@mozartfan --
I suppose you refer to passive cross-overs first and foremost, and (if so) on that we agree. Instead of going totally sans XO though I’m using one actively (DSP), implemented prior to amplification and with one XO-point on the main speakers only - in the more or less critical band (just above 600Hz), that is; a XO-point is also placed below 100Hz for subs augmentation.
Debate arises over where the lesser harmful XO-point(s) should be placed, but in a 2-way main speaker design that can be dictated by factors that wouldn’t consider the most optimal XO-point as an outset. Using non-waveguide loaded dome tweeters necessitates a XO typically not much lower than 2kHz, whereas acoustic transformers can lower that point considerable with dome tweeters, AMT units and compression drivers alike (with the latter offering the lowest extension), and hereby give way to experimentation - in conjunction with other design considerations - on where to most optimally place the XO-point.
To me the very important "power region" (~150 to 600Hz) should be left untarnished - that is, sans XO-point here - and be reproduced with ample radiation area. One or two high efficiency paper coned 15" drivers here, not least actively driven, simply smothers anything lower eff. typical 8" or smaller alternative with a more unforced, dynamic and naturally full presentation here. They won’t extend clear of the central midrange though, but that mayn’t be an issue with a large horn to cover from 6-700Hz on up, offering qualities here - also in regard to directivity control - that direct radiating, smaller coned drivers wouldn’t be able to replicate.
Resisting changes mayn’t be a bad thing, not least in light of what has gone before that position and shaped it into what it is, but it can also be a rigid stance that limits oneself from further exploration. I’ve expelled myself from much of typical hifi and wouldn’t dream of changing that with what I know now. One the other hand, if spacing and economy had allowed I’d have cherished seeking out a secondary set-up with a smaller pair of passively driven 2-way speakers (or even XO-less widebander) and a good integrated amp and source - and just that with no subs or anything other. Simple, clean - like it all started..
talk about resist changes,
WOW,
I will not continue down the xover design any longer,
40 years of xovers is quite enough for this audiophile.
You can have em.
I suppose you refer to passive cross-overs first and foremost, and (if so) on that we agree. Instead of going totally sans XO though I’m using one actively (DSP), implemented prior to amplification and with one XO-point on the main speakers only - in the more or less critical band (just above 600Hz), that is; a XO-point is also placed below 100Hz for subs augmentation.
Debate arises over where the lesser harmful XO-point(s) should be placed, but in a 2-way main speaker design that can be dictated by factors that wouldn’t consider the most optimal XO-point as an outset. Using non-waveguide loaded dome tweeters necessitates a XO typically not much lower than 2kHz, whereas acoustic transformers can lower that point considerable with dome tweeters, AMT units and compression drivers alike (with the latter offering the lowest extension), and hereby give way to experimentation - in conjunction with other design considerations - on where to most optimally place the XO-point.
To me the very important "power region" (~150 to 600Hz) should be left untarnished - that is, sans XO-point here - and be reproduced with ample radiation area. One or two high efficiency paper coned 15" drivers here, not least actively driven, simply smothers anything lower eff. typical 8" or smaller alternative with a more unforced, dynamic and naturally full presentation here. They won’t extend clear of the central midrange though, but that mayn’t be an issue with a large horn to cover from 6-700Hz on up, offering qualities here - also in regard to directivity control - that direct radiating, smaller coned drivers wouldn’t be able to replicate.
Resisting changes mayn’t be a bad thing, not least in light of what has gone before that position and shaped it into what it is, but it can also be a rigid stance that limits oneself from further exploration. I’ve expelled myself from much of typical hifi and wouldn’t dream of changing that with what I know now. One the other hand, if spacing and economy had allowed I’d have cherished seeking out a secondary set-up with a smaller pair of passively driven 2-way speakers (or even XO-less widebander) and a good integrated amp and source - and just that with no subs or anything other. Simple, clean - like it all started..