Planar Speaker Asylum

Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.

Return to Planar Speaker Asylum


Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

canned goods

72.220.169.158

Posted on January 16, 2017 at 19:54:14
Green Lantern
Audiophile

Posts: 16952
Location: San Diego, Ca
Joined: November 12, 2002
Contributor
  Since:
June 17, 2003
a member of a Maggie group on fb sells these for 1.5s, 1.6s for $450 a pair:


I asked him how the internal XO's are bypassed he replied:

"Disconnected all 4 internal factory wirings from the original XO to both drivers leads. First solder a jumper wire to connect mid bass and the qr tweeter. Then we have 3 wires out to connect to the new external box. Done!"


another member proudly displayed his own:











 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
RE: canned goods, posted on January 17, 2017 at 06:52:49
neolith
Audiophile

Posts: 4842
Location: Virginia
Joined: February 21, 2002
Contributor
  Since:
December 2, 2004
The price seems reasonable for Obbligato caps, and what looks like an Alpha Core inductor (probably 14G). The red cap looks like a Dynamicap. I am not sure why the Duelund resistor is in the circuit as the OEM does not use a resistor. It would seem this crossover either does not exactly match the OEM or perhaps the resistor is optionally wired in as an attenuator. The components would appear to make a significant improvement over stock.
Of course, IMO, for the money one is better off building a PPLXO (Davey has a schematic on the Tweaks page) and biamping using an relatively inexpensive Crown amp for the bass.




"Our head is round in order to allow our thoughts to change direction." Francis Picabia

 

RE: canned goods, posted on January 17, 2017 at 10:30:55
Satie
Audiophile

Posts: 5426
Joined: July 6, 2002
I am guessing that the resistor is used to compensate for lower DC R of the new coil vs. OEM, but can't tell for sure where it is wired.

 

RE: canned goods, posted on January 17, 2017 at 12:07:56
neolith
Audiophile

Posts: 4842
Location: Virginia
Joined: February 21, 2002
Contributor
  Since:
December 2, 2004
Perhaps you are right but to me it makes no sense to spend money on a fancy inductor with lower DCR only to add the resistance back. It would be better to recalculate a new inductor value to come up with the same fc.



"Our head is round in order to allow our thoughts to change direction." Francis Picabia

 

RE: canned goods, posted on January 17, 2017 at 15:13:00
Satie
Audiophile

Posts: 5426
Joined: July 6, 2002
With you on that, but some folks insist on using OEM values with their new parts.

 

RE: canned goods, posted on January 17, 2017 at 15:32:30
The whole concept of that makes zero sense. :)

You start with a passive crossover with component values identified and you finish with another passive crossover with the same component values.........except your wallet is much lighter. And the only thing you have possibly justifying that expense is a subjective evaluation.

Eye rolling time again. :)

Dave.

 

RE: canned goods, posted on January 17, 2017 at 15:57:44
Satie
Audiophile

Posts: 5426
Joined: July 6, 2002
That is the sole and unique goal of the hobby. Why rail against it.

 

RE: canned goods, posted on January 17, 2017 at 16:19:33
RickeyM
Audiophile

Posts: 2208
Location: East Coast
Joined: March 15, 2003
It is true that you can't measure subjective qualities of crossover component changes, you can still hear differences derived from those changes.

 

RE: canned goods, posted on January 17, 2017 at 16:41:34
The "sole and unique goal?" You're kidding, right??

Subjective evaluation is only the final (small) piece of a design objective that produces all these various products. Your statement is equivalent to putting the cart before the horse.

Dave.

 

RE: canned goods, posted on January 17, 2017 at 16:48:13
No, that is not (necessarily) true.

Subjective evaluation is notoriously open to false conclusions. Many people have heard differences derived from no changes at all. :)

Or vice versa, where objective measurable changes have been made and no subjective difference could be heard.

Dave.

 

Cart before the horse, posted on January 17, 2017 at 18:40:29
neolith
Audiophile

Posts: 4842
Location: Virginia
Joined: February 21, 2002
Contributor
  Since:
December 2, 2004




"Our head is round in order to allow our thoughts to change direction." Francis Picabia

 

RE: Cart before the horse, posted on January 17, 2017 at 20:20:12
watts
Audiophile

Posts: 536
Location: B.C.
Joined: June 30, 2004
I've got some better wheels for that cart; exact same circumference and mass, but they roll better...

 

But have they been cyrotreated? (nt), posted on January 18, 2017 at 10:09:27
neolith
Audiophile

Posts: 4842
Location: Virginia
Joined: February 21, 2002
Contributor
  Since:
December 2, 2004




"Our head is round in order to allow our thoughts to change direction." Francis Picabia

 

RE: canned goods, posted on January 18, 2017 at 13:47:21
Satie
Audiophile

Posts: 5426
Joined: July 6, 2002
You already have a well designed crossover and not redesigning it so yes, Sole and unique goal. The measurements and concepts of technical perfection are only important as the path to getting to desired subjective performance.

 

RE: canned goods, posted on January 18, 2017 at 18:10:16
That might be YOUR "sole and unique goal." As long as you're only speaking for yourself, I don't have a problem with it. But don't be ascribing your evaluation acumen to me....or anybody else.

BTW, a true subjectivist would say "the measurements and concepts of technical perfection" are irrelevant.

You're going to twist yourself into a pretzel on this. Be careful.

Dave.

 

RE: canned goods, posted on January 18, 2017 at 19:14:48
zulugone
Audiophile

Posts: 98
Location: Seattle, Washington
Joined: August 31, 2013
My work ToDo list has grown so long I may never get around to experimenting with crossover components on my 1.7s. If I were going to experiment I would prefer to know in advance how to measure an audible difference for example lower distortion or a smoother frequency response curve in REW. If it is possible to measure an audible change and I lack the tools to measure I can still hear the audible change I just can't prove I heard it. So my assertion that an audible change occurred would be objective even if false because it can be proven or disproven by someone with the appropriate tools.

I found a couple of relevant articles that suggest changing components may be audible in some cases but they don't provide any before and after tests:
http://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/loudspeaker-myths-and-truths/loudspeaker-myths-crossovers-bracing-drivers-oh-my
http://www.audioholics.com/loudspeaker-design/crossovers/identifying-legitimately-high-fidelity-loudspeakers-crossover-coils-capacitors

Perhaps understood by all but: the statement that coating my speaker cables with mustard smooths the frequency response of mid base is objective because it can be proven false. The statement that coating my speaker cables with mustard induces inner harmony is subjective because it cannot be proven or disproven.

On the other hand I may not know what I am doing with REW :|.

 

RE: canned goods, posted on January 18, 2017 at 19:38:45
You need more mustard on your pretzels. :)

I'm not sure why folks are intent on blending the line between subjective and objective evaluations. It's black and white. There's is no gray area with regard to discussion on one of those evaluations.

This particular case is an interesting one because we're making the assumption that the crossover was duplicated exactly....component value wise. But, supposedly subjectively superior components were substituted. However, there must be the possibility said components might deteriorate the subjective performance???? :)

Cheers,

Dave.

 

Page processed in 0.026 seconds.