I don't think you are missing a thing.
Yes, all my reply did was reinforce the elegance of a first order crossover.
You know, I've noticed the guys who say step response is an important measurement are generally talking either:
a. full range designs, where no crossover is needed
b. first order designs, using well behaved, overlapping drivers (aka this thread)
c. linear phase crossovers, where any design works
The common factor in all three, is relatively flat phase.
So a step response will look good, and gets promoted as valuable. (I've been liking step for maybe for no other reason than I use linear phase, and can make pretty looking step pictures, lol)
Any other design that uses higher order IIR x-overs, starts to make step look sucky.
No one using such, is going to advocate looking at step responses, huh?
In 'my recently acquired opinion', having dug into step a little bit more, I'd say from a pragmatic point of view,
all a step response helps show is phase from a time domain perspective, and it isn't really a measurement you can tune from easily enough to be of great use.
I share your questioning perspective on measurements, when they are based on amplitude alone. But not when phase is also included.
A lot of speakers with flat frequency response sound bad to me too.
I think you are probably right that they have been force-filtered into flat magnitude.
And I think the culprit behind the bad sound is forced bad phase.
IME, flat mag, and rotated or wonky phase measurements bear this out.
I think a real problem is hi-fi doesn't know what flat phase sounds like.
How many designers have taken a first-order only approach,
or a true full range approach,
or implemented linear-phase x-overs that are fully complementary?
Maybe it's easier to just say we can't hear phase, and then x-over at will...
Yet, it's nearly accepted as universal truth that low order crossovers sound better.
Heck, all low order means is less phase rotation...that simple, IMO.
And we all know how PEQ's or other equalization taken too far, inevitably sound crappy.
We've messed with phase again....that simple.
I also think hi-fi is quick to say, 'but what's the point of flat mag and phase once we take the room into account, which is going to destroy it all'...
I'd say the point is, fix the speaker, then fix the room.
Otherwise we are trying to juggle too many tuning balls at once.
Unless maybe we are willing to just tune to a spot...but even then, a lot of sound quality is left on the table.
Personally, it has been an absolute joy for me to learn how to maintain flat phase in my speaker builds, using linear phase.
I couldn't imagine setting FIR and linear phase aside for IIR, either passive or active. (unless I had an application that demanded zero latency)
I find on all the various boxes I've tried building, that flat magnitude always sounds excellent, when phase is also flat. Vocals are clearer, bass is cleaner, and transients are waaay crisper.
I listen, tune outdoors first, and then bring it into the room. Always works, although the room can make me cry when compared to outdoors.
I've got some FIR tuned, home/PA stuff, that when cranking sounds like it could almost rip air in two!
Timing is that tight.....has a nice step response
Ok, off the soap box... thank you for the indulgence, Mr. Old'n'Cranky
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
The ever deepening mystery of smoke and (curved) mirrors
I wonder how many upper end designers that go to all the pain and effort of tweaking their design, then go and set up and hear their babies in the wild, go home and cry at the compromised sound in the customers premises...
The more I learn, the more I believe we all are just so brainwashed we have no choice but to overthink the primitive concept of left foot right foot, left foot right foot..
The ever deepening mystery of smoke and (curved) mirrors
I wonder how many upper end designers that go to all the pain and effort of tweaking their design, then go and set up and hear their babies in the wild, go home and cry at the compromised sound in the customers premises...
The more I learn, the more I believe we all are just so brainwashed we have no choice but to overthink the primitive concept of left foot right foot, left foot right foot..
The manual that came with the Duntechs that I purchased had dimensions for suggested listening room, and details for correct placement within that room, discussing impact of other options as well. So yes, I believe you are correct.
In addition, the dealer insisted that they set them up in my home.
WRT parts, horses for courses. Trying a different type of capacitor can't hurt anything, if you don't like it, simply put them back. Personally I find MKP strident compared with film and foil, or PIO.
Last edited:
The only one I'd be tempted to try is C6 (15MFD) with a high quality cap (Jantzen or the like) and see what you think over a period of time. In my Elsinore's I replaced the series cap in the tweeter filter from a Solen to a Jantzen Superior Z cap. The difference was night and day. The Jantzens aren't horribly expensive and you can always put the originals back if your not happy.
Yes, 3 way with acoustic first order crossover. The Vifa is actually the heart of Dunlavy SC IV speakers. It is a unique speaker with a very wide and balanced frequency range. I don't know a replacement for this speaker, so I asked if there was anything similar on the market. Bass and tweeter, this is not a big problem.
Making measurements, designing the crossover and making the woodwork is not a problem for me.
It's seems, that there was several revisions of the crossovers. I took the SC-IV crossovers photo when a colleague asked to replace damaged tweeters. Although revision printed in the PCB looks the same, however the crossovers physically looks slightly different (mine have more capacitors and coils).
What are the serial numbers of both speakers? Depending on when they were built they could have Morel or Vifa woofers and different Vifa tweeters.. Mine are 842-A/B
I have been tempted with a very large build for some time, have been influenced by the Duntech Sovereign and latterly Dunlavy SC VI I am looking at 15" bass drivers. now to search for suitable candidates
GESTALT: The whole speaker is greater than the sum of the parts... An entire speaker using Dunlavey philosopy and engineering sounded musical ... Back-in-the-Day!
PBN Audio in the USA evolved the Dunlavey Audio ideas, and gradually moved forward with Linkwitz-Riley crossovers, reduced edge diffraction cabinets, and... even acceptance of advances in controlled directivity horns like their M2!5.
M2!5 Loudspeaker – PBN Audio
YEAR 2020 GESTALT SPEAKERS = coaxial compression driver like the B&C DCX464 (2020 speaker of the year) behind a SEOS24 horn, with a 15" midrange, and two 15" counter-force subwoofers.
2020 GESTALT = copy off of the NEW Smart Kids!
Attachments
He would have been 100% against 2nd-order or higher crossovers and ported enclosures for sure.
Very true -he would. But from an operational & listening POV it ultimately comes down to how much you care about whether it's nominally a linear phase speaker or not. Some do, some don't. For e.g., I can take it or leave it -I simply can't hear the huge advantages that are sometimes claimed. Clearly others can; fair enough. It's just not a universal guide to quality. For some it might even be the opposite in certain situations -say, if power-handling & dynamic range is their focus, since linear-phase designs by nature tend to be more demanding on the tweeter's low end distortion performance, which may (may) place them at a disadvantage compared to an alternative. YMMV as always.
Last edited:
Yep for sure, if the linear phase design is passive or IIR active.
High SPL and dynamic range work very well with steep linear phase xovers, ime.
But of course, only available via FIR. Always the tradeoffs, huh....
