X, I've been meaning to ask, have you looked at the impulse response to check for reflections? Since these measurements are taken indoors you probably do not have the resolution down low that you think you do. And since your crossover is at 300ish this creates a problem.
If they're not gated and indoors then you're seeing a lot of the room around you crossover point. Of course you can't gate it either because it will basically through away the information that you need to set you xo. You might need to take it outside and raise it up to get accurate measurements to around 100 with about a 10-12ms gate
If they're not gated and indoors then you're seeing a lot of the room around you crossover point. Of course you can't gate it either because it will basically through away the information that you need to set you xo. You might need to take it outside and raise it up to get accurate measurements to around 100 with about a 10-12ms gate
Still works here so checked it starting a computer that had not cashed web for months and there could see the two first pictures in post 217 up between text is broken now and could be a temperary system error. The two is still working if one click at them at the bottom of the post, here link to that post 217 http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full...-rs225-8-fast-ref-monitor-22.html#post4332550.
I think I am good for up to 4ms before first reflection. Here is frequency response posted earlier with 4ms gate:
I never plotted the XO with the gate though.
Yes, that's about right inside if you're lucky if they're halfway between floor and ceiling. What I mean though is that if your trying to set your crossover at 300 or whatever with measurements taken inside you could have issues with accuracy. 4ms is 250hz resolution, 3ms about 350Hz. So you're definitely pretty close. And with even a 250 resolution, what you think your seeing on the low end of the 10f when settign xo and trying to hit target slopes might actually be a mirage and you're really setting the slope of the room response. That means every time you move your speaker, they're gonna sound different
And I don't know what's going on with the minimum phase, but it doesn't look that great. Did you check the box in rew to adjust for time delay error?
Damn, I my post got deleted!
I don't know why I thought that was minimum phase, sorry.
I still think you're borderline for getting accurate results for a xo that low. If it were me, I'd take it outside, raise it up 6-8 feet and make sure the low end is what you expect. At the least I would take nearfield measurements of the whole and each driver with the xo implemented. So 1/2" or so from each driver and maybe a 1' when measuring both drivers together. With the mic right near the cone it should be accurate to 6-800 I think
Anyways, how do they sound? Better or worse?
I don't know why I thought that was minimum phase, sorry.
I still think you're borderline for getting accurate results for a xo that low. If it were me, I'd take it outside, raise it up 6-8 feet and make sure the low end is what you expect. At the least I would take nearfield measurements of the whole and each driver with the xo implemented. So 1/2" or so from each driver and maybe a 1' when measuring both drivers together. With the mic right near the cone it should be accurate to 6-800 I think
Anyways, how do they sound? Better or worse?
I actually haven't had a chance to listen to them since I implemented the new xo. It's been a long and busy day. Maybe go listen to a few of my go to reference tracks now.
I like the the PS95-8 - it is very high quality and feature packed for the price. It sounds quite nice with a paper cone smoothness but with some sizzle on the top register. Off axis is perfectly great sounding. A bit to harsh HF on axis but a little EQ would take care of it.
I like the the PS95-8 - it is very high quality and feature packed for the price. It sounds quite nice with a paper cone smoothness but with some sizzle on the top register. Off axis is perfectly great sounding. A bit to harsh HF on axis but a little EQ would take care of it.
Listening impressions w/ new XO settings
This is for the 350Hz BW1 electrical, circa 600Hz acoustic XO frequency setup that had the driver responses flattened with gentle PEQ's prior to applying the XO.
It sounds quite nice. So far I have put on female vocals (Diana Krall sounds really good), live jazz, studio recorded jazz, metal, classical piano concerto, classic rock, pop, male vocals, big band, like a good monitor - all genre's sound equally good.
Right now I am checking for sound stage and imaging and that is doing well too. I can place instruments in a live jazz setting recorded at a night club.
I am not sure if I like this more than the earlier XO I had though. It's close...
I have this strange phase shift above and below the XO that is troubling me. It's like things are in phase above and out of phase below. Flipping polarity made it worse (SR went to hell and it sounds wierd and all phasey with a collapsed stereo image). I may just have too much PEQ going to get the driver responses flat prior to XO. The good old simple way of no PEQ at all and just the XO sounded better phase wise.
This is for the 350Hz BW1 electrical, circa 600Hz acoustic XO frequency setup that had the driver responses flattened with gentle PEQ's prior to applying the XO.
It sounds quite nice. So far I have put on female vocals (Diana Krall sounds really good), live jazz, studio recorded jazz, metal, classical piano concerto, classic rock, pop, male vocals, big band, like a good monitor - all genre's sound equally good.
Right now I am checking for sound stage and imaging and that is doing well too. I can place instruments in a live jazz setting recorded at a night club.
I am not sure if I like this more than the earlier XO I had though. It's close...
I have this strange phase shift above and below the XO that is troubling me. It's like things are in phase above and out of phase below. Flipping polarity made it worse (SR went to hell and it sounds wierd and all phasey with a collapsed stereo image). I may just have too much PEQ going to get the driver responses flat prior to XO. The good old simple way of no PEQ at all and just the XO sounded better phase wise.
Yes, the step looked a bit better before, but it sure looked like you had some serious phase issues going on.
You can see the phase issues in the FR still, just better than before. Good phase above, poor phase below. To get phase, FR, Imp, power response, etc. all correct is just a juggling act and it takes time. Impedance and power response should be a non issue for you though.
It's not the easiest thing to make adjustments and measure over and over. I would download PCD or use wantever you have if it has an active section. That way you can really see what's going on with your phase and FR down low.
If you have any phasiness or hot areas in the FR it can often sound good and exciting at first, but after a while you notice somethings wrong. When it's smooth and low distortion it can almost sound a little boring at first, but you know when it's right.
I know you want to use 1st order crossovers, but they take very special drivers and conditions to work properly . You may be trying to force these drivers to do one thing when they really want to do something else. If it was me, I'd probably at least try a 2nd order xo on the 10F. And probable 2nd order all around. At the least crossing the little on steeper should clean up the sound at higher volumes and it's probably fix the phase issue on the low end (though it might cause a problem somewhere else).
You can see the phase issues in the FR still, just better than before. Good phase above, poor phase below. To get phase, FR, Imp, power response, etc. all correct is just a juggling act and it takes time. Impedance and power response should be a non issue for you though.
It's not the easiest thing to make adjustments and measure over and over. I would download PCD or use wantever you have if it has an active section. That way you can really see what's going on with your phase and FR down low.
If you have any phasiness or hot areas in the FR it can often sound good and exciting at first, but after a while you notice somethings wrong. When it's smooth and low distortion it can almost sound a little boring at first, but you know when it's right.
I know you want to use 1st order crossovers, but they take very special drivers and conditions to work properly . You may be trying to force these drivers to do one thing when they really want to do something else. If it was me, I'd probably at least try a 2nd order xo on the 10F. And probable 2nd order all around. At the least crossing the little on steeper should clean up the sound at higher volumes and it's probably fix the phase issue on the low end (though it might cause a problem somewhere else).
Thanks sound clip will listen tomorrow. In Rephase have made some FIR XO IR-wav files and can upload them if interested. Because i think the BW1 XO transients response sound so good i thought this should give as good a flat phase and could get steeper slopes at the cost of CPU time. Will share more data tomorrow if there is interest. Tried few different ones but fell in love these brick wall steep ones and especially the 150Hz one is good for full ranger lovers in that from my experience so far it preserves all the signature of the full ranger keeping the woofer at little influence into higher frequency area. BW1 textbook slopes at 350Hz is added as to compare 
.
.Attachments
Is that data measured with a mic? Very cool - I can't imagine what it sounds like to hand over sound from one driver to the next without overlap - would that sound kind of harsh? There would be ringing in the FR due to the steep wall? Very interesting - please post sound clips compare Butterworth 1 to brick wall. Both BW acronyms.
Thanks sound clip will listen tomorrow. In Rephase have made some FIR XO IR-wav files and can upload them if interested. Because i think the BW1 XO transients response sound so good i thought this should give as good a flat phase and could get steeper slopes at the cost of CPU time. Will share more data tomorrow if there is interest. Tried few different ones but fell in love these brick wall steep ones and especially the 150Hz one is good for full ranger lovers in that from my experience so far it preserves all the signature of the full ranger keeping the woofer at little influence into higher frequency area. BW1 textbook slopes at 350Hz is added as to compare
Wow! how did you do that? is that like a 1000db/octave filter?
If you're using an 8" I would want that to handle the upper bass instead of a 3" driver. There's a lot of information in that range and you want it to have impact
Thanks sound clip will listen tomorrow. In Rephase have made some FIR XO IR-wav files and can upload them if interested. Because i think the BW1 XO transients response sound so good i thought this should give as good a flat phase and could get steeper slopes at the cost of CPU time. Will share more data tomorrow if there is interest. Tried few different ones but fell in love these brick wall steep ones and especially the 150Hz one is good for full ranger lovers in that from my experience so far it preserves all the signature of the full ranger keeping the woofer at little influence into higher frequency area. BW1 textbook slopes at 350Hz is added as to compare
Good stuff BYRTT, does the steep slope bring extra pre-ringing in the IR?
xrk971,
Yes both XO points is the same FAST system measured and overlayed and could look like a three way system sorry : ). It rings when measuring LF or HF alone but when summed it looks fine. It does't sound harsh at all, and at IRR domain have by EQ corrected linear overlap before choose the XO points else think the ringing gets annoying and unsymmetrical for pre and post ringing as i understand. And no other FIR tricks is used its still a minimum phase speaker as it was one driver because the invinsible XO phase shift.
Hi satx,
Member POS has shared a program called Rehase and it can create those filters pretty easy. I use a 10" as seen at past in thread where it was paired a TC9FD.
Is it good enough excuse i retire for today even i posted the interesting XO, because feel like a hanged cat or something worse. Will post data and picture of speaker and sound clips later.
Hope that tomorrow it sounds as great as perceived this evening when tired, because the nice BW1 square wave reproducer i had with TC9FD seems distances a lot at present. The 400Hz XO i perceived sound so clean and nice that i call it Ref Monitor here local, and the 150Hz one was full ranger sound when best because it had most of the audio band covered and distortion rise. Today i lean to the 150Hz one but lets see after some rest.
Hi wesayso,
You joined just as i had to post, sorry i can't hang on more this night but answer that i tried carefull get linear in IRR domain to get best symmetry in pre and post ringing.
EDIT okay i post IR and SR for sum 400Hz XO and HD. And it shoul be said it is nearly as same standard as the BW1 (post 63 http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full...4-rs225-8-fast-ref-monitor-7.html#post4310944) because no treatment here, i measure speaker sitting in a bookcase up agaist a wall because i haven't else where to put it and therefor the reflections.
Will retire get back tomorrow .... 
Yes both XO points is the same FAST system measured and overlayed and could look like a three way system sorry : ). It rings when measuring LF or HF alone but when summed it looks fine. It does't sound harsh at all, and at IRR domain have by EQ corrected linear overlap before choose the XO points else think the ringing gets annoying and unsymmetrical for pre and post ringing as i understand. And no other FIR tricks is used its still a minimum phase speaker as it was one driver because the invinsible XO phase shift.
Hi satx,
Member POS has shared a program called Rehase and it can create those filters pretty easy. I use a 10" as seen at past in thread where it was paired a TC9FD.
Is it good enough excuse i retire for today even i posted the interesting XO, because feel like a hanged cat or something worse. Will post data and picture of speaker and sound clips later.
Hope that tomorrow it sounds as great as perceived this evening when tired, because the nice BW1 square wave reproducer i had with TC9FD seems distances a lot at present. The 400Hz XO i perceived sound so clean and nice that i call it Ref Monitor here local, and the 150Hz one was full ranger sound when best because it had most of the audio band covered and distortion rise. Today i lean to the 150Hz one but lets see after some rest.
Hi wesayso,
You joined just as i had to post
, sorry i can't hang on more this night but answer that i tried carefull get linear in IRR domain to get best symmetry in pre and post ringing.EDIT okay i post IR and SR for sum 400Hz XO and HD. And it shoul be said it is nearly as same standard as the BW1 (post 63 http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/full...4-rs225-8-fast-ref-monitor-7.html#post4310944) because no treatment here, i measure speaker sitting in a bookcase up agaist a wall because i haven't else where to put it and therefor the reflections.
Will retire get back tomorrow
.... Attachments
Last edited: