard to read. Please could you use more conventional punctuation. Thanks! 🙂
Punctuation .
Hi Al , by "punctuation" do you mean my use of " " , or all the ,,,,s , or the ____ I use to space sections ? ___ I use the ___ to space sections because I do not know sufficient about computers to be able to separate my posts into paragraphs . If there is an easy way to do the paragraphs , how does one access it ? . ___ Is it amongst those items in the box immediately above this reply form ? _____ I'm interested in Audio . I only learn sufficient about computers to research the things I'm interested in , but beyond that I detest computers ! ___ Yes , they are useful as tools , etc ... , and I accept that for some people they are interesting otherwise , but I have more other interests to do with my time than I ever have time to do , so I only learn what is necessary , but I will learn some things for the sake of courtesy to readers ... , thus , what specifically ?
Hi Al , by "punctuation" do you mean my use of " " , or all the ,,,,s , or the ____ I use to space sections ? ___ I use the ___ to space sections because I do not know sufficient about computers to be able to separate my posts into paragraphs . If there is an easy way to do the paragraphs , how does one access it ? . ___ Is it amongst those items in the box immediately above this reply form ? _____ I'm interested in Audio . I only learn sufficient about computers to research the things I'm interested in , but beyond that I detest computers ! ___ Yes , they are useful as tools , etc ... , and I accept that for some people they are interesting otherwise , but I have more other interests to do with my time than I ever have time to do , so I only learn what is necessary , but I will learn some things for the sake of courtesy to readers ... , thus , what specifically ?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.