How good is the crossover in your loudspeakers?

 

@bmbmzig: Danny Richie has repeated stated that achieving a desired frequency response (the specs/measurements to which you refer) does only one thing: make the speaker accurate. He over and over has stressed the point that replacing sound-degrading crossover parts with parts that don’t degrade the signal is the way to increase a loudspeaker’s transparency, resolution, fine detail, soundstage layering (depth, width,  height, spacing between singers and musicians), and other audiophile performance characteristics.

For the speakers sent to him that have technical problems (less than optimum crossovers), he designs a new crossover to correct those technical shortcomings. And he also of course builds the new crossover using parts he has found produce good sonic results  For the speakers that already have an accurate frequency response, he just replicates the stock crossover, but replaces the electrolytic capacitors, sand cast resistors, and iron core inductors with audiophile grade parts, including internal wiring, copper binding posts, etc.

People often say (in fact did so just above) "Why not just buy a better loudspeaker, one you like the sound of more?" That’s fine, but what makes you think the better speaker doesn’t also have a "junk"  crossover. All loudspeakers are built to a price point, and using the best crossover parts can increase the cost of a speaker to the point of it not being a commercially viable product. Loudspeaker companies don’t divulge what parts they use in the crossovers, and Wilson Audio "pots" their crossovers so that you can see what’s in them.

The video below---Danny’s latest, posted just yesterday---is an interesting (and unique) case. An owner of a Magnepan 2.6 sent his speakers to Magnepan to have them repaired and refurbished (details in the video). When that was completed he had Magnepan ship the speakers to GR Research, Yes, Magnepan is well aware of the mods Danny offers for their speakers. To hear Danny’s thoughts on the 2.6 (and Magnepan’s in general), you can watch the video.

So if you’re a Magnepan lover, how do you take the advice others have made in this thread, and just buy a speaker whose sound you like more than Maggies? Like what? A "better" model Maggie? Sorry, they all contain the same quality crossovers. At least they did until recently. Magnepan themselves now offer some of their models in the new X Series, which feature crossovers using better parts, internal wiring, binding posts, etc.

And what if you like your current speaker more than any other in it’s price range, but suspect that an upgraded crossover will keep it’s basic sound character, but improve it in the ways I listed in an above paragraph? A GR Research mod is just one alternate to consider.

 

Yesterday’s GR Research YouTube video is entitled "Is This The Best Deal In High-End Audio? (Magnepan + Mods). It may be, but it has stiff competition from the Eminent Technology LFT-8b, another planar-magnetic loudspeaker. Here’s the video:

 

https://youtu.be/WjNV8BbZRG8?si=HyRoyMQiMGXhWe1Y

 

And here’s a video on the ET LFT-8b:

 

https://youtu.be/Uc5O5T1UHkE?si=yyvaTIj9e-Rc44JL

 

Purchased a pair of JBL L-100T's in 1986 when I saw them on the cover of Stereo Review in the spring. Had them gone thru and woofers refoamed couple of years ago by an old retired JBL guy in Ca. I used to live in Northridge about 2 mi. from where the JBL company was years ago. Always liked the speakers but the highs were just a bit bright. I noticed an ad on Ebay for the Crossover Chef. He makes upgraded crossovers for 30 or more speakers and all the vintage JBL's. They cost $400 with shipping and the guy is slammed , took 3 months to get them. Had a tech help me install them , they are twice the size of the originals about 2 months ago. Just amazing really , I am astounded. More bass , still tight and not muddy , the mid range is smoother and the high's are no longer too bright. I drive them with a McIntosh MA 7900 integrated amp 200 wpc into 8 ohms. Know I sound like a commercial for this dude but one of the best investments I've ever made.

I love the crossovers in my Omega CAMs. They are without crossovers. 😊

When I chose my most recent speaker I watched a you tube video by the designer.  He described the country origin of the components. Nice tweeter made to their spec , nice woofer made for them by Morel , but the nicest looking part inside was the crossover.  It looked really high quality.   Looked like it belonged in a more expensive speaker.  

@zx10 The route you have taken is a growing trend and one methodology for using a Speaker that is worthwhile making the time for, to have it known about in a location where there is a broader audience.

A Speaker Model that has been used for this type of refurbishment with the end result being similar to your own, being a modern Xover Design built with Modern Components when Interfaced to a Olden Speaker Design brings exceptional results.

Myself I endorse this type of activity for two reasons, but my first reason is not exactly audio related, it more aligned to being active by doing less to encourage less CO2 release.

I am a Advocate of and Adopter of, being proactive in what is referred to in todays world as the Circular Economy.

My second reason is that designs from a particular era have been invested in quite healthily for the Parts that are able to be seen by the Purchaser, but under the hood, where concealment is the advantageous condition created, costings awarded to produce the Parts that are concealed have been scrimped on as a BOM and the concealment has been very very deliberate.

Why not at another time when Warranty Issues are over and other ideas are surfacing as a result of being inquisitive, spend a little time to Ponder how it might be if one was to couple to Quality Speaker Drive Units used from a past era of production, the most modern electrical parts and design concept for the Xover Interface.

Additionally, why let cost be the constraint, if $400 - $1500 is the costing for BOM of selected Parts and is inclusive of the cost of assembly of the electronics, then as a comparison to other options, this one is looing to be well within the boundaries of VFM.

What happens when the outcome of following through on such a methodology to experience something new from a Speaker, produces a Speaker that really does make a discernible change for the better, when using recollection if Olden Speaker Design to New Design for assessing the end sound. With better as the outcome, then what is the issue there are plenty of positives and wins with adopting this method.

A comparative Updated Speaker Design from certain Brands or a Build produced in recent times can easily be costing 400% - 2000% Increase in cost to own the Speaker as a current New Purchase. The Purchase comes with the unavoidable added condition, where after approx' 18 months - 30 months there will be seen a depreciation of Value of the Purchase by 30% - 50%.

In relation to the Speaker Model JBL L-100T, this model is replaceable currently with a Modern Design being the L100 Classic MkII. The Classic Mk II is going to cost the best part of $4K as a New Purchase and approx' 40% less as Used Item  Purchase ($2.6K)

The Owned 100T Speakers, were most likely purchased in 1986 @ approx' $1K. $1K over the the 40 Years owned are actually costing $25 per year or $00.50c per week, which is great VFM, and in relation to the method used to make changes to the Speakers by zx10, there are other bonuses.

Bonus No1, Great VFM has been attained from the original purchase, especially with the outcome the Speaker are remaining wanted to be kept in daily use -    Bonus No 2, The Owner of the Speaker, knows every day of the Upgraded Donor Speakers usage History - Bonus No 3, The Most Recent Xover Upgrade, is one that is producing a Bespoke Design for this Speaker and as a design it is highly likely the end design will be a challenge for the latest 100 Model to show where it is the better producer of an end sound.        

As an investigator of Build Costs for Speakers, as having a commission built Speaker is an interest of mine. I am familiar (not expert) on costs of a small range of Drivers. From the 80's / 90's Drivers built to a High Spec' can easily be costed in todays monies at $2K to $4K if a set of 6 x equivalent drivers are being selected for a BOM.

I have seen on a few Build Topics for Speakers, where the guidance is for a Particular Model of Speaker, where a  Modern Tweeter to be used in place of a Original Tweeter that is Shot, or being suggested as an Upgrade Tweeter for a Olden Design Speaker where the Pair of Tweeters being suggested are to cost as a New Part, the best part of $1K.

If an individual is in the fortunate position to have the set up in the listening space,   where the Speakers are Coupled to the Room, where the energies produced from the Sound are managed to the point the energies are not interfering negatively with the Produced Sound. In conjunction with the management of Produced Sound, if the system can produce a Signal that is of the quality when it arrives at the Speaker Xover it is unadulterated.

It makes absolute sense that a improved electronics selected for the Xover, can add further attraction for the end sound that is being produced as the result of the changes made.

As stated in an earlier Post:  

 "Coupling a Speaker to a room is the way forward to create a confidence the speaker interacts at its best when transmitting sound through the physical structure of the room, including the floor, walls, ceiling and locally placed items. 

The Speaker / Room Interaction can have a profound effect that is a negative impact on the quality of the sound being transferred. Creating effects like room modes (standing waves), Reflected Sound, Causing Local Placed Materials to produce sound. Each when being generated will be negatively affecting the overall acoustic characteristics of the room.

Xovers design does not do anything to alleviate the above influences on produced sound."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

as analog engineer, I would advise to be careful to just switch existing x-over components w/ “better” ones, because in many speaker designs x-over components parasitics are counted in speaker’s design optimization process. in my speaker design flow I characterize driver, inside actual cabinet w/ damping materials, by measuring complex impedance vs. frequency at desired power, and then I create RLC model for my circuit simulator, used for design new “perfect” x-over circuit. 

 

Now THAT is interesting @westcoastaudiophile. Can you elaborate on crossover component "parasitics?

 

very funny ! $28K speakers and he had to fix them ! they had serious issues ! LOL   "The $27,900 disappointment? Wilson Audio Watt Puppy 8 issues..."
I spent $28K  for speakers? i would expect perfect!    they are FAR from it ! 

https://youtu.be/Tma9jFZ3-3k?si=i8RMcHqUAa6Towj-
 

surely @bdp24: 

discrete capacitors and inductors can be represented in circuit simulator as RLC first/second/third order models, where R is ESR (equivalent series resistance), which in ideal capacitors/inductors is very low (TanD below ~0.01). high volume manufacturers use cheaper than ideal components, and count on ESR as “free” resistor in series with inductors/capacitors, which is added to actual resistors in mid/high legs of x-over circuit. replacing “so-so” performance capacitors and inductors in x-over circuit with excellent ones will increase resonances, if circuit is not recalculated and other related components not changed.

saying that I am not against replacing aged/degraded components in x-over part, if you know what you are doing. 

 

Danny Richie makes a point of stating that crossovers cannot be correctly done in simulated circuits, but only by using them with the intended drivers that are mounted in the intended enclosure, then doing acoustic measurements. Of course the crossover parts have to be matched left speaker to right, the matching being done electronically.

 

Wow, I barely follow this thread but based on the A’gon headlines I’ve definitely learned that Danny Richie has a lot of opinions.  

 

Unlike, say, you and/or I, Erik? 

 

Well the speakers sound excellent so the crossover must be too.   

 

Weakest link???

@ned1000 how do you know Danny is right and Wilson is wrong.

invalid

1,283 posts

06-17-2025 at 05:02pm 

@ned1000 how do you know Danny is right and Wilson is wrong.
OK i watched the video did you ? it is obvious Danny is correct what silly thing to say! 
also he is honest and would not lie he is a straight talking texan they seldom BS 
here watch and this one too! 
https://youtu.be/Tma9jFZ3-3k?si=Mx38QtXZJszr6mKk
https://youtu.be/dYZlMFsMFK4?si=WRsJwtXuggpcESE0
so watch them learn and report back 
i have done buisiness w/ Danny he has at all times been honest knowledgable and far from greedy w/ some speakers not worth modifying and fixing he told me and only when i persisted did he agree to assist me w/ them I decided to spend the $ as i had already spent the $ to buy them and i considered it a project many people in the yamha/ sony  FB group were eager to see what could be done to improve them .( they had the same speakers )  all outcomes have been entirely satisfactory . in case of cheap low-end speakers yes it makes less sense ( or no sense at all as it costs about the same whether low end or high end ! )  but i view it as fun project .
in car world guys will mod a FWD car like SAAB 9-3 and it is nuts to mod a FWD car they will NEVER work as well as RWD car but people enjoy doing mods increasing HP making cars faster , better handling etc  Not everything has to make perfect sense! 

 

Not everything has to make any sense at all!

 

I have restored a lot of speakers in my time including refurbishing crossovers. At times I have had 3 or 4 speakers of the same make and model all with quite different capacitor values due to varying degrees of aging and natural variability.

Unless the values are way off [and I mean WAY off-like 50%out of value] they all sound much the same.That has surprised me.I have had to conclude that a fair degree of the sound relates to the drivers independent of what crossover components or values might be used.You certainly hear when drivers are not working properly.

How good are my crossovers?  There are probably no others in the world that function as these do using these components and the parts selection has taken years of tweaking.

 

Caps were mixed for there "particular sound" and multiple values were mixed to as to produce the most common value (e.g., the higher of the two was always mixed with the lower of the two other caps when used in parallel).

 

@toddalin 

It looks like VR1's wiper is floating, essentially making it a 50R fixed resistor?  Normally a L-pad wired as a variable resistor has ground (pin 3) floating. I'm probably not reading this schematics correctly.

I find myself on the fence regarding modifying crossovers.

One on hand, I purchased them for their sonic character so I’m resistant to change.   On the other hand, I’m open to changes of certain speaker crossovers like Magnepan and Klipsch - maybe it’s because the outcome is more positively predictable by following the footsteps of others.

On an Lpad, there are two floating wipers, but only one is shown in the schematics.  We are using the other and it goes from ~11 to ~36 ohms before it opens completely.  The circuit works best above ~18 ohms, hence R2, with ~20 ohms being near optimal.

If you saw the frequency response of the JBL 2251J, the circuit would make more sense.

I want to roll it off at about 2,500 Hz but that peak at ~3kHz makes this near impossible to do cleanly.  I had to come up with some very imaginative thinking and a bit of luck from experimentation to make this work!

What I do is to roll it off a bit earlier by "over capacitating" it.  If you use too much capacitance in a second order low pass filter, you will greatly increase the slope but also  create a hump just below the roll off point.  The more capacitance, the bigger and lower the hump.  The shape of the rising hump is obvious with the Lpad is turned full up (open).

But I also let some of the signal pass through R1 or R2/VR1.  This portion of the signal is NOT IN PHASE with the hump and the more you let through, the lower the hump becomes until you have a fairly smooth response up to the ~2,500 Hz roll off point.  VR1 lets you selectively tune the hump.