planar vs cone

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 10391 times.

Chops

Re: planar vs cone
« Reply #20 on: 26 Dec 2011, 06:19 pm »
The frequency response is amazingly smooth... Dsp?

Sorta... This.





And very minimal EQ'ing. Most of what you see there in that response is a LOT of hours tweaking the crossover settings including, x-over frequency, slope, gains and time delay. The only EQ adjustment was on the extreme top end where the old, tired Altec 902 diaphragms fell off a little steeper than I liked and on the extreme bottom end just to give a bit more "body" since the baffles couldn't be the optimum width. I boosted... Well, I'll just show you in the pics below.





Remlab

Re: planar vs cone
« Reply #21 on: 1 Jan 2012, 11:18 am »
I'm certainly familiar with the dcx. I have one for each channel. After a lot of experimentation with 8th,4th and 2nd order slopes, I am now using mine with 1st order. The shallower slopes on the dcx are way more transparent,dynamic and musical. I never would have thought this of dsp if I didn't hear it myself (The effect not subtle..). I can get away with 1st order because the drivers I use are VERY well behaved outside of their passbands.
« Last Edit: 4 Jan 2012, 11:43 pm by Remlab »

Remlab

Re: planar vs cone
« Reply #22 on: 1 Jan 2012, 11:21 am »
Somehow, I deleted my systems page. It's now back up.

Danny Richie

Re: planar vs cone
« Reply #23 on: 1 Jan 2012, 06:22 pm »
I'm certainly familiar with the dcx. I have one for each channel. After a lot of experimentation with 8th,4th and 2nd order slopes, I am now using mine with 1st order. The shallower slopes on the dcx are way more transparent,dynamic and musical. I never would have thought this of dsp if I didn't hear it myself (The effect not subtle..). I can get away with this because the drivers I use are VERY well behaved way outside of their passbands.

The lower order slopes require less processing and puts less in the signal path. Get that piece of gear out of the signal path all together and all will take another step up across the board.

Remlab

Re: planar vs cone
« Reply #24 on: 1 Jan 2012, 09:10 pm »
Hi Danny!
My first high end system (15 years)consisted of Conrad Johnson equipment driving Dunlavy sc-3's. Then I developed a fascination with ultra inexpensive high end(Tang Band bamboo's driven by S.I. t-amp). Although both systems were very musical, Neither could be played loud without losing their composure. My current project is an attempt to maintain the extreme musicality of my previous systems using electronics and techniques that are considered by the establishment to be not very high end(Except the speaker components) . The largest single variable I have come across so far is what you just mentioned. The beautiful thing about the DCX though is that it allows you to do these experiments quickly while your auditory memory is still fresh. Also, as far as complex systems go, I feel that dsp crossovers are the only practical solution.
« Last Edit: 5 Jan 2012, 12:03 am by Remlab »