626R combination oxo/stand!!!!!!!!

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 3690 times.

James Romeyn

  • Industry Participant
  • Posts: 3329
  • James Romeyn Music and Audio, LLC
    • James Romeyn Music and Audio, LLC
Re: 626R combination oxo/stand!!!!!!!!
« Reply #20 on: 28 Oct 2006, 06:23 pm »
...
Quote from: Brian Cheney
Outboard crossovers are nothing new here.  They're standard on the ST3SRE system and have found application in smaller speakers.  My experience had been that the extra wiring and connectors negated most advantage from the elimination of microphonics and other phenomena.  Well, at least this time round, I was wrong, a rare admission for me and my various alter egi.
...

Here's why the oxo was previously not worth it but is such a huge success now: The design is so much more evolved & improved (CDW + tweeter dehorn + passive eq xo upgrades, caps, MLS cabinets, BH5), esp with superb components & a superb room, that deleting any of the above upgrades is immediately noticed.  In other words, if you have every possible upgrade, & the room & components are similarly good, & every little other item is addressed like dedicated 20A circuits, hospital grade outlets, etc, etc......deleting any single upgrade will make an immediate negative difference. 

This is an educated guess: I'd list the three most audible improvements in the order of CDW + tweeter dehorn + all current passive eq xo upgrades are one inseperable package (CDW can absolutely never be auditioned seperately, NO EXCEPTIONS), TRT Dynamicaps, then the OXO.  It would be very interesting to directly compare the OXO to the TRT Dynamicaps & really hear which one is better w/o the other.  All the upgrades combined in the right system & room are pure magic. 
« Last Edit: 28 Oct 2006, 08:52 pm by RibbonSpeakers.net »

John Casler

Re: 626R combination oxo/stand!!!!!!!!
« Reply #21 on: 28 Oct 2006, 08:37 pm »
Doesn't putting the crossovers in the speaker stands once again subject the crossovers to the speaker cabinet vibrations that you were seeking to avoid in the first place?

Vibration that leaches through into the stand is probably attenuated on the order of 100x.  The difference between being inside the box vs. inside another box coupled between its top & the speaker bottom is great. 

Such is the situation.

In making a "design change" there may be many reasons. (many of which I listed).

After making that change other benefits may come to light.

The birth of the OXO was to create a more flexible speaker model, with unknown but with hope for possible sonic improvements.

Brian's comment deals with his previous expereince and anticipated result, with which he was pleasantly surprised with the outcome.

I didn't identify the former situation (XO in the speaker box) as needing a sonic improvement, and as mentioned earlier that was not what fueled the transition.

BUT...I did recognize the "possibility" that there may be a basis for improvement due to the reduction of internal airborne and mechanical vibrations , but knowing it might be "neutralized" by additional wire length.

And much of the motivation of my client (Roc) who ordered the first pair, was to reduce the vibration, since he has had good luck in doing so with many other components.

B, says it did help, and that is a big plus, to the whole application.

I'm just glad that now we have the option, and that it has yeilded the flexibility I envisioned, and that the performance benefits and improvements came along for the ride.

Yahooo :dance:
« Last Edit: 29 Oct 2006, 05:19 pm by John Casler »