Chris A Posted December 4, 2014 Author Share Posted December 4, 2014 To illustrate my point on phase, here is a phase and FR plot for the JuBelle (the active crossover settings of which I finished up yesterday). Where am I crossing the drivers in this three-way loudspeaker? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khornukopia Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 While scrolling through the forum a couple weeks ago, reading a thread about passive crossovers, I saw a recommendation for the Electro-Voice digital crossover. That reminded me of my intention to upgrade from my DCX-2496 digital crossover after listening to the active x-o system for a few months, so I bought this E-V DC-One. The EQ settings in my picture are just for display, my tri-amped K-horns sound good with minimal EQ, but it is fun to play with the 31 band graphic equalizer and the 9 band parametric equalizers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted December 9, 2014 Author Share Posted December 9, 2014 Hi there...it's been a while, and it's good to see that you're enjoying your new DC-One. Do you hear any differences once you dial it in? I've not played with the older RACE software with my Dx38s since my computers don't have a RS232 port. Do you find the DC-One Editor software easy to use? Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khornukopia Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 To illustrate my point on phase, here is a phase and FR plot for the JuBelle (the active crossover settings of which I finished up yesterday). Where am I crossing the drivers in this three-way loudspeaker? My answer to your quoted question is; I can not determine your crossover points looking at the phase and FR plots because your woofer, midrange and tweeter time alignment is correct, so the crossover transitions can not be audibly measured. About my E-V DC-One digital crossover, the (free download) Editor software is easy and intuitive. Most parameters can be selected from drop menus, typed into menu boxes, or click and dragged around the graphs by mouse pointer. The unit connects to the PC with a USB wire. Settings can also be adjusted at the front panel of the unit without needing a computer. I have only listened to the new X-O for a short time. The audible differences to my previous digital active crossover are subtle but worthwhile. The words clarity and spacious have crossed my mind during a few songs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khornukopia Posted March 8, 2015 Share Posted March 8, 2015 As a follow up, I want to say thanks to the advice and guidance of the Klipsch forum, installing and adjusting the active crossover system was easier than I would have thought before starting the project. I also imagined I would be experimenting with many more different crossover parameters, but it has worked so well and been maintenance free that the only adjustments I have done for months is of the volume control. Slightly off topic, but reading the forums has a tendency to make me want to "improve" something, so I decided to put some Crites CT-125 tweeters in my other K-horns with the passive AK-2 networks. After installing a Crites tweeter in one speaker, I did some left channel, right channel comparisons in mono. Interesting observation is that the Crites CT-125 measured a couple db SPL louded than the K-77, but they did not seem to sound louder in my acoustically treated room. I like them well enough to keep the Crites and I will store the K-77s, so I can always return my speakers to OEM condition. I chose not to install the Crites CT-125s into my tri-amped speakers because the digital electronic crossover there gives me the option to choose from a wider SPL variety of high quality tweeters. P.S. When replacing a tweeter or wires in a K-horn, it is just as easy to remove the six screws holding the top panel as it is to work in the confines of the top hat. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted March 8, 2015 Author Share Posted March 8, 2015 (edited) ...installing and adjusting the active crossover system was easier than I would have thought before starting the project. I also imagined I would be experimenting with many more different crossover parameters, but it has worked so well and been maintenance free that the only adjustments I have done for months is of the volume control... This is the "big idea" of using digital active crossovers--the ease and flexibility of changing loudspeaker drivers and crossover points/types, and balancing equalization for the rooms that you use for your setup(s). Digital active crossovers are one of the few investments (instead of high priced turntables and other electronics) that one can make since they can be reused basically forever. Chris Edited March 8, 2015 by Chris A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sancho Panza Posted July 24, 2015 Share Posted July 24, 2015 ***OLD THREAD ALERT*** Top so I may find easier, later... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMH Posted September 8, 2015 Share Posted September 8, 2015 I just completed converting my Belle's to "active" with a DX38. It was too easy thanks to Chris A's parameters listed on page 1. A couple of weeks ago I purchased Gordon Goodwin's "Swinging for the Fences". I've played it few times with the twin Belle center channel while the speakers were passive. I didn't think much could be done to improve the quality. Well, besides major horn upgrades including new mid drivers and tweeters. It really sounded great - I'm sure it did... No doubt about it... Or maybe, I didn't really know how good it could get? Now, after going "active" with the Belle's - WOW, W-O-W! My 3-way active (Yamaha SP2060) MWM's/402's and the Belle's meld together seamlessly. Seriously, from my listening position I can't differentiate that the center channel is even on. It's an amazing wall of sound that flows over you like the band is right there. A big giant "sweet spot" that covers the entire space. Simply amazing! Now I'm considering going active with my Volti modified Khorn surround speakers. Thanks again Chris! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khornukopia Posted November 3, 2015 Share Posted November 3, 2015 The collection of ticket stubs from this year's live music events is to remind me that Klipsch speakers are a really good deal, especially for reproducing that "front row center" sound at home. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khornukopia Posted December 7, 2015 Share Posted December 7, 2015 I recently read someone's comment about equalizing their frequency response to being "flat" but the sound being sterile or weak. I can't relocate the specific thread to reply, so I will write here that we want the speakers to have a relatively flat response with a Test Tone, but not a flat music playback response. The attached picture is a snapshot of a hand held RTA display during an excellent sounding live music moment. Any other snapshot will be different and unique for that specific instant, but the green line, momentary average curve of this example is a good guideline for a desirable live music reproduction response at your listening position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted December 7, 2015 Author Share Posted December 7, 2015 (edited) I recently read someone's comment about equalizing their frequency response to being "flat" but the sound being sterile or weak. If you go look at the music being played on those "flat FR" systems, I think that there is more than enough information to realize that it isn't the flat FR that's the problem. Most non-near-field studio monitors have very flat FR--it's the music itself that is the problem. Here is a thread that begins to shed light on what I consider to be the real issue: the "missing octave(s)". Fully 30% of the value of a loudspeaker's performance comes from its bass response, according to Toole (whom I trust on this subject the most of any acoustic researcher). If the low frequency roll-off of music is played back and is not "unmastered" to restore the bass and rebalance the highs, then it sounds a lot worse than "flat" - it sounds quite anemic and shrill due to the simultaneous boosting of frequencies above 500 Hz and up to about 10 kHz. I would hate to be a mastering engineer - because the result of the "industry standard practices" on using EQ on the finished music tracks (which actually varies all over the map with relatively high standard deviation) is that the results of all the work done wind up sounding a little bit like someone grabbed a bass tone control and turned it almost all the way the way to the left, and turned the treble tone control to the right by a significant amount. That's what those type of articles fail to mention. The problem is: no one has standardized the level of "pre-EQing" to the mastered music, so that the manufacturers can standardize on some sort of pre-formed FR of their loudspeakers. As it is, it's merely a random walk when looking at loudspeaker manufacturers. I prefer PWK's approach: essentially flat FR and let the chips fall where they might. BTW: this subject is the major reason why I've chosen to unmaster all my recordings (apparently to the dismay of some audiophiles and other techno-audioists that don't want to hear how bad the status quo actually is--in both the music and the loudspeaker sides of the state of the art). Chris Edited December 7, 2015 by Chris A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted December 7, 2015 Author Share Posted December 7, 2015 The attached picture is a snapshot of a hand held RTA display during an excellent sounding live music moment. The interesting thing to see is the 1/f trend of the live music performance to below 40 Hz. The drop off above 10 kHz is typical in this type of plot, but when you look at the spectrogram log(f) plot, corrected for about -18 dB/octave of the 1/f curve, you will see that the high frequencies are actually there in the recording. Just a little lessons learned from the Audacity unmastering that I've been focused on for the better part of a year. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khornukopia Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 This is a better acoustic example, front row center at The Nutcracker Ballet with 30+ musicians performing Tchaikovsky's music in the orchestra pit directly in front of me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted December 14, 2015 Author Share Posted December 14, 2015 (edited) That's also pretty typical in my experience with the classical (ballet) recordings that I've been unmastering. Thanks for sharing that. Most recordings will be mastered to have a significant bend down starting at about 500 Hz down to the lowest frequencies that a string orchestra can create without percussion: 41 Hz. Here is an unmastering EQ curve that I applied to a Boston Pops/John WIlliams recording (Philips) of the Nutcracker Suite - the Arabian Dance: and here is the resulting frequency response of the averaged track (max. of 3 1/2 minutes of it): Also of note is the amount of sub-harmonic energy in your live performance below 40 Hz: bass drum and very low wind instruments, such as contrabass bassoon or clarinet. In the case of the Nutcracker Suite, all are used (IIRC) at least somewhere in the ballet. Chris Edited December 14, 2015 by Chris A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvel Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 BTW: this subject is the major reason why I've chosen to unmaster all my recordings (apparently to the dismay of some audiophiles and other techno-audioists that don't want to hear how bad the status quo actually is--in both the music and the loudspeaker sides of the state of the art). No complaints from me! Have you done any unmastering of any LSO (London Symphony Orchestra) discs? I have a few that sound ok now, but haven't taken the time to tweak them as you have. Partly because I have never liked Audacity... Bruce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted December 14, 2015 Author Share Posted December 14, 2015 (edited) Have you done any unmastering of any LSO (London Symphony Orchestra) discs? Here are the discs that I've unmastered that feature the LSO: Mahavishnu Orchestra With The London Symphony Orchestra , Michael Tilson Thomas - [Apocalypse] Nadja Salerno-Sonnenberg & the London Symphony Orchestra - [barber & Shostakovich - Violin Concertos] Nadja Salerno-Sonnenberg - [Humoresque] London Symphony Orchestra - [A Classic Case - The Music of Jethro Tull] London Symphony Orchestra - [A Festival of Christmas Carols] Here are the LSO discs that I own and that I've ripped to flac that I haven't yet unmastered: London Symphony Orchestra, Richard Hickox, conductor. - [The Black Knight and Bavarian Highland Scenes] London Symphony Orchestra, MacKerras - [scheherezade - Capriccio Espagnol] Claudio Arrau, London Symphony Orch., Sir Colin Davis [ultimate Liszt, Concertos pour piano et orchestre No.1 & 2 - 3 études de concert] Carol Rosenberger, Della Jones, London Symphony, Gerard Schwarz - [Manuel de Falla's Spain] Vladimir Ashkenazy, London Symphony Orchestra, Andre Previn - [Prokofiev Complete Concertos] Valery Gergiev, London Symphony Orchestra - [RACHMANINOV Symphonic Dances & STRAVINSKY Symphony in Three Movements] London Symphony Orchestra - [Prokofiev Orchestral Suites] Generally speaking, I've unmastered my non-classical discs first with the rationale that most of the real mastering issues would be found on those. Unfortunately, I've found that isn't true The Nadja Solerno-Sonnenberg discs (particularly the Nonesuch label) have required a large amount of EQ to unscramble what the mastering engineers placed on them. {Edit 15 April 2016: The preceding sentence wasn't particularly true, but there was an amount of EQ required that affected the resulting sound greatly.] The upside, of course, is that once unmastered, the resulting performance is like finding buried gold. If any of those discs look interesting, let me know. My unmastering queue is fairly flexible and haphazard (with respect to genre) of late, so I can easily change it to include any of the above. I unmaster from 2-5 discs per day currently, based on the difficulty (i.e., did they use a unique EQ curve for each track or did they reuse the same curve over and over) and the time that I've got to throw at it each day. Chris Edited April 15, 2016 by Chris A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khornukopia Posted December 31, 2015 Share Posted December 31, 2015 The RTA image on the left is of a 440 Hz test tone. The image on the right is of the sound produced by a piano when pressing the 440 Hz A-4 key. This visual display showing the overtones of a single note from a single musical instrument helps me understand why everything more complex than a test tone sounds better through a properly configured tri-amp system. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted December 31, 2015 Author Share Posted December 31, 2015 Exactly. When a mastering engineer applies a heavy EQ curve to music tracks, he's pulling the balance of every musical instrument off its natural overtone series, thus making everything sound unnatural. That's the whole basis of why I try to return my music tracks back to "as recorded" balance using spectrogram plots and cumulative spectrum plots. When you start to get closer to finding that as-recorded balance through using unmastering EQ, everything starts to snap back into natural balance, and very small changes to the curves after that balance is found makes large changes in the resulting sound. That's a clue that you're getting close to true balance. This concept seems to be so simple in principle to see but apparently not enough for musicians to stop the practice of "EQing to get a different sound". It doesn't really work, but it's been done so much and for so long that people's ears have started to accommodate that unnatural sound without questioning it. However, it doesn't sound very good to my ears. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khornukopia Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 I just completed converting my Belle's to "active" with a DX38. It was too easy thanks to Chris A's parameters listed on page 1. My 3-way active (Yamaha SP2060) MWM's/402's and the Belle's meld together seamlessly. DavidH, Glad to read that you enjoy your speakers. Do you have any pictures to share? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khornukopia Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 Chris, It is interesting to read about the corrections your are making to music recordings. I will need to try that someday, but how do you adjust for streaming music like XM radio, Pandora, etc.? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.