![]() |
Tweakers' Asylum Tweaks for systems, rooms and Do It Yourself (DIY) help. FAQ. |
|
experimenting? costs?And, is it the -6db point or the -3db points we want to match?
It is a valid point that a high-pass power level capacitor where calculated from theory with the tweeters Z at the freq. - 'to match the existing acoustic low-pass' on the mids may NOT give a good blend, giving an audible notch OR a forward hump. leading to more expense, esp. if using better thru to 'expensive' caps
But if you designed a passive line level R& C 1st order filter knowing these relatively more stable source and inputs z's. might this be MORE likely to give a good match. With lower costs for experimentation / matching? And,
How important is 'quality' of R and C in such conditions? IE will a Holco or a VISHAY sound a LOT better than a 1 watt 1% Philips MF?
And,
Can we add a knob to trim the result?
TIA
WarmestTimbo in Oz
The Skyptical Mensurer and Audio ScroungerAnd gladly would he learn and gladly teach - Chaucer. ;-)!
'Still not saluting.'
http://www.theanalogdept.com/tim_bailey.htm
Edits: 03/07/08
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - 1st order tweeter xovers? Not pros and cons BUT passive line level Vs a single spkr level cap - Timbo in Oz 18:47:26 03/07/08 (4)
- RE: 1st order tweeter xovers? Not pros and cons BUT passive line level Vs a single spkr level cap - andyr 03:43:22 03/21/08 (0)
- I like this design more than anything else. - sser2 19:34:17 03/07/08 (2)
- ?????? which design And / OR L and C means a 2nd order spkr level high pass, NO? - Timbo in Oz 20:23:23 03/07/08 (1)
- RE: ?????? which design And / OR L and C means a 2nd order spkr level high pass, NO? - Ron Oehlert 10:43:28 03/10/08 (0)