Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
184.58.110.124
In Reply to: RE: Should I get my Tympani I-Ds rebuilt? posted by pictureguy on February 27, 2017 at 11:30:24
The question is what is the benefit vs. the cost in time, funds and a digital processing stage when compared to a PLLXO, which is easily and cheaply implemented with no learning curve and fewer components. The fact that you can ignore all the flexible possibilities in the mini DSP is not a selling point, if there is no interest in applying what is unique to DSP - i.e. room correction..
Follow Ups:
I don't know how it can easily be done in Analogue, but one additional feature of the 'mini' product line is that some of them, like the 2x4HD have access to FIR filters.
This filter has NO phase shift thru the passband. Maybe? Maybe Not? for Maggies?
One other thing is that doing an all-analogue crossover is that you need to know what you want when you construct it. Changes? I don't know how easy they'd be.
You also have some Run-Length limits with the PLLXO which may or may not apply. My system, for example, could easily live within those limits. Total run from pre to speaker is 8 feet on the longest side. A 2-way PLLXO should be easily constructed in a Altoids Tin.
Time delays are another thing in favor of the DSP approach. And if your room is 'boomy' at some frequency, you can use one of the PEQ poles to 'notch' it out.
As far as time? I don't know. Same time invovled for cracking into the speaker and modifying for direct-2-amp hookup. Time must be spent fabricating the PLLXO and desgning for Minimum run length due to very low capacitance values typically used. Balance that aginst the time spent doing the mini's initial setup. Install would be a wash, being mainly running cables and the power for the Mini's WallWart.
I would say to START with a duplicate of the 'As-Issued' crossover. For my 1.6s? The crossover is at 600hz so the 2 knee frequencies are slightly above and below that value. Woofer gets a 12db/oct cut and the tweeter section gets 6db/oct. The inductor is 0.4ohms which is about 10% of the bass end resistance, so removing it MIGHT make the low end run a little 'hot'. Subtract 1 or 2 db and retest.
I think the time spent might be fairly close for the simpliest implementation.
Additional time would need be spent on the 'unique to DSP' feature set.
MiniDSP DOES cost more. No question about it. I think you may be right about a few things, like the value of the additional features being fairly subjective. But for me? I think I'd enjoy experimenting with those features. Time alignment of lows and highs is a very attractive idea which is easily experimented with in the DSP world.
Room Correction is not the limit of the flexibility.
Too much is never enough
2 or 4 pots, 4 caps, 2 resistors. 1/2 -1 hour of work depending on how nice you want it, A bit of calculation on a spreadsheet or calculator. Can be executed for really little $, depending on the parts quality you choose.
The DSP software requires a day for the basics, costs more and has a great variety of features.
The Tympani series can be time aligned physically, And the equidistant setup with symmetrical crossovers such as the 1st order XO of the T1D will provide time alignment. For the non- symmetrical crossovers you can choose placements to complement the delay in the crossover.
MiniDSP plug in costs 10$.
Yes, time delay can be done in the 'physical' domain with setup.
Maggies are unique in that a single panel / frame is the wavefront origin. Unlike multi-driver designs where each driver represents its own plane.
Now? If for some reason you want FIR filters? Try that in a pure analogue topology.
Too much is never enough
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: