# Question on enclosure design



## generalkorrd (Jan 10, 2009)

Ok, I am building some home speakers with a ported 15 inch sub in the side. It is seperated from all the other drivers by an internal baffle. When you look at the below pic, you will see the port entrance. Due to the port length that I want, I have to do a turnaround. The entrance for the port will be approx 6.5 inches from the back wall of the main box. My question is, will the upper part of the enclosure act as a port, or will it act as enclosure dut to it being larger than the port itself?









Thanks for any help


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

I'm inclined to say that since the area in question is much larger in diameter than the rest of the port, that it won't be factored into the port length, but I can't say 100% for sure as I've never built something like that before.


----------



## generalkorrd (Jan 10, 2009)

XtremeRevolution said:


> I'm inclined to say that since the area in question is much larger in diameter than the rest of the port, that it won't be factored into the port length, but I can't say 100% for sure as I've never built something like that before.


Thats what my buddy who has done a few ported boxes says, but my concern is that it so close (6.5inches compared to 4 inch for the port height) that it will act at least partly as part of the port


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

generalkorrd said:


> Thats what my buddy who has done a few ported boxes says, but my concern is that it so close (6.5inches compared to 4 inch for the port height) that it will act at least partly as part of the port


At this point, I'd say build it and see how it works. Ultimately, I think you've got a slight flaw in your design, in that the actual chamber of the subwoofer is much too small relative to the size of the port. It looks like you're trying to use a sub that needs a much larger box, in much too small of a box, thereby requiring much too long of a port. Either that, or your port area is too large. Without knowing the sub being used, I can't comment to far.


----------



## sirvent_95 (Feb 14, 2011)

Just from the picture I'm inclined to say that the port has a huge volume. Are you sure your math was correct when calculating this volume?

If so I would say the the last section you mention would likely affect box performance, maybe not drastically but I think there could be a better way to build it.

Do you have the box depth behind the woofer to have the slot go all the way across the back wall?


----------



## generalkorrd (Jan 10, 2009)

@xtr: The net volume for the sub is 3.2 cu ft, according to MMATS, it requires 2.5, so Im good there. The port is 65 inches long, for a final tuning of ~22 hz.

@cajunner, it is a simple long port, it just looked funny is all. I have approx 45 sq inches of port area, I wanted it big to reduce noise as much as possible.

I fixed it, zigzag instead:


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

generalkorrd said:


> @xtr: The net volume for the sub is 3.2 cu ft, according to MMATS, it requires 2.5, so Im good there. The port is 65 inches long, for a final tuning of ~22 hz.
> 
> @cajunner, it is a simple long port, it just looked funny is all. I have approx 45 sq inches of port area, I wanted it big to reduce noise as much as possible.
> 
> I fixed it, zigzag instead:


Have you actually modeled the vent air velocity? If not, see the first link in my signature.


----------



## generalkorrd (Jan 10, 2009)

cajunner said:


> I like the visual representation, good work!
> 
> however, did a long vent against the back of the front volume, exiting out the back at the bottom of the enclosure with the one ninety degree bend, seem too simple? I know it's a little late to place the sub further to the back of the box to make room, but..
> 
> ...


My original plan was to come out the bottom and up between the sub and the front enclosure, but I couldnt get the sub back far enough to work with my port height of 4 inches. With a 12 it would have worked, but not with the 15 I have in there. 

@ xtr: Have you? is there something you see that I don't?


----------



## its_bacon12 (Aug 16, 2007)

It is advised to have the subwoofer's chamber separate from the mids. The pressure will be very high in there above/at tuning frequency and would adversely affect the composure of the mids. They will do some weird stuff..

You'd need to put a piece of MDF separating the port from the mids, but with the design you currently have, it would effectively make the port much longer. I'd hate to see you get done with a speaker and have the mids sound like garbage because this precaution wasn't taken. Additionally, I don't want you to put that chamber for the mids in and end up with a drastically lower tuning frequency than desired.

Edit: You new enclosure looks much better. I would think that it might be easier to use a flared port, but this would be fine too.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

cajunner said:


> I like the visual representation, good work!
> 
> however, did a long vent against the back of the front volume, exiting out the back at the bottom of the enclosure with the one ninety degree bend, seem too simple? I know it's a little late to place the sub further to the back of the box to make room, but..
> 
> ...


Oh, I'm not concerned about the constraints here. I'm concerned about the topic at hand, and the fact that making this vent smaller would eliminate the issue.



generalkorrd said:


> My original plan was to come out the bottom and up between the sub and the front enclosure, but I couldnt get the sub back far enough to work with my port height of 4 inches. With a 12 it would have worked, but not with the 15 I have in there.
> 
> @ xtr: Have you? is there something you see that I don't?


I haven't, but I can do it for you. What are the dimensions of that port?


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

its_bacon12 said:


> It is advised to have the subwoofer's chamber separate from the mids. The pressure will be very high in there above/at tuning frequency and would adversely affect the composure of the mids. They will do some weird stuff..
> 
> You'd need to put a piece of MDF separating the port from the mids, but with the design you currently have, it would effectively make the port much longer. I'd hate to see you get done with a speaker and have the mids sound like garbage because this precaution wasn't taken. Additionally, I don't want you to put that chamber for the mids in and end up with a drastically lower tuning frequency than desired.
> 
> Edit: You new enclosure looks much better. I would think that it might be easier to use a flared port, but this would be fine too.


Good call on the mids and cabinet coloration. I didn't realize this was for a full range speaker and not for a dedicated subwoofer. 

I would definitely recommend a good amount of fiberglass insulation as wall treatment for the midrange chamber.


----------



## generalkorrd (Jan 10, 2009)

Are you guys seeing what I did for the mids, or did you just ignore that sheet of mdf 6 inches behind the mids going from top to bottom of the enclosure?

The 4 woofers are in their own encl. and the mid and tweet have their own as well, also they are both sealed back drivers. Im not going to stuff the woofers yet, if ever. They are low passed at 500 hz/12db.

According to the calcs I have used, I am good on velocity, but if you want to run it for ****s and giggles, you are more than welcome to. The port is 4 x 11.5 for a total of 46 sq inches.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

generalkorrd said:


> Are you guys seeing what I did for the mids, or did you just ignore that sheet of mdf 6 inches behind the mids going from top to bottom of the enclosure?
> 
> The 4 woofers are in their own encl. and the mid and tweet have their own as well, also they are both sealed back drivers. Im not going to stuff the woofers yet, if ever. They are low passed at 500 hz/12db.
> 
> According to the calcs I have used, I am good on velocity, but if you want to run it for ****s and giggles, you are more than welcome to. The port is 4 x 11.5 for a total of 46 sq inches.


I saw what you did for the mids. I noted it in my post. I post a lot during my breaks at work, and a lot of image hosting sites are blocked at work so I missed it the first time around. 

If you aren't worried about the port and already modeled velocity, then I won't bother. You should be good to go with the updated design.


----------



## generalkorrd (Jan 10, 2009)

XtremeRevolution said:


> I saw what you did for the mids. I noted it in my post. I post a lot during my breaks at work, and a lot of image hosting sites are blocked at work so I missed it the first time around.
> 
> If you aren't worried about the port and already modeled velocity, then I won't bother. You should be good to go with the updated design.


Ahh no problem. The calc I used came in at 8% of mach, which is under the recc'ed 10%, so I figure Im good there. I have already listened to the front end of the speaker, and it sounds quite nice, although you can definitely tell that it wants a lot more than my reciever can deliver-thankfully, my new amps are finally coming home to me this weekend!!


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

generalkorrd said:


> Ahh no problem. The calc I used came in at 8% of mach, which is under the recc'ed 10%, so I figure Im good there. I have already listened to the front end of the speaker, and it sounds quite nice, although you can definitely tell that it wants a lot more than my reciever can deliver-thankfully, my new amps are finally coming home to me this weekend!!


Mind if I ask what crossover you designed for these?


----------



## generalkorrd (Jan 10, 2009)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Mind if I ask what crossover you designed for these?


I didnt design one, bought a premade, but it seems to worke great so far:
Dayton Audio XO3W-500/4K 3-Way Crossover 500/4,000 Hz


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

generalkorrd said:


> I didnt design one, bought a premade, but it seems to worke great so far:
> Dayton Audio XO3W-500/4K 3-Way Crossover 500/4,000 Hz


Oh boy, here's a can of worms in itself. 

I'll let the following speak for itself. 

The Speaker Building Bible - Techtalk Speaker Building, Audio, Video, and Electronics Customer Discussion Forum From Parts-Express.com

Click on "start here first!"

Canned crossovers are a terrible way to design a speaker. Have you even verified if the sensitivity of all of your speakers match up? I have never heard a speaker sound good with a pre-made crossover. Yes, you'll get sound, but it will be nothing compared to a properly designed crossover.


----------



## its_bacon12 (Aug 16, 2007)

generalkorrd said:


> I didnt design one, bought a premade, but it seems to worke great so far:
> Dayton Audio XO3W-500/4K 3-Way Crossover 500/4,000 Hz



What drivers are you using in the design?


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

its_bacon12 said:


> What drivers are you using in the design?


I'm also curious about this. 

More on the actual crossover, there's no way to determine if your phase alignment is anywhere near close, or if you have adequate baffle step compensation.


----------



## generalkorrd (Jan 10, 2009)

its_bacon12 said:


> What drivers are you using in the design?


I'm using these tweets:
Morel CAT 308 1-1/8" Soft Dome Tweeter

DLS Ultimate Iridum 3 inch mids:
Ultimate Iridium 3 - 3 inch midrange speaker

4 of these woofs in each tower:
Aurasound NS8-385-4A 8" Woofer: Madisound Speaker Store

Since the mids are 4 ohm, and I didnt want them to be too loud or shift the xover freq, I am using one of these inline with each mid:
Mills 4 Ohm 12W Non-Inductive Resistor

@ xtr: The way I figure it, I was able to get a good 3way xover that does what I need it to for not too much money, and I didnt have to try and design one myself( which I cant anyway). Also, if I decide to design one later, I can always rebuild these boards with whatever componenets I want to get the specs I want.


----------



## generalkorrd (Jan 10, 2009)

XtremeRevolution said:


> I'm also curious about this.
> 
> More on the actual crossover, there's no way to determine if your phase alignment is anywhere near close, or if you have adequate baffle step compensation.


LOL, don't read too much into this build, I dont even know what all that is! I just wanted some big towers that have an all in one design and that sound great. As I havent been able to test the sub portion yet, I can't speak for it, but I have listened to the front end for about an hour already, and they sound amazing! Demoed it next to my Polk monitor 70, and it blew them away-- to me anyway.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

generalkorrd said:


> LOL, don't read too much into this build, I dont even know what all that is! I just wanted some big towers that have an all in one design and that sound great. As I havent been able to test the sub portion yet, I can't speak for it, but I have listened to the front end for about an hour already, and they sound amazing! Demoed it next to my Polk monitor 70, and it blew them away-- to me anyway.


I used to have some Polk Monitor speakers. Lots of them in fact, and pair of RM40Ts. I then built my father in law a set of floorstanding speakers based on a published design by Chris Roemer, and instantly knew I had to get rid of the polks. The sound was incredibly superior. It was night and day. 

Since then, all of my speakers have been based on published designs. Why build your own when for the same price, you can use a crossover that someone with the proper measurement equipment and simulations software put hours upon hours into in order to get a nearly perfect design. I soon realized there's no purpose, and the personalized part of my designs would have to come out of the cabinet construction, not the choice of components, because there was no possible way for me to (at the time) design one that would sound as good. 

I've been recently designing my own crossover; my first one in fact. A 12 driver (per side) line array with a high efficiency tweeter. 

Please critique my first crossover - Techtalk Speaker Building, Audio, Video, and Electronics Customer Discussion Forum From Parts-Express.com


----------



## generalkorrd (Jan 10, 2009)

@xtr:

I looked and no one has designed anything similar to what I am using, so I would rather use a xover that is designed for a wider range of 3 ways than one that is designed for a certain type. As stated, if I decide to change it later, I can do that- soldering irons are a wonderful thing.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

generalkorrd said:


> @xtr:
> 
> I looked and no one has designed anything similar to what I am using, so I would rather use a xover that is designed for a wider range of 3 ways than one that is designed for a certain type. As stated, if I decide to change it later, I can do that- soldering irons are a wonderful thing.


Well, the problem there is that you bought the drivers first without checking if there was a published design. 

I'm not knocking your project, I'm just saying it could sound 10x better if there was a published crossover design for your choice of components, and that I wouldn't have even purchased the parts you did without knowing if there was a design that is vastly superior to any pre-made crossover network. When I decide to start a new project, the first thing I look into is whether or not there's a published design for an available driver. If there isn't, there's probably a very good reason for it, given the number of speaker designers out there, so I pass it up and move onto another project. 

Lets put it this way. Crossover parts considered, I could go out right now and spend the same amount of money you did (give or take a few bucks) and make a vastly better sounding speaker than the one you've put together with that canned crossover. 

Half the fun though is building it and gaining the experience from it, and its pretty clear that you're enjoying this process. Just be aware for the future that its generally a good idea to either A. design your own crossover, or B. use a crossover someone else with many years of experience has already designed. Given your choice of drivers, you may soon be asking how you could go about learning how to design your own crossover. I hope you like a challenge.


----------



## generalkorrd (Jan 10, 2009)

@xtr

You know, just because it is a premade xover does not mean that it will sound bad, or not be able to sound good at all. If you were to read the reviews, they have all said that their systems sound much better with these xovers in them. They are solid, well built units, perfect for me because I don't want to spend hours upon hours:
learning xover design
learning about the quality of different components
learning how those components work together
learning how they interact with the drivers. 

I'll bet that your line array design has taken and will take quite a long time. I am more of a plug and play kind of guy. Also, I am a full time college student at the age of 39, I have enough **** to learn lol!


----------



## its_bacon12 (Aug 16, 2007)

generalkorrd said:


> I'm using these tweets:
> Morel CAT 308 1-1/8" Soft Dome Tweeter
> 
> DLS Ultimate Iridum 3 inch mids:
> ...


A couple things. If you read the crossover you are getting, the Dayton 3way, it states that you cannot use anything but an 8 ohm midrange. Also, there is a switch on the crossover that allows you to adjust the midbass section from 8 to 4 ohm, so your extra resistor is irrelevant. 

Xtr hit on a few things. Crossover design is by far the most complicated process of any speaker, but simple crossovers can often times be sufficient for beginners. Lastly, I think that you'd be better off making a very simple crossover for the speakers with help of others. That crossover is (meh) at absolute best. Not to mention, that tweeter is too much for your application. I think you should stick to proven well tested drivers with enough information about them second hand to make an adequate design.

Other things you'll need to know:

BSC = Baffle step compensation. If you plan on using the set of speakers away from a wall (which you will be based on your port design) then your midbass will probably need some BSC to help compensate and match to the midrange/tweeter.
LPAD = tweeter step down. It's to pad the tweeter if it's output is not matched to the mid. 
Phase Alignment = phase of the drivers. The passive crossover networks can change the phase of a driver because of the electrical properties of the parts involved. If your tweeter is 180 degrees out of phase for example, with your midrange, you will have a huge null at the crossover point. Anywhere from -30 to -50db which means there is a vacuum in the response.
Notch Filter - this is a part of a crossover that will pad down a narrow (or somewhat wide) frequency band to remove a peak. 
Zobel Network - helps flatten impedance


----------



## its_bacon12 (Aug 16, 2007)

generalkorrd said:


> @xtr
> 
> You know, just because it is a premade xover does not mean that it will sound bad, or not be able to sound good at all. If you were to read the reviews, they have all said that their systems sound much better with these xovers in them. They are solid, well built units, perfect for me because I don't want to spend hours upon hours:
> learning xover design
> ...


Nobody is saying that it will sound bad, but inherently it's a crapshoot without it being tested, modeled and built. There are a LOT of things to nitpick about your design but until you build it, it's hard to say whether it will sound good or not, and that's completely subjective based on the listener.

I do however wish you would have done some research into the accomplished/tested/built designs to get some ideas about commonly used drivers and building methods. 

In all honesty, I hope this works for you because I hate having spent a lot of time/money on something and be dissapointed. I don't want to see that happen to you and then have you become discouraged with DIY home audio. I just graduated college double major and have been learning a little bit each day for several years. 

I encourage you to visit http://www.htguide.com/forum/forumdisplay.php4?f=39 - There are some outstanding designers that contribute there; quite frankly some of the best speaker designers in the world.


----------



## generalkorrd (Jan 10, 2009)

its_bacon12 said:


> A couple things. If you read the crossover you are getting, the Dayton 3way, it states that you cannot use anything but an 8 ohm midrange. Also, there is a switch on the crossover that allows you to adjust the midbass section from 8 to 4 ohm, so your extra resistor is irrelevant.
> 
> Xtr hit on a few things. Crossover design is by far the most complicated process of any speaker, but simple crossovers can often times be sufficient for beginners. Lastly, I think that you'd be better off making a very simple crossover for the speakers with help of others. That crossover is (meh) at absolute best. Not to mention, that tweeter is too much for your application. I think you should stick to proven well tested drivers with enough information about them second hand to make an adequate design.
> 
> ...


Actually, you have it wrong. The BASS section is switchable from 4 to 8 ohm, the midrange is not, so yes I do need that resistor inline with them. As I understand it, the slope of the cutoff dictates your phasing. If you have the mid cut @ 12db on the high end, and the tweet cut in @ 12db, you should minimize phase problems.


----------



## generalkorrd (Jan 10, 2009)

Wow, complete ninja edit there bacon. It seems I caught you tho. 

LOL my bad, I didnt scroll up. Disregard


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

generalkorrd said:


> @xtr
> 
> You know, just because it is a premade xover does not mean that it will sound bad, or not be able to sound good at all. If you were to read the reviews, they have all said that their systems sound much better with these xovers in them. They are solid, well built units, perfect for me because I don't want to spend hours upon hours:
> learning xover design
> ...


Please take this lightheartedly. 

Pre-made crossovers don't factor in a number of issues. Primarily, *phase alignment*. The values of the components I use affect phase alignment. If you look at the simulation I made, you'll notice that the phase of the tweeter is in line with the phase of the driver in my designs, or at least extremely close. This will determine when the sounds reach your ears. If these are not entirely in-phase, it will cause issues and the sound won't be as clear. This is something canned crossovers cannot take into consideration because its based on the specific impedance measurements of each individual driver and the slope of the crossovers. 

Then there's *Baffle Step compensation*. This is something even some experienced speaker builders don't fully understand. I like to call it baffle step loss. Every speaker that's measured is measured on a very large flat plane. What happens when you put this speaker inside a box with a baffle of say, 12" wide? A certain range of frequencies will start to drop in output, down to a -6db drop at 20hz. My particular line array starts dropping at 500hz. Here's an image of baffle loss:










You'll notice that for this sample, frequencies below 400hz start to drop off significantly. Your canned crossover has no way to determine what kind of baffle you're using, so it cannot integrate this concept to help you. 

Then we have *baffle diffraction*. Baffle diffraction is altered and affected by not only the size of the baffle, but the shape and the amount of roundover (or lack of) on the edges of the speaker. This may introduce peaks or dips in the frequency response that have to be accounted for. The following model has a large rise of ~2db at around 700hz. 










That's something you'd have to design your crossover around, or you'll get a heavier than usual midbass. 2db is 20%, so your midbass would be 20% louder than the rest of it. 

Then there's *cone breakup*, which is a *very big deal*. The cones I'm using for my project have an insane cone resonance at 5000-6000hz. You can see it looking at my crossover simulations, then you can see that I entirely cut it off with a parallel filter. While that's past my crossover point, it still creates a spike in the frequency as a crossover only rolls off a frequency response, it doesn't cut it off entirely. Here's an example of a speaker with bad cone breakup/cone resonance:










You'll notice that huge spike between 3000hz and 7000hz. Sure you can start rolling off your crossover before that point, but you're only reducing those frequencies at a rapid rate. What if the drivers you chose have such a cone breakup that you don't know about? You're crossing at 4000hz, so you'd have a frequency response that peaks really bad that you don't know about until you use the speaker, and it will sound good at first, but it will be fatiguing to listen to, and you won't be able to equalize it. We use tanks and notch filters in our crossovers to eliminate those peaks so they don't affect our frequency response and create harsh sounds in our speakers. That's another thing your pre-made crossover cannot do. 

Then there's the issue of *sensitivity*. What do you do when the sensitivity of your midrange is higher than your tweeters? This is potentially a big issue for you. 

Looking at your design, it looks like the mid will be 1db louder than the tweeter. How do you think that will play out near your crossover point or otherwise? For example, my line array has a combined output of ~95db for the drivers, and my tweeter can produce 93db. I applied 3db of BSC, lowering my driver output to 92db, and needed a resistor to pad the output on the tweeter a bit to bring it down to 92db as well. Again, this is something your crossover doesn't take into account.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

its_bacon12 said:


> A couple things. If you read the crossover you are getting, the Dayton 3way, it states that you cannot use anything but an 8 ohm midrange. Also, there is a switch on the crossover that allows you to adjust the midbass section from 8 to 4 ohm, so your extra resistor is irrelevant.
> 
> Xtr hit on a few things. Crossover design is by far the most complicated process of any speaker, but simple crossovers can often times be sufficient for beginners. Lastly, I think that you'd be better off making a very simple crossover for the speakers with help of others. That crossover is (meh) at absolute best. Not to mention, that tweeter is too much for your application. I think you should stick to proven well tested drivers with enough information about them second hand to make an adequate design.
> 
> ...


Lol, pretty much exactly what I pointed out, though I didn't bother with the zobel network as it would probably be a bit advanced. 



its_bacon12 said:


> Nobody is saying that it will sound bad, but inherently it's a crapshoot without it being tested, modeled and built. There are a LOT of things to nitpick about your design but until you build it, it's hard to say whether it will sound good or not, and that's completely subjective based on the listener.
> 
> I do however wish you would have done some research into the accomplished/tested/built designs to get some ideas about commonly used drivers and building methods.
> 
> ...


Great website. Techtalk.parts-express.com is also an excellent place to visit for this kind of thing.


----------



## generalkorrd (Jan 10, 2009)

@ xtr

I did look at the sensititvity of the mid and tweet, Thats why I put that resistor inline with the mid, to bring it inline with the woofs and tweet. I have already listened to 1 tower, and I am impressed with how good it sounds( I still have to build the other). I am not quite done with the tower, as it is a large mdf box right now, and the wife wont let that in our living room. I do plan on rounding the edges over and also installing speaker screens, as well as some kind of laminate for looks. If you know a way for me to measure cone breakup on these drivers without spending any money, let me know. I think that you are thinking wayyy to "audiophile" for this build. It is just a big badass 3way tower using my mids that needed a home, and a way for me to get rid of that 12 inch Infinty sub I have to open up the bottom of my ent. center for more storage.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

generalkorrd said:


> @ xtr
> 
> I did look at the sensititvity of the mid and tweet, Thats why I put that resistor inline with the mid, to bring it inline with the woofs and tweet. I have already listened to 1 tower, and I am impressed with how good it sounds( I still have to build the other). I am not quite done with the tower, as it is a large mdf box right now, and the wife wont let that in our living room. I do plan on rounding the edges over and also installing speaker screens, as well as some kind of laminate for looks. If you know a way for me to measure cone breakup on these drivers without spending any money, let me know. I think that you are thinking wayyy to "audiophile" for this build. It is just a big badass 3way tower using my mids that needed a home, and a way for me to get rid of that 12 inch Infinty sub I have to open up the bottom of my ent. center for more storage.


I understand. There's really no way to measure cone breakup without actually sending it in to someone with a setup to measure speaker, but you can probably get a good idea. 

You could use a generic microphone and some RTA software that you can download for free (TrueRTA Audio Spectrum Analyzer Software), hook the driver up to an amp with all equalization off, and run a white noise signal to see if there are any distinct peaks or dips in the frequency response. It won't be very accurate, but it will show you if you've got some bad cone breakup going on. 

If you already had the drivers, then more power to you. I had the impression you bought them specifically for this design. 

What resistance is that resistor you're using on the tweeter? I apologize you had already mentioned it. 

As for way too audiophile, your mind will change the moment you build your first published design, but this should do for now.


----------



## generalkorrd (Jan 10, 2009)

XtremeRevolution said:


> I understand. There's really no way to measure cone breakup without actually sending it in to someone with a setup to measure speaker, but you can probably get a good idea.
> 
> You could use a generic microphone and some RTA software that you can download for free (TrueRTA Audio Spectrum Analyzer Software), hook the driver up to an amp with all equalization off, and run a white noise signal to see if there are any distinct peaks or dips in the frequency response. It won't be very accurate, but it will show you if you've got some bad cone breakup going on.
> 
> ...


I already owned the DLS, bought the Aura 8's for 17 bucks each, and the tweets were about 60 bucks each, so I have about 500 into these towers incuding the 15's I got for 70 bucks each. The resistor is 4 ohm, so it comes to 8ohms that the xover sees. I have a feeling that once these sweet babies show up(Soundcraftsmen PM860)-









I will be MUCH happier with my new speaks!


----------



## its_bacon12 (Aug 16, 2007)

generalkorrd said:


> I already owned the DLS, bought the Aura 8's for 17 bucks each, and the tweets were about 60 bucks each, so I have about 500 into these towers incuding the 15's I got for 70 bucks each. The resistor is 4 ohm, so it comes to 8ohms that the xover sees. I have a feeling that once these sweet babies show up(Soundcraftsmen PM860)-
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well, you're resisting what we are offering so here on out you're solo. If you're happy with it that's all that matters but for what it's worth, your project is a nightmare in my eyes. lol..

But I reiterate - if you are happy, that is all that matters.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Dec 3, 2010)

Once these are done, I would encourage you to build a set of speakers on a published design so you can see what a good crossover really sounds like. $500 is really a lot of money for something that's put together so blindly. You have no way of knowing what's going on. I have a feeling that with that much invested, you'll want to learn how to design your own crossovers.

Sent from my HTC Awesome using Tapatalk


----------

