Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New three-way monkey coffins

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DeZZar
    commented on 's reply
    Yeah I should have stated - that's exactly what I ended up doing!

  • Wolf
    replied
    If it were me, I'd just invert the mid. This way the forward DC pulse of the woofer is kept intact for making impact sound right.
    Wolf

    Leave a comment:


  • DeZZar
    replied
    Thought I would also add the CSD results...don't see enough of these...

    Click image for larger version

Name:	xOver v1.0 CSD.png
Views:	146
Size:	390.1 KB
ID:	1494831

    Leave a comment:


  • DeZZar
    replied
    Here are the on-axis results. These measurements were taken outside at night and I was able to get the speaker quite high off the ground for a 9ms gate time - measured 1m on tweeter axis. There were some pesky crickets singing away in the background but I don't think they affected the results.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	xOver v1.0 On-Axis Result.png
Views:	216
Size:	185.2 KB
ID:	1494779

    Interestingly the modelling called for the tweeter and midrange to be wired in normal polarity and the woofer reversed but when measured it was clear the tweeter needed to be inverted as well. Turns out we had been listening to them all this time with the deep null at 2.5K - they sounded great but we did notice some strange 'honkiness' to vocals on certain tracks - turns out this was the cause.

    The other key difference is the model was predicting a rise in the tweeter response (akin to its raw measured nature) but in reality the on axis result is a little closer to the predicted listening window. There might be some room to bring the tweeter back up a little but for now it sounds very nice right where it is.

    Here is the distortion from the above measurement. At 90db we are below 0.5% most of the time and well below 1% even considering the peaks across this range.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	xOver v1.0 Distortion.png
Views:	193
Size:	226.2 KB
ID:	1494781

    Sanity check on impedance results and we have a near on perfect match with the model:
    Click image for larger version

Name:	xOver v1.0 Impedance.png
Views:	189
Size:	55.9 KB
ID:	1494780

    Looks like we'd probably classify these as a 6ohm nominal load with a minimum of 4.2ohms.

    All the parts arrived to assemble a proper prototype version of the crossover so more updates to come in due course.

    Leave a comment:


  • DeZZar
    replied
    Hi All,

    Little bit of progress on this build over the holidays so thought I would provide a bit of an update.

    After modelling and trying a few different crossovers we've landed here for now:

    Click image for larger version

Name:	xOver v1.0 Schematic.png
Views:	197
Size:	33.9 KB
ID:	1494776


    Keeping it fairly simple all round with 2nd order filters and just a third order on the midrange low pass with a notch to really suppress the high frequency breakup. Here is the expected results from the modelling:
    Click image for larger version

Name:	xOver v1.0 Model.png
Views:	202
Size:	376.9 KB
ID:	1494777


    As I was driving interstate over the holidays to visit family I took the opportunity to deliver these to their new home in their current unfinished state as it would be quite some time before I had another opportunity. So they just remain raw boxes at the moment and in future visits they'll get their veneer and finishing touches.

    We spent some time listening to the above crossover in a prototype state both in my workshop and in their final resting place. In short, they sound incredible even at this stage. I wasn't able to take a complete set of measurements with this crossover but based on the listening tests and an on-axis measurement to confirm the results we'll go ahead an assemble this crossover with some cheaper parts for further listening before upping the parts quality for a final build.

    Workshop listening session:
    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG20221224165850.jpg
Views:	220
Size:	177.8 KB
ID:	1494774

    Prototype crossovers - this is one of the iterations under test.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG20221224165834.jpg
Views:	201
Size:	209.2 KB
ID:	1494775

    Leave a comment:


  • Ryan
    replied
    I am inspired to start my build, just need lumber prices to fall before August! Great work!

    Leave a comment:


  • DeZZar
    replied
    Originally posted by dkalsi View Post
    did you use VituixCAD to determine ideal driver placement/offset - if so, were you specifying the enclosure width based on the protruding baffle, or the full width of the speaker?
    Yes. For these I specified the width based on the protruding surface. I figured there might be some unknown oddities to deal with based on the stepped edges but there isn't really a way to model that exactly.

    Just off centre seemed best for these. The "best" positions are usually impractical so it's always a game of compromises.

    Leave a comment:


  • PWR RYD
    replied
    Originally posted by Wolf View Post
    I have dust collecting on my build as well.
    Wolf
    Classic!

    Leave a comment:


  • dkalsi
    replied
    DeZZar - did you use VituixCAD to determine ideal driver placement/offset - if so, were you specifying the enclosure width based on the protruding baffle, or the full width of the speaker?

    Leave a comment:


  • dkalsi
    commented on 's reply
    DeZZar - did you use VituixCAD to determine ideal driver placement/offset - if so, were you specifying the enclosure width based on the protruding baffle, or the full width of the speaker?

  • DeZZar
    commented on 's reply
    Its a little better because its actually more like an Acme thread - not like a normal bolt - so it has a much longer pitch to it - it doesn't take long at all - but then again I'm not really going from one extreme to the other. Usually tweeter first, then midrange then woofer so from a change in radius point of view its just a few inches at a time. If I was needing to go from one end to the other I might create a thread release kind of mechanism where you can just press it down and slide it the whole way manually - but its never really been an issue.

  • DeZZar
    commented on 's reply
    These will end up in a house with small kids so they'll get a grill. It will just press fit over the raised baffle.

  • DeZZar
    commented on 's reply
    One day when I get around to making a better one I'll have a measurement system dialled in for it so its just a case of setting it like a table saw and cutting - but for now I generally measure it, then do a quick little test cut on some scrap and then cut all the circles I need for that radius before moving on to the next size.

  • Paul Carmody
    commented on 's reply
    Oh I know how they work. It's how I used to do it before I broke down and bought a Jasper Jig. I really don't like that JJs are so fragile, but it's hard to beat how easy and quick they are to use.

  • davidroberts
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul Carmody View Post
    The circle jig is awesome. I think that's the first time I've seen someone use a threaded rod to move the pivot point.

    Do you find you have to do test cuts before routing the baffle, or do you have it dialed in to certain diameters somehow?
    Should be able to measure from the outside of the bit to the center of the pin. Craftsman used to have very simple jig. We had several of them at the car audio shop that I worked at in my younger days.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X