A properly designed crossover using proven scientific principles (mine is passive) and # 3 listed above. The 10" woofer/horn tweeter, 97dB sensitivity, 2-way I designed with the help of Marshall Leach's book "Introduction to Electroacoustics & Audio Amplifier Design" is absolutely phenomenal IMHO.
Scott
Last edited:
Hi.
That is interesting design, slightly reminding me of Rega RS3.
DO you think is your Tysen good speaker with heavy rock and metal or is it more chill out jazz-speaker? Does it have attack and slam? ( (small) bass driver on the side of enclosure is that what doesn't come to your mind at first when speaking of speaker for heavy metal.)
Do you mean those sensitive PA midwoofers like B&C SPEAKERS
Why use light cone if you cross it low? Light cone can't go low, is it only sensitivity what you are looking for?
----
2-way desing means that woofer MUST produce enough bass I think. If are going use subwoofers, your system is not true 2-way. At least what I am seeking for is 2-way desing which is true 2-way, not going to used any sub's. Speaker must produce enough bass. Enough is hard to determine, it depends a lot of room, user and taste of music. For me, 20-30 litre big standmounters with 6,5"-8" midbass had gave enough bass, smaller 8-13 litre 5"-6,5" desings not.
Do you think could sensitive PA midrange give "enough" bass if room is slightly boosting (as they always do)? http://www.bcspeakers.com/product.php?id=57
Sound might be too dry if everything below 45 Hz is almost inaudible? 18 l / 48 Hz tuning seems good with 8NDL51 ?
Last edited:
The secret of building a good 2-way?
Use a subwoofer and turn it into a three way.
Loudspeaker drivers are inherently resonant devices with a usable bandwidth typically no more than 2 1/2 to 3 octaves. The audible range of sound for people with unimpaired hearing is 10 octaves. There are techniques to extend drivers' usable range such as using small "midwoofers" with enormous power handling capacity or in multiples and equalizing the hell out of them to get deep bass. There's nothing wrong with that but you have to accept that it's necessary.
Anything else entails compromise, a lack of performace somewhere. It may be the deepest bass, the highest treble, or an FR dip somewhere in the crossover range. Ported designs extend bass at the expense of risking a resonant peak in the bass and nothing below that frequency. Tweeters that can respond low enough to meet a midwoofer usually have very poor high frequency dispersion in the top octave, something considered a virtue today because it improves what is commonly called "imaging" but you must sit in a "sweet spot" to hear it. Not my idea of a good design. Even a 3 way design is usually a compromise. Speakers with a peak around 70-110 hz may appear to have good bass but the thump thump thump droning of some pop music is more annoying to me than anything else. Usually when it comes to really deep bass there's nothing there. Peaks in that range also make male voices sound tubby.
Look at commercial designs you like and copy their ideas. IMO in one way or another their performance as high fidelity speaker systems is invariably poor in one regard or another. Systems people like in that category include BBC LS3/5 which are manufactured by several companies I think including Harbeth, Rogers, and possibly KEF, KLH Model 6, Larger Advent. There are number of others.
Even in 3 way systems there are tradeoffs that compromise performance. I've re-engineered most of my own systems, my main system is a modified Teledyne AR9 4 way because it's performace as manufactured was unacceptable to me to. I've never heard a commercially manufactured speaker I thought sounded like real music. The one exception was a carefully contrived LvR demo nearly 50 years ago and only applied to the specifics of the controlled situation in the demo. Usually that speaker AR3 sounded flawed to me.
Use a subwoofer and turn it into a three way.
Loudspeaker drivers are inherently resonant devices with a usable bandwidth typically no more than 2 1/2 to 3 octaves. The audible range of sound for people with unimpaired hearing is 10 octaves. There are techniques to extend drivers' usable range such as using small "midwoofers" with enormous power handling capacity or in multiples and equalizing the hell out of them to get deep bass. There's nothing wrong with that but you have to accept that it's necessary.
Anything else entails compromise, a lack of performace somewhere. It may be the deepest bass, the highest treble, or an FR dip somewhere in the crossover range. Ported designs extend bass at the expense of risking a resonant peak in the bass and nothing below that frequency. Tweeters that can respond low enough to meet a midwoofer usually have very poor high frequency dispersion in the top octave, something considered a virtue today because it improves what is commonly called "imaging" but you must sit in a "sweet spot" to hear it. Not my idea of a good design. Even a 3 way design is usually a compromise. Speakers with a peak around 70-110 hz may appear to have good bass but the thump thump thump droning of some pop music is more annoying to me than anything else. Usually when it comes to really deep bass there's nothing there. Peaks in that range also make male voices sound tubby.
Look at commercial designs you like and copy their ideas. IMO in one way or another their performance as high fidelity speaker systems is invariably poor in one regard or another. Systems people like in that category include BBC LS3/5 which are manufactured by several companies I think including Harbeth, Rogers, and possibly KEF, KLH Model 6, Larger Advent. There are number of others.
Even in 3 way systems there are tradeoffs that compromise performance. I've re-engineered most of my own systems, my main system is a modified Teledyne AR9 4 way because it's performace as manufactured was unacceptable to me to. I've never heard a commercially manufactured speaker I thought sounded like real music. The one exception was a carefully contrived LvR demo nearly 50 years ago and only applied to the specifics of the controlled situation in the demo. Usually that speaker AR3 sounded flawed to me.
Hi Starre, I didn't see your question till now. Yes, an NP (non-polar) electrolytic is just another name for a bi-polar electrolytic
Tony.
That seems strange to me!? Bi-polar means it has a + and - pole that you must use in the right direction. Non-polar means you can use it in either direction without any difference.
So you wintermute mean that if a capacitor is said to be bi-polar you mean it is of the type electrolytic as apposed to for example a film capacitor like this:
4.70u cross cap - Jantzen cross cap 4.70u 400V - Europe Audio
I am a little confused.
So you wintermute mean that if a capacitor is said to be bi-polar you mean it is of the type electrolytic as apposed to for example a film capacitor like this:
4.70u cross cap - Jantzen cross cap 4.70u 400V - Europe Audio
I am a little confused
.
NP = bi-polar
The name bi-polar comes from the internal physical construction which is 2 polar caps back to back.
dave
For heavy metal i'd suggest more woofer. I did these as another example of the genre http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/css/176790-el166-mtm-ml-tl.html. At the diyFEST last WE it fooled some into thinking there was a sub, and that in my BIG room.
Alpair6P (or something larger like EL70) would give more loudness capability.
dave
That seems strange to me!? Bi-polar means it has a + and - pole that you must use in the right direction. Non-polar means you can use it in either direction without any difference.
So you wintermute mean that if a capacitor is said to be bi-polar you mean it is of the type electrolytic as apposed to for example a film capacitor like this:
4.70u cross cap - Jantzen cross cap 4.70u 400V - Europe Audio
I am a little confused
No as Dave said bi-polar refers to the internal construction. Polar would mean what you say (ie a positive and a negative pole) bi polar (or non-polar) electrolytics are constructed by joining two normal polarised electrolytics back to back. This is why they are in general bigger than standard electrolytics of the same capacity, joining in series halves the capacitance, so to get a 100uF bi-polar internally it is 2 X 200uF polar caps connected in series).
You certainly cannot use standard (polarized) electrolytic capacitors in a crossover. But if you see bi-polar or NP you can probably assume it is a non-polar electrolytic capacitor as opposed to an inherently non-polar film cap.
Tony.
Can you example? Do you mean foam surround or foam cone!? Heat dissipation away from voice coil through the cone?
High power handling pro drivers are better than hifi drivers, if we think transient response and heat dissipation? That might be even more meaningful matter with compressed heavy rock (which sound bad usually) than with high quality "hifi music" which has much more "gaps" in music for heat to dissipate.
I made some different projects and I like my two way project monitor XL a lot.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/193513-project-monitor-xl-reference-values.html
The key to make a good two way is to find a good lowmid-driver. With a smooth response. To have a detailed sound I would look for a speaker with a low Rms-value. I did see nice one's from audax,usher,scanspeak,tangband as for hifidrivers there are also great proaudio drivers beyma,18sound ,eminence look good to me I only ask my self how they perform on second and third harmonic.
For monitor XL I used a 10" paper-cone very good sub-bas and efficiency with reasonable good low distortion. And I used a horn + driver for the low XO and very good linearity and super distortion behavior. 18sound sels a great horn + driver for a a sharpprice the xd125 would fit nice with a 10"-8" woofer.XD125 - HF Compression Driver
If you want to go for a dome tweeter I have good experience with morel they have a low resonance so you can cross low or first order. Scan speak has also very nice Low Fs dome tweeters. Usher has nice low priced scan-speak dome tweeter clones.
To get the xo right you must measure the response and phase to of the woofer and tweeter to see you got it right in the real situation. I would advise to put i a superiorZ capacitor of janzen for the tweeter wen your sure about the value you need. The janzen really gives extra brightness. I just used a mundorf supreme in my latest project sounds good but isn't bright as the janzen but more natural.
With coils I did not experienced better performance with the flat-wire ones. you only put in the series resistance in the simulation of the woofer.
It is worth to put in time in to the filter and listen if you can hear improvements or measure a better response. It is important to have a good balanced response it means often not to loose subbas and at the other side at the high frequencies can be difficult to to get it nice intact on your listening spot.
Thats a other reason to use a horn with controlled directivity.
There are also a lot of coaxial chassis to try, like tangband with dome or beyma with horn that would be the ultimate two way design as point source.
With a dome tweeter the sound become more open with angled sides it really helps a lot.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/193513-project-monitor-xl-reference-values.html
The key to make a good two way is to find a good lowmid-driver. With a smooth response. To have a detailed sound I would look for a speaker with a low Rms-value. I did see nice one's from audax,usher,scanspeak,tangband as for hifidrivers there are also great proaudio drivers beyma,18sound ,eminence look good to me I only ask my self how they perform on second and third harmonic.
For monitor XL I used a 10" paper-cone very good sub-bas and efficiency with reasonable good low distortion. And I used a horn + driver for the low XO and very good linearity and super distortion behavior. 18sound sels a great horn + driver for a a sharpprice the xd125 would fit nice with a 10"-8" woofer.XD125 - HF Compression Driver
If you want to go for a dome tweeter I have good experience with morel they have a low resonance so you can cross low or first order. Scan speak has also very nice Low Fs dome tweeters. Usher has nice low priced scan-speak dome tweeter clones.
To get the xo right you must measure the response and phase to of the woofer and tweeter to see you got it right in the real situation. I would advise to put i a superiorZ capacitor of janzen for the tweeter wen your sure about the value you need. The janzen really gives extra brightness. I just used a mundorf supreme in my latest project sounds good but isn't bright as the janzen but more natural.
With coils I did not experienced better performance with the flat-wire ones. you only put in the series resistance in the simulation of the woofer.
It is worth to put in time in to the filter and listen if you can hear improvements or measure a better response. It is important to have a good balanced response it means often not to loose subbas and at the other side at the high frequencies can be difficult to to get it nice intact on your listening spot.
Thats a other reason to use a horn with controlled directivity.
There are also a lot of coaxial chassis to try, like tangband with dome or beyma with horn that would be the ultimate two way design as point source.
With a dome tweeter the sound become more open with angled sides it really helps a lot.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Last edited:
alspe, I have not done any extensive research on this topic, all I can say is that subjective difference is there.
I meant block of foam placed in front of the drivers, only gedlee does it in his speakers, and only for tweeters. In my tests woofers also benefit from foam blocks.
And I meant heat dissipation vithin coil itself, transferring heat away from coil of course is necessary, but it happens too slow.
I meant block of foam placed in front of the drivers, only gedlee does it in his speakers, and only for tweeters. In my tests woofers also benefit from foam blocks.
And I meant heat dissipation vithin coil itself, transferring heat away from coil of course is necessary, but it happens too slow.
I am interested in Salas "tired2way" speaker. I have purchased the drivers for it and am now thinking of the cabinet and filters for it. From what I can see the filter is a second order Butterworth with an additional RCL-link. Can you please explain the filter a little for me? What is the crossover frequence? I have tried to figure that out but I am unsure of it.
The cabinet: do you recommend me using the dimensions or altering something? I know you reused a cabinet for this construction so I wonder if you thought about something to modify to make it even better?
Since I am building the speaker from scratch I see this possibility.
I hope I am not asking too much with this, but it would be nice to read your opinions.
The cabinet: do you recommend me using the dimensions or altering something? I know you reused a cabinet for this construction so I wonder if you thought about something to modify to make it even better?
Since I am building the speaker from scratch I see this possibility.
I hope I am not asking too much with this, but it would be nice to read your opinions.
Hello. Unfortunately I could not find the full Leap files for it. From some notes I found, it has 2.4K cross point, 35Hz port resonance, the impedance does not go below 6 Ohm. Its not adhering to textbook roll off, acoustically is 2nd order. It was tweaked by ear +/-10% after the best crossover topology got homed in. What I posted is what used finally. I don't recommend altering box volume or dimensions anything because the diffraction is going to change and the bass resonance was well defined anyway. It still serves in my friend's system very well. TT, DAC, pre, amps, many times changed or tweaked, but he is happy with the speaker still. I recommend 50-100W amp. Will be happy to see your version finished and posted in the threads, maybe opening a build thread for it.
On a luckier note, I found in a portable computer some measurements for it. Here is the impedance, and a frequency response chart from the pair in room at 2.5m distance on sofa sitting, ear axis. This is not bass near field spliced, or anechoic, its pink noise one point, 2 speakers playing.The impedance shows it does not fall below 5 Ohm, not 6 as my notes were saying. Maybe the notes were older with a higher testing tweeter resistor, or just noting the power range region of interest. Its 3 years now and I don't remember exactly.
Attachments
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.