Go Back   Home > Forums > >
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

Best way to balance speaker for a flat response
Best way to balance speaker for a flat response
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 14th August 2019, 02:25 AM   #51
gabdx is offline gabdx  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
I don't think DSP is a solution to audio.

It involves dissecting music into events, placing events into microscopic boxes.

it then multiply some boxes, make some smaller, it rearrange some boxes, it changes their order, the number, multiply the amount or diminish their amount in other boxes.

Multiply the box contents by some numbers or divide or use logs.

Then you are believing that this is music. All it proves is how bad in the history of humanity our audio systems are, how tasteless, lifeless.
__________________
amplificateurslegrand.ca
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2019, 02:52 AM   #52
Bill poster is offline Bill poster  Thailand
diyAudio Member
 
Bill poster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Bangkok/London
Going back to OP, there are benefits to a small rise approx 350-400hz and small dip around 7-9khz
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2019, 03:31 PM   #53
mbrennwa is offline mbrennwa  Switzerland
diyAudio Member
 
mbrennwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Quote:
Originally Posted by sal87 View Post
Ok cool. I got the FRD and ZMA files from the manufacturer websites and fed them into xsim when I designed my crossover. I guess that’s the next best thing next to actually spending the money and testing physically.


Nah. The driver SPL curves will most likely be quite different in your box/baffle.

You also need to take into account the baffle step, which is not included in the manufacturer data. It's usually best to use a good baffle step simulator for this. Vituix CAD has one. I like Tolvan Edge (old but good).
__________________
------
Group buy for augerpro waveguides for Scan Speak tweeters -- elliptical version -- circular version
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2019, 04:34 PM   #54
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
gedlee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
Regarding baffle step: the cabinet has strong effect on the system response so one should always use measurements made with the drivers in the enclosure. When this is done, then the "baffle step" is fully accounted for in a manner that is much more accurate than simulations.
__________________
Earl Geddes Gedlee Website
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2019, 04:40 PM   #55
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
gedlee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
Quote:
Originally Posted by gabdx View Post
I don't think DSP is a solution to audio.

It involves dissecting music into events, placing events into microscopic boxes.

it then multiply some boxes, make some smaller, it rearrange some boxes, it changes their order, the number, multiply the amount or diminish their amount in other boxes.

Multiply the box contents by some numbers or divide or use logs.

Then you are believing that this is music. All it proves is how bad in the history of humanity our audio systems are, how tasteless, lifeless.
WOW! This post is over-the-top. Sorry, but years of testing has shown none of this to be true.
__________________
Earl Geddes Gedlee Website
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2019, 05:48 PM   #56
Zuhl is offline Zuhl  England
diyAudio Member
 
Zuhl's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Sheffield, UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by gabdx View Post
I don't think DSP is a solution to audio.

It involves dissecting music into events, placing events into microscopic boxes.

it then multiply some boxes, make some smaller, it rearrange some boxes, it changes their order, the number, multiply the amount or diminish their amount in other boxes.

Multiply the box contents by some numbers or divide or use logs.

Then you are believing that this is music. All it proves is how bad in the history of humanity our audio systems are, how tasteless, lifeless.
I have no clue what you just said, other that it being utter nonsense.
__________________
One good thing about music, when it hits you, you feel no pain - Bob Marley

Naim NDX 2 + Naim NAC72/HiCap/NAP250/NACA5
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2019, 06:54 PM   #57
bentoronto is offline bentoronto  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Toronto and Delray Beach, FL
Best way to balance speaker for a flat response
Quote:
Originally Posted by PLB View Post
" my critique is that phase at your ear - and each separately - and even when a single source/driver is used, is very scrambled and gets more scrambled when you so much as breathe. "

Hi Ben,

Are you saying that if I were to move a microphone about 5mm on the same axis and re-measure the impulse response, there will be a visible change between the 2 impulse responses or their gated FFT derived frequency/phase responses?
If yes, what would be the cause and do you have data to show this?

Peter
OK, back to Geddes imaginative notions on coherent phase information reaching your ears. What I have to post in exact reply to Peter's question will not be new to anyone who has experience in audio testing.

I sent a 1kHz sq wave to near full-range ESL panel (6 cells per panel). If you know audio, the RTA will have the familiar look of a square wave. At 1kHz, not sure the sound has much character to talk about. But if you wanted to make the best possible square waves, my full-range ESLs are among the best you are likely to ever find to ever make square square waves unless you have your own ESL panels.

And if you know audio, the following two plots will also look like the usual square wave: All Scrambled and barely resembling sq waves and scrambled slightly differently because, as Peter asked, one side is roughly 8.5 inches and the other 9.5, on axis ("roughly" since you can't define the exact distance to a panel, a mic, etc). Should be self-evident which is 8.5 inches.

Well, good-bye to coherent phase information and all that loose prattle on this forum about tweaking phase in XOs.

Peter - what do you think?

B.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg SW RTA.jpg (140.5 KB, 151 views)
File Type: jpg 8.5 and 9.5.jpg (92.4 KB, 153 views)
__________________
HiFi aspirations since 1957. "When the toilet paper of experience is depleted, the **** of reason goes unwiped"

Last edited by bentoronto; 14th August 2019 at 07:06 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2019, 07:18 PM   #58
picowallspeaker is offline picowallspeaker  Italy
diyAudio Member
 
picowallspeaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zuhl View Post
I have no clue what you just said, other that it being utter nonsense.
Yeah, digital has become the reference and with DSP you can tailor the sound as you like.
__________________
Everything under and above heaven is in utter chaos
mare monstrum
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2019, 07:19 PM   #59
Dave Bullet is offline Dave Bullet  New Zealand
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Quote:
Originally Posted by bentoronto View Post
I can't recall last seeing a clearer presentation of an innocent dream of audio engineering theory. The steps (if they actually could be performed) might result in the desired response in an anechoic chamber. Of course, sound in an anechoic chamber is awful, if I recall my experience in the world's largest long ago.

Or you could simply skip steps 1, 3, 4, and half of 5.

B.
Thanks Ben, however I didn't qualify with the environment for the steps nor whether I had applied gating for pseudo-anechoic measurements.

I plan to follow the method using both gated and "full room" effects.

Its good to know the method is not flawed to achieve a desired, consistent outcome. Whether someone agrees the outcome is useful is another matter.
__________________
"Usual diyaudio train wreck of dubious drivers and just the crossover to sort out. Well, how are you on crossovers and modelling? Pretty green, I reckon" - system7 (Steve)
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2019, 07:55 PM   #60
bentoronto is offline bentoronto  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Toronto and Delray Beach, FL
Best way to balance speaker for a flat response
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Bullet View Post
I plan to follow the method using both gated and "full room" effects.
Fine. Let's take your step 1:

"1. model the "perfect" acoustic slope for a particular driver"

I don't know what the slope might be for any driver derived from theory or in practice until tested. Do you or perhaps wintermute knows how to decide?

But I do know that you I would run each driver and see how it outputs, distorts, resonates, takes power, etc. And then using your mature judgment, decide where you need to cut if off and with what slope and in relation to the other drivers. For example, if you like soft dome tweeters you need canny judgment (not perfect theory) about how low you can go.

Seems to me, that exactly zero of this empirical procedure could be in any way described as "'perfect' acoustic slope".

... and that's why you might as well start right off with step 2 even if it violates the Infinitely True Rules of Science as understood by wintermute, and skip 3 and 4.

B.
__________________
HiFi aspirations since 1957. "When the toilet paper of experience is depleted, the **** of reason goes unwiped"

Last edited by bentoronto; 14th August 2019 at 07:59 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Best way to balance speaker for a flat responseHide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
speaker drivers: flat frequency response does NOT mean good sound quality kinsei Multi-Way 149 19th February 2019 05:53 AM
Flat frequency response speaker has been developed charlie2 Multi-Way 18 12th January 2018 07:16 PM
Why the emphasis on flat speaker response? jmikes Multi-Way 46 8th August 2017 02:31 AM
Flat Impedance and Flat Power response design. system7 Multi-Way 10 11th January 2017 11:57 AM
Flat FR, Flat Power Response, in-phase crossover? RockLeeEV Multi-Way 15 7th February 2012 08:07 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:40 AM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 14.29%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2019 diyAudio
Wiki