$vboptions[bbtitle]   $vboptions[bbtitle]  
  Terms and Conditions     Project Showcase
  Resource Index   Speaker Terms Glossary
  Security/Privacy   Speaker Replacement Help
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 68
  1. #21
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Camden County, NJ
    Posts
    129

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Roemer View Post
    .
    But don't buy anything yet, I'm going to look at something.
    Maybe something to make it cheaper? I just did some price checking from both Parts Express and Erse Audio, and they're $99 and $85 respectively for crossover components.

    I have four old crossovers lying around (2 generic, 2 pulled from speakers), I wish I had an LCR meter to find out the values of the inductors, that's the biggest cost.

    This was supposed to be a budget build, but it's getting more expensive. That said, I hate doing a bad job with anything I do, so I might have to sell some stuff and order the bits for whatever you come up with.

    Let me see if anyone has anything over on the classifieds section...

    Lee.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Appleton
    Posts
    7,721

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by leesonic View Post
    Maybe something to make it cheaper? I just did some price checking from both Parts Express and Erse Audio, and they're $99 and $85 respectively for crossover components.

    I have four old crossovers lying around (2 generic, 2 pulled from speakers), I wish I had an LCR meter to find out the values of the inductors, that's the biggest cost.

    This was supposed to be a budget build, but it's getting more expensive. That said, I hate doing a bad job with anything I do, so I might have to sell some stuff and order the bits for whatever you come up with.

    Let me see if anyone has anything over on the classifieds section...

    Lee.
    Yeah, problem with 3-ways is that component count DOUBLES since the band pass is a high pass AND a low pass. THEN, the low cross pt. between the woofer and mid needs high value parts, and those big coils can be killers.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Appleton
    Posts
    7,721

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Roemer View Post
    Yup, EXCEPT on the BP, instead of series/shunt/series/shunt (for the caps & coils) I modeled it with the series cap & series coil FIRST (either of those can come before the other - they're in series - so THAT doesn't matter),

    (hmmm . . . I also see that you flopped the 2 coils around - the series coil is the 0.50mH, the shunt (to gnd) coil is the 2.0mH)

    THEN

    the 3 "shunt" legs to ground: cap, coil, & Zobel. THEIR order doesn't matter either - as they're all in parallel with each other

    BUT they have to follow the 2 series elements or the response will be affected.

    Notes: poly caps probably just for the 6.8 & 18 uF on the tweeter, otherwise the cheap npes.

    I don't bother with the "Dayton Audio Grade"s, I just use the 0.50c cheap 10w wirewound resistors - they all measure the same. The $1.25 ones DO have a gold plating that falls off when you make a sharp bend in the leads - if you go for that sort of thing.

    For coils: follow any "DCR" (DC resistance) or ohms (n) notation I might have made for any in series (DCR of shunt coils usually don't matter, so the smaller/cheaper the better - like the 2mH shunt coil on the bandpass, use a #20 with the 1.2n DCR - it'll be fine). I THINK that means a #18 for the BP 0.50mH. Your mid is the least sensitive driver, so if you used a #20 here, you'd cut its output even more (not by much, but let's not, anyway). And use the ERSE? "I-Core" for the 8.0mH in the low pass, 0.5n.

    Chris
    OK - probaby my last update unless you've got ?'s

    If you used foil caps and coils the pair of XOs would run $1900, so $90 seem like a bargain to me, anyway . . .

    I fiddled around a bit, and revised things slightly. This will save a lit'l money, but gives you a slight gain in sensitivity, AND gives you a slightly flatter response.

    For the most part, the XO stands: same driver polarity (- on tweet and mid), same parts count, SAME tweeter L-pad, same Zobel on mid, exact same LP on woofer (sorry about that $17 coil).

    What I've changed - 2 things:

    HP - still 3rd order, but instead of 6.8uF cap, 0.30mH shunt coil, 18uF cap,
    GO WITH 8uF npe cap, 0.25mH shunt coil, 22uF npe cap.
    Using npe's instead of pp caps can save almost $20, and it's just a "Silky".

    BP - changing laydown order and a few specs slightly
    instead of 50 series cap, then .50 series coil, THEN 2mh shunt coil, 8uF shunt cap
    GO WITH: 0.40mH series coil, THEN 8uF SHUNT cap, then 50uF series cap, THEN 2.0mH shunt coil (then Zobel)

    I get about $75 from PE.

    Chris

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    NW Ohio
    Posts
    524

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    Cool , thanks for posting
    Big fat monkey coffins are back in style.
    I like the BAMTW look with the baffle

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    council bluffs iowa
    Posts
    7,412

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    those wisconsin guys are so generous.
    " And it's not just the end result -- nice speakers or a cool amp -- but the creative process that adds richness to my life; and an artistic outlet. A cool looking speaker qualifies as art in my book."
    Tom Zarbo, January 2014

    Quote Originally Posted by hongrn. Oct 2014
    Do you realize that being an American is like winning the biggest jackpot ever??

    http://www.midwestaudioclub.com/spot...owell-simpson/
    http://s413.photobucket.com/albums/pp216/arlis/

  6. #26
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Camden County, NJ
    Posts
    129

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Roemer View Post
    OK - probaby my last update unless you've got ?'s

    If you used foil caps and coils the pair of XOs would run $1900, so $90 seem like a bargain to me, anyway . . .
    Yeah, I know, I'm not trying to sound cheap. I'll probably use polys on the tweeter as per your original recommendation, they're not the expensive part.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Roemer View Post
    I fiddled around a bit, and revised things slightly. This will save a lit'l money, but gives you a slight gain in sensitivity, AND gives you a slightly flatter response.
    So it should look like this now :



    Lee.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Appleton
    Posts
    7,721

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by leesonic View Post
    Yeah, I know, I'm not trying to sound cheap. I'll probably use polys on the tweeter as per your original recommendation, they're not the expensive part.



    So it should look like this now :



    Lee.

    Looks great. I tried dropping that 8mH coil down to a 7, but just ddn't like the way it looked.

    chrsi

  8. #28
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Camden County, NJ
    Posts
    129

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    With regards to the midrange enclosure, needed as the Dayton 4" woofer isn't closed back, is there a minimum size I need to make it? My JBLs and Infinities have what looks like a piece of cardboard tube glued to the back of the baffle, with a round piece of wood glued in the end to close it off. I wish I could find something similar, as at the moment, I'm going to have to cut out and make a little box to go there.

    Lee.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sioux Falls
    Posts
    11,952

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by leesonic View Post
    With regards to the midrange enclosure, needed as the Dayton 4" woofer isn't closed back, is there a minimum size I need to make it? My JBLs and Infinities have what looks like a piece of cardboard tube glued to the back of the baffle, with a round piece of wood glued in the end to close it off. I wish I could find something similar, as at the moment, I'm going to have to cut out and make a little box to go there.

    Lee.
    You have something similar with a length of PVC and a hot glue gun Don't forget to stuff it with some fiberglass or something!

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    west coast of Michigan
    Posts
    467

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by johnnyrichards View Post
    You have something similar with a length of PVC and a hot glue gun Don't forget to stuff it with some fiberglass or something!
    or run the PVC from front to rear, so the rear of the box seals it off....you've got the benefit of the enclosure, AND a pretty stiff baffle brace....I'd probably look for a 4" to 2" reducer, and then run 2" PVC to the back of the cab, and stuff the 2" with fiberglass, and the 4" reducer with polyfill.

    size, depends on what you want to do for the crossover...~2-2.3L will give you a Q of the system for the midbass in the .71-.75 range, before stuffing. 1L gets you a system Q of .97 and a 1db rise centered about 200hz...1/2L gives a Q of 1.3, and a 3db peak at 220hz...

    this may allow the use of smaller xover components depending on desired xover frequency to counteract the rising response on the low end, similar to Johnny's findings when using the GRS sealed back midrange. With it's very high Q and rising response near the Fs, coupling it with a small, 6uf cap gives near flat response with a close to 4th order rolloff at ~800hz...

  11. #31
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Camden County, NJ
    Posts
    129

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by michiganpat View Post
    or run the PVC from front to rear, so the rear of the box seals it off....you've got the benefit of the enclosure, AND a pretty stiff baffle brace.
    I don't think I can sacrifice that much cabinet space. The cabinet is already slightly undersized for the woofers as it is.

    Thanks for your advice though.

    Lee.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    west coast of Michigan
    Posts
    467

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by leesonic View Post
    I don't think I can sacrifice that much cabinet space. The cabinet is already slightly undersized for the woofers as it is.

    Thanks for your advice though.

    Lee.
    well....3.5" schedule 40 is 3.521" ID, 4" OD. can't remember how deep the advent cabs are, but for argument's sake, lets say it's 10"...a 4"x12" cylinder is 4*pi*10=~126 cubic inches, or .073 cubic feet, or 2.06L, so not a terrible loss of volume...

    internal volume of the sub-enclosure would be 97ci, or .056 cubic foot, or 1.6L

  13. #33
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Camden County, NJ
    Posts
    129

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by michiganpat View Post
    well....3.5" schedule 40 is 3.521" ID, 4" OD. can't remember how deep the advent cabs are, but for argument's sake, lets say it's 10"...a 4"x12" cylinder is 4*pi*10=~126 cubic inches, or .073 cubic feet, or 2.06L, so not a terrible loss of volume...

    internal volume of the sub-enclosure would be 97ci, or .056 cubic foot, or 1.6L
    When you put it like that, it isn't a lot of volume to lose. The only trouble is the cutout for the terminals on the back panel is very close to where the end of te PVC pipe would be. I'll have to investigate further...

    Lee.

  14. #34

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    I just modeled that woofer in 2.5 cubic feet tuned to 30Hz and you get a 1dB bump at 55Hz, an F3 of 30Hz, and you reach xmax with 50watts and 105dB. If these end up sounding nice in the upper register, I may end up building a pair in short, fat towers. Would there be anything to gain from offsetting the MT portion or is the XO specific to centered on that baffle width?

  15. #35

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    Could the DA215-8 (8" version) be "dropped" into this design? and if not how much change to the crossover would be necessary?

  16. #36

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    Just looking at the SPL graphs on PE and 8" and 10" look very close.

  17. #37
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Camden County, NJ
    Posts
    129

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    Look what followed me home, care of a pair of old Infinity speakers...midrange cups, or whatever you call them.





    They should work, if not from the front of the baffle, then mounted from behind.

    Lee.

  18. #38
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Camden County, NJ
    Posts
    129

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Roemer View Post
    OK - probaby my last update unless you've got ?'s
    One thing still confuses me about the crossover design. With a woofer with a response going up to 6kHz, why set the crossover frequency so low?

    Also, I was looking at that FRD Consortium site for the XOverSim program. Where do you get the data files to make it work, specifically the ones for the three drivers I'm using here?

    My questions aren't meant to pick holes in the excellent work you've done, I just would like to understand more about this crossover design.

    Thanks,

    Lee.

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Appleton
    Posts
    7,721

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    Quote Originally Posted by leesonic View Post
    One thing still confuses me about the crossover design. With a woofer with a response going up to 6kHz, why set the crossover frequency so low?

    Also, I was looking at that FRD Consortium site for the XOverSim program. Where do you get the data files to make it work, specifically the ones for the three drivers I'm using here?

    My questions aren't meant to pick holes in the excellent work you've done, I just would like to understand more about this crossover design.

    Thanks,

    Lee.
    No offense taken, but trying to learn XO design purely by asking ?'s on the internet is NOT a good way to go aboout it.

    Currently, "Speakerbuilding 201" would be the best book for you to read to get up to speed (plus it's a good resource that you'll refer to over and over again).

    ROT: Don't push any driver higher than the SOS (speed of sound = 13,500 ips) divided by the (actual) cone diameter, because the driver starts to "beam" (like a spotlight - we want the sound to spread out like a floodlight - GOOD DISPERSION). Your 10" most likely has an actual cone dia. close to 8". 13,500 / 8 = about 1.7kHz. To have a useful driver extend up to 6k, its cone would be no larger than 13,500 / 6,000 = 2.2". So, about a 3" driver. Hell, we're not even crossing your 4" up at 6k (same rules apply).

    ROT: Don't cross a pair of drivers higher than SOS / C-C distance between drivers. I'd judge the distance from your woofer's center to the mid at 8". Hmmm . . . 13,500 / 8 = 1.7kHz. SAME ANSWER (they often are). You COULD have tightened up your driver spacing (you didn't know any better), and THIS number would be higher, but you'd get beaming anyway unless you used a smaller woofer, like an 8", which actually would have been a better fit to your box volume, vented.

    ROT: A mid should cover about 3 octaves. If you ran your beaming 10" up to 6k, why would you use a mid when the Silky can go below 2k? (You didn't know any better.)

    Your tweet and mid look to be about 5" C-C (so . . . about 2.7kHz). A 4" mid (3" cone) COULD run up to about 4-5k, IF you didn't space them so far apart (you didn't know any better, read Speakerbuilding and you WILL).

    OK. So with the mid's top end set to 2.7k, coming down 3 octaves would put us near 350 Hz for the cross down to the 10". I believe I set your cross points near 400 and 2.4k, so we've got about 2-2/3 octaves covered. If you tried to run the tweeter down to 2k, and the woofer up to 1k, and just tried to fill the small gap with a mid, you basically end up with 3 drivers overlapping at 1.5k, which is a mess, AND you'd probably end up with a system impedance tthat dipped below 3 ohms, and that's using all 8n drivers.

    You can use "SPLTrace" (from the FRD site) to trace impedance and response curves off off .jpgs or pdfs that you hunt down online.

    Chris

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    WI. Near the Infamous Dells. Pllhhh!
    Posts
    275

    Default Re: Original Large Advent upgrade with Dayton drivers

    Ditto ckmoore. I love the old classics.
    'Soupy'

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




Your #1 Source for Audio, Video & Speaker Building Components


Clearance Center
Deal of the Day
New Products




View Our latest
Sales Flyer

Prices Effective
Through 12/31/14


Order our FREE 336 Page Full Color Catalog


Speaker Component Categories

Home Audio Speakers

Professional Audio & Guitar Speakers

Car Audio Speakers

Speaker Buyouts

Measurement & Design Tools

Subwoofer Plate Amplifiers

Full-Range Plate Amplifiers

Crossover Components

Cabinet Hardware & Speaker
Grill Cloth

Speaker Cabinets

Subwoofer System Kits

Speaker Kits

Speaker Repair Parts

Speaker Wire