Jump to content

3ll3d00d

Members
  • Posts

    529
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    28

Everything posted by 3ll3d00d

  1. headroom is always good of course but, as far as I can see, you are not talking about challenging listening levels ("occasional bursts to 110dB"). This may be worth bearing in mind as you decide on what to build. re the HPF, I assume you're talking about a passive high pass filter. Of course such filters are expensive and/or impractical so the question is why use a passive filter?
  2. Lead times only about a week atm apparently
  3. not a bad idea, needs a bigger box though really
  4. you can import the measurement into REW and let it calculate them for you. This is probably a nice thing to add to all the driver measurements from data-bass.
  5. I see he's released a build with this feature in -> http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/subwoofers/119854-hornresp-post5404994.html
  6. actually it's probably more like 16mm or so clearance so a bit tighter than I thought, I guess I'll just have to buy one and give it a try to see what happens I did start looking into 12" woofers (in order to find a shallower one) though anyway the B&C 12NW76 (http://www.bcspeakers.com/en/products/lf-driver/12-0/8/12nw76) seemed somewhat on paper (shorting ring, seems like similar motor strength) albeit models with much more midrange(which I won't be using). I'm never quite sure whether to use xvar or xmax from the b&c specs though. the BMS 12N804 (http://www.bmsspeakers.com/index.php?id=12n804_overview) was another one that looked promising a comparison from hornresp models with EQ applied to use up the 200W on offer while keeping within xmax (vs the 15n840) https://imgur.com/C3qXkV1 anyone with any views on any of these? (or any of the other 12" drivers for that matter)
  7. I've put together the cabinet for this (pretty simple sealed box) and run into a possible issue due to my depth constraint, if I stick to that constraint then I'm only going to have a shade under an inch (~23mm) clearance behind the pole vent. I estimate the diameter of that vent is ~60mm. I will not be running this really hard, well under rated power, so I have a feeling I can get away with this with no real negative impact (even if it's not ideal). Any views?
  8. Interesting thread developing on diya - http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/subwoofers/320189-inductance-cancellation-techniques.html - regarding more accurately modelling the effect of inductance (and building that into hornresp making use of data that is captured by rew or arta).
  9. it sounds like the same feature but with different access controls unless I'm missing something so I'd vote for both, if forced to choose then I would go with the "official" custom systems
  10. See http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/rew-forum/61149-group-delay-graph-how-add-lines.html
  11. the measurement graphs are not loaded due to an https page requesting js over http error is Mixed Content: The page at 'https://data-bass.com/data?page=system&id=112&mset=124' was loaded over HTTPS, but requested an insecure script 'http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.6/jquery.min.js'. This request has been blocked; the content must be served over HTTPS.
  12. I don't think I've ever seen a way to do that, you could export the data though and use some external app to produce your own chart for an arbitrary time period
  13. you can scroll back (assuming it's still in the buffer) using the controls on the left or are you asking whether you can capture an image larger than your screen?
  14. Thanks for the suggested drivers. I'll have to discount them both though as I'm not prepared to spend time in the queue with AE on this occasion & the JBL looks like it will only work in the ported enclosure as well as being somewhat more expensive (in Europe) than any of the other options. Is there something about the JBL that makes it stand out from the BMS?
  15. sorry brain fail, you said mid and I replied talking about woofers. There is some discussion of an additional mid in the thread, conclusion is that there isn't a benefit and it is likely to make the HF response more ragged. He does put two on the 3d printed version but AIUI that is really to do the mechanics of printing it in 2 parts.
  16. FWIW he recommends running a 4 mid version like a 3.5 way (by rolling off the top woofers) to minimise any negative impact on the vertical pattern. I have 2 problems with a full size synergy, one is size and the other is making the cuts to make the thing. I reckon it would be doable with my track saw though but probably one for the future. He does have a 3d printed version available that does mount the woofers on the horn itself, see http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/307434-3d-printing-1-2-waveguide.html for details.
  17. FWIW I am currently using a pair of TD12Ms for W/M though. The thought is to turn the fronts into 4 ways however it's not to add another driver beneath what I currently have, it's for a different speaker entirely. I've wanted to try a synergy style horn for a while and there is a design out there which uses a SEOS15 for this purpose (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/292379-syns.html). I happen to have a bunch of SEOS15s in the house so I thought I'd give it a whirl. This design is limited by the <200Hz region though as it uses a pair of 6s and I don't think it will be enough for me. I sketched out a 4 driver version (which will have pretty much as much capability my existing setup) but that box seems a little unwieldy. The other option is to go 4 way (but not a 4 way passive, go active between the woofer and the horn) which then made me think why not go big enough to spread the LFE around to mitigate room issues. Plan is to build one to try it out, if it works then build some more (as the first one will be donated to a local community choir for their rehearsals which is also one driver behind the desire to use something capable of running in a smaller sealed box as well as a larger ported box).
  18. I'm looking for a woofer suitable for use in the ~40-250Hz range and that is comfortable in a relatively small enclosure and ideally could be used in either ~40L sealed or ~75L ported. Intended use is HT as the bottom end of the LCR but which will also receive that portion of the LFE (i.e. want to be able to try spreading the LFE down to this point across the LCR). Not too concerned about cost really. Drivers I've modelled so far include FaitalPro 15XL1400 - 15XL1400 by FaitalPROBeyma 15p80Nd - LOW & MID FREQUENCY 15P80Nd | Beyma18sound 15nlw9401 - 15NLW9401BMS 15n840 - Overview Current favourite is the BMS. Any other suggestions or personal experience of such drivers appreciated.
  19. Do you find this in other systems or just your own system?
  20. Thanks for the comments, it's interesting to hear how other people approach this. IIRC the correction was based on an average of 0-45 degrees (though looking at the data again, I might be misremembering that...). I'm still not entirely happy with the 100-400Hz range yet but haven't had the time (or inclination) to properly revisit it. My current setup is really quite time consuming to work through the various filters and somewhat prone to manual error so I've left it as good enough for a while now. I would like to work out a better strategy for that mid bass area at some point though. FWIW I posted some more graphs in http://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-diy-speakers-subs/2188265-attempting-3way-seos10.html#post55396722 which show the directivity & power response (with 0 and 15 degree reference angles) of that quasi anechoic data with the correction filter applied. The main thing that stands out to me from this data is that a 1-1.5dB hump develops from 1.5-4.5kHz as you move from 0-30 degrees so perhaps the filter should give a bit more weight to taking that down.
  21. yes that's what I meant by "an anechoic correction", i.e. the magnitude response correction switches to one based on those quasi anechoic measurements of the speaker. Here's a pic to illustrate https://imgur.com/a/Meaxg red is the on axis response, green is the filter based on that response and blue is the result of applying that filter I don't find that, it sounds quite neutral and well balanced to me. tbh generally speaking I don't find upper frequencies to be an issue with this setup, the system sounds quite smooth to me. My old (commercial) speakers certainly needed shelving down in the same room to avoid harshness and fatigue but these don't at all. I find that sort of curve comes out a bit too fat in my room for both music and films. My room does have produce some bloat over time in that range though atm so that may be the root cause of that one. If so that may change if/when I build my screen wall later in the year. It's certainly true that I no longer run different filters for music and films as I find the same setup works well for both. Good job really as I I definitely don't have the time (or inclination/knowledge) to attempt to re-eq tracks myself!
  22. I wouldn't watch the whole film again, don't mind trying some specific scenes though. >> Did you implement the JRiver coefficients that you posted here (what I'm calling "v1")? Or did you calculate new JRiver coefficients, based the updated "v2" config I posted afterwards? the v1 ones >> What playback level (approximately) did you use to evaluate? -7 >> How are your speakers calibrated? Do you use Acourate? And if so, what kind of target curve do you use for the high frequencies? Or did you use outdoor / anechoic polar response measurements? current target rises ~5dB from 125Hz down to 25Hz and is basically flat above that, the correction switches at about 900Hz to an anechoic only correction (based on measurements taken outdoor from 0-60 degrees). The speaker itself is maybe 1dB down from 1-16kHz on axis, graphs in http://www.avsforum.com/forum/155-diy-speakers-subs/2188265-attempting-3way-seos10.html#post54724444
  23. I gave the correction a try on a few scenes, bit of a mixed bag tbh. Effects noticed included; Voices in some scenes were more natural (less full/warm) though were also less obviously the focus of the scene. Some scenes took on a certain hollowness/metallic tang which was similar to a sound ISTR from one particular EQ which went wrong and was doing something excessive around 1kHz. Some scenes, which involved more ambient noise, were less engaging as if the track had receded into the distance. I tried ~4-5 scenes (a couple from the island stage, a couple from the later ww1 bit) and a few had fairly inconsequential differences, the 2 that stood out more were the scene in the castle when he tries to chat to the chemist (ambient voices as he walks up to her were receded, their voices were less pronounced but more natural) and the scene when the young diana is asking her mum to let her train and her mum is going on about moulding her out of clay (metallic tang). I'm afraid I couldn't trial this over a prolonged slice of film because I thought the film itself was borderline terrible which was a surprise given the reviews. I thought it had a bizarrely disjointed storyline that felt like they mashed 3 different films together and was at least 30mins too long. The love story angle was pretty sad too given the main character & the seriousness with which they played the film given the storyline was rather odd.
  24. Wonder Woman - corrected vs uncorrected - https://imgur.com/veQRiUG
×
×
  • Create New...