Points to consider
Good point Tosh !
Also, if anyone specifically wants to use that Peerless tweeter, buy a pair soon because it seems manufacture of it has ceased,
but do not worry too much, because it is likely that Peerless will introduce an improved model at some time.
For what I prefer in tweeters I would not buy that model,
though I'd try them if I was given a pair, or found at a very low price somewhere.
*****************************
Matt,
as you are using a digital cross-over in your computer,
I suppose you have 2 power amplifiers - one for tweeters and one for woofers ... ?
Important - if you are driving a tweeter directly from an amplifier with no capacitor in Series in circuit between - measure the DC voltage offsets across both channels' outputs of your amplifier.
Measure with the tweeter connected to the amplifier.
The offset voltage may measure either + or - , and some number of millivolts.
Any significant DC voltage present will cause the tweeter voice-coil to be either forward or behind the centre of its position in the magnetic gap,
and the centre position of its suspension extention.
That will cause distortion for one half of each cycle of the tweeter's oscillation.
Remember, there is only 0.5mm maximum excursion permitted for that SEAS tweeter, and a significant DC voltage can occupy all of that.
This problem does not occur for woofers, unless much larger DC offsets,
because woofers have several millimetres of excursion capability at least.
Also, given the peculiarities of Digital outputs - such as from Computers - there may be differences in the amount of DC offset from the computer for different selected frequencies of its cross-over program,
thus, if you find only low DC millivolts' output from the amplifier when the computer is not active to amp input, turn ON the computer and measure the amp's outputs again, and with different cross-over frequencies selected in the computer.
The amplifier will of course amplify greatly any very small DC offsets from the computer, if your amp is a DC-coupled type, and most modern amplfiers are.
Post your results here.
*******************************
Regarding your other plans:-
are the High-pass and Low-pass Filters in your computer program able to be set at different frequencies and dB/octave slopes to each other ? ,
or, can only one frequency be selected for both filters, and only one selectable type of filter slope applied to both ?
If different can be selected for each filter arm of the crossover there are other things you can try for practical application of your tweeters to your CC17 woofer, and to whatever other you may decide to buy.
Some loudspeaker system manufacturers do this, and for good reasons.
********************************
The RC network in the Ruarks may be only an Impedance compensating Zobel,
or it may be part of the cross-over slope filter - and it may be part-both.
There are no fixed applications for filter components for use with moving coil speaker drivers, because moving coil drivers are not constant Resistance Loads, nor even Constant Impedance Loads -
- except a few by co-incidence or very clever design.
Look at the Impedance Plot for a woofer or tweeter.
The peak at the low frequency end is the fundamental resonance - Fs - of the moving system - of its total mass reacting with its total suspensions' compliances.
Further up the frequency range you will see a minimum Impedance area,
and the Impedance there is usually very close to the Specifications' Rated Impedance for the driver,
and is purely Resistive at its minimum point, but greater than the DC resistance of the voice-coil of the driver.
Further up the frequency range you will see the Impedance curve sloping upwards.
Many DIYers think this is caused only by the Inductance of the voice-coil,
and that as voice-coil Inductance is constant, the Impedance increase is a linear Inductive Reactance,
but that is NOT the case.
Voice-coil Resistance and Inductance are only constant when the voice-coil is not a part of the speaker.
When the voice-coil is connected to the resonant mass of the speaker cone or dome, and its suspensions, and within the Magnetic Field of the gap within the Metal magnet, all those fixtures present cause BOTH the total effective Resistance and total effective Inductance to change with the frequency of the signal applied.
What happens in reality is that as frequency is increased above the minimum Impedance region, the effective Resistance increases and the effective Inductance decreases.
This cannot be completely compensated for with a fixed Resistor + fixed Capacitor Zobel.
Basically, all the R, C, and L components chosen for use in cross-overs have to be considered in relation to the changes I have described that occur with frequency in the driver, AND for that reason NONE of the simple cross-over calculations' formulae actually work in practice !
Those formulae are all taken from Radio Frequency theory and applications where there are constant Resistances, or at least constant Impedances.
Most successful manufacturers choose crossover components after making comprehensive measurements on the drivers they intend to use.
Applying simple Filter formulae is at best only an approximation, unless a lucky co-incidence occurs.
Only a FEW computer programs can analyse sufficient of the driver's characteristics to predict a suitable cross-over circuit - most of the programs simply estimate, and there is then always some amount of error.
This also happens with Active cross-overs, such as you seem to be using, because unless the roll-off slopes and any resonant peaks in the drivers' responses in the cross-over region are taken into account, the actual cross-over will not be simply what the active filter is presenting.
A lot for you to think about.
******************************
Why do you want your sealed bookshelf speaker to work to around 100Hz ?
If you want to be able to use them as "stand-alone" if required, then for the reason of the frequencies actually present in popular music recordings in the bass, it is better to design to work down to at least 80Hz, and to 60Hz is better, for sealed cabinets.
For Ported cabinets the situation is somewhat different, and more complicated given how the brain interprets what is heard,
but the Port should be tuned no higher than 40Hz if the speaker is to have wide application.
Given the size of your Ruarks, and the capabilities of the CC17 SEAS driver, a 40Hz port tuning is possible.
I can recommend a suitable to 80Hz, at least, SEAS 6 1/2" driver for use in a smaller sealed enclosure,
or you can use the CC17 in a smaller sealed enclosure, and a new model, suitable SEAS driver in your Ruark cabinets.
*******************************
Most metal coned mid/bass drivers have a large resonant peak in the midrange which has to be allowed for in the crossover design, regardless of whether Active or Passive is used.
Until you become very knowledgeable about such it is better to avoid metal coned mid/bass drivers, or simply copy a proven design by an experienced person.
Quite good results can be got using some paper or plastic coned mid/bass drivers, and these are usually simpler to desgn cross-overs for.
********************************
What do you prefer to do now ?
... before I even mention the audible problems caused when using 2nd order filters for cross-over to sub-woofers.
Good point Tosh !
Also, if anyone specifically wants to use that Peerless tweeter, buy a pair soon because it seems manufacture of it has ceased,
but do not worry too much, because it is likely that Peerless will introduce an improved model at some time.
For what I prefer in tweeters I would not buy that model,
though I'd try them if I was given a pair, or found at a very low price somewhere.
*****************************
Matt,
as you are using a digital cross-over in your computer,
I suppose you have 2 power amplifiers - one for tweeters and one for woofers ... ?
Important - if you are driving a tweeter directly from an amplifier with no capacitor in Series in circuit between - measure the DC voltage offsets across both channels' outputs of your amplifier.
Measure with the tweeter connected to the amplifier.
The offset voltage may measure either + or - , and some number of millivolts.
Any significant DC voltage present will cause the tweeter voice-coil to be either forward or behind the centre of its position in the magnetic gap,
and the centre position of its suspension extention.
That will cause distortion for one half of each cycle of the tweeter's oscillation.
Remember, there is only 0.5mm maximum excursion permitted for that SEAS tweeter, and a significant DC voltage can occupy all of that.
This problem does not occur for woofers, unless much larger DC offsets,
because woofers have several millimetres of excursion capability at least.
Also, given the peculiarities of Digital outputs - such as from Computers - there may be differences in the amount of DC offset from the computer for different selected frequencies of its cross-over program,
thus, if you find only low DC millivolts' output from the amplifier when the computer is not active to amp input, turn ON the computer and measure the amp's outputs again, and with different cross-over frequencies selected in the computer.
The amplifier will of course amplify greatly any very small DC offsets from the computer, if your amp is a DC-coupled type, and most modern amplfiers are.
Post your results here.
*******************************
Regarding your other plans:-
are the High-pass and Low-pass Filters in your computer program able to be set at different frequencies and dB/octave slopes to each other ? ,
or, can only one frequency be selected for both filters, and only one selectable type of filter slope applied to both ?
If different can be selected for each filter arm of the crossover there are other things you can try for practical application of your tweeters to your CC17 woofer, and to whatever other you may decide to buy.
Some loudspeaker system manufacturers do this, and for good reasons.
********************************
The RC network in the Ruarks may be only an Impedance compensating Zobel,
or it may be part of the cross-over slope filter - and it may be part-both.
There are no fixed applications for filter components for use with moving coil speaker drivers, because moving coil drivers are not constant Resistance Loads, nor even Constant Impedance Loads -
- except a few by co-incidence or very clever design.
Look at the Impedance Plot for a woofer or tweeter.
The peak at the low frequency end is the fundamental resonance - Fs - of the moving system - of its total mass reacting with its total suspensions' compliances.
Further up the frequency range you will see a minimum Impedance area,
and the Impedance there is usually very close to the Specifications' Rated Impedance for the driver,
and is purely Resistive at its minimum point, but greater than the DC resistance of the voice-coil of the driver.
Further up the frequency range you will see the Impedance curve sloping upwards.
Many DIYers think this is caused only by the Inductance of the voice-coil,
and that as voice-coil Inductance is constant, the Impedance increase is a linear Inductive Reactance,
but that is NOT the case.
Voice-coil Resistance and Inductance are only constant when the voice-coil is not a part of the speaker.
When the voice-coil is connected to the resonant mass of the speaker cone or dome, and its suspensions, and within the Magnetic Field of the gap within the Metal magnet, all those fixtures present cause BOTH the total effective Resistance and total effective Inductance to change with the frequency of the signal applied.
What happens in reality is that as frequency is increased above the minimum Impedance region, the effective Resistance increases and the effective Inductance decreases.
This cannot be completely compensated for with a fixed Resistor + fixed Capacitor Zobel.
Basically, all the R, C, and L components chosen for use in cross-overs have to be considered in relation to the changes I have described that occur with frequency in the driver, AND for that reason NONE of the simple cross-over calculations' formulae actually work in practice !
Those formulae are all taken from Radio Frequency theory and applications where there are constant Resistances, or at least constant Impedances.
Most successful manufacturers choose crossover components after making comprehensive measurements on the drivers they intend to use.
Applying simple Filter formulae is at best only an approximation, unless a lucky co-incidence occurs.
Only a FEW computer programs can analyse sufficient of the driver's characteristics to predict a suitable cross-over circuit - most of the programs simply estimate, and there is then always some amount of error.
This also happens with Active cross-overs, such as you seem to be using, because unless the roll-off slopes and any resonant peaks in the drivers' responses in the cross-over region are taken into account, the actual cross-over will not be simply what the active filter is presenting.
A lot for you to think about.
******************************
Why do you want your sealed bookshelf speaker to work to around 100Hz ?
If you want to be able to use them as "stand-alone" if required, then for the reason of the frequencies actually present in popular music recordings in the bass, it is better to design to work down to at least 80Hz, and to 60Hz is better, for sealed cabinets.
For Ported cabinets the situation is somewhat different, and more complicated given how the brain interprets what is heard,
but the Port should be tuned no higher than 40Hz if the speaker is to have wide application.
Given the size of your Ruarks, and the capabilities of the CC17 SEAS driver, a 40Hz port tuning is possible.
I can recommend a suitable to 80Hz, at least, SEAS 6 1/2" driver for use in a smaller sealed enclosure,
or you can use the CC17 in a smaller sealed enclosure, and a new model, suitable SEAS driver in your Ruark cabinets.
*******************************
Most metal coned mid/bass drivers have a large resonant peak in the midrange which has to be allowed for in the crossover design, regardless of whether Active or Passive is used.
Until you become very knowledgeable about such it is better to avoid metal coned mid/bass drivers, or simply copy a proven design by an experienced person.
Quite good results can be got using some paper or plastic coned mid/bass drivers, and these are usually simpler to desgn cross-overs for.
********************************
What do you prefer to do now ?
... before I even mention the audible problems caused when using 2nd order filters for cross-over to sub-woofers.
Last edited:
First, thank you! This is the best reply I've ever had to any question I've ever posted on any forum on the internet! After several rereads, I've finally digested it =)
Regarding DC offset: This was the biggest revelation to me, I didn't realise its importance, I'll buy a multimeter and post the results when I've measured everything
The crossover I use is called Frequency Allocator Light, it can load measured FRD files and model them and simulate the crossover which I can then tweak after measuring the result with my mic. It can alter the slope just like any analogue crossover, as well as delay and EQ for each driver. I use a calibrated microphone to measure the frequency response of the drivers, my sound card is EMU 1820m, I use its microphone preamp. I currently use an old Marantz SR6200 home theatre receiver's RCA inputs, I will upgrade to good quality amplifiers once I've decided what to buy.
What sort of sound improvement would an amplifier upgrade give please? I've read all sorts of conflicting information, like "all amps sound the same", which is of course not always true, but are the main desirable properties lower distortion than the drivers at the loudest volumes used, low DC offset, low noise and linear frequency response? How much does component quality affect sound with amplifiers? With passive crossovers it seems to sometimes have a huge effect, eg going from electrolytics to polypropylene
What are the problems with 2nd order crossovers at low frequencies please? The passive subwoofer will be also crossed over with the software
I only need a speaker that goes down to 100Hz, mainly because it will almost definately be used with subwoofers, and I was thinking maybe I could get a clearer midrange if I didn't limit myself to larger woofers, but the other issue was that I thought maybe it would be easier to look less intrusive and big if the speakers were smaller (obviously!). The main problem I have with the Ruark cabinets is they don't use flared ports, so the port noise is very bad.
I think I've covered everything, thanks for all your help, I deeply appreciate it
Regarding DC offset: This was the biggest revelation to me, I didn't realise its importance, I'll buy a multimeter and post the results when I've measured everything
The crossover I use is called Frequency Allocator Light, it can load measured FRD files and model them and simulate the crossover which I can then tweak after measuring the result with my mic. It can alter the slope just like any analogue crossover, as well as delay and EQ for each driver. I use a calibrated microphone to measure the frequency response of the drivers, my sound card is EMU 1820m, I use its microphone preamp. I currently use an old Marantz SR6200 home theatre receiver's RCA inputs, I will upgrade to good quality amplifiers once I've decided what to buy.
What sort of sound improvement would an amplifier upgrade give please? I've read all sorts of conflicting information, like "all amps sound the same", which is of course not always true, but are the main desirable properties lower distortion than the drivers at the loudest volumes used, low DC offset, low noise and linear frequency response? How much does component quality affect sound with amplifiers? With passive crossovers it seems to sometimes have a huge effect, eg going from electrolytics to polypropylene
What are the problems with 2nd order crossovers at low frequencies please? The passive subwoofer will be also crossed over with the software
I only need a speaker that goes down to 100Hz, mainly because it will almost definately be used with subwoofers, and I was thinking maybe I could get a clearer midrange if I didn't limit myself to larger woofers, but the other issue was that I thought maybe it would be easier to look less intrusive and big if the speakers were smaller (obviously!). The main problem I have with the Ruark cabinets is they don't use flared ports, so the port noise is very bad.
I think I've covered everything, thanks for all your help, I deeply appreciate it
Replies to some of yours ...
If you are buying a Multimeter, decide first whether you want to be able to do a lot of Audio work with it,
or whether you want to only make a few rudimentary measurements.
If you want to later make accurate measurements of Audio-band signals, then buy a True RMS capable meter,
AND, look at the Specifications for its AC Voltage Bandwidth.
Some are accurate to only 400Hz, some to 2kHz, some to 10kHz -{which is just sufficient for basic audio work}-,
and a few, more expensive, will measure AC signals fairly accurately to beyond 20kHz.
In the "Short Specification" quoted in most catalogs, only the basic DC Voltage accuracy is stated.
You will have to search further to find the full Specifications.
*********************************************
I suppose Marantz SR6200 has four separate power amplifiers in it ?
- and perhaps a fifth for Sub-woofer ?
It may be quite a good amplifier - what year was it made ?
*********************************************
All amps only sound the same to people who do not listen,
and those whose brains do not register differences in presentation of sound as high priority -{some people are born lucky !} ,
and those who confuse the differences in the amplifiers' sounds with the differences between speakers' sounds,
and those who are susceptable to various tricks that some equipment sellers practice.
*********************************************
Are the Ruarks too visually intrusive, and you want to dispose of them ?
If you want to keep them, they can be modified to give two some-what different bass responses,
and better quality of even if a little less quantity of bass.
What is the Internal diameter of their Port ?
*********************************************
I'll Post about sub-woofers after I've understood sufficiently what you are hoping to achieve,
because a lot of this is very time-consuming to explain comprehensively.
Name some critical recordings you own which actually have very low-frequency bass notes,
as distinct from recordings which simply have a lot of upper bass frequencies ... ?
Does your computer program have a Spectrum Analyser function to enable you to see how low in the bass the pitches of the notes
on your recordings are ?
If you are buying a Multimeter, decide first whether you want to be able to do a lot of Audio work with it,
or whether you want to only make a few rudimentary measurements.
If you want to later make accurate measurements of Audio-band signals, then buy a True RMS capable meter,
AND, look at the Specifications for its AC Voltage Bandwidth.
Some are accurate to only 400Hz, some to 2kHz, some to 10kHz -{which is just sufficient for basic audio work}-,
and a few, more expensive, will measure AC signals fairly accurately to beyond 20kHz.
In the "Short Specification" quoted in most catalogs, only the basic DC Voltage accuracy is stated.
You will have to search further to find the full Specifications.
*********************************************
I suppose Marantz SR6200 has four separate power amplifiers in it ?
- and perhaps a fifth for Sub-woofer ?
It may be quite a good amplifier - what year was it made ?
*********************************************
All amps only sound the same to people who do not listen,
and those whose brains do not register differences in presentation of sound as high priority -{some people are born lucky !} ,
and those who confuse the differences in the amplifiers' sounds with the differences between speakers' sounds,
and those who are susceptable to various tricks that some equipment sellers practice.
*********************************************
Are the Ruarks too visually intrusive, and you want to dispose of them ?
If you want to keep them, they can be modified to give two some-what different bass responses,
and better quality of even if a little less quantity of bass.
What is the Internal diameter of their Port ?
*********************************************
I'll Post about sub-woofers after I've understood sufficiently what you are hoping to achieve,
because a lot of this is very time-consuming to explain comprehensively.
Name some critical recordings you own which actually have very low-frequency bass notes,
as distinct from recordings which simply have a lot of upper bass frequencies ... ?
Does your computer program have a Spectrum Analyser function to enable you to see how low in the bass the pitches of the notes
on your recordings are ?
Last edited:
First, thanks for your help again. The SR6200 was made in 2002, there is some low noise (nothing noticable at normal distances) in a couple of channels, it has 6 power amplifiers in it.
One of the Ruark speakers is working fine, as new. The other has had its tweeter replaced, and some crossover wires cut. I suppose I could replace the tweeter back to the 25TFFC, resolder the crossover wires and pass it to a family member. Until then, I will use them with the ports plugged
My goal to make a pair of speakers using 12" woofer, 3" dome and a tweeter. I would like to use waveguides, and the speakers will hopefully last over 15 years and look good.
One reason I would like such low bass is because I use them for watching movies too, and also if I use ported and go low enough the group delay won't be audible at all with music that does have low bass, and also distortion will be very low with frequencies in music. I realise the flaws in me trying to get good low bass (the room being a major one, audibility of distortion and group delay in the low frequencies being another), but I want to try anyway!
I notice the Klein + Hummel O 300 and O 500 monitors. Between these 2 driver layouts, which one will be best? The O 300 will be more space saving and possibly better visually, but are there dispersion disadvantages of the midrange beside tweeter?
Are there any dome midranges that are made with waveguides, such as the Seas 27TBCD/GB-DXT tweeter? I will probably crossover at around 3kHz LR4 and around 500Hz LR4. Would it be best to make my own waveguide? Is there anything special about the DXT "technology" over a traditional waveguide, or are they effectively the same despite the marketing?
I apologise if I've asked too much in one go! I'd like to once again say a big thankyou
One of the Ruark speakers is working fine, as new. The other has had its tweeter replaced, and some crossover wires cut. I suppose I could replace the tweeter back to the 25TFFC, resolder the crossover wires and pass it to a family member. Until then, I will use them with the ports plugged
My goal to make a pair of speakers using 12" woofer, 3" dome and a tweeter. I would like to use waveguides, and the speakers will hopefully last over 15 years and look good.
One reason I would like such low bass is because I use them for watching movies too, and also if I use ported and go low enough the group delay won't be audible at all with music that does have low bass, and also distortion will be very low with frequencies in music. I realise the flaws in me trying to get good low bass (the room being a major one, audibility of distortion and group delay in the low frequencies being another), but I want to try anyway!
I notice the Klein + Hummel O 300 and O 500 monitors. Between these 2 driver layouts, which one will be best? The O 300 will be more space saving and possibly better visually, but are there dispersion disadvantages of the midrange beside tweeter?
Are there any dome midranges that are made with waveguides, such as the Seas 27TBCD/GB-DXT tweeter? I will probably crossover at around 3kHz LR4 and around 500Hz LR4. Would it be best to make my own waveguide? Is there anything special about the DXT "technology" over a traditional waveguide, or are they effectively the same despite the marketing?
I apologise if I've asked too much in one go! I'd like to once again say a big thankyou
What do like most about it ?
Hi Ling Gowa,
Thankyou for updating us about the continuing version of the HDS tweeter.
Likely it was originally made by ScanSpeak for Peerless,
and is now released under their own name following the separation of the Ownership of the two Companies.
Compared to other tweeters you have experience with,
what is it about the HDS/Discovery tweeter that you prefer ?
Hi Ling Gowa,
Thankyou for updating us about the continuing version of the HDS tweeter.
Likely it was originally made by ScanSpeak for Peerless,
and is now released under their own name following the separation of the Ownership of the two Companies.
Compared to other tweeters you have experience with,
what is it about the HDS/Discovery tweeter that you prefer ?
Klein + Hummel, and what you are planning ...
Hi Matt,
Klein + Hummel O 300 is designed for use by a single listener - such as a recording or mix-down Engineer or Producer,
and can be angled in such way as to give a reasonably coherent, frequency correct balance for one listening position only.
I do NOT recommend you buy these for home use.
You can, if planned and designed carefully, achieve something more suitable, and otherways just as good, and better in the bass.
If you want K + H's O 500, buy them, because it will be very difficult to make something like that yourself, likely imposible.
However, those are really for recording studio control rooms.
I would make something simpler for home use.
Problem with 12" drivers is that they do not extend with good audible characteristics into the lower midrange,
thus one has to find a suitable Cone driver to use for lower midrange through to upper midrange.
The only mid-dome I know of that can be got to do the jo& is the ATC driver,
but that is very expensive, and requires a lot of cross-over design to get to work at its best.
I cannot advise well on how to do that via Posts in a Thread,
nor in any way other than with the drivers in a test room.
The SEAS DXT tweeter is fascinating for its excellent off-axis response,
and as result of that I have thought a lot about ways it could be used,
but none are simple, nor will apply to what you seem to be trying to do.
I do not know of any DXT type mid-dome, and trying to make one work optimally with a wave-guide will be difficult,
and is more complicated than I can describe here.
For what you seem to want a 12"
- ㅣㅐㅛㅅㅏㅑㅋㅕ교ㅋ로 - - ????
Hi Matt,
Klein + Hummel O 300 is designed for use by a single listener - such as a recording or mix-down Engineer or Producer,
and can be angled in such way as to give a reasonably coherent, frequency correct balance for one listening position only.
I do NOT recommend you buy these for home use.
You can, if planned and designed carefully, achieve something more suitable, and otherways just as good, and better in the bass.
If you want K + H's O 500, buy them, because it will be very difficult to make something like that yourself, likely imposible.
However, those are really for recording studio control rooms.
I would make something simpler for home use.
Problem with 12" drivers is that they do not extend with good audible characteristics into the lower midrange,
thus one has to find a suitable Cone driver to use for lower midrange through to upper midrange.
The only mid-dome I know of that can be got to do the jo& is the ATC driver,
but that is very expensive, and requires a lot of cross-over design to get to work at its best.
I cannot advise well on how to do that via Posts in a Thread,
nor in any way other than with the drivers in a test room.
The SEAS DXT tweeter is fascinating for its excellent off-axis response,
and as result of that I have thought a lot about ways it could be used,
but none are simple, nor will apply to what you seem to be trying to do.
I do not know of any DXT type mid-dome, and trying to make one work optimally with a wave-guide will be difficult,
and is more complicated than I can describe here.
For what you seem to want a 12"
- ㅣㅐㅛㅅㅏㅑㅋㅕ교ㅋ로 - - ????
Thanks Alan, I'm still here, and reading your good advice =)
(the English bit anyway!!)
I'm interested in whether you would recommend 2 low crossed subwoofers properly placed separate to main 2 way speakers in a room instead of all-in-one speakers? Would the crossover (is around 80Hz best?) need to be 4th order in this case to prevent directionality from the subs, and would this group delay be audible?
Thanks
(the English bit anyway!!)
I'm interested in whether you would recommend 2 low crossed subwoofers properly placed separate to main 2 way speakers in a room instead of all-in-one speakers? Would the crossover (is around 80Hz best?) need to be 4th order in this case to prevent directionality from the subs, and would this group delay be audible?
Thanks
Why the hurry ?
Hi Matt,
sorry about all the time till I got back here - too much else to do !
Why do you want to buy the passive B&K - before you have fully decided everything else that you actually need to know before you will get the sound that exists in your imagination ...
I'll continue from where I got interrupted by these evil keyboards !
For what you seem to want a 12" to do can be done with a modern 10" such as one or other of the three SEAS medium priced models I previously mentioned.
With either one of two of those you will be able to use a Morel EM-1308 mid-dome, which seems to be the best medium priced mid-dome currently available, though there may be some others which I do not know about.
The third SEAS 10" would need a cone-mid because its midrange is not good enough to a sufficiently high frequency to cross to most domes.
This 10" could be used separately in a subwoofer, and you could use your Ruarks as the main speakers.
A 10" does not need a cabinet as large as a 12", and a good 10" can play quite loudly, BUT if you want very loud to a very low frequency then you may need a suitable 12", or a dual-drivers' subwoofer.
All this is getting quite complicated, and too much to discuss comprehensively in a Thread in the limited amount of time I have available.
Your Marantz can drive 6 drivers after your cross-over, thus you can make a 3-way loudspeaker if you want to, and quite a good one if you apply suitable planning to it.
You say you are worried about Group Delay, and Ringing -{high-order filters' ringing I presume you mean ?}- and you want Good Definition -{of the bass range through to the midrange I presume}.
In my experience, and that of a lot of listeners I know who know nothing about the technical terms but comment in everyday language about the nature of the sounds they hear from various loudspeaker systems,
Group Delay is not as much a problem as Polarity Inversion is, and especially if one wants a punchy sound and not only a lot of indistinct bass wobbling around as the pitch changes and whilst substantial Transients are occurring in the music.
Thus leave Group Delay as the last consideration, -{and for the Engineers to rabbit on about}-.
Better is to avoid x-over types that require Inversion of the Polarity of one of the drivers to be able sum to flat frequency response.
Inverted polarity causes loss of punch and definition, though it does cause a distance-perspective to the sound that some listeners like,
however that is useful only in the midrange or treble, and not in the bass.
All high-slope crossovers Ring - it cannot be avoided, but it can be minimalized.
Best option is to use drivers with a smooth roll-off at one or both ends of their pass-band so that these roll-offs can be part of the cross-over slope,
and then use lower slope electrical filters.
If a bass driver with an approximately 2nd order mids' roll-off slope is used then one can apply a 2nd order electrical filter at a suitable frequency to achieve an effective 4th order cross-over, and with less of the Ringing, and no requirement to invert the polarity of one of the drivers.
This can produce "good definition".
Similar can be done with driver slopes for mid-driver and tweeter,
and for 3rd order as well as 4th order crossovers - both using same polarity connected drivers.
One simply has to choose the optimum drivers.
That means choosing one to start with - usually either the mid-driver OR the bass driver, depending on what one wants to achieve -
and then choose a suitable tweeter that can be optimally combined with the mid-driver - and not picking as start point a technically measured close to ideal tweeter, because that tweeter may not be the best one to use with the optimum mid-driver, unless one wants to have to do a lot of mucking around with the cross-over, even if it is a PC-programmable one !
The simpler circuit the design can be that can be made to work well
will always produce sound closer to the original sound of the recording played
than the same technical result achieved via a more complex circuit design.
Complex designs create additional sound effects.
Hi Matt,
sorry about all the time till I got back here - too much else to do !
Why do you want to buy the passive B&K - before you have fully decided everything else that you actually need to know before you will get the sound that exists in your imagination ...
I'll continue from where I got interrupted by these evil keyboards !
For what you seem to want a 12" to do can be done with a modern 10" such as one or other of the three SEAS medium priced models I previously mentioned.
With either one of two of those you will be able to use a Morel EM-1308 mid-dome, which seems to be the best medium priced mid-dome currently available, though there may be some others which I do not know about.
The third SEAS 10" would need a cone-mid because its midrange is not good enough to a sufficiently high frequency to cross to most domes.
This 10" could be used separately in a subwoofer, and you could use your Ruarks as the main speakers.
A 10" does not need a cabinet as large as a 12", and a good 10" can play quite loudly, BUT if you want very loud to a very low frequency then you may need a suitable 12", or a dual-drivers' subwoofer.
All this is getting quite complicated, and too much to discuss comprehensively in a Thread in the limited amount of time I have available.
Your Marantz can drive 6 drivers after your cross-over, thus you can make a 3-way loudspeaker if you want to, and quite a good one if you apply suitable planning to it.
You say you are worried about Group Delay, and Ringing -{high-order filters' ringing I presume you mean ?}- and you want Good Definition -{of the bass range through to the midrange I presume}.
In my experience, and that of a lot of listeners I know who know nothing about the technical terms but comment in everyday language about the nature of the sounds they hear from various loudspeaker systems,
Group Delay is not as much a problem as Polarity Inversion is, and especially if one wants a punchy sound and not only a lot of indistinct bass wobbling around as the pitch changes and whilst substantial Transients are occurring in the music.
Thus leave Group Delay as the last consideration, -{and for the Engineers to rabbit on about}-.
Better is to avoid x-over types that require Inversion of the Polarity of one of the drivers to be able sum to flat frequency response.
Inverted polarity causes loss of punch and definition, though it does cause a distance-perspective to the sound that some listeners like,
however that is useful only in the midrange or treble, and not in the bass.
All high-slope crossovers Ring - it cannot be avoided, but it can be minimalized.
Best option is to use drivers with a smooth roll-off at one or both ends of their pass-band so that these roll-offs can be part of the cross-over slope,
and then use lower slope electrical filters.
If a bass driver with an approximately 2nd order mids' roll-off slope is used then one can apply a 2nd order electrical filter at a suitable frequency to achieve an effective 4th order cross-over, and with less of the Ringing, and no requirement to invert the polarity of one of the drivers.
This can produce "good definition".
Similar can be done with driver slopes for mid-driver and tweeter,
and for 3rd order as well as 4th order crossovers - both using same polarity connected drivers.
One simply has to choose the optimum drivers.
That means choosing one to start with - usually either the mid-driver OR the bass driver, depending on what one wants to achieve -
and then choose a suitable tweeter that can be optimally combined with the mid-driver - and not picking as start point a technically measured close to ideal tweeter, because that tweeter may not be the best one to use with the optimum mid-driver, unless one wants to have to do a lot of mucking around with the cross-over, even if it is a PC-programmable one !
The simpler circuit the design can be that can be made to work well
will always produce sound closer to the original sound of the recording played
than the same technical result achieved via a more complex circuit design.
Complex designs create additional sound effects.
Last edited:
Thanks for the reply, I thought maybe a subwoofer was the way to go because they need good positioning in a room to get good sound and using them in normal speaker positions would be unlikely to be best. I also thought that maybe in the future I could have the option to upgrade the driver in the sub/subs so that if I did want to change tact I could still use the subs as part of the speakers.
Thanks for the advice on crossovers, if you had time delay available would you always use an LR4 acoustic crossover?
Regarding Qms and Qes, if I used great amplifiers would you recommend me to opt for drivers with low mechanical damping and high electrical damping? (for better dynamic range/lower volume resolution?)
Thanks, so much to learn =)
Thanks for the advice on crossovers, if you had time delay available would you always use an LR4 acoustic crossover?
Regarding Qms and Qes, if I used great amplifiers would you recommend me to opt for drivers with low mechanical damping and high electrical damping? (for better dynamic range/lower volume resolution?)
Thanks, so much to learn =)
Various
Room positioning of a pair of loudspeakers is decided by several factors,
and some of those are the visual asthetics, and the practical location with regard to the available space and quantity of other things in the room,
but for Sound there are two criteria:-
(1) Tonal balance - usually one decides the best position for an even bass response, and unless the room's acoustics are very live or very dead, usually the midrange and treble will be optimum there also.
Treble-Midrange balance is often a matter of the correct height - the vertical axis one listens on - with respect to the drivers AND to the diectional characteristics of the crossover between the drivers.
(2) Imaging - this is determined by the proximity or the distance of the loudspeakers to/from other large items,walls, closed windows, etc ...
and the angle at which they are pointed towards the listener, and the distance the listener is from the loudspeakers.
Often both (1) & (2) can be got to be good in a single position.
It depends on your room, and what is in it, etc ...
A Single subwoofer can draw audible attention to itself if its size prevents it from being optimally placed with regard to dominant room modes in the bass, AND if it is crossed over too high in frequency - into the range where one's hearing is direction sensitive, AND if it is simply too much further spaced from the stereo speakers to the degree that the transient response is ruined by delayed arrival time -{worse than simply Group Delay}.
I think a suitable 10" in a tall cabinet with mid and treble drivers can give very good bass, along with very good tonal balance.
This has to be considered in the Design stage, and if any other users of the room have to be considered .
You can make a separate single one or a pair of sub-woofers if you wish.
As well as the SEAS 10" drivers, there are also very good 10" drivers made in the UK by Volt, who also make 12" and larger ...
***************************************
I would only use a full electrical or electronic LR4 crossover if I had no other option, because I prefer the sound from a crossover combinating the drivers' natural roll-offs and the added filters, AND I do not like LR4 for home-audio because the filters ring if fully electrical/electronic,
-{but less so if a combination of drivers' responses plus added filters}.
Full electrical/electronic LR4 is good for Public Address systems, and some types of Recording Studio monitors.
I prefer the sound of 1st order slopes, but that means a carefully chosen tweeter and reduced loudness capacity otherwise distortion from the tweeter,
or from the midrange in some 3-ways even if not as much from the tweeter then in a 3-way as in a 2-way.
If not 1st order, then I don't mind 3rd order when its a combination of the drivers' responses and the additional filters, and I am using one of this type currently.
I would only use Time Delay for a Studio Monitor or a Public Address system,
because I do not like the audible results of the additional circuitry required for such.
I prefer to position the drivers in such way as to get the correct arrival times.
Basically, I like the sounds from as simple a circuit as possible,
because MUSIC is NOT always what a 2-dimensional graph on paper or a screen depicts a measurable response to be, nor even what a 3-D image can show ...
The audio/brain function is complex, and more-so than many engineering-obsessive researchers, or similar designers, seem to understand.
Of course, what you like to hear may be different to me !
******************************************
Damping - whether mechanical or electrical - it depends on what is required to achieve the sound one wants.
Mechanical always involves Inertia, and Stability under hard driving conditions,
thus the mechanical needs to be in between where both such are not too detrimental.
High electrical is usually good for tweeters and mid-drivers, but for woofers it has to be optimum for the type of enclosure the driver has to work in, and to achieve the type of bass response one wants for both the practical audibilty of the lowest notes possible with the chosen driver, and how well those notes are reproduced.
Design for best sound from the drivers and enclosure, and one can upgrade the amplifiers later.
If one wants to use Valve/Tube amps, then one has to decide some of the driver/enclosure matters differently than for conventional solid state amps, because most valve/tube amps have lower Damping Factor than most solid state amps.
Room positioning of a pair of loudspeakers is decided by several factors,
and some of those are the visual asthetics, and the practical location with regard to the available space and quantity of other things in the room,
but for Sound there are two criteria:-
(1) Tonal balance - usually one decides the best position for an even bass response, and unless the room's acoustics are very live or very dead, usually the midrange and treble will be optimum there also.
Treble-Midrange balance is often a matter of the correct height - the vertical axis one listens on - with respect to the drivers AND to the diectional characteristics of the crossover between the drivers.
(2) Imaging - this is determined by the proximity or the distance of the loudspeakers to/from other large items,walls, closed windows, etc ...
and the angle at which they are pointed towards the listener, and the distance the listener is from the loudspeakers.
Often both (1) & (2) can be got to be good in a single position.
It depends on your room, and what is in it, etc ...
A Single subwoofer can draw audible attention to itself if its size prevents it from being optimally placed with regard to dominant room modes in the bass, AND if it is crossed over too high in frequency - into the range where one's hearing is direction sensitive, AND if it is simply too much further spaced from the stereo speakers to the degree that the transient response is ruined by delayed arrival time -{worse than simply Group Delay}.
I think a suitable 10" in a tall cabinet with mid and treble drivers can give very good bass, along with very good tonal balance.
This has to be considered in the Design stage, and if any other users of the room have to be considered .
You can make a separate single one or a pair of sub-woofers if you wish.
As well as the SEAS 10" drivers, there are also very good 10" drivers made in the UK by Volt, who also make 12" and larger ...
***************************************
I would only use a full electrical or electronic LR4 crossover if I had no other option, because I prefer the sound from a crossover combinating the drivers' natural roll-offs and the added filters, AND I do not like LR4 for home-audio because the filters ring if fully electrical/electronic,
-{but less so if a combination of drivers' responses plus added filters}.
Full electrical/electronic LR4 is good for Public Address systems, and some types of Recording Studio monitors.
I prefer the sound of 1st order slopes, but that means a carefully chosen tweeter and reduced loudness capacity otherwise distortion from the tweeter,
or from the midrange in some 3-ways even if not as much from the tweeter then in a 3-way as in a 2-way.
If not 1st order, then I don't mind 3rd order when its a combination of the drivers' responses and the additional filters, and I am using one of this type currently.
I would only use Time Delay for a Studio Monitor or a Public Address system,
because I do not like the audible results of the additional circuitry required for such.
I prefer to position the drivers in such way as to get the correct arrival times.
Basically, I like the sounds from as simple a circuit as possible,
because MUSIC is NOT always what a 2-dimensional graph on paper or a screen depicts a measurable response to be, nor even what a 3-D image can show ...
The audio/brain function is complex, and more-so than many engineering-obsessive researchers, or similar designers, seem to understand.
Of course, what you like to hear may be different to me !
******************************************
Damping - whether mechanical or electrical - it depends on what is required to achieve the sound one wants.
Mechanical always involves Inertia, and Stability under hard driving conditions,
thus the mechanical needs to be in between where both such are not too detrimental.
High electrical is usually good for tweeters and mid-drivers, but for woofers it has to be optimum for the type of enclosure the driver has to work in, and to achieve the type of bass response one wants for both the practical audibilty of the lowest notes possible with the chosen driver, and how well those notes are reproduced.
Design for best sound from the drivers and enclosure, and one can upgrade the amplifiers later.
If one wants to use Valve/Tube amps, then one has to decide some of the driver/enclosure matters differently than for conventional solid state amps, because most valve/tube amps have lower Damping Factor than most solid state amps.
Last edited:
Thanks, your insight is really interesting. I have my eye on either a 2 or 3 way using a compression driver (with a good horn or waveguide) and "pro" woofers. Do you know out of Precision Devices, BMS and Beyma, which brand would give the best build quality and driver consistency if I spent a decent amount, or how they compare to each other?
I'm led to believe that using Hamming window with FIR crossover would allow steep slopes to be used without audible anomolies, but I would still like to plan for using an IIR crossover for low latency. I think 1st order would be impossible to use with good results at a reasonably close distance?
I will most likely be using good discrete transistor amplifiers, but possibly chipamp and/or class D (for sub 1kHz). If I used a valve amplifier with an active crossover, would it be affected by the large impedance peaks by pro drivers?
Thanks
I'm led to believe that using Hamming window with FIR crossover would allow steep slopes to be used without audible anomolies, but I would still like to plan for using an IIR crossover for low latency. I think 1st order would be impossible to use with good results at a reasonably close distance?
I will most likely be using good discrete transistor amplifiers, but possibly chipamp and/or class D (for sub 1kHz). If I used a valve amplifier with an active crossover, would it be affected by the large impedance peaks by pro drivers?
Thanks
Drivers ; PMC with Waveguide : digital filters
All three of the professional brands you list are likely to have good build quality and reasonable consistency because those three companies have been in business for a while and would not have survived in business with the high prices for their products if the products did not satisfy sufficient pro-buyers.
Pro equipment gets driven very hard and long, thus it has to be rugged at least.
The sound - well one has to listen and decide for one's self - there are always audible differences, but some are the result of how the drivers are mounted and the types of enclosures and other components used in the audio system.
I have heard Beyma cone drivers in two applications and they sounded fine.
I do not know if I have heard drivers from the other two brands, because I do not usually look inside the speaker enclosures of Pro-systems unless there is good reason to, and usually there is not the time or opportunity to.
I would if I was buying.
I think for your application for in-home use that the UK manufactured "Volt" drivers will be suitable, and they are very good, plus can be repaired at the UK factory, if ever necessary.
Find a shop which sells the PMC brand of loudspeakers.
These are basically studio monitors which are also sold for home-audio, and are in some Hi-Fi dealers showrooms for audition.
Listen to the new PMC IB2i model.
This is a 3-way and uses a Volt woofer, plus PMC's own design of a waveguide mid-driver -{as you mention interest in waveguide mid-drivers}-
plus a good tweeter from SEAS.
It is a variation of quarter-wave pipe bass loading, and this model is tuned to a frequency below 30Hz, which as 30Hz is below the lowest pitch of almost all bass instruments will give somewhat better bass accuracy than higher tuned pipes, etc ...
I still prefer sealed enclosures, but well designed quarter-wave pipes - if optimally damped, etc ... - are a good second best for accuracy, and can be got to play louder with less distortion than a similar sized box/driver combination -{except when a substantially better driver in the sealed box}.
I do not study digital filters a lot, thus you may find better information by starting a Thread about those in a suitable Forum section of this web-site, but do remember that you will receive all sorts of opinions of which some will not be based on any, or little, practical experience but merely repeats of understandings or misunderstandings of other published explanations of such.
Within the limits of what I think I understand,
it seems to me that FIR can yield more listenable results than IIR, and is easier to implement stabily.
There are trade-offs with both types, as there is with EVERYTHING , whether digital or otherwise.
One has to decide what one wants to try to achieve, and be aware that one will not get an audible ideal, unless one does not critically listen to the result,
and don't believe any-one who tells you otherwise - but perhaps some people do not have very critically discerning listening ability ...
though the audible results will depend on the source material used.
If one only listens with digitally encoded source material then some types digital filters will sound close to ideal.
I try to hear audio equipment in a live sound or recording application so as to not have to listen to digital artefacts except what may result from the item of equipment under evaluation.
Search for:- Apodization ; apodizing filter/s ; apodising filter/s ; Dr Peter Craven .
{the spelling is "apodiZe" but it seems that equipment manufacturer Meridian uses the spelling "apodiSe",
perhaps as a Trademark for their application of the type of the filter that they use, but I do not know for sure at this time.}
Search also for the differences between :-
"minimum phase apodizing filters" and "minimum phase soft-knee filters",
and for both versus "linear phase filters".
CD player manufacturers' Ayre and Meridian each use a different type in their latest model players, and I have not yet heard either.
I think both types of minimum phase filters will render more audibly pleasing results than linear phase filters, but it will still depend on the nature of the source material, and on the type of sound that one likes, and I may have heard something via a minimum phase filter but I am not sure at this time.
Listening to 1st order x-overs has nothing to do with distance from the loudspeaker except if the distance causes one to not be able to listen on the optimum vertical axis for the filter to sum optimally.
I think for the volume levels that you seem to be intending to use that 1st order will not be for you unless you buy very high efficiency/low distortion drivers and/or use efficient horn loading.
All steep slope filters generate audible anomolies, and for home-audio at least, but also in most pro applications, nothing steeper than 4th order would ever be necessary if one chooses optimum drivers and crosses them at sensible frequencies within their bandwidths and impedance characteristics' compromises.
Latency is only audible if one is combining direct sound with system reproduced sound - such as a loud band playing beside a PA system which also has their signals through it, etc ...
In a digital crossover I would have thought that there would be always be a way of adding time delay to the lesser latency causing filters to get the total delay through those equal to that through the highest latency causing filter.
Some digital audio equipment does have this facility adjustable.
I think Class D amplification is ridiculous to apply for use for critical audio listening, because there are massive compromises that cost an enormous amount of money to reduce the audible effects of, and additional future costs in servicing those compromises.
Leave Class D for lo-fi and spend your money on a simpler to maintain in good sound condition technology.
The impedance peaks in the resultant system using any type of driver have to be designed as far as possible to minimize interaction with high output impedance valve amplifiers, but better is to design lower output impedance valve amplifiers - which is possible and with less of the audible compromises of most of those currently on the market.
Why aren't such optimised valve amps on the market ? - because most valve enthusiasts like the vintage sounds and/or do not know that better can be designed, thus manufacturers sell what is easiest to sell to those buyers ... {as manufacturers do for EVERYTHING - because that is how the human mind works in Business matters}.
A lot of what you are introducing now is not my central area of work, and I only study what I need to know outside of that, thus for digital crossovers applications there is not anything more I can advise you.
Basically I do not much like any digital audio - I tolerate only the amount of it that I have to, and I have found that some types are not as audibly unpleasant as other types.
All three of the professional brands you list are likely to have good build quality and reasonable consistency because those three companies have been in business for a while and would not have survived in business with the high prices for their products if the products did not satisfy sufficient pro-buyers.
Pro equipment gets driven very hard and long, thus it has to be rugged at least.
The sound - well one has to listen and decide for one's self - there are always audible differences, but some are the result of how the drivers are mounted and the types of enclosures and other components used in the audio system.
I have heard Beyma cone drivers in two applications and they sounded fine.
I do not know if I have heard drivers from the other two brands, because I do not usually look inside the speaker enclosures of Pro-systems unless there is good reason to, and usually there is not the time or opportunity to.
I would if I was buying.
I think for your application for in-home use that the UK manufactured "Volt" drivers will be suitable, and they are very good, plus can be repaired at the UK factory, if ever necessary.
Find a shop which sells the PMC brand of loudspeakers.
These are basically studio monitors which are also sold for home-audio, and are in some Hi-Fi dealers showrooms for audition.
Listen to the new PMC IB2i model.
This is a 3-way and uses a Volt woofer, plus PMC's own design of a waveguide mid-driver -{as you mention interest in waveguide mid-drivers}-
plus a good tweeter from SEAS.
It is a variation of quarter-wave pipe bass loading, and this model is tuned to a frequency below 30Hz, which as 30Hz is below the lowest pitch of almost all bass instruments will give somewhat better bass accuracy than higher tuned pipes, etc ...
I still prefer sealed enclosures, but well designed quarter-wave pipes - if optimally damped, etc ... - are a good second best for accuracy, and can be got to play louder with less distortion than a similar sized box/driver combination -{except when a substantially better driver in the sealed box}.
I do not study digital filters a lot, thus you may find better information by starting a Thread about those in a suitable Forum section of this web-site, but do remember that you will receive all sorts of opinions of which some will not be based on any, or little, practical experience but merely repeats of understandings or misunderstandings of other published explanations of such.
Within the limits of what I think I understand,
it seems to me that FIR can yield more listenable results than IIR, and is easier to implement stabily.
There are trade-offs with both types, as there is with EVERYTHING , whether digital or otherwise.
One has to decide what one wants to try to achieve, and be aware that one will not get an audible ideal, unless one does not critically listen to the result,
and don't believe any-one who tells you otherwise - but perhaps some people do not have very critically discerning listening ability ...
though the audible results will depend on the source material used.
If one only listens with digitally encoded source material then some types digital filters will sound close to ideal.
I try to hear audio equipment in a live sound or recording application so as to not have to listen to digital artefacts except what may result from the item of equipment under evaluation.
Search for:- Apodization ; apodizing filter/s ; apodising filter/s ; Dr Peter Craven .
{the spelling is "apodiZe" but it seems that equipment manufacturer Meridian uses the spelling "apodiSe",
perhaps as a Trademark for their application of the type of the filter that they use, but I do not know for sure at this time.}
Search also for the differences between :-
"minimum phase apodizing filters" and "minimum phase soft-knee filters",
and for both versus "linear phase filters".
CD player manufacturers' Ayre and Meridian each use a different type in their latest model players, and I have not yet heard either.
I think both types of minimum phase filters will render more audibly pleasing results than linear phase filters, but it will still depend on the nature of the source material, and on the type of sound that one likes, and I may have heard something via a minimum phase filter but I am not sure at this time.
Listening to 1st order x-overs has nothing to do with distance from the loudspeaker except if the distance causes one to not be able to listen on the optimum vertical axis for the filter to sum optimally.
I think for the volume levels that you seem to be intending to use that 1st order will not be for you unless you buy very high efficiency/low distortion drivers and/or use efficient horn loading.
All steep slope filters generate audible anomolies, and for home-audio at least, but also in most pro applications, nothing steeper than 4th order would ever be necessary if one chooses optimum drivers and crosses them at sensible frequencies within their bandwidths and impedance characteristics' compromises.
Latency is only audible if one is combining direct sound with system reproduced sound - such as a loud band playing beside a PA system which also has their signals through it, etc ...
In a digital crossover I would have thought that there would be always be a way of adding time delay to the lesser latency causing filters to get the total delay through those equal to that through the highest latency causing filter.
Some digital audio equipment does have this facility adjustable.
I think Class D amplification is ridiculous to apply for use for critical audio listening, because there are massive compromises that cost an enormous amount of money to reduce the audible effects of, and additional future costs in servicing those compromises.
Leave Class D for lo-fi and spend your money on a simpler to maintain in good sound condition technology.
The impedance peaks in the resultant system using any type of driver have to be designed as far as possible to minimize interaction with high output impedance valve amplifiers, but better is to design lower output impedance valve amplifiers - which is possible and with less of the audible compromises of most of those currently on the market.
Why aren't such optimised valve amps on the market ? - because most valve enthusiasts like the vintage sounds and/or do not know that better can be designed, thus manufacturers sell what is easiest to sell to those buyers ... {as manufacturers do for EVERYTHING - because that is how the human mind works in Business matters}.
A lot of what you are introducing now is not my central area of work, and I only study what I need to know outside of that, thus for digital crossovers applications there is not anything more I can advise you.
Basically I do not much like any digital audio - I tolerate only the amount of it that I have to, and I have found that some types are not as audibly unpleasant as other types.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.