I still wouldn't be terribly surprised if there was a goof in the documentation.
I don't have enough gumption to tear into my in-regular-use L100T pair which are very similar.
I still wouldn't be terribly surprised if there was a goof in the documentation.
I don't have enough gumption to tear into my in-regular-use L100T pair which are very similar.
What, no dance?
I noticed the polarity notation the other day.
My questions reveals several areas of weakness in my understanding...
Um, the initial reason for my query was brought about by a suggestion that I try reversing the polarity of the midrange. This was suggested as something I could try to contour the sound to my liking, not as an improvement as such. I tried it and didn't like it. This didn't really surprise me since these speakers came to me with their tweeters wired in backwards, they even went through all the trouble of soldering the posts in reverse. It was only because I had two sets (L100T/L100S) that I became aware of this while poking around inside. This inverted tweeter is actually how I got to buy the L100S since the owner said they didn't sound right, they did sound different..
I realized after trying to invert the mid that I could try to invert the woofer, and since I was in passive bi-amp, it was very simple. This actually didn't sound too horrible. It did seem to cause a "hole" in the midrange, but I can't be certain what the effect is since I read the the summing of the woofer and mid could cause a 3db increase at the XO.
Was I hearing a hole, or the lack of summation? I think it's a hole.
I wondered if the biamped XO offered any solution since it's network is divided. Apparently not.
I'm not too far away from actively bi-amping the speakers. This is all just about understanding better how my system works, and how to improve it. And addressing some long standing issues with the performance.
To be fair it was suggested as an experiment with no claims for certain improvement. My understanding about it was that sometimes it's a simple design call and that there might be some room for interpretation. My initial question to the forum was posed to get a better understanding of the complexity of it, specific to this speaker design.
So, you bring up a couple of points I didn't realize. 1. That the schematic doesn't definitively trace the polarity of the signal. 2. It doesn't show the acoustic slope you speak of. 3. The schematic could be wrong.
It doesn't sound as bad a reversing the mid, to my ears. It sounds attenuated, and the bass is different, sometimes heavier sounding. The sweetness of the sound goes away, so I can't call it an improvement.
Thanks!
Duly noted.
Soon, I'll get the electronic XO hooked up. Would you hazard a opinion on how it would improve performance?
Would it offer me the ability to have a steeper XO, and would that improve phase at the XO between the mid/woofer?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)