High order crossovers


Do or can high order crossovers rob a speaker system of more dynamics?
koestner

Showing 10 responses by audiokinesis

If a speaker is NOT time coherent, the fundamentals and overtones do not arrive at the exact same instant in time. The overtones arrive a little bit later. My understanding is that this does reduce the perceived dynamic contrast a little bit. (Note that a speaker can be "phase coherent" without being "time coherent". It’s not hard to put the drivers in-phase in the crossover region and claim "phase coherence", but among passive crossovers only a first-order crossover can be time coherent, and if the drivers are non-coincident, the system is only time coherent at locations where the geometrical relationship between drivers and listener falls within a narrow range.)

Of far greater impact on system dynamics, in my experience, are thermal and mechanical compression and thermal modulation (the latter being the short-time-constant, but much less-well-studied, companion of thermal compression). These effects tend to round off the peaks. Thermal effects are typically negligible when a driver is only seeing a very small fraction of its rated power handling. Mechanical effects can arise from suspension system or motor system limitations at high power levels, and from suspension system hysteresis at very low power levels.

The generally superior dynamic contrast of systems with prosound-capable drivers imo indicates that their negligible thermal compression, thermal modulation, and mechanical compression at home-audio listening levels are solving the most significant problems. Very expensive and/or multiple "hifi" drivers can sometimes achieve similar dynamic performance.

Duke

@erik_squires wrote:  "I feel as if low order crossovers were actually significantly better in dynamics I'd have heard it. "

I think true (acoustic) first order is more dynamic, ALL ELSE BEING EQUAL. 

All else is seldom equal. 

There is a tradeoff relationship between bandwidth and efficiency, and a true first-order crossover calls for a LOT of bandwidth.  For a system with a 2 kHz true first-order crossover, we'd want the midwoofer to be approximately flat to 8 kHz, and the tweeter to be approximately flat to 500 Hz (with adequate thermal and mechanical power handling).  We have to trade off efficiency to get this sort of bandwidth.  Thus we don't see high efficiency speakers with true first-order (acoustic) crossovers.  

Pick your poison.

My current poison of choice starts out with a 6 dB per octave initial rolloff and then accelerates to 24 dB per octave.  This seems to work pretty well with some combinations of high efficiency drivers.

Duke  

Trelja wrote:

"Thiels employ first order crossovers, yet with all of the added circuitry, represent some of the most complex crossovers, with the highest parts counts around. THAT’S why they’re so difficult to drive."

Sorry but I must disagree that there is a correlation between parts count and how difficult a speaker is to drive.

But ime there IS DEFINITELY a correlation between the impedance curve and how difficult a speaker is to drive. 

I have been designing speakers to work well with Atma-Sphere amps, and in most cases specifically the little S-30, for thirteen years.   In my experience it's the impedance curve, not the parts count, that matters.  Of course you can ask Ralph whether my speakers work with his amps. 

Hope to see you at RMAF, whether or not we agree about crossovers!

Duke

@tomic601 wrote:  "single caps inserted are bad..so bypass them AND form both of them with DBS....."

Pardon my ig'nernce...what is DBS?

Thanks!

@c1ferrari , thank you very much.

I think there are scientific explanations for many of our subjective observations.  

When the science and the observation seem to be at odds, then either the observation has a mistake in it or the science is faulty or incomplete.   In other words, I don't see "science" as necessarily being "the absolute truth" on a given subject - it is just our (hopefully) best understanding of the subject at this point in time.  


Trelja wrote: "Could you shed a bit more insight into how you landed on your assertion, and potentially provide some specifics, please?"

I assume this is the assertion you’re talking about: "I disagree that there is a correlation between parts count and how difficult a speaker is to drive."

Well my wording was imprecise; here is what I should have said: "I do not think there is a causal relationship between crossover parts count and how difficult a speaker is to drive." (There can be a correlation without causation.)

I have designed many speakers specifically to work well with high-damping-factor tube amps (such as the Atma-Sphere S-30 mentioned above). Here are four things that make for good synergy between such amps and a speaker: High efficiency; fairly high impedance curve; fairly smooth impedance curve; and if the impedance curve is not smooth, then the target frequency response should take the amplifier’s output impedance into account.

Smoothing an impedance curve calls for additional crossover parts. I have tried it both ways: Tailoring the response specifically for the high-output-impedance tube amp and not caring what the impedance curve looks like; and using additional crossover parts to smooth the impedance curve. Not only is the latter sonically superior when done right (in my opinion as the crossover designer), it also results in compatibility with a much wider range of amplifiers.

Most of my work is in prosound. Among other things, I build high-end bass guitar cabs. Many of my designs use bypassable notch filters for response shaping to give the bassist at least two distinctly different voicings from the same cab. With the notch filters bypassed (via a switch on the back of the cab), there is no filtering of any kind on the woofer. I do not hear any difference in dynamics between filters engaged and filters bypassed. But more significantly, neither do any of my customers, to the best of my knowledge. However what my customers CAN hear is, the cab starting to compress at high power levels, regardless of how the switches are set. So this is anecdotal evidence that thermal effects have a more audible impact on dynamics than crossover parts do (at least at the quality level of the crossover parts in my bass cabs).

I am friends with a recording engineer who has asked me not to drop his name. He has for decades been testing the dynamic compression of various loudspeakers that he has had access to. What he looks for is, how much does the speaker compress the peaks? This would be a short-term effect, which has not been studied in nearly as much depth as have long-term compression effects. (Had an interesting exchange with Floyd Toole on the subject once - details if you’d like.)

Anyway my recording engineer friend sets the volume to his reference level and then hits the speaker with what should be a 20 dB peak, to see if the speaker delivers the full 20 dB. Most deliver less, maybe 16 or 17 dB. A few deliver the full 20 dB. His observation is that loudspeaker efficiency is the best predictor. And among those speakers with less efficiency that still do well, power handling tends to be unusually high. This doesn’t PROVE that crossover type and/or parts count makes less of a difference than power compression, but it does indicate pretty good correlation between good dynamics and drivers that are just loafing along.

Note I would agree that, all else being equal, a time-coherent loudspeaker should have superior dynamics because the fundamentals and overtones are all arriving at exactly the same instant. Time-coherence implies first-order acoustic crossovers, if we’re talking about passive loudspeakers. A first order electrical filter doesn’t necessarily give us a true first order acoustic rolloff, so to achieve that target response, additional crossover parts are usually required.

Driver compression mechanisms (thermal, mechanical, flux modulation) are documented. They are real. I cannot think of anything about a series crossover that would mitigate any of these effects. I’ve owned two Frieds and spent a fair amount of time with an IMF speaker, and imo they didn’t begin to compete with the likes of Klipsch Heritage Series in dynamics (though they were imo superior in other areas). A first-order series crossover topology may be the theoretical ideal from a dynamic range standpoint (assuming it results in true time coherence), but if driver compression effects dominate, it may not matter very much.

@trelja, can you tell me what the actual mechanisms are by which crossover parts count and/or conventional crossover topologies constrain dynamics? There may be effects I’m unaware of that are worth taking into account, even if they aren’t necessarily the primary cause of compression.  You may be correct that a steep crossover slope constrains dynamics, but can you tell me why?   The "why's" interest me a great deal. 

Thanks!

Duke

@trelja , thank you for taking the time to explain your position.

My understanding is that series resistance decreases the voltage going to the driver (perhaps more precisely, it decreases the voltage drop across the driver).  So it decreases SPL accordingly.  I think we are in agreement there.

But dynamic contrast is not the same thing as sound pressure level.    Dynamic contrast is about CHANGES in sound pressure level. 

So dynamic contrast is about voltage ratios.  A voltage ratio of 10:1 is a 100 fold increase in wattage, and therefore a 20 dB increase in SPL (ignoring compression effects). 

And adding series resistance has no effect on voltage ratios. 

Say we have an 8 ohm driver, and we increase the voltage going into the speaker from 1 volt to 10 volts.   The voltage ration is 10:1, and assuming no compression effects, the SPL that the driver is producing goes up by 20 dB.

Suppose we put a 2 ohm resistor inside the box in series with the driver, and we send 1 volt into the speaker.  Now the driver sees .8 volts.  If we increase the input to 10 volts, the driver sees 8 volts.  The voltage ratio is exactly the same, 10:1, so assuming no compression effects, the SPL that the driver is producing goes up by 20 dB.

So it is not obvious to me that series resistance reduces the voltage ratios that a driver sees, and therefore I do not see how it would reduce the dynamic contrast.  The volume level being reduced is not the same thing as the dynamic contrast being reduced.

Am I missing something?

Duke

Thank you Roy!! If you see any mistakes in my posts, PLEASE correct me!

Roy makes the best-imaging speakers I know of. If I hadn’t crossed over to the Dark Side and become a manufacturer, I’d still be a dealer for him.

Anyway just to clarify a bit, imo my bass cabs actually have pretty good woofers - my point was that thermal compression can be fairly audible when it sets in.

The bass guitar world is less prejudiced against little guys than the high-end audio world.  If you’re REALLY bored, one of my bass cabs was just reviewed by Bass Gear Magazine: http://https//www.bassgearmag.com/audiokinesis-changeling-c112t-bass-cab-real-world-science-fiction/

They seemed to think it didn’t suck too bad.

Anyway I hear what you’re saying about capacitors. I’ve not paid much attention to capacitor quality in the past, kinda just threw some money at the issue and hoped for the best. Recently I’ve gotten some valuable advice from someone who knows a lot more about capacitors than I do, so I changed a few things and yup it makes a difference.

I’m going to start listening for the "On/Off" phenomenon you describe. Totally agree with you about the importance of low-level details. THANK YOU for the heads-up!

Duke

@ trelja,

Wow, THANK YOU SO MUCH for that in-depth education!! 

I think you have just explained something I observed years ago but did not understand.

In the course of my own crossover builds, I found that a cluster of resistors paralleled to get a particular target value sounds "more open" (better dynamics?)  than a single resistor of the same type having that target value.  Presumably this is because the more resistors soaking up the heat, the less the actual temperature rise will be in any one of them, thus the less change in resistance.  So my crossover boards all have these big unsightly clusters of resistors.

Because our hearing is logarithmic, with a doubling of perceived loudness calling for a tenfold increase in power, an efficient speaker system has an inherent advantage in the thermal domain. 

There may well be other dynamics-reducing effects that come into play in a steep crossover which are related to the rolloff itself.  As mentioned earlier, I think time-coherence should offer the best dynamic contrast, all else being equal, by delivering all the harmonics of a note at the exact same instant.  Perhaps it's not either/or, but rather the further from time coherence we get (via steep slopes), the more the dynamics are degraded.  I haven't done any actual A/B comparisons, but I THINK that my current hybrid filter (first-order in the crossover region, accelerating to fourth-order further away), does sound more dynamic than my previous builds with similar drivers. 

Thank you very much Trelja for taking the time to explain what's going on with resistors.  As usual the real world is a lot more complicated than my simplistic model of it!

Duke