Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="zako" data-source="post: 7505890" data-attributes="member: 629735"><p>Well, the effectiveness of time alignment for tweeters depends on how far they play down into mid range. For the highs, 5KHz and up, time alignment supposedly will not have effect as far as localization of sound is concerned. Cymbals live in the frequencies way above that. In fact, time differences are most  important in the region below 2KHz. Perhaps the frequency numbers I present here are not 100% correct, so I hope someone with more knowledge will chime in. If time alignment is used to align tweeters, as opposed the woofers, with each other then there will be a bigger problem, with human voices coming from the woofer closest to you instead of the center of the sound stage. In the end, since a lot of tweeters play down into mid range frequencies, there is no way to get coherent imaging through time alignment in passive speaker setups unless tweeter and woofer are mounted next to each other. Going active is the best way. This is why my next speakers will be HAT Imagine speakers. All HAT speakers are designed so that woofer plays into &gt;5KHz region before the tweeters take over, so it should be safe to time align the woofers without tweeters screwing up imaging. In higher frequencies, what matters most for localization of sound is the intensity differences, not time differences. So, if your highs are not centered, then this can be fixed by changing the volume on the tweeters. Some component speakers have crossovers that allow changing tweeter volume in 2 to 3dB increments and I think this could have worked for the OP. Unfortunately, Morel Maximos do not have the jumpers for changing tweeters intensity. This is why I recommended to the op simply to play with the balance control on the head unit.</p></blockquote><p></p>

Verification

Top

What's new

Forum list