Home » Audio » Speaker » Widerange midwoofers, specs, and x-o pts...
Widerange midwoofers, specs, and x-o pts... [message #60972] Mon, 21 September 2009 21:17 Go to next message
darkmoebius2 is currently offline  darkmoebius2
Messages: 37
Registered: August 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Baron
I just wanted to open a general discussion about widerange mid drivers(3" & 4") and the most desired aspects from a specs POV.

In a perfect world, we could easily find and affordable driver capable of 80-6,500Hz FR with a nice, smooth, curve and rolloff at both ends of the spectrum. But, this isn't a perfect world.

Seeing how, in most cases, one has to crossover to both the LF and HF drivers at 1/2 to a full octave before the actual crossover point, one likely has to trade off one end of the FR against the other.

So, let me ask which is a better trait in a world of compromises (assuming one starts an array from the mids out) - extension below 120Hz or smooth highs above 3.5kHz? taking into account that comb filtering effects likely kick in above that point?

Is this a too simplistic view?




Re: Widerange midwoofers, specs, and x-o pts... [message #60983 is a reply to message #60972] Tue, 22 September 2009 19:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
selahaudio is currently offline  selahaudio
Messages: 56
Registered: September 2009
Baron
darkmoebius2 wrote on Mon, 21 September 2009 21:17
I just wanted to open a general discussion about widerange mid drivers(3" & 4") and the most desired aspects from a specs POV.

In a perfect world, we could easily find and affordable driver capable of 80-6,500Hz FR with a nice, smooth, curve and rolloff at both ends of the spectrum. But, this isn't a perfect world.

Seeing how, in most cases, one has to crossover to both the LF and HF drivers at 1/2 to a full octave before the actual crossover point, one likely has to trade off one end of the FR against the other.

So, let me ask which is a better trait in a world of compromises (assuming one starts an array from the mids out) - extension below 120Hz or smooth highs above 3.5kHz? taking into account that comb filtering effects likely kick in above that point?

Is this a too simplistic view?







Comb filtering doesn't remove everything so you still have to pay attention to the transfer function of your filter. There may be still be peaks and dips along the line depending on where you place your crossover and how steep the slope is.

Depending on the location and bandwidth of your subwoofer you may want to go lower than 120hz. A steeper crossover slope on the sub will also allow you more flexibility. There are more choices at say 80hz for subs but also Dayton RS / Seas 10"-12" that will easily handle a 120hz crossover point. The really long excursion drivers (15mm+ xmax) tend to be more limited because of their inductive voicecoils.
Re: Widerange midwoofers, specs, and x-o pts... [message #60986 is a reply to message #60983] Tue, 22 September 2009 20:05 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marlboro
Messages: 403
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)
Rick,

RE: "Comb filtering doesn't remove everything so you still have to pay attention to the transfer function of your filter."

I'm sorry. Where does comb filtering come in here? Maybe I'm the only one who doesn't understand this, but I would like to know what you are talking about here.

I'm not assuming that its inaccurate, just that I don't know where this came into the discussion.

Thanks,

Marlboro
Re: Widerange midwoofers, specs, and x-o pts... [message #60988 is a reply to message #60983] Wed, 23 September 2009 01:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
darkmoebius2 is currently offline  darkmoebius2
Messages: 37
Registered: August 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Baron
selahaudio wrote on Tue, 22 September 2009 19:37
Comb filtering doesn't remove everything so you still have to pay attention to the transfer function of your filter.
Do you know of a good website that explains comb filtering? I guess I don't really have a full grasp of what is going on with it beyond that it causes an increasing decline in output above certain frequencies. Is it a matter of cancellation? Are there formulas for quantifying how much cancellation there is at certain frequency ranges?
Re: Widerange midwoofers, specs, and x-o pts... [message #60989 is a reply to message #60988] Wed, 23 September 2009 06:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marlboro
Messages: 403
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)
If we are taling about comb filter distortion, this is what Jim Griffin said on PE back in 2006:

"Comb lining will dull the highs and will be most noticeable in the lack of air (dull highs) especially as you move off axis. Essentially, the high frequencies are rolled off as the ensemble of the tweeter outputs don't add up but start to cancel. Now the ear is less sensitive in the upper octave (10-20 kHz) you may not observe the full impact of this effect. But if you compare to an array that is properly designed, then there is no comparison as the proper array will yield a more airy (and accurate) sound."

Jim Griffin on PE 11-21-06

If you look at a frequency chart, it looks like you put your hand over it and drew around your fingers. However if you use the proper spacing of the speakers and match the correct crossover as described in the white paper, you can avoid the issue. And if you don't move but sit still when you listen, you may not be able to hear it at all even if you have a difficult problem. Pipedreams have comb filter distortion but because people sit still, its not audible.

But I'm not sure where this subject cam up in your original discussion.
Re: Widerange midwoofers, specs, and x-o pts... [message #60990 is a reply to message #60988] Wed, 23 September 2009 09:19 Go to previous messageGo to next message
selahaudio is currently offline  selahaudio
Messages: 56
Registered: September 2009
Baron
darkmoebius2 wrote on Wed, 23 September 2009 01:16
selahaudio wrote on Tue, 22 September 2009 19:37
Comb filtering doesn't remove everything so you still have to pay attention to the transfer function of your filter.
Do you know of a good website that explains comb filtering? I guess I don't really have a full grasp of what is going on with it beyond that it causes an increasing decline in output above certain frequencies. Is it a matter of cancellation? Are there formulas for quantifying how much cancellation there is at certain frequency ranges?


There are some formulas but in reality the measured response can vary from the theory. Comb filtering is basically a phase issue where the drivers don't sum correctly and this creates dips in the response.

The vertical off-axis frequency response of the driver plays a role as well which is why planars and ribbons function better as tweeters in an array. Domes have more interference because they radiate sound the same at all angles. If you ever listen to an array with domes you'll notice the top octave sounds partially missing and that's the result of comb filtering.The same is true for arrays with small drivers operating full-range. Ribbons/planars aren't totally immune to it but they have lower interference due to the longer radiating element and in most cases the quasi-horn loading of the front faceplate.

With woofers and mids the combing starts at a lower frequency and is affected by the center-to-center spacing as well as the off-axis response. After several years of working with different woofers I have concluded that 3"-5" woofers work best with the planars and ribbons that are available. A DSP crossover with steep slopes (48db or more) is a big advantage if you want to use a 6"-7" woofer because it will handle the comb filtering better than a passive crossover.
Re: Widerange midwoofers, specs, and x-o pts... [message #60993 is a reply to message #60990] Wed, 23 September 2009 15:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
darkmoebius2 is currently offline  darkmoebius2
Messages: 37
Registered: August 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Baron
Thanks for the responses, guys. Having read so much stuff about crossovers, bi/tri-amping, etc. I forgot that I had a fairly good idea of comb filter effects from a white paper by one of the commercial array manufacturers(or was it an AES paper?) that I cam across.

Re: Widerange midwoofers, specs, and x-o pts... [message #60994 is a reply to message #60993] Wed, 23 September 2009 15:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marlboro
Messages: 403
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)
RE: "Domes have more interference because they radiate sound the same at all angles. If you ever listen to an array with domes you'll notice the top octave sounds partially missing and that's the result of comb filtering.The same is true for arrays with small drivers operating full-range."

You have to understand here that the only line array that Rick Craig has PROBABLY listened to that is commercially available is the PipeDreams. This may be the only line array that he has listened to with domes in it.

My research has shown that 1 inch domes are too big and 1/2 inch domes are too small. Only 3/4 inch domes will work due to comb filter distortion issues and crossover issues. And even these have to have their edges truncated so that they are literally silk to silk.

I can assure you, and everyone who has listened to my array can assure you, that there is not a hint of loss of high frequencies using my method. However, no commercial builder could possibly do it due to the labor intensiveness.

Rick has brought this up numerous times about domes, and specifically mine. Here is what Jim Griffin had to say about SPECIFICALLY ABOUT MY LINE ARRAY on April 28, 2007, when Rick Craig commented that my line array with the domes and the 3 inch midranges was very poorly executed:

"Perhaps not as bad as you are thinking. He is using 3" diameter mid-woofs with 4" pipe loading for each one. It would have been better to locate these drivers closer together so that the center to center spacing was smaller (I'm guessing about 5" c-t-c in his design[ACTUALLY 4.75 inches- marlboro]). While with his crossover at 2650 Hz would create some potential combing issues for a low slope crossover, his active crossover likely has a high enough slope to minimize the crossover overlap region between the mid-woofs and tweeters. He does trim the flanges on the dome tweeters so that their c-t-c spacing is reduced. Hence, he pushes the coherent frequency coverage for the tweeters higher than you would have without those trimmed flanges.[START OF COMB FILTER DISTORTION IS 16.5 khz--- quite a bite above my hearing and most people above 25 years old- Marlboro]

"He is a student of my white paper......"

Since I consulted with Jim every step of the way, I want to assure you that you can use domes, but you will be limited to using Dayton Neo20FA's only. Although if you can believe Zaph's reports, the little Dayton neo's charts beat all the ribbons except the B&G.

So I have to conclude that Rick's statement about domes has to be with the ones where the edges are not cut to make the center to center distance about .78. Its too bad that he lives in NC and can't hear a decent line array using domes.

Marlboro.

P.S.: If I was unable to use domes, or Dayton changed the style of their neos, i would most certainly use a ribbon. But it would be the B&G model. Until I see tests somewhere that compare all three testing graphs that John Krutke uses, I will have to use his measurements.
Re: Widerange midwoofers, specs, and x-o pts... [message #60996 is a reply to message #60994] Wed, 23 September 2009 18:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Marlboro
Messages: 403
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)
Back to the original question.....

I believe that distortion is the most significant measurement.

FR is so dependent on so many things from the speakers to the room to actual hearing of the individual to almost everything.

But distortion is pretty steady: IT INCREASES AS THE VOLUME INCREASES.

MARLBORO
Re: Widerange midwoofers, specs, and x-o pts... [message #60998 is a reply to message #60994] Wed, 23 September 2009 19:10 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
darkmoebius2 is currently offline  darkmoebius2
Messages: 37
Registered: August 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Baron
Marlboro wrote on Wed, 23 September 2009 15:56

You have to understand here that the only line array that Rick Craig has PROBABLY listened to that is commercially available is the PipeDreams. This may be the only line array that he has listened to with domes in it.
Marlboro, you cannot lambaste Rick for supposedly making an assumption, then turn around and make an assumption yourself about what he has, and has not, heard without seeming slightly hypocritical.
Quote:
My research has shown that 1 inch domes are too big and 1/2 inch domes are too small.
And what do the majority of line arrays using dome tweeters utilize? So, in general, Rick's statement might be true about a lot of arrays using dome tweeters - maybe even a majority.
Quote:
I can assure you, and everyone who has listened to my array can assure you, that there is not a hint of loss of high frequencies using my method. However, no commercial builder could possibly do it due to the labor intensiveness.
I have a feeling that you are taking every statement Rick makes too personally, as if it is intentionally directed at you. That does not seem to be the case, to me, and I think others might agree.
Quote:
Rick has brought this up numerous times about domes, and specifically mine.
But, he did not mention you, or your array, this time.
Quote:
So I have to conclude that Rick's statement about domes has to be with the ones where the edges are not cut to make the center to center distance about .78
How many other arrays do you know of where someone has done this? This only goes to buttress that, outside of your speakers, any array using domes the rest of us are likely to hear will be using tweeters that are not close enough together and will experience some noticeable loss in HF response.
Previous Topic: Crossover Question about building line arrays
Next Topic: Last Sunday
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Oct 31 17:46:47 CDT 2024

Sponsoring Organizations

DIY Audio Projects
DIY Audio Projects
OddWatt Audio
OddWatt Audio
Pi Speakers
Pi Speakers
Prosound Shootout
Prosound Shootout
Miller Audio
Miller Audio
Tubes For Amps
TubesForAmps.com

Lone Star Audiofest