frequency response 2-10khz will be similar, above- soem diferencies. and yes it will be noticeable change in sound (not quality)
there is very easy way to repair wilson tweeters with titanium berylium , aluminium magnesium domes from focal other tweeters.
This started as a thread about bi-amping a WATT/Puppy system, so I hope that my question is not out of subject. Please let me know if this post should be moved. Here goes:
About 6 years ago, a friend of mine gifted me a pair of Series 2 WATTs (S/N: 129 & 130), along with two tall passive subwoofer cabinets, as he was upgrading his entire system. I'm not sure why my friend never paired the WATTs with Puppys, and decided to use custom built subwoofer cabinets. I myself have paired the WATTs (perched on top of the passive cabinets) with an active Velodyne DLS-3750R 10" subwoofer, and have enjoyed listening to this combination since then.
Those passive sub cabinets are sealed and were customs built without a crossover, so I have to assume that his system included an external active crossover, and bi-amping? Regardless, the sealed cabinets are each built with two 10" Vifa M25W0-40 8 Ohm drivers, in separate chambers, each filled with damping material to the brim. I am considering building a passive crossover placed inside the cabinet, similar to what Wilson originally intended, crossing over to the WATTs.
Is this a good idea, and if so, what should the crossover design look like? 1st order, 2nd order, etc.? I have had a hard time finding the Vifa specs since those woofers have been discontinued for a while, and am sure that some basic WATT specs are needed in order to decide how to cross them.
If this is a bad idea, I might still like this to be a learning experience for me and a fun one, building this crossover, and comparing this combination over what I currently have.
Here's a link to Wilson's Puppy Series 2 specs https://www.wilsonaudio.com/products/puppy/puppy-series-2 for reference, which might give some clues as to how they crossed over to the WATTs, back then.
Open to any suggestions, and looking for answers from this vastly knowledgeable group.
Thank you!
About 6 years ago, a friend of mine gifted me a pair of Series 2 WATTs (S/N: 129 & 130), along with two tall passive subwoofer cabinets, as he was upgrading his entire system. I'm not sure why my friend never paired the WATTs with Puppys, and decided to use custom built subwoofer cabinets. I myself have paired the WATTs (perched on top of the passive cabinets) with an active Velodyne DLS-3750R 10" subwoofer, and have enjoyed listening to this combination since then.
Those passive sub cabinets are sealed and were customs built without a crossover, so I have to assume that his system included an external active crossover, and bi-amping? Regardless, the sealed cabinets are each built with two 10" Vifa M25W0-40 8 Ohm drivers, in separate chambers, each filled with damping material to the brim. I am considering building a passive crossover placed inside the cabinet, similar to what Wilson originally intended, crossing over to the WATTs.
Is this a good idea, and if so, what should the crossover design look like? 1st order, 2nd order, etc.? I have had a hard time finding the Vifa specs since those woofers have been discontinued for a while, and am sure that some basic WATT specs are needed in order to decide how to cross them.
If this is a bad idea, I might still like this to be a learning experience for me and a fun one, building this crossover, and comparing this combination over what I currently have.
Here's a link to Wilson's Puppy Series 2 specs https://www.wilsonaudio.com/products/puppy/puppy-series-2 for reference, which might give some clues as to how they crossed over to the WATTs, back then.
Open to any suggestions, and looking for answers from this vastly knowledgeable group.
Thank you!
........so there are 2 (eight ohms) vifa woofers per side.
i guess these are in parallel connected (and you get 4 ohm bass loudspeakers)?
i guess these are in parallel connected (and you get 4 ohm bass loudspeakers)?
That 01 perhaps indicates a special order by Wilson, it is not a likely to be a commonly available Scan speak part.
I have disasembled wp7/8 midrange drivers many times.. They arfe MIDRANGE drivers, NOTmidwoofers like scan speak. If anyone need them I still have a bunch of those for repairs.
That's very interesting, there is virtually nothing online about 4545-01 and if there is then it is related to Wilson audio, or this thread!.
.....so the crossover will be calculated for a 4 ohms load.
annother question: what crossover frequency have you choosen
at your active subwoofer?
annother question: what crossover frequency have you choosen
at your active subwoofer?
It is currently set at 40Hz, but it's not relevant to my setup because the WATTs are currently fed a full range signal from the amp, and apart from an HF crossover inside, there is nothing prior to the speaker inputs. Just for clarity, and forgive me if this is apparent to you already, the Puppys usually have the high pass filter built in them. And that's the recommendation I'm looking for.
Thanks!
samer0214:
i am no wp-expert...........;
if you want to play with crossover parts: i would try out a 8,2mH coil (low resistance, ferrite or sowhat).
first only the coil - gives a 6dB filter......
after this the coil with a capacitor (220uF bipolar electrolytic or so......), similar to a 12dB filter.
you can parallel ecaps to get any capacitance you like.
i am no wp-expert...........;
if you want to play with crossover parts: i would try out a 8,2mH coil (low resistance, ferrite or sowhat).
first only the coil - gives a 6dB filter......
after this the coil with a capacitor (220uF bipolar electrolytic or so......), similar to a 12dB filter.
you can parallel ecaps to get any capacitance you like.
I've calculated the following for a simple Butterworth 2nd order low pass crossover, based on a 100Hz cutoff, Q=0.7, and a 4 Ohm nominal impedance of the subs, wired in parallel: 9.09mH coil and 278mF capacitor.
Since "the system" is made up of the sub cabinets, and Wilson WATTS, as mentioned above, a let's call it, mid-pass signal should now be fed to the WATTS, which already in themselves include a high pass filter, for the 7" mid-bass and 1" tweeter. An additional component to this crossover network would have to now include a mid-pass portion, correct? And the signal flow would be as follows:
|-- Low Pass Crossover => Sub
Full Signal from Amp => | ||
|-- Mid Pass Crossover => WATT Input (which incorporates its own mid-pass crossover
Both Low Pass and Mid-Pass crossovers would be fed the full signal from the amp (in parallel), correct? The mid-pass 2nd order simple Butterworth filter, would be based on the following; 130Hz cutoff, Q=0.7, and a nominal impedance of 4 Ohm, resulting in a 7mH coil and 215mF capacitor.
Based on this, https://www.calsci.com/audio/X-Overs1b.html, the signal from the mid-pass crossover should be phase reversed. Does this in fact apply here, since it's only meant for a high pass filter feeding a tweeter?
Thank you.
Since "the system" is made up of the sub cabinets, and Wilson WATTS, as mentioned above, a let's call it, mid-pass signal should now be fed to the WATTS, which already in themselves include a high pass filter, for the 7" mid-bass and 1" tweeter. An additional component to this crossover network would have to now include a mid-pass portion, correct? And the signal flow would be as follows:
|-- Low Pass Crossover => Sub
Full Signal from Amp => | ||
|-- Mid Pass Crossover => WATT Input (which incorporates its own mid-pass crossover
Both Low Pass and Mid-Pass crossovers would be fed the full signal from the amp (in parallel), correct? The mid-pass 2nd order simple Butterworth filter, would be based on the following; 130Hz cutoff, Q=0.7, and a nominal impedance of 4 Ohm, resulting in a 7mH coil and 215mF capacitor.
Based on this, https://www.calsci.com/audio/X-Overs1b.html, the signal from the mid-pass crossover should be phase reversed. Does this in fact apply here, since it's only meant for a high pass filter feeding a tweeter?
Thank you.
Samer0214 , you should take the both woofer impedance and its SPL in box into consideration while designing a lowpass @100Hz. Calculators do not work.
Get REW or ARTA, a mic, a jig and some simulating software.Measure SPL and Z and then optimize in the simulator. Its is all for free these days, apart from the mic.
Get REW or ARTA, a mic, a jig and some simulating software.Measure SPL and Z and then optimize in the simulator. Its is all for free these days, apart from the mic.
Hi Boden,
Thank you for the reply and the valuable information.
Assuming that the subs have a combined nominal impedance of 4 ohms, are the rest of my statements above correct? Don't worry about the calculations, because that's just formulas.
What's a decent mic you might recommend please?
Thank you,
the problem is that especially around 100 Hz the woofers may not be 4 ohms: at 100 Hz the impedance peak (or peaks in a vented enclosure) may still be at work, so the x/o does not see a resistive load at all.
For a mic a Behringer MC 8000 will do the job nicely.
https://www.behringer.com/product.html?modelCode=P0118
For a mic a Behringer MC 8000 will do the job nicely.
https://www.behringer.com/product.html?modelCode=P0118
Last edited by a moderator:
Wilson Audio speakers are highly overrated from strictly a sonic standpoint. They sound blah and stale. Too bad because the focal tweeters can sound great used the right way. Im not a fan of the SS woofer. It has alot of FR issues and is way overdampened, lifeless, boring sounding, and not in a good way like other higher resolving speakers. Any company that pots their xovers are snake oil salesman pushing overpriced parts, trying to hide them. Most companies are proud of their xovers and display the parts they use. Nothing special about any of their speaker designs.
Said no one. Also leaving out the most basic Dave Wilson philosophy and research about time domain, for example.
So any company that wants to protect its trade secrets, and perhaps, one of the reasons for their success, is a snake oil salesman. Good to know.
The fun thing is there is no hiding a passive design these days. As has been mentioned before: measure the voltage across the drivers with the drivers connected, or measure the unfiltered in-box spl of each driver and measure the in-box filterd drivers (both .frd and. zma) and ready you are for reverse engineering.
Any pseudo tech talk or hiding components by manufacturers is only to impress the less informed clientele: there are no more secrets in passive x/o design whatever manufacturers want to make you believe. The design power and flexibilty of e.g. VituixCad is immense.
Any pseudo tech talk or hiding components by manufacturers is only to impress the less informed clientele: there are no more secrets in passive x/o design whatever manufacturers want to make you believe. The design power and flexibilty of e.g. VituixCad is immense.