most over-rated sub?

[JimJ 5,000+ posts]

You want the slopes to overlap *somewhat*, so you don't get a hole in the frequency response, but at what frequencies and what slopes is something that takes experimenting...

 

[BassAddictJ 5,000+ posts]

Audiobling.

x a million

 

[vladd 10+ year member]

helotaxi
I have never met you but you sure do know your ****

Anyways from my experience I was always told it is better to have your stages overl lap in frequency

so a sub plays 20-100hz

midrange woofer 80 - 300 hz

midrange sub woofer - 100 - 1.5 khz

tweeter 1khz - 30khz

It would sound much more MUSICALLY sound

then if each speaker STOPPED at one frequency and another had to take over...

mainly being that every speakers response and accuracy will differ from brand to brand, size to size.. so having them stop or play one freqeuncy will actually cause it to sound paused or skippy.... so i have heard...

Anyways looking for helotaxi to expound on what i was told

yep like jim said you want some overlap but not necessarily the way you have it either. Usually (being extremely general here) you'd want something like

tweet from 2.5khz - 20khz and mid from 63hz-2khz the 2khz-2.5khz "gap" will be filled in with the slopes from the crossover. Of course since a vehicle is such a great acoustical environment sometimes this doesn't work at all and you need overlap to actually make up for a null created by the car.

 

[matrxx dude 5,000+ posts]

dam this thread is still alive.lol

 

[///M5 10+ year member]

I've heard one...listened to it extensively...still prefer the W6v2...
//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/fyi.gif.9f1f679348da7204ce960cfc74bca8e0.gif

By a Chit TON!

 

[///M5 10+ year member]

Is that you CBFryman?

Best post eVar!

 

[WhoSayWho? 5,000+ posts]

he repeatedly insulted me and told me to kill myself several ways... when i simply stopped argueing with him and ignored him he banned me

I think that the problem is that, despite repeated reguests, you did not, in fact, kill yourself. Had you done that, we would not be having this conversation now.

 

[Towncar 10+ year member]

Sig worthy posts in this thread..

 

[Duke 10+ year member]

Sig worthy posts in this thread..

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/up2something.gif.dd110ecf3ae4b76050d87598f2f8de7c.gif

 

[Rattlebrain 10+ year member]

I think Pyle is over rated. I mean its good, but....... Come on.....

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/up2something.gif.dd110ecf3ae4b76050d87598f2f8de7c.gif

 

[helotaxi 5,000+ posts]

It would sound much more MUSICALLY soundthen if each speaker STOPPED at one frequency and another had to take over...

mainly being that every speakers response and accuracy will differ from brand to brand, size to size.. so having them stop or play one freqeuncy will actually cause it to sound paused or skippy.... so i have heard...

Anyways looking for helotaxi to expound on what i was told

The real answer as always is that "it depends." It depends on the install, the drivers involved, the interaction between the drivers and the car, the actual crossover freqs etc.

First thing to remember is that a speaker doesn't just stop playing at a filter freq. There is a specified rolloff rate for the filter and that is the rate at which the output level of that signal is attenuated by the filter beyond the filter freq. Becuase of the slope, there will be overlap if the filter point is set the same for both the tweet and the mid. The filter freq is where the signal is at -3dB, also known as the half power point. If the mid is -3dB at that point and sloping down above that and the tweet is 3dB down and sloping down below that, they are both playing the freqs at and around the crossover freq (we have 2 fliters, one high pass and one low pass, that "cross over" at that freq so we can officially call it a crossover freq now). The summation of the two crossover outputs results in a small hump or dip at the crossover freq depending on the order and alignment of the filter. Which you want depends again on the particular situation.

With a passive network, the freq and slope are fixed and the high and low pass filters are typically set for the same freq. To get the two drivers to phase couple and produce the smooth frequency curve that is coming from the summed halves of the crossover, the mid and tweet should ideally be on the same plane and at the same distance from the listener.

Once you go with an active setup, you have the ability to overlap and underlap as needed. An overlap might be needed when the crossover freq is right around a cancellation freq in the car. Both drivers need to be playing to get a decent reponse at that freq in the particular install. Underlap might be used to tame a resonance node. If you don't have either situation, an overlap will create a loud spot in the response and the underlap will create a hole in the response. Neither sounds terribly musical.

Bottom line is that if the drivers are resonably well matched, the transition from one driver to the next should be relatively seamless with the filter freq set the same on both the high and low side. Thanks to the filter slopes you can kind of think of it as one speaker fading out while the next one fades in as you go up the freq range.

 

[denim 5,000+ posts]

not this **** again

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

In an ideal world, playing a stereo signal, 2 speakers and only 2 speakers would be necessary, and ideal, to reproduce the signal accurately. The more you add, the more xover points/slopes to color the sound, the more point sources you have to color the sound stage, etc etc. KISS really does apply here.

And, imo like 99.8% of car audio enthusiasts have considered the multiple sizes sub theory at one point or another, back when they didn't understand the more intricate aspects of the situation. No offense cots, but that's what is happening here, and you are by far not the first person to think of, or even try this idea. Listen to helotaxi, he's right. The reason nobody who knows what they are doing uses this technique (multiple sized subs) is because the idea is inefficient, not cost effective, is a pita and really has no up-side.

Your subwoofers play a relatively small portion of the frequency spectrum that we listen to. Nobody ever suggests breaking up the wider bandwidth played by a midrange or tweeter driver, why do you suppose so many people are obsessed with breaking up the 20-100hz range? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

Overlap is not always best when blending two adjoining speakers, there are many factors such as xover slope, speakers involved, environment, etc. Sometimes an underlap, or slight hole in the frequency spectrum, actually is what works out best.

 

[cotsretribution]

In an ideal world, playing a stereo signal, 2 speakers and only 2 speakers would be necessary, and ideal, to reproduce the signal accurately. The more you add, the more xover points/slopes to color the sound, the more point sources you have to color the sound stage, etc etc. KISS really does apply here.

this would make perfect sence if not for the fact that different speakers produce different frequencies of sound louder... IE; a middrange can barely even hit 50 hz

likewise a sub can scaresley go above 200 the frequency range of a speaker looks like a curve in contrast with volume... with most speakers x-overs are required to make these responces flater so yes a single sub would be able to play a range, say 20hz to 120 fairly flat.... even so this is still implying the use of x-overs to get the desired effect and it has to because every speaker has resonance.... a frequency that it produces more efficiently than all others... so basically this is not the ideal world, or your consept would work

And, imo like 99.8% of car audio enthusiasts have considered the multiple sizes sub theory at one point or another, back when they didn't understand the more intricate aspects of the situation. No offense cots, but that's what is happening here, and you are by far not the first person to think of, or even try this idea. Listen to helotaxi, he's right. The reason nobody who knows what they are doing uses this technique (multiple sized subs) is because the idea is inefficient, not cost effective, is a pita and really has no up-side.

maybe, i believe it can when applied right

Your subwoofers play a relatively small portion of the frequency spectrum that we listen to. Nobody ever suggests breaking up the wider bandwidth played by a midrange or tweeter driver, why do you suppose so many people are obsessed with breaking up the 20-100hz range? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

notice that the lower the frequency goes the greater the change... 20-21hz is alot bigger change then 20,000hz to 20,001hz in fact the ladder might even seem unnoticeable, this is where your idea makes sence...at the range that a tweeter covers it isn't that difficult to produce all of its frequencies relatively flat... a sub however is much more difficult... they can do it but it is more difficult... the reason for the obsession with bass is because thanks to companies like bose, focal, many other top companies known for their highs and mids, we have come to close to as good of midrange and highs as we can get... the major differences in some of the better sets can scarcely be told apart by the ear.. if not for analyisers and computers. no one has yet to create a sub with this level of accuracy and if they have they are dramaticly over-priced and often installed wrong... the bass is a very hard frequency range to get just right

Overlap is not always best when blending two adjoining speakers, there are many factors such as xover slope, speakers involved, environment, etc. Sometimes an underlap, or slight hole in the frequency spectrum, actually is what works out best.

i just hope the song you are listening to doesn't incorporate the "missing frequency" as a major part of its composistion...

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

this would make perfect sence if not for the fact that different speakers produce different frequencies of sound louder... IE; a middrange can barely even hit 50 hz.

Okay, you misunderstood my point. Let me re-ezplain it. When I said in an 'ideal world' I was referring to a world where we had the technology to build a speaker that could play flat, and with authority at audible listening levels, from 20hz to 20khz. We do not, so we split up the freqs. But, if we did have that technology, 1 speaker per side would be ideal (one sound point source, less anomolies in the signal from filters, etc etc). The more speakers you add, the more problems you also add. Therefore, the fewer used to acomplish the same goal, the better off you are. Period.

likewise a sub can scaresley go above 200 the frequency range of a speaker looks like a curve in contrast with volume... with most speakers x-overs are required to make these responces flater so yes a single sub would be able to play a range, say 20hz to 120 fairly flat.... even so this is still implying the use of x-overs to get the desired effect and it has to because every speaker has resonance.... a frequency that it produces more efficiently than all others... so basically this is not the ideal world, or your consept would work.

Uhm, no. First of all a 'sub' is only defined as a 'sub' based upon the frequency range it is playing. There are plenty of 'subs' that can also work effectively as a midbass driver, extending above your arbitrary 200hz region you pulled from the air. Granted, most true dedicated subwoofer wont play above 200hz effectively (or even to it), but this shows you are basing specifics theories on generalities.
Secondly, a sub does not require a highpass filter to play the subbass region 'flat'. I really have no idea where you got that, but Id love to see you prove it via testing.

A speaker's resonant frequency is not its sweet spot that it plays best, that is a function of the subwoofer in combination with the enclosure size/type/design. The Fs of the speaker affects the design of the enclosure, but ultimately you can tailor the system tuning via enclosure perameters. Yet another generalization.

The word is concept. And what I stated isn't merely a personal theory, its a basic acoustical fact. Most in-depth books, like speaker design cookbook, say the exact same thing.

maybe, i believe it can when applied right.

It can what? Perform better? Lets put it this way, if you cannot build a single-sized sub system to play 'flat' from, say 30hz to 100hz, well that's your problem, not a design flaw in today's speakers, systems or designer's heads. Again, this is an age-old arguement, you aren't the first relative noob (no offense) to think of it, argue its possible blah blah blah, but in the end, never proves it. Go ahead, go build some insane multiple sized sub system to play your 2 or 3 octaves, all blended perfectly, all level matched perfectly, and performing in ANY noticeably better wy than a well built single sub system. Go ahead and try. Then, when you are done, do it for the same money as that single sub system, or hell, even close to the same money, then come back here and tell us we are all wrong. If you do, I'll be the first one to congratulate you. But until then, you are simply a pipe dreamer with an attitude.

notice that the lower the frequency goes the greater the change... 20-21hz is alot bigger change then 20,000hz to 20,001hz in fact the ladder might even seem unnoticeable, this is where your idea makes sence...at the range that a tweeter covers it isn't that difficult to produce all of its frequencies relatively flat... a sub however is much more difficult... they can do it but it is more difficult... the reason for the obsession with bass is because thanks to companies like bose, focal, many other top companies known for their highs and mids, we have come to close to as good of midrange and highs as we can get... the major differences in some of the better sets can scarcely be told apart by the ear.. if not for analyisers and computers. no one has yet to create a sub with this level of accuracy and if they have they are dramaticly over-priced and often installed wrong... the bass is a very hard frequency range to get just right

So, its your opinion its easy to build a tweeter that'll play 4khz to 20khz flat? Do yours? I bet you'd be surprised.
There are plenty of single sized sub systems out there that play flat as a ruler from 20hz up well into their midbass range, and do it at volume levels you would find painful, so why your big need to break through some technological ceiling that does not even exist?

You do realize these companies you cite as making the perfect mids and tweeters, also make subwoofers right? Any theory as to why they make such near perfect mids and tweets, and yet their subs cannot play 20hz to 100hz flat? Subs are just that much more tricky to design? lol You are seriously talking way over your head dude, give it up.

My favorite part was when you said nobody has created such a perfect sub yet, but when they do they are too expensive and often installed wrong. Which is it, they do not exist yet, or they are over priced and installed wrong? lmao Can't have it both ways. Care to pull any more facts from your posterior to back up your claims?

the bass is a very hard frequency range to get just right.

Maybe for you. Care to explain exactly why you think its such a difficult task for everyone else?

i just hope the song you are listening to doesn't incorporate the "missing frequency" as a major part of its composistion...

See, this is the attitude Im talking about. Clearly I was talking over your head, but instead of simply asking me to elaborate, you jump to a conclusion, assume you are right, and talk trash as if you know what the hell you are talking about. You don't.
There wont be any 'missing frequency' if done correctly. Aprently you think a crossover is a brickwall, its not. Ever wonder why there are different slopes in xovers? Gee, maybe its to play with overlap/underlap...? Ever consider that your environemnt may be giving you an artificial boost at a freq very near your xover point, and how to fix such a problem? Hmm, maybe if I 'underlap' that freq so both the mid and tweet are trailing off at that freq, coupled with the artificial boost equals *gasp* a flat frequency response. Chew on that situation a little bit before you contemplate coming back with yet another smart-ass comment that shows you dont even fully grasp the topic, mmmkay? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/cool.gif.3bcaf8f141236c00f8044d07150e34f7.gif