[RonP]

Ok question:

This page ( https://gr-research.com/product/lgk-2-4-towers-pair/ ) states "The final step of the LGK 2.0 lineup". Does that mean we are not getting new LGK Wedge models?


Thanks
Ron

[Danny Richie]

Ok question:

This page ( https://gr-research.com/product/lgk-2-4-towers-pair/ ) states "The final step of the LGK 2.0 lineup". Does that mean we are not getting new LGK Wedge models?


Thanks
Ron

We still may re-release the Wedgies once we figure out the best solution for what handles 200Hz and down.

[RonP]

We still may re-release the Wedgies once we figure out the best solution for what handles 200Hz and down.

Thanks, Danny.

btw, what's the db sensitivity of these 2.4s?

[Hobbsmeerkat]

Thanks, Danny.

btw, what's the db sensitivity of these 2.4s?

86dB

[vinniechin]

Anyone compare these to the XLS?  Sorry if this has been asked a million times.  I am not able to use the search function yet.  But fairly close in price "finished" but wondering if it's worth the slight premium for a tower that doesn't play "that low".

Thanks in advance for any insights.

Vinnie

[Hobbsmeerkat]

The LGK 2.1 and X-LS are more similar, they are voiced to be balanced, but they do have some thing differences tonally that measurements wont show.
Using a wide-band instead of a traditional tweeter offers a really cohesive sound, that is really tough to beat, especially when it comes to midrange, especially vocals and acoustic instruments.
Where the Encore's win out is in bass extension & texture, especially below 200Hz, and also in upper-treble clarity & detail due to being a lighter weight material, but for us we don't really feel like we're missing out, especially if you have a good sub. The LGK models will likely sound a little more "smooth" compared to the Encores which are more detailed and "clear" up top.

The 2.4s are likewise very similar to the smaller 2.1s, with with the main differences being 4 woofers in series vs one. The 2.4s also have a 2nd set of LGKs as rear ambiance driver which gives them a greater sense of space & openness, especially in the treble. (something we also did with the old LGK 1.0 "Skinny 6" model)

The Midrange and treble of the 2.1 and 2.4s are pretty much identical, except for the more spacious soundstage in the treble. The rear driver only needs 1 foot of space behind them.
Bass isn't too much different either, only a little deeper than the 2.1 at 60-65Hz depending on placement, but the sealed design allows for more flexibility with placement & makes it easier to control room issues.

[oz_audio_todd]

Sorry for the late rework of this thread, but is there a reason that the woofers in this design can't be paralleled/ series'd and given the same tweak as the Brute in the low end (wouldn't it make the impedance a whole heap more balanced and the speaker more usable as a stand alone option?)?

[Hobbsmeerkat]

The woofers cannot be series-paralleled unfortunately as both the output and crossover point is too high to allow for it.
Even using a larger inductor would still cause a massive increase in output down low, and pulling it down enough would push the crossover point down too low, limiting the power handling of the front LGK driver. If the LGK had an efficiency closer to 90db then that would be more possible.

[oz_audio_todd]

Thanks Hobbs, but doesn't the Brute use a method to selectively reduce the higher frequency output on the woofer, and artificially lower the 3dB point of the speaker at the same time that would work in this instance too?

[Danny Richie]

Thanks Hobbs, but doesn't the Brute use a method to selectively reduce the higher frequency output on the woofer, and artificially lower the 3dB point of the speaker at the same time that would work in this instance too?

Yep, we did that on the Brute. In this case the output differences were too great and the crossover point is way too high to do that. I tried.

[planet10]

The woofers cannot be series-paralleled unfortunately as both the output and crossover point is too high to allow for it.

This explaination is lacking.

Woofers are all Parallel (ie 32Ω woofers) or all series (2Ω woofers).

I cannot find an XO diagram so i find your reason mystifying.

Where is the XO?

dave

[Hobbsmeerkat]

This explaination is lacking.

Woofers are all Parallel (ie 32Ω woofers) or all series (2Ω woofers).

I cannot find an XO diagram so i find your reason mystifying.

Where is the XO?

dave

The are 8ohm woofers wired in series, making them 32 ohms.
The XO diagram is only for those who buy the kit.
The woofer is crossed at 350Hz

[oz_audio_todd]

Thanks Danny, that answers my Q.

[planet10]

The are 8ohm woofers wired in series, making them 32 ohms.
...
The woofer is crossed at 350Hz

So the 8Ω spec is not accurate.

Hard to see how the XO point limits that… sensitivity matching yes. 4 woofers in series will have the same sensitivity as a single.

dave

[Hobbsmeerkat]

So the 8Ω spec is not accurate.

Hard to see how the XO point limits that… sensitivity matching yes. 4 woofers in series will have the same sensitivity as a single.

dave

We would have to cross the LGK at ~150Hz in order to attempt do what we did with the brute, but the LGK has a limited x-max compared to the M130. We would be limiting the LGKs power handling to push it that low.
The LGK has a sensitivity of 86dB. 4 of the 5" woofers In series-parallel would be around 93-94db, a 7-8dB difference.
In the case of the Brute, the 12" woofer is 94db and the mids are at 90-91db, difference of 3-4dB, which is much smaller difference, and are crossed around 200Hz.
Crossing the LGK to 4 woofers in series-parallel would mean humped up bass output from 70-200Hz, without any better bass extension.

Impedance is typically rated on the lowest measured impedance of the speaker.
Though there are many manufacturers that have speakers with a 4ohm woofer but they rate the speaker at 8ohm, when it is not.
It's not much different than putting a large capacitor on the woofer to roll off the bottom end, it raises impedance in a similar manner, but the speaker will still need to be rated by it's lowest impedance.

[planet10]

We would have to cross the LGK at ~150Hz in order to attempt do what we did with the brute

Not familiar with the Brute… certainly for such a small midTweeter, the 350 Hz XO is completely understandable, but why it affects the wiring of the bass drivers still mystifies me.

Having designed a number of WAW (i don’t do the passive XOs) the rationale for why is very much of interest.

LGK has a sensitivity of 86dB. 4 of the 5" woofers In series-parallel would be around 93-94db, a 7-8dB difference.

So it seems we are back to my original assertion, the series wiring is to get the sensitivity of the woofers to match the midTweeter. And little to do with the XO frequency. Working backwards that makes the series woofer section sensitivity at 87-88 dB, a dB or 2 less than i have typically aimed at.

Biampling would allow wiring anyway you want.

Also with a 350 Hz XO one could likely adjust the XO for push-push woofers on the side and dramatically reduce the box loading from the woofer given ACTIVE reative force cancelation.

dave

[Hobbsmeerkat]

Not familiar with the Brute… certainly for such a small midTweeter, the 350 Hz XO is completely understandable, but why it affects the wiring of the bass drivers still mystifies me.

Having designed a number of WAW (i don’t do the passive XOs) the rationale for why is very much of interest.

So it seems we are back to my original assertion, the series wiring is to get the sensitivity of the woofers to match the midTweeter. And little to do with the XO frequency. Working backwards that makes the series woofer section sensitivity at 87-88 dB, a dB or 2 less than i have typically aimed at.

Biampling would allow wiring anyway you want.

Also with a 350 Hz XO one could likely adjust the XO for push-push woofers on the side and dramatically reduce the box loading from the woofer given ACTIVE reative force cancelation.

dave

The Brute has its 12" woofer which is rolled off aggressively, turning it's stock -7db point into the -3db point for the speaker as a whole.
And the original question was why we didn't do the same with the 2.4s.
The main reason was due to the limited power handling of the LGK driver and the higher sensitivity of the 4 woofers.
You have to balance to what you think is more important; higher power handling or lower bass extension.

The sensitivity of the 4 woofers in series-parallel is too great compared to the sensitivity of the LGKs, so the only means to balance the output of the drivers passively is by wiring them in series, and crossing it higher.

If you're using an active network or bi-amping, you will definitely have a lot more flexibility in that regard.

[planet10]

The Brute has its 12" woofer which is rolled off aggressively, turning it's stock -7db point into the -3db point for the speaker as a whole.

Very common in OBs.

...and the higher sensitivity of the 4 woofers.

In most hifi loudspeakers power handling is not an issue… but you have confirmed the series wiring is for the sensitivity and has little to do where the XO is.

dave

[mlundy57]

We still may re-release the Wedgies once we figure out the best solution for what handles 200Hz and down.

Best? Performance wise it's dual 12" OB subs all the way