[KJ]

B, told me no disconnect device is required, the way he will wire it.

Does this mean there is a way to wire it into the system without having the current pass back through the passive crossover?

-KJ

[John Casler]

B, told me no disconnect device is required, the way he will wire it.

Does this mean there is a way to wire it into the system without having the current pass back through the passive crossover?

-KJ

I assume it means that it is not a concern the way it is wired.

[Jose R.]

[quote="KJDoes this mean there is a way to wire it into the system without having the current pass back through the passive crossover?
-KJ[/quote]

I have been thinking about this and now realize that the way I have wired my direct connection to the individual drivers does not eliminate the passive crossovers completely.  What effect they will have is unclear as this will be determined by the resistance of the passive components vs the drivers themselves.
This perhaps explains my measurements of the direct connections vs those via the passive crossovers where the lower end roll-off of the panels for example was quite similar in the two measurements.  This could be that the passive crossover was still in the circuit (in parallel with the link between pos and neg being the inductor).
The only way I can see to overcome this and get a true direct connection is to interrupt one of the legs between the passive components and drivers, pos or neg, connect two wires to each cut end and bring these wires out of the cabinet.  These wires could be joined to complete the circuit and allow use of the passive crossover or separated, allowing direct connections to the drivers using separate binding posts.  Three sets of wires would thus have to be created (for the RM30C) and while it may not look fancy, it would do the trick.

Jose

[PLMONROE]

Is there a practical way to use eiher the TacT or DEQX  for room equalilzation in a trinaural setup, short of buying two units???

[ekovalsky]

Is there a practical way to use eiher the TacT or DEQX  for room equalilzation in a trinaural setup, short of buying two units???

TacT TCS mk2 will probably do the trick but it is expensive.

[John Casler]

Is there a practical way to use eiher the TacT or DEQX  for room equalilzation in a trinaural setup, short of buying two units???

Hi Paul,

Interesting question.  If the TACT or DEQX can provide the "room equalization" circuitry to the 2 channel outputs "full range" only, then that could be fed to the TriNaural.

The TriNaural would then be able to "triangulate"  the "equalized signal over the three speakers, or three speakers and a SUB.

Not knowing if the TACT or DEQX "can" output the "room equalized" signal full range into only 2 channel outs is the question.

If it can do the two channel thing, then obviously the whole room equalization process, would have to take place with the TriNaural in the system during the set up.

It would also mean sacrificing the "speaker equalization/correction" processes, since they rely on more outputs.

If the "room equalization" program and "output" cannot be directed through the 2 channel line outs of the DSP units into the "line ins" of the TNP, then it cannot be done without multiple units.

I hope that is sound logic.

[John Ashman]

The only other option, if you have 3 *identical fronts* is to buy two or three Trinaural units - one for each frequency range.  But that hardly saves you any money either.  DEQX has said that a 3-channel processor is in the agenda, but who knows when it could emerge.

[PLMONROE]

Yes, I do have three identical fronts (three RM-40s). John, I was thinking the same thing -- I am hoping that doing room equalization just ahead of the trinaural might work since it derives the signal for the center channel amp.  Alternatively I might be able to use readings from the DEQX to manually set the parametric equalizers in my Behringer DEQ9426 for the left and right channels and then use the DEQX for the center or something. Any other ideas, anyone?

Paul