Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 20 of 20

Thread: TIME ALIGN

  1. #16
    Senior Moment Member Oldmics's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Between Venus and Mars
    Posts
    865

    Bo says

    quote

    "Surely it is a jumble phase-wise, but it is by design ."

    When I used Smarrt and Iasys on the Hartsfields the information revealed was "a jumble" to say the least.

    But I love them

    As for passive time alignment.

    Two words-More componets.

    Oldmics

  2. #17
    Senior Member Ian Mackenzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,331
    Passive time alignment to can only be considered as part of an overall system design exercise. Not for the faint hearted and you need to weigh up ''why'' and if the "pain" of doing to is worthwhile. Some designers use sloping baffles and a combination of 2 Pi baffle loading like a dipole while others use waveguides. Another approach is Lattice filters in ther passove crossovers more commonly known "Allpass filters".

    You need a lot of time, elaborate equipment and grey matter to make it a viable design objective.

  3. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    long beach, new york
    Posts
    32

    More time align stuff

    Ok to be very specific I'm using a Urei 803, but with an LE85 driver. I think a 1200hz crossover point would be good. If the time offset is too small to be an issue then I guess this is all moot.
    I am not familiar with the other active crossovers mentioned here...but the qualtiy issue is what I was addressing with the "PA" units.
    It has also come to my attention the Marchand does have delay modules available for their crossovers...I would just need to tell them,in milliseconds, what i need. So I just measure the distance between the voice coils and converts to milliseconds.
    As fas as EQ goes...I'm old school about it and really will only EQ as a last resort to smooth a room resonance or other pesky peaks. I want to try to get it as right as possible so that the amount of EQ will be minimal. Thanks RC

  4. #19
    Administrator Robh3606's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Rocinante
    Posts
    8,159
    You are using an 803?? How are you attaching the LE-85?? Normally they use a 2416H which thread into the driver back. If you really worried about the time alignment just use a 2416 and purchase the crossover for the Urei 809 in the Tent Sale and your done. They have them for sale as B stock for not that much money at all. You get 2416's on the cheap on Ebay.

    Rob


    http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/URE...s/809A-L,R.pdf

  5. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    long beach, new york
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by Robh3606 View Post
    You are using an 803?? How are you attaching the LE-85?? Normally they use a 2416H which thread into the driver back.

    Rob


    http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/URE...s/809A-L,R.pdf
    I'm using a bolt to thread adapter to attatch the LE85 to the 803. I believe that the LE85 is sonically superior to the 2416H, but thats a matter of taste. I also want to use seperate amps to power the components.

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
  •