Dungeon Keeper

Dedicated to those large boxes at one end of the room
Michael L
Old Hand
Posts: 653
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:10 pm
Location: Shrewsbury

#241 Re: Dungeon Keeper

Post by Michael L »

Dr Bunsen Honeydew wrote: Wed Apr 12, 2017 3:29 pm That is not what I said and you know it - more twisting. Anyway this pointless exercise has to end somewhere so I will let you have last word. *****UNLESS you publish more useless crap about loudspeakers*****
audio-talk reborn.
User avatar
Scottmoose
Needs to get out more
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 11:03 am
Contact:

#242 Re: Dungeon Keeper

Post by Scottmoose »

Hope springs eternal...
'"That'll do," comes the cry of the perfectionist down the ages.' (James May The Reassembler)
Website www.wodendesign.com
Community sites www.frugal-horn.com & www.frugal-phile.com
User avatar
Scottmoose
Needs to get out more
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 11:03 am
Contact:

#243 Re: Dungeon Keeper

Post by Scottmoose »

Since we've been treated to a few days of beautiful silence, perhaps this is a good time to bring the thread back to what it was supposed to be, i.e. some pondering over higher order filters with an example of a design that used them.

Rather than high order crossovers 'getting in the way of "the music"', I would suggest they can do exactly the reverse in some appropriate situations. You don't use a high order filter without need, but they can offer things minimalism cannot. The blanket statement that all speakers with high order filters are 'over complicated' is utter twaddle, since a properly designed speaker crossover should be as simple as possible to do the job required of it; you don't add extra components into a crossover for the hell of it, you use what you need to use.

The downsides of high order filters are potentially higher insertion losses than physically simpler designs, but these are typically less than you would get in terms of the production tolerances of most drive units. They're rarely minimum or linear phase either, but that also applies to low order types. On the other hand, a high order crossover at a low frequency can provide an extremely consistent response on & off axis since you avoid the inherent beaming of a large cone bass / midbass driver toward the top of its range. Tone / timbre can become much more natural as a result, especially in the diffuse / reverberant field. By suppressing unwanted resonances of the bass drivers you also end up with a cleaner midband and presence region due to the lowered distortion levels. A panacea? Obviously not. But they can work extremely well when used appropriately.
'"That'll do," comes the cry of the perfectionist down the ages.' (James May The Reassembler)
Website www.wodendesign.com
Community sites www.frugal-horn.com & www.frugal-phile.com
User avatar
Nick
Site Admin
Posts: 15706
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 10:20 am
Location: West Yorkshire

#244 Re: Dungeon Keeper

Post by Nick »

You don't use a high order filter without need,
Maybe its in the previous pages, but what "need" will cause the specification of a higher order crossover?
Whenever an honest man discovers that he's mistaken, he will either cease to be mistaken or he will cease to be honest.
User avatar
Scottmoose
Needs to get out more
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 11:03 am
Contact:

#245 Re: Dungeon Keeper

Post by Scottmoose »

Apologies Nick, lack of clarity on my part.

Depends really on what you're doing & have to work with. It may be to shunt cone resonances above the crossover frequency to a sufficiently low level they (and the distortion they cause lower down the range) become inaudible. It might be to help provide a more consistent response over a wider axis -most midbass drivers are beaming significantly at the top of their range, while the tweeter is merrily radiating over a much wider angle, so you have a mismatch in the transition region, which can be audible, especially off-axis. Another reason could be to reduce the audibility of the XO by moving it to a point where our hearing is less effective. Or a combination of these or others.

Don't get me wrong here, high order filters are no panacea & I'm not suggesting they are; they have their problems too, and I like low order filters as well (for different reasons). But higher order filters often get quite casually dismissed, unjustly in my view. I often like the results of a low + steep filter for 2-ways; assuming the tweeter can handle it you can get a really natural sound.

Something I suppose I should have mentioned before: I've been mostly talking about acoustic rather than electrical slopes.
'"That'll do," comes the cry of the perfectionist down the ages.' (James May The Reassembler)
Website www.wodendesign.com
Community sites www.frugal-horn.com & www.frugal-phile.com
User avatar
Dr Bunsen Honeydew
Old Hand
Posts: 1358
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:50 am
Location: Muppet Labs

#246 Re: Dungeon Keeper

Post by Dr Bunsen Honeydew »

I have had my say, and I can prove it empirically, as yet no one has taken me up on it. I am packing my B&W Doc Mods to send to Nick, he can say what he likes about them, and he is welcome to pass them on to members here who have not attacked me or if preferred take them to Owston, but I will not trust the Dunn haters with them, been bitten by that once with Greg, not falling for it again.
steve s
Shed dweller
Posts: 2829
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 6:19 pm
Location: east yorks

#247 Re: Dungeon Keeper

Post by steve s »

Be great if they are at owston Doc, be nice to see how they sound next to my new open-ish baffles

Cheers...
The tube manual is quite like a telephone book. The number of it perfect. It is useful to make it possible to speak with a girl. But we can't see her beautiful face from the telephone number
User avatar
Scottmoose
Needs to get out more
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 11:03 am
Contact:

#248 Re: Dungeon Keeper

Post by Scottmoose »

'Prove' what? There is nothing for you to 'prove' Richard. This thread is not about you or your modifications to inexpensive commercial speakers. You have your own to discuss those.
'"That'll do," comes the cry of the perfectionist down the ages.' (James May The Reassembler)
Website www.wodendesign.com
Community sites www.frugal-horn.com & www.frugal-phile.com
User avatar
Dr Bunsen Honeydew
Old Hand
Posts: 1358
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:50 am
Location: Muppet Labs

#249 Re: Dungeon Keeper

Post by Dr Bunsen Honeydew »

Simple, I think everyone knows what I think about your designs (well the ones you have talked about in the last two threads). You wont take me up on my challenge so I will make my argument for simplicity available in physical form for people to judge - the only way really.
Daniel Quinn
Old Hand
Posts: 859
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:19 am

#250 Re: Dungeon Keeper

Post by Daniel Quinn »

If you do not think there is nothing to prove , then you are being deliberately silly. Whilst I advocate Rd's approach I have not invested the majority of my life in these matters and so I can be more detached . However , I have to say I can appreciate Richards annoyance .

You talk a lot of theory , yet you present this as fact . They are not the same thing.

This "Depends really on what you're doing & have to work with. It may be to shunt cone resonances above the crossover frequency to a sufficiently low level they (and the distortion they cause lower down the range) become inaudible. It might be to help provide a more consistent response over a wider axis -most midbass drivers are beaming significantly at the top of their range, while the tweeter is merrily radiating over a much wider angle, so you have a mismatch in the transition region, which can be audible, especially off-axis. Another reason could be to reduce the audibility of the XO by moving it to a point where our hearing is less effective. Or a combination of these or others.

Don't get me wrong here, high order filters are no panacea & I'm not suggesting they are; they have their problems too, and I like low order filters as well (for different reasons). But higher order filters often get quite casually dismissed, unjustly in my view. I often like the results of a low + steep filter for 2-ways; assuming the tweeter can handle it you can get a really natural sound
."

Is a theoretical position presented as fact . I appreciate that to someone who believes the theory then it is fact , hell I cannot understand anyone who doesn't believe in Marxism , but I do accept many do not . You have two choices , ignore them or try engage with them on their level . Your discussions with rd go as follows

you outline an theoretical position

rd says I reject your theory it is bollock

you outline more theory

rd calls you a name out of frustration and says the only test is empirical not theoretical

you outline more theory

:drunken:

In essence you are saying I am right cause the theory says I am right . RD will say the theory is bollocks , I am presenting a new paradigm that rejects the accepted wisdom .

My personal position form my own tinkering with speakers and crossovers , is that passive components in higher order crossovers "fuck up the music" from my own experience I totally reject your contention that they can be successfully applied , you cannot change my mind by quoting theory at me , I have read all the theory and there is a very poor explanatory relationship between theory and what you actually hear .

So it seems to me there is only 1 way forward , empricical testing , hows about cubix pro against the best you can do with a high order crossover :mrgreen: { joke rd }


you can of course ignore RD , however it seems to me you have the same desire to prove you are right as he does
chris661
Shed dweller
Posts: 2556
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 7:29 am
Location: Sheffield

#251 Re: Dungeon Keeper

Post by chris661 »

Daniel Quinn wrote: Tue Apr 18, 2017 9:45 am My personal position form my own tinkering with speakers and crossovers , is that passive components in higher order crossovers "fuck up the music" from my own experience I totally reject your contention that they can be successfully applied , you cannot change my mind by quoting theory at me , I have read all the theory and there is a very poor explanatory relationship between theory and what you actually hear .
Just because you haven't managed to get a higher-order crossover working correctly, it doesn't mean it can't be done. It just means you haven't got one working correctly yet.

Chris
User avatar
Nick
Site Admin
Posts: 15706
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 10:20 am
Location: West Yorkshire

#252 Re: Dungeon Keeper

Post by Nick »

chris661 wrote: Tue Apr 18, 2017 11:48 am
Daniel Quinn wrote: Tue Apr 18, 2017 9:45 am My personal position form my own tinkering with speakers and crossovers , is that passive components in higher order crossovers "fuck up the music" from my own experience I totally reject your contention that they can be successfully applied , you cannot change my mind by quoting theory at me , I have read all the theory and there is a very poor explanatory relationship between theory and what you actually hear .
Just because you haven't managed to get a higher-order crossover working correctly, it doesn't mean it can't be done. It just means you haven't got one working correctly yet.

Chris
Thats why I think it would be useful to hear a "correctly working" example. DQ's statement that "passive components in higher order crossovers 'fuck up the music'" would be easy to disprove with a example of a higher order crossover that doesn’t "fuck up the music"
Whenever an honest man discovers that he's mistaken, he will either cease to be mistaken or he will cease to be honest.
Daniel Quinn
Old Hand
Posts: 859
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:19 am

#253 Re: Dungeon Keeper

Post by Daniel Quinn »

chris661 wrote: Tue Apr 18, 2017 11:48 am
Daniel Quinn wrote: Tue Apr 18, 2017 9:45 am My personal position form my own tinkering with speakers and crossovers , is that passive components in higher order crossovers "fuck up the music" from my own experience I totally reject your contention that they can be successfully applied , you cannot change my mind by quoting theory at me , I have read all the theory and there is a very poor explanatory relationship between theory and what you actually hear .
Just because you haven't managed to get a higher-order crossover working correctly, it doesn't mean it can't be done. It just means you haven't got one working correctly yet.

Chris
you should appreciate that when I say "my personal position" I make no claims to the validity of my position beyond it being my experience. I do not seek to extend my experience in time and space and elevate what I say to fact .So your post is in effect an unnecessary duplication of what I said. It is the illegiamte extending of peoples personal experience in time and space , to take on the status of fact that I have been raging against for the past six years .

Additionally , you will appreciate the scottmoose makes no such limitations to his experience , he seeks to rarefy his personal experience to the status of fact.

And correctly is a subjective term , the reality of the situation is likely to be that scottmoose's correctly is a million miles from my correctly .
Last edited by Daniel Quinn on Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Dr Bunsen Honeydew
Old Hand
Posts: 1358
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:50 am
Location: Muppet Labs

#254 Re: Dungeon Keeper

Post by Dr Bunsen Honeydew »

It seems to me a lot of people have a odd view of music, music is information (most importantly emotional communication) and timing. In my opinion and empiric experiments, having tried many, if not all configs over 40 years, complex crossovers feck that up. But as with some people not being tone perfect or even it seems aware, so they don't even notice when an instrument is out of tune or a singer off key, I hold no hope that everyone will appreciate this.
Daniel Quinn
Old Hand
Posts: 859
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:19 am

#255 Re: Dungeon Keeper

Post by Daniel Quinn »

may be not in a vested interest competitive environment , but in the comfort of thier own home . not many people will turn their back on an improvement .

Though I do suspect I am different from a lot of people on this forum , as most here are hobbyists and like messing and making things and therefore do have intellectual capital invested in their designs and knowledge .

I turned to building speakers out of financial necessity , it was a cheaper way to a high quality sound . I did not like the sound of my hifi , I listen predominantly to genesis and seventies rock music as well as billy bragg. An important part of the emotional content of the music of genesis , is the : interplay between the musicians , the stopping and starting of various instruments and the way they evolve through a song , think Suppers Ready Guaranteed eternal sanctuary man :

You, can't you see he's fooled you all.
Yes, he's here again, can't you see he's fooled you all.
Share his peace,
Sign the lease.
He's a supersonic scientist,
He's the guaranteed eternal sanctuary man.


before doc mods , for me it lacked excitement and emotion , that I could appreciate listening to it on headphones , it didn't stop and start quick enough , it lacked dynamic impact , timing and it did not convey the emotion .

Getting rid of the crossover restored all of these things and I now just listen .

Another example , Billy Bragg song St Swithians day is a master piece of lost love ,

Thanks all the same,
But I just can't bring myself to answer your letters
It's not your fault
But your honesty touches me like a fire
The Polaroids that hold us together
Will surely fade away
Like the love that we spoke of forever
On St Swithin's Day


it is him and his guitar - that's it , on crossovered speakers I have heared , his guitar losses the rawness , the attack , the realism and the song loses its emotion , get rid of the crossover and it is spine chillingly Brilliant .

that is why I love doc mods and that is why I advocate them , the rest is up to you .
Post Reply