I'll probably try to fashion something more permanent, since I picture eventually trying to fish a balled-up sock out of the speaker guts without damaging anything
@mmmikeymike
Hahah, don't do that!! You don't need to shove it in far. Shoving the sock in deeper does not help. Just so the majority of air is prevented from moving freely from the inside to the outside, and you can easily pinch it with your fingers to pull it out. Really really helps to be able to measure the system and adjust EQ accordingly after plugging.
|
@musicaddict Raise that crossover frequency, if you can!! Most find the reduction in distortion of the mains totally worth it.
|
@mmmikeymike - Clean sports socks. :) You don't have to overstuff the whole port. If you can roll up a sock and shove it in, that's enough.
|
Hey @mmmikeymike
That's a fine idea. I suggest you plug your main speakers though. It will further reduce excursion, and may make integrating with the sub easier.
|
@helomech
That's interesting, usually three way speakers are considered ideal due to the midrange covering the entire human voice and much of the piano without the crossover involved.
I wonder if your hearing more bass boominess from 3 way designs?
|
@timlub Everything that Erik has quoted throughout this thread is correct. Thank you kindly. @marqmike This has been a great thread for me to understand a little bit better about something I enjoy. Thanks Eric for the thread Glad to be of service! What makes these threads interesting is the wide variety of experience and expertise everyone brings to them. Best, Erik |
Helo -
I can't disagree with you in terms of the voice, but I will say, I just haven't found the upper crossover point to be a really clear indicator of performance either way.
|
Be careful reading that. There is a significant difference between the fundamental and the range. The fundamentals are the bottom, pure note. But the range is far higher.
|
|
1. Isn’t crossing at 2kHz or lower in the range of female voice, that has fundamentals between 350Hz and 3kHz?
I refer you to wikipedia on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_frequency
2. Isn’t crossing below 2kHz to close to resonance of most tweeters? I’ve read recommendation to keep crossover frequency at least 1-2 octaves above tweeter’s resonance.
It's at the bottom end of most tweeters, yes. Usually the rule of thumb is to be 2-3x the resonance. What really matters though is not the resonance but distortion and excursion. That is, overwhelming the tweeter. So your choice in tweeter, as well as the slope and knee point matter. The ring-radiator I use in my desktop speakers is the "deep chamber" version with significantly lower usable crossover point than the normal variety. The Mundorf AMT I use in my living room has awesome power handling, distortion and a relatively low resonance point. The crossover also matters. A tweeter may be able to safely be crossed at 2kHz using a fourth order (24 dB/octave) filter, but 5 kHz using a first order filter (6 dB/octave). You see this with the Joseph Audio speakers discussed in other threads. With a fast drop off they push the tweeter lower than average.
3. Break-up modes for typical woofer might be around 5kHz. Isn’t cutting at 2kHz too close - especially for 6dB/octave? In comparison my 3-way speakers cut at 230Hz and 3kHz - outside of "sensitive" zone.
This really depends on the driver and crossover, and what exactly you mean by a "woofer" or "mid-woofer." The combination of slope, and filters used in the woofer may help push the usable range up.
Also, I agree with you that small sweet spot, caused by beaming, might be advantage in acoustically bad rooms, but that’s only if you listen alone. For me wide sweet spot is very important. If I’m not mistaken beaming for 6.5" drivers starts around 1.5kHz. Even if a 6.5" starts beaming, it is not like a LASER. It doesn't switch from omni-directional to flash light at 1.5 kHz. It just gets narrower as it goes up. If your tweeter's dispersion matches you will still have very nice sound off axis, as the entire speaker will seem to diminish, and not just one particular range. I do not think that a 6" mid-woofer in a 2 or 2.5 way is a terrible idea at all, or that you will have a pin-point sweet spot, but it can give you added clarity when you are constrained in where you put them. There are many designers who push the idea that crossovers are bad. Either you want no crossover, or 1st order, or you want the crossover completely out of the vocal range, etc. I'm not really with them. Personally ( and I do not insist that you agree with me ) I have not heard a problem with a well implemented crossover in the 1-3kHz range. I have also not fallen in love with Thiel or Vandersteen or any other perfect time aligned speaker. I'm happy to have learned that at least on this subject, Joseph Audio agrees with me, and none of their fans mention any sort of discontinuity in the vocal ranges. Best, E |
I tend to crossover at 2 kHz or slightly lower since I have only really made 2-ways so far, and don't have an issue with any coherency. One pair sits on my desktop. The near field listening is a real treat given my living room is an acoustic mess.
|
Interesting! I always assumed otherwise. Especially with the Monitor Audio, that tweeter doesn't really have a lot of low end extension.
Definitely not how I would do a 3-way at all, but then hey, I'm not making the big bucks designing speakers. It'd get a very lively, composite midrange and cross it over at 3-5kHz
Best,
E
|
Hi Helo,
Interesting! Point me to a low crossover 3-way, please! :)
Though I think JA speakers does this. Their steep crossover slops let them push the tweeter lower than most.
Best,
E
|
@tcutter Yep, the Wilson Benesch Vector is a funky beast indeed! Not only are they using no crossover on the midrange, they are using 1st order slopes on the tweeter and woofer, but wait! There’s more! They are also porting the mid-range unit. Not unheard of, but rather rare. Only other speaker I can think of with similar dual-porting is from Sonus Faber. I don’t think calling it a 2.5 way really does it justice since it really has only 2 filter sections, which would normally be for a 2-way speaker. It’s pretty miraculous they are able to do all of this and still maintain a comfortable impedance that they do. In some ways, this reminds me of the famous Seas A25 speaker, now available as the A26 kit speakers. http://www.madisoundspeakerstore.com/2-way-speaker-kits/seas-a26-10-2-way-kit-pair-based-on-the-clas...Best, E |
I'm not sure I follow, @helomech -
Usually higher tweeter points are achieved with 3-way systems which use a "true" midrange.
Best,
E |
It is not a dispersion pattern for particular speaker but for the group of them. Speakers that have large membrane (2.5 way) will suffer.
@kijanki - In what way? For me to believe this, I have to agree that wider = better at all times. I do not agree with this assessment at all. Best, E |
@cedargrover I think you have it backwards.
The top two drivers are just a traditional 2-way.
The treble covers above 3kHz.
The midrange is only covered by the upper woofer. Say it has a low pass at 3 kHz.
Up to here, this is a normal 2-way. The added 0.5 is the lower woofer, which cuts off at 500 Hz (for example).
|
@Cedargrover
Indeed, but this is what crossover designers must do anyway. In any multi-way system there is almost always some level matching that must occur, in this case that as well as the dimensions of the upper woofer enclosure must be carefully balanced.
Best,
E |
@kijanki -
What I mean to say is, there is no 1 ideal dispersion pattern. From ESL's to open baffles, to traditional multi-way speakers, some with horns. All have very different radiating patterns, and all have ardent fans.
Beaming is not, by itself, bad. It may not be ideal for you in your listening room however.
For the record, my current speakers are traditional 2-way designs, with subwoofer for music. I still like 2.5 ways though. :)
Best,
Erik |
Hi Kijanki!
You say beaming is a disadvantage? I disagree! :) A speaker with tight dispersion can sound better in the sweet spot, especially with an acoustically messy room.
It all depends on your listening style and location.
Some of Magico's smaller speakers are very wide dispersion. Great stereo imaging no matter where, but the trade off is they need a lot of room or great room acoustics.
Best,
E
|
Let me get a little more basic. Typically when you read about a "crossover point" in a speaker, you are actually talking about 2 filters:
A low pass
A high pass
So a 2-way speaker has a crossover point of 3 kHz. That means there’s a high pass filter that goes to the tweeter tuned to 3 kHz, and a low pass filter that goes to the mid-woofer that is also tuned to 3 kHz. I should point out that reality is even messier than this, but let's stay away from that.
A 3-way speaker has 2 crossover points (say 300 Hz and 3kHz) and 4 filter sections.
1 - HP to the tweeter
2 - HP and LP to the midrange
1 - LP to the woofer.
This adds up to 4 sections.
A 2.5 way also has 2 crossover points, but is missing 1 filter section:
1 - HP to the tweeter
1 - LP to the upper woofer
1 - LP to the lower woofer
That missing HP filter allows the upper woofer to play all the bass.
|
Hi @donvito101 -
The term 2.5 way is a term of art. The difference is in the filters on the upper woofer. Here it is:
2.5-way : Has NO high pass filter.
3 -way: Has both a high pass and low pass filter.
What is confusing is that in both a 2.5 and 3 way there are 2 crossover points.
|
Hi @kijanki - I think you are confusing an open baffle and beaming.
Open baffle speakers behave like you describe, with a complete null at the sides. Boxed speakers do not.
The issue with frequency vs. angle is not related to delays, phase shifts or comb filtering, since the sound is coming from a single surface there cannot be any (unless it breaks up and stops acting like a single surface).
The reason you have "beaming" where the frequency response rolls off to the sides is due to the surface area. The larger the driver, the lower it will beam. This has more to do with the waveform. At very low frequencies, the wave is like a semi-sphere. It radiates in all directions, but at high frequencies it is flat, and mostly travels straight ahead.
|
@astewart8944 - The one thing, I would encourage you to play with room acoustics. Throw some blankets between and behind the speakers on the floor. See if you find something there you like. Of course, this is temporary!!!
Best,
E |
@astewart8944 - Then I'd suggest keeping what you have.
Dialing in a new pair of speakers like that will get complicated.
@kijanki - Could you explain what you mean about bending at the upper midrange?
Best,
E |
HI @astewart8944 - Not sure if I was clear.
With the Pearls, I’d be tempted to run the bass units via your EQ and separate amps.
The trouble area is 16 to 60 Hz. In that range, dragons lurk. This is why smaller speakers may sound "faster" or "more musical" - They avoid the dangerous areas, and why a sub with good EQ can totally outperform them.
But since you are already happy with your perspectives and 2 subs - I'd suggest you stick with what you have. :) If you must upgrade, room acoustics are always a good place to work on. Contact GIK Acoustics for great advice.
Best,
E |
@rlb61 thanks for the info. I really have learned a lot from your insights.
What a terribly kind thing to say, thank you. E |
hi @astewart8944 !
Well, I think of 2.5 way as full-range. I meant, that for the slim form factor a 2.5 way can offer a lot of benefits compared to a more traditional 3-way with a large diameter woofer.
In all cases, the ability to use a separate amp with EQ and proper room tuning for the bass is absolutely magical, and (when properly set up) will always outperform a full-range speaker without them.
As an audiophile, I spent a lot (for me!) of cash on my DAC, and pre. I don’t want an EQ in most of my music, BUT, if I can run the EQ for the bass only, it’s heaven.
Best,
E |
Hi @rlb61 - Sorry for the confusion!
Whether or not a speaker is a 2.5 way is characterized by the crossover, not the woofers.
In a 2.5 way, the two woofers have low pass filters ONLY, but set to different points and slopes. This can be implemented with identical drivers (like the JA Perspective and Klan Ton Ophelia) or like the Focal Profile 918 which used different drivers for each.
The missing 0.5 in the equation (2.5 + 0.5 = 3 way) is a high pass filter on the top woofer. This would reduce the bass the mid-woofer plays, relegating it all to the bottom woofer. Without this, both woofers play the deepest octaves.
Best,
E
|
|
I think one of the main benefits of a 2.5 way is foot print vs. bass extension and dynamic range as well as overall speaker sensitivity.
2.5 way speakers tend to be made with 6" drivers, so you end up with a rather narrow speaker overall.
there are some close variations, like a T - M - W - W, true 3-way speaker, but with two woofer. |
+1 @rlb61 - This is also one of my top methods for exactly those reasons
amg - I think you have to separate the enclosures, to avoid having the lower woofer interact in weird ways with the upper woofer.
|
