Think We May Have a Keeper Here!!!

[Zilch]

Accurately measuring system bass response is certainly challenging, in my experience. For the most part, I've just ignored it. Some of my stumbling attempts at near-field appear earlier in this thread.

I think I'm gonna punt and try in-box per Small, but I still can't get Andre interested in selling me a second CLIO mic to do it with. He just won't respond to my phone calls or eMails.

Ground-plane also looks interesting; gotta read up more on that.

For now, it's near-field and its shortcomings, though I'm getting better results with it lately....

[Zilch]

Higher XO frequency (~8.5 kHz) for 077/2405:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/s...246#post130246

Two-way version with adjustable HF:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/s...396#post127396

[toddalin]

Higher XO frequency (~8.5 kHz) for 077/2405:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/s...246#post130246

Two-way version with adjustable HF:

http://audioheritage.org/vbulletin/s...396#post127396

You recognize that the 1.0 mfd/coil/1.5 mfd cap in the HF path adds that unnatural peak just before the slope (either Giskard or Widget posted the results). I would suggest that one try using just the 1.0 mfd and the 0.16 coil for a more gentle slope, but alleviate the peak. May like the results better, but if not, it's simple enough to add the 1.5 mfd afterwards.

[Zilch]

(either Giskard or Widget posted the results)

Find it and link it here please, Todd.

[I'm attempting to get this all referenced in one place....]

[toddalin]

Find it and link it here please, Todd.

[I'm attempting to get this all referenced in one place....]

It was Giskard, and of course he deleted all of that stuff way back when. Go to Post #45 of this thread and you'll still find reference to this effect.