+ Reply to Thread
Page 24 of 35 FirstFirst ... 14222324252634 ... LastLast
Results 346 to 360 of 511

Thread: 4343 crossover modifications

  1. #346
    Senior Member B&KMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    491
    same mesure comparison but in 1/3 octave slope...

    the last pict is the difference level of peak and cut freq of hf.
    close to 9 db down (...)




    it is my driver of I feeling is to much drop... ???

    :dont-know



    thanks for all is decorticate this info for confirm or unconfirm the response data coherence in regards of design network 3145....


    Jean.
    Attached Images Attached Images    

  2. #347
    Senior Member Ian Mackenzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    The Tardis
    Posts
    5,950
    Jean,

    Have you checked to see how much vibrations from the woofer make transmission through the rear baffle at various bass frequencies?

    It just seems to me that the resonances and vibrations from the speaker cabinet would far exceed that from within the capacitors and this would be worth testing and I am sure a some simple test with Floyd Dark Side of the Moon would tell you this..LOL

    For this reason would it not be better to completely de couple the crossover from the speaker cabinet?

    Okay removing the crossover components from the interior of the bass enclosure is acknowledged as better for "audio" but if you are critical of vibrations why attach the crossover panel to the speaker box and rear panel the largest panel most susceptable flex and to vibrations? :dont-know .

    Sorry if am am a pain in the arse.!

    The Doctor

    Ps Be careful of the fibreglass, it can make you very itchy in all the wrong places..Muhhahahah

  3. #348
    Senior Member B&KMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    491
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Mackenzie
    Jean,

    Have you checked to see how much vibrations from the woofer make transmission through the rear baffle at various bass frequencies?

    It just seems to me that the resonances and vibrations from the speaker cabinet would far exceed that from within the capacitors and this would be worth testing and I am sure a some simple test with Floyd Dark Side of the Moon would tell you this..LOL

    For this reason would it not be better to completely de couple the crossover from the speaker cabinet?

    Okay removing the crossover components from the interior of the bass enclosure is acknowledged as better for "audio" but if you are critical of vibrations why attach the crossover panel to the speaker box and rear panel the largest panel most susceptable flex and to vibrations? :dont-know .

    Sorry if am am a pain in the arse.!

    The Doctor

    Ps Be careful of the fibreglass, it can make you very itchy in all the wrong places..Muhhahahah


    excelent remarks...


    Ok Why I put network on back Panel ???


    Yes it is the major panel vibration...

    I have option to put into indepedant box but I try to fix multi-aspects

    1--- load mass back speaker increase resolution of speaker ...

    2--- Remember all in fill in sand so really dead for caps and really flat result on back panel...

    3--- The form of back panel is a " natural " diffusor so is broken the standing wave load on back side speaker...

    the mass of network adding of mass on speaker is more better than 2 mass separate...

    Well I feel all this point is necessity of proof Ok I try a build experience for you...

    (I hope you help me better in regards of the curve of my hf -uhf driver.... )

    Jean.

  4. #349
    Senior Member B&KMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    491
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Mackenzie

    Ps Be careful of the fibreglass, it can make you very itchy in all the wrong places..Muhhahahah
    I keep pict fiberglass position for cloner ....



    Jean.

  5. #350
    Senior Member B&KMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    491
    Quote Originally Posted by B&KMan

    Well I feel all this point is necessity of proof Ok I try a build experience for you...
    Jean.
    I play dark side in sacd mmmm really good but I have better procedure for kill anybody doubth...

    OK I perform another dispendious test for you great member...

    the test protocol:

    1--- I put mic in front of the low driver 2 inch precisely
    2--- I put same power and same impluse at all mesure.
    3--- I put sensor vibration on 3 positions:
    A--- on the bignet rock plate (the big Net is fixed on back-panel 4343)
    B--- On back panel on unaltered 4343
    C--- On floor 2 inch back and half distance of each feet 4343.

    The first pict is expose the set-up

    Syncro signal with mic and sensor vibration...

    The special function is check the pulse input to mic and compare of acc for compensation of variation of signal excitation and put algorith for expose real power excitation in regards of variation "shaking"

    Finnaly look carrefully the picts for difference in DB or linear scale...
    N"B" each notch scale on botton =200K (so 0,200,400,600,etc.) 1600 max Hz evaluate...
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  6. #351
    Senior Member B&KMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    491
    I put sensor vibration on 3 positions:
    A--- on the bignet rock plate (the big Net is fixed on back-panel 4343)
    B--- On back panel on unaltered 4343
    C--- On floor 2 inch back and half distance of each feet 4343.

    ok this 2 pict is compare level vibration in regards of spectrum 0-1600Hz

    THe stored is the mesure of BigNet and input is the mesure on standart back panel 4343

    same pulse power, same position mic reference, etc...

    First look the difference of DB level vibration... more 30DB !!

    in mode linear scale the difference is look more the Db scale is logarith

    OK do doubth the bigNet composite and addition mass is create inertia and flateness response.. but this is not proof is better than put network on the floor...
    Attached Images Attached Images   

  7. #352
    Senior Member B&KMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    491
    So what is the noise vibration on floor ???

    Attention this mesure is keep the result response of 2 ways

    the mesure is the sum of direct impact vibration and acoustical exication...
    So it is possible to produre big reactance on floor and put the speaker on supension with no contact of the floor...


    ok this 2 pict is compare level vibration in regards of spectrum 0-1600Hz

    THe stored is the mesure of BigNet and input is the mesure on floor locate at 1 feet back speaker...

    same pulse power, same position mic reference, etc...

    First look the difference of DB level vibration... less than plain back put realy higher than bignet...

    in mode linear scale the difference is look more the Db scale is logarith

    OK do doubth the bigNet composite and addition mass is create inertia and flateness response.. this inertia of this mass added to back panel help the back to drop level vibration... so, better reaction of cabinet and less general vibration... for power air sound the addition of mass create a better inertia vibration than is you expose a device free placement on back speaker or n top or arround speaker...

    Now add the 80LBS sand in network and imagine the dead vibration result...

    the mesures is surprising ???

    I hope you appreciate thi 2K test !!
    Attached Images Attached Images   

  8. #353
    Senior Member B&KMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    491
    HUMMMMM



    Another long silent here...

    but the visit is increase regulary...


    Well well , I back just for write my surprising on Bignet, the time rodage appear maybe small or the dc charge is more stabilising. the unpleasant momment with sound go up and down, stiff and bloom, is really small...

    after 48 hours the sound is quite stabilising... if the normal effect is reproduce the final result was very impressive because actually the speaker modified play same detail but little bit more stiff than old speaker not modified...


    scotie entreprise end report !!!

    Jean.

  9. #354
    Senior Member Ian Mackenzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    The Tardis
    Posts
    5,950
    Jean,

    Good to hear your project is progressing.

    I here is an update of the cabinet for the 4343 external crossover.

    As seen by the A4 laser copy they are about the size of a PC Mini tower.

    I should have details of final assembly in a day or two.

    Oh I forgot the other box, this one is for the active crossover.

    It was the first fabrication of the style, I am starting to get better at it.

    I might buy a CNC router next year, that would be nice.

    Ian
    Attached Images Attached Images     

  10. #355
    Senior Member B&KMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    491
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Mackenzie
    Jean,

    Good to hear your project is progressing.

    I here is an update of the cabinet for the 4343 external crossover.

    As seen by the A4 laser copy they are about the size of a PC Mini tower.

    I should have details of final assembly in a day or two.

    Ian


    MMMMMM It look very professionnal....




    For suite of ear report

    The time rodage is continuing... and maybe modification...

    I dont know if is the soldering silver or is the caps film and foil is suck or not ringning, but my high UHF is play more low than my first modification. After a test I realise a good power if i put out the 2 resistances of end circuit uhf nework...

    Ian, (and other) do you a experienced this effect with cascade set-up ???

  11. #356
    Senior Member Ian Mackenzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    The Tardis
    Posts
    5,950
    I am not quite sure what you are saying?

    My interpretation of your question is that the parrellel effect of smaller and alternate dieletics will result in a different ESR and other electrical properties of the capacitors. It will therefore in all probability sound subjectively different and that's the whole point of the exercise.

    Jean, there is still a lot that measurements don't record in terms of subjective impressions of sound quality and it is even more difficult to describe adequately in words what we often hear.

    My own inclination is that superior capacitors tend to sound less like a cheese grater on the inner ear and may therefore sound lower level until you become more acquainted with the change. This is despite the fact that you are able to hear and differential more specific details of sounds from the louspeaker with improvements in audio fidelity.

    Enjoy the rediscovery of your record collection.


    Ian

  12. #357
    Administrator Robh3606's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Destiny
    Posts
    7,511
    "I dont know if is the soldering silver or is the caps film and foil is suck or not ringning, but my high UHF is play more low than my first modification. After a test I realise a good power if i put out the 2 resistances of end circuit uhf nework..."

    Do you know if the driver levels have changed at all. Any baseline measurements before?? Could be the caps could be a 1-2dB driver level change as well??? I found that with the charge coupling on my 2344 horns that the levels were right where they were as best as I could measure so the difference had to be the caps. What I found was they sounded smoother and were not as harsh you I think you could hear that as a drop in level especially at higher listenning levels. The effects were subtle but there.

  13. #358
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    N.E. Ohio
    Posts
    181
    "Silver Solder Connections"... It must be my "Granite (Hard) brain that doesn't allow me to understand how a SOUND mechanical joint can/would be influenced by the top gas/air barrier (solder). To me, the "Sound Mechanical Joint" IS the connection (the cake), the solder is the "Frosting" on the cake. A helical twisted connection (with wire nuts...ala Henry Kloss) beats a poor weld/solder job, because the solder is the connection, rather than the "Sound Mechanical Joint". I've read about cascading caps and it is interesting but all those caps, instead of one or two for the needed value, might just cause its own problems; a lack of cohesion and focus.... Is it Live, or is it Memorex? At any rate, Nice Work guys! Any Unchallenged man remains a King of nothing. Trying/Working reveals who we really are....

  14. #359
    Senior Member B&KMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    491
    The problem of the UHF is not a problem of subjective perception... If you look at the photograph, the UHF is definitely too low and although L-pad is to the
    maximum....

    The same phenomenon occurred at the time of my modification of the
    3143 original... The wire were not twister etc,

    I notice that by doubling the condensers the attenuation is stronger
    but that frequency response is excellent.... Thus which is the problem? (#$#@$#$)

    Jean.

    Solen is explainthe higher power handling the less sensitivity caps...

    My hypothesis is the place where the power is really low is UHF so maybe is pass the line of minimum ...

    What your feeling ???
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  15. #360
    Senior Member B&KMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    491
    Quote Originally Posted by Robh3606
    Do you know if the driver levels have changed at all. Any baseline measurements before?? Could be the caps could be a 1-2dB driver level change as well??? I found that with the charge coupling on my 2344 horns that the levels were right where they were as best as I could measure so the difference had to be the caps. What I found was they sounded smoother and were not as harsh you I think you could hear that as a drop in level especially at higher listenning levels. The effects were subtle but there.
    Thanks Robh3606,

    Not, I is not made of exaustive measurement on the power before the
    condensers... I am obviously conscious that the distortion is a factor which
    accentuates the UHF... In this precise case, one speaks about a lack of more than 10 decibels... It is more than one subtlety or of the distortion... I obtain has little close the good result by removing the 2
    6.5 ohms to the end of the circuit of UHF...

    Other hand if you look my result on prev page, The the crossNetwork on HF and UHF is really strong and deep... and create little hole.

    I have in my mind this circuit is not for 2420 diaphram but for UHF it is a good layout...

    strange.... other idea ???

    Jean

+ Reply to Thread

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Ashly XR1001 Active Crossover
    By boputnam in forum Electronic Crossovers
    Replies: 156
    Last Post: 10-06-2009, 09:58 AM
  2. JBL 4343 external crossover needed? help!!!
    By catcaster1 in forum Lansing Product Technical Help
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-29-2004, 08:23 PM
  3. Questions about the Ashly XR1001 Active Crossover
    By porschedpm in forum Lansing Product Technical Help
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-19-2004, 01:37 PM
  4. Upgrading a 4343 to 4344 components
    By porschedpm in forum Lansing Product Technical Help
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-29-2004, 10:45 AM
  5. L300 convert to 4343?
    By tv506 in forum Lansing Product Technical Help
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-24-2003, 12:08 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts