Chief bonehead

Yes.

No I’m not.

I do!!! I do!!!

Never take Deano seriously…🤓

Actually it was me that didn’t explain it clearly. Looking at crossovers independently without realizing that it is part of closed system is the only way to get to the acoustic response that we are designing for…..ultimately that is what your ears hear and that determines the quality of the sound.

Well I tried……🙂

Be nice. And maybe teach…..

yep. In the “ideal” world. I’m still looking. and how are they “typically” defined? Isn’t it into a consistent load? Do speakers represent a consistent load? yep with constant loads. Not varying loads. which means at higher voltages the drivers just might be outside their linear range and begin to distort. A large overlap will occur but you might be able to get a single point in space where the curve just might look very good. But again, is a good looking curve all that is needed? I like whatever order is needed to provide the things in need in order to have constant amplitude, similar phase at acoustic crossover, constant coverage, similar distortion characteristics and very close coverage patterns at the crossover freq, etc etc that meets those needs. The crossover is a tool and should not be limited to textbook designs that are derived using a constant load because in the real world, typically not the ideal world, you don’t have a constant load as it will vary over a frequency. And typical, hornload speaker is even worse because of their efficiency. And to make matters worse you have to adjust gain between the drivers and provide eq along with crossovers thus the name networks. The network is a tool that is adjusted to make the drivers blend and become coherent cause after all, we don’t want to hear a good voltage transfer curve……if we did our job correctly, we want not only a good freq curve but also one that meets our other criteria. Wouldn’t that make a network very specialized for a set of specific drivers with specific specs? Just wondering. Maybe being wholeheartedly concerned what the acoustic slope is a better goal?

So is the goal a good looking voltage transfer curve or a good looking freq response?

What will the acoustic response look like?

Why not?

What exactly is your point deano?

Praying for my friend, Gil……..

People are bored Travis…..

This is good advice for every post……

Eh…..they sound ok.

Pva’s is what is used on cloth surrounds.

Excuse me???? Stop what????

Hmmmmm....

Buy them klipsch.

Wow.....pretty extreme

That’s what I call him. El Don. Either that or sir!!

Some “trash/particle” could gotten between the diap and phase plug. Doing exactly what you did will solve that problem.

i really was trying to answer your questions. i did truncate it because honestly, i can talk alot but i dont write alot. weird i know. i think we have been open to quite a few developments that have happened in my 35 years at klipsch and of course, much further than that with paul. i mean, gary gillum brought the drone idea to paul and since it did not contradict pauls acoustic philosophy, he very much embraced it. i will say, some of those concepts we looked at just didnt seem to fit but i guarantee you, we studied it. sometimes its better to come in from stands than from left field to see a concept in a different light.

actually some of these existed as concepts quite a long time ago. one particular noteworthy event was richard heyser's method of looking at data in the time domain; time energy frequency. paul was good friends with mr heyser and i remember paul and i talking about how that kind of "evaluation of data" could help push a little farther forward.