Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 20

Thread: TIME ALIGN

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    long beach, new york
    Posts
    32

    TIME ALIGN

    Does anyone know how to calculate the amount of delay needed to time-align components? I would imagine we're converting inches to milliseconds!
    I think Its an oft overlooked area that reaps significant aural benefit. Also...can the delay be accomplished by passive means? Thanks.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    3,266
    Quote Originally Posted by rich carnese View Post
    Does anyone know how to calculate the amount of delay needed to time-align components? I would imagine we're converting inches to milliseconds!
    I think Its an oft overlooked area that reaps significant aural benefit. Also...can the delay be accomplished by passive means? Thanks.
    Speed of sound at sea level is about 1,116 feet per second, so it works out to be about 1.1 ft per millisecond. Most people just use 1 foot/ms.

    Sure, just move one speaker forward or backwards accordingly.

  3. #3
    RIP 2011 Zilch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Berkeley, CA
    Posts
    10,036
    13.56 in/ms

  4. #4
    Senior Señor boputnam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    northern california
    Posts
    7,009
    Quote Originally Posted by rich carnese View Post
    I think Its an oft overlooked area that reaps significant aural benefit.


    Quote Originally Posted by rich carnese View Post
    Also...can the delay be accomplished by passive means? Thanks.
    Not that I know of.

    Quote Originally Posted by toddalin View Post
    ...just move one speaker forward or backwards accordingly.
    But be mindful that passive crossovers induce measurable "delay" between drivers - this particularly impacts the woofer (IIRC, this is imparted by the inductor in the HPF, but my knowledge of crossover design is admittedly limited. I'm a user... . Someone no doubt will correct me.)
    bo

    "Indeed, not!!"

  5. #5
    Senior Member edgewound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    2,699
    Quote Originally Posted by rich carnese View Post
    Does anyone know how to calculate the amount of delay needed to time-align components? I would imagine we're converting inches to milliseconds!
    I think Its an oft overlooked area that reaps significant aural benefit. Also...can the delay be accomplished by passive means? Thanks.
    Yes it can be done passively. P.A.S. has done it extensively with Time Offset Correction*, and so did UREI with Time-Align* monitors.

    It has to do with calculating the crossover filters' phase delay of physically offset voicecoils.

    You won't find the formulas to calculate such passive filter wizardry here but you might find it in a copy of LEAP or some other filter design software.
    Edgewound...JBL Pro Authorized...since 1988
    Upland Loudspeaker Service, Upland, CA

  6. #6
    Senior Member UreiCollector's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    NY. USA.
    Posts
    220

    phase shifting

    Quote Originally Posted by rich carnese View Post
    Also...can the delay be accomplished by passive means? Thanks.
    All passive crossover exhibit a phase shift along with affecting amplitude. The trick would be to use that phase shift to "align" the drivers. As to how to make this happen, I don't know....Urei used a crossover designed by E.M.Long to time align the 604.

    I have seen the use of so-called "all pass" crossovers (active analog) that exhibit time delay (through pase shifting i believe)....but, this obviously doesn't meet your passive requirement.
    Frederick "The Urei Collector"

  7. #7
    Senior Señor boputnam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    northern california
    Posts
    7,009
    Quote Originally Posted by UreiCollector View Post
    The trick would be to use that phase shift to "align" the drivers. As to how to make this happen, I don't know....
    Yea, exactly my quandary...
    bo

    "Indeed, not!!"

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    791
    Divide the wavelength at XO by the percent of phase shift where 360 degrees = 100%

    (Or should I say multiply...? You get the picture.)

    Handy-dandy wavelength calculator;

    http://www.mcsquared.com/wavelength.htm

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    791
    Example;
    With 90 degrees shift (25% of 360) at 800Hz (16.95")
    16.95" x 0.25 = 4.2375" offset

  10. #10
    Senior Member SEAWOLF97's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    sheltering in place
    Posts
    9,448
    Quote Originally Posted by rich carnese View Post
    ..can the delay be accomplished by passive means? Thanks.
    YES , Lincoln Walsh designed it into his full range driver. Works very well , thank you.
    STRANGE ....is the new NORMAL

  11. #11
    Senior Señor boputnam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    northern california
    Posts
    7,009
    Quote Originally Posted by moldyoldy View Post
    Example;
    With 90 degrees shift (25% of 360) at 800Hz (16.95")
    16.95" x 0.25 = 4.2375" offset
    Yea, but to know what is going on, he'd need to measure the speaker output, and iterate the design.
    bo

    "Indeed, not!!"

  12. #12
    Super Moderator yggdrasil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Våle, Norway
    Posts
    1,159
    Quote Originally Posted by boputnam View Post
    Yea, but to know what is going on, he'd need to measure the speaker output, and iterate the design.


    It is either measurements or true guesswork.

    I advise you to do some extensive reading. There are some treatment of this topic in "Loudspeaker Design Cookbook". Since the topic is compound you'll find it is covered in several chapters...
    Johnny Haugen Sørgård

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    long beach, new york
    Posts
    32
    Thanks for the info. I cant physically move the components because it is a coaxial unit. I want to use active crossovers and the ones I'v seen with any kind of delay built in are like the DBX and BBE. and they're really designed for PA use. As posted elsewhere Marchand Electronics makes some nice stuff but makes no provision for time-align. Does anyone have experience with the PA style speaker management units at home? Thanks

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    151
    Quote Originally Posted by rich carnese View Post
    I want to use active crossovers and the ones I'v seen with any kind of delay built in are like the DBX and BBE. and they're really designed for PA use. Does anyone have experience with the PA style speaker management units at home? Thanks



    Well, you know how we all feel about using a speaker designed for “pro use” in the home environment.

    Seriously, a friend of mine has had excellent results with some of the newer generation, PA style active units with room correction, parametric EQ, etc. This is route I would take. You may have a time aligned speaker, and without the proper acoustic environment- it wouldn't be fully utilized. A unit that "compensates" for some of the most detrimental anomalies will probably give you the best performance per dollar/time ratio especially when you consider the complexity of aligning via passive means. Rather than focusing on how the drivers are time aligned from a mic positioned in an anechoic chamber with respect to the baffle- you can mic the sweet spot of your listening position in your own room.


    Then there’s the parametric EQ you gain. Bo can tell you how important SmartLive software has been for home use. Ken P can tell you how vital the DEQX units have been for home use. What I’m driving at is the parametric EQ performance alone is worth the admission. Really good parametric EQ with on-the-fly adjustability, combined with a means to measure it will probably yield higher performance than a time aligned speaker in an average (acoustically challenged) environment.


    All of the above aside- you can run your drivers with steep order crossover slopes (up to 300db/oct in some cases) at infinitely adjustable points.

    The newest ones exhibit very low distortion and have a graveyard quiet noise floor. If you like to modify, there is plenty of upgradeability inherent in them. Bypassing the screens, and unused ins/outs is just the start…

    So, I say..
    Go for it!!

    Nate.






  15. #15
    Senior Señor boputnam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    northern california
    Posts
    7,009
    Quote Originally Posted by rich carnese View Post
    I cant physically move the components because it is a coaxial unit...
    The plot thickens - key characters are kept hidden from the readers!

    Anyway, my L-Acoustics are coaxial and I can tell you the "delay" between elements, when run active, is very very small - by design. You may have no real concern. But until you reveal what stuff you are using and talking about, we can be only moderately helpful.

    Quote Originally Posted by rich carnese View Post
    I want to use active crossovers and the ones I'v seen with any kind of delay built in are like the DBX and BBE. and they're really designed for PA use. As posted elsewhere Marchand Electronics makes some nice stuff but makes no provision for time-align. Does anyone have experience with the PA style speaker management units at home? Thanks
    Don't leave out the xta, KT and BSS units - all higher quality than those you mention. Were it me, and I was going this route, I would not scrimp on cost - it will really impact the quality of the A/D - D/A converters and all the rest of the internals. That would be a bad idea.

    As posted elsewhere, I've used the KT DN9848 for over three-years in my SR and have no issues with it. It is a truly amazing unit. My most recent experience was of a few days-time tuning my system for the new L-Acoustics. With Smaart I modelled a preset of PEQ filters (up to 6 on each output), delays and gain that is so darn flat, I've since gone through 5 shows and not touched my outboard graphic "safety net". Much of this is the quality of the L-Acoustics, but the power lies in the DSP.

    When I set-up my SR system and do the routine tests and listening pre-show, it is suprisingly high quality - distractingly so. IMO, if you went with one of these in the home, you would be pleased. But, that opinion contains no knowledge of your system, listening environment or much else - it is merely an appraisal of the KT DSP in my experience.

    I do not use the DN9848 at home, because I'm damned pleased with the sound of the 4345's run biamped (and backwards...), old-school. Surely it is a jumble phase-wise, but it is by design . Come to think of it, I never even bothered with Impulse tests in Smaart - since I wasn't going to try and correct it, it was superfluous data to me.
    bo

    "Indeed, not!!"

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. time delay problem JBL 4343 (3143 network)
    By B&KMan in forum Lansing Product Technical Help
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 03-20-2007, 10:09 AM
  2. Long time reader First time member /sounds like am talk radio!
    By itgoestwo11 in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-13-2006, 05:33 AM
  3. Surround break in time?
    By dblaxter in forum Lansing Product Technical Help
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-06-2004, 07:23 AM

Posting Permissions

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