Filter Help w/ Speakers
May 2, 2015 at 10:08 PM Post #16 of 20
  I'd have to look into such a thing, but that sounds like a good idea.

 
I can't find the post and pics anymore, but back around 2004 or 2003 someone in a local forum here did that with an Alpine receiver (and its built-in amplifier). Lower noise floor and variable gain (used on the tweeter channels) made that enough power. He didn't like the results as much as he thought he would, but my theory then was that his cabinets aren't that good. If you're going to do this, at least make sure you match the quality of midrange speaker line cabinets - like at least 3/4in thick MDF on all sides. I'd personally use 1in thick on the front baffle. No need to fess around with fancy front baffle shapes like angling or experimenting with M-T vs T-M configs since a car audio receiver like that has time alignment.
 
Just make sure that whatever you use has crossover cut-offs at the tweeter-midrange range. Still, to be perfectly honest though if I myself would use a car audio DSP at home, it would be more of a way to help design the passive crossover, since the use of four channels (at least) of amplification feels like too many bits and wires in a setting where I hope to avoid everything in cars and pro applications.
 
May 4, 2015 at 6:22 PM Post #18 of 20
   
I can't find the post and pics anymore, but back around 2004 or 2003 someone in a local forum here did that with an Alpine receiver (and its built-in amplifier). Lower noise floor and variable gain (used on the tweeter channels) made that enough power. He didn't like the results as much as he thought he would, but my theory then was that his cabinets aren't that good. If you're going to do this, at least make sure you match the quality of midrange speaker line cabinets - like at least 3/4in thick MDF on all sides. I'd personally use 1in thick on the front baffle. No need to fess around with fancy front baffle shapes like angling or experimenting with M-T vs T-M configs since a car audio receiver like that has time alignment.
 
Just make sure that whatever you use has crossover cut-offs at the tweeter-midrange range. Still, to be perfectly honest though if I myself would use a car audio DSP at home, it would be more of a way to help design the passive crossover, since the use of four channels (at least) of amplification feels like too many bits and wires in a setting where I hope to avoid everything in cars and pro applications.

I'm using 3/4" birch ply, rather than cabinets I'm going boxless (open baffle). I'm gonna add a bit of bracing to the back of the panels and don't intend for the bass drivers to go very low so resonance shouldn't be problematic. I'm using a fullrange driver specifically so I can cross lower, probably around 200hz. I've tested the fullrange driver carefully to see what loudness/excursion it can handle without pushing it.
 
May 4, 2015 at 6:27 PM Post #19 of 20
 
I have tech's that manage to do it. They mixed up the crossover with some  other project. Smoked a few hundred dollars in  drivers. 

That's awful, when you spend that much on drivers and the techs screw it up for you.. I didn't have much money for my build, so I spent 40$ on a pair of Tang Band fullrange drivers and re-used a bad sounding pair of JVC 12" drivers from one of their vintage speakers I had lying around. The bass driver sounds fantastic boxless, very much like open headphones though not as deep unless you're pretty close.
 
May 4, 2015 at 6:31 PM Post #20 of 20
  If you have variable gain on your amps you should be able to get the passive line level crossover to work without much trouble if you don't you might have to come up with a passive level control. Test everything at low levels so you don't blow the tweeters.

The 'amps' I'm using are two receivers with tone control, I haven't been able to test much since I'm not done building my speakers, but a lot of hassle could probably be saved if either one of those receivers rolls off the bass enough for the fullrange driver.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top