2. speakers
  3. 1113252618

First Order Crossovers: Pros and Cons

I wonder if some folks might share their expertise on the question of crossover design. I'm coming around to the view that this is perhaps the most significant element of speaker design yet I really know very little about it and don't really understand the basic principles. Several of the speakers I have heard in my quest for full range floorstanders are "first order" designs. I have really enjoyed their sound but do not know if this is attributable primarily to the crossover design or to a combination of other factors as well. In addition, I have heard that, for example, because of the use of this crossover configuration on the Vandersteen 5 one has to sit at least 10 feet away from the speakers in order for the drivers to properly mesh. Is this really true and if so why? Another brand also in contention is the Fried Studio 7 which also uses a first order design. Same issue? Could someone share in laymans terms the basic principles of crossover design and indicate the advantages and disadvantages of each. Also, what designers are making intelligent choices in trying to work around the problems associated with crossover design? Thanks for your input.
128x128dodgealum
trelja
3,223 posts
 
Skrivis, I must applaud you on the link you provided!

Also, along with the series crossover being "self correcting" in terms of driver variation, it exhibits the same characteristics for variances in the crossover components. For example, as we know, using a 5% capacitor in the network can result in a fair bit of variation from speaker to speaker. While painstaking matching of all components is a solution, the cost effects (time, testing, and parts) cannot be dismissed. The series network yields some very positive advantages here.

However, as the article points out, in the end, there is no free lunch. But, we have always known that and come to this conclusion for a lot of things. Otherwise, there wouldn't need to be much variation in crossover design.
skrivis
30 posts
 
Rod puts a lot of thought into the articles he writes. :-)

I feel series crossovers are better than Rod makes them out to be, but they're not the greatest thing to ever happen to speakers - as some people claim. :-)

Bud had an article that he was making available that contained a summary of his knowledge on series crossovers. However, I was told that this (and other) articles are no longer available. Perhaps someone will make it available on the web so I can read it.

Where I disagreed with Bud (and the current Fried Products) is the claim: "Properly implemented series networks provide superior driver coherence, increased dynamic range and introduce a Doppler effect similar to live music that increases the sense of realism."

"Doppler effect?" Sounds like pseudo-science to me, and it also would qualify as distortion if it exists.

Perhaps it simply strikes me as odd because DiAural were making some unfounded claims about "Doppler" effects, but they were using series crossovers to reduce them. :-)

Nevertheless, I'd like to see some proof for this "Doppler effect" and how it "increases the sense of realism."

gregm
3,409 posts
 
Some series xover related pages: Graddon, Murray H, K Lehma, Jon Risch.

Of course, any ref list on xovers would be incomplete without the frd consortium.

Cheers
cdc
1,822 posts
 
So what makes a time and phase coherent 1st order speaker better than a single driver design like Jordan JX92s or Fostex F200A? Jordan has NO crossover, no components in the signal path to create distortion, no driver blending problems, etc. etc.
Seems the more people talk about their 1st order T & P designs the more I like the single driver approach. Are the only benefits broader frequency range and louder volumes?
gregm
3,409 posts
 
Cdc -- there may be numerous advantages to multi-driver spkrs but spl is not necessarily one of them (think of those 22.000 gauss Lowthers with a front horn).

I love wide-range drivers. Single wide-range drivers are actually rare; remember the whizzers on most such drive units. Limited frequency range, beaming, dispersion, IM, (response peaks & valleys)... are some of the most annoying (to me) problems. {BTW, you DO use a circuit on the Jordan & it actually sounds good}.

BUT, a single wide-range unit has immediacy, reasonable response in a critical region (200-4kHz, most will do 8kHz for you, some will actually hit F6 @ 20kHz withOUT a whizzer!!), phase & the like are out... it's marvellous. Extension can be had using a supertweet (not easy to match) and, better still, using a stereo subwoof.
Tough to beat.

Ultimately though, these are EXPENSIVE spkrs. Driver cost alone for a high level full-range biamped design can easily top $6k (that's $35-50k in commercial equivalent).
More to discover