Attenuate compression driver output. |
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Author | |
rezsbc
Registered User Joined: 21 November 2006 Location: Ireland Status: Offline Points: 352 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: 24 September 2007 at 11:18am |
ok so will just any sock in the horn do the trick or what???
(interesting thread though thanks for everyones input learning a little although it is above my head...)
|
|
HansA
Registered User Joined: 07 March 2007 Location: Norway Status: Offline Points: 595 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
yes. It even start to make sense in my onion brain.
|
|
�*�o�O�o�*�*: HansA, The FUBAR sound technician :*�*�o�O�o�*�
|
|
_djk_
Old Croc Joined: 23 November 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 6002 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I was editing while you were posting.
Also consider the 0.3mH in series with the 5.6µF, what is it actually doing? It has a pole zero at about 3.9Khz and about 30R of reactance at 16Khz. It's difficult to calculate because the reactive component of the load (driver + horn) is not known. If it was about 30R as shown on the data sheet for the 2451H (which is not correct, and not our horn), and purely resistive (which it is not), then this inductor would only cause about a 3dB loss at 16Khz. We do know that if we use an 8R L-pad set to 6dB of attenuation that the driver which is about 6R mid-band and around 15R in the high end will drop to 9.5R, so the 0.3mH inductor will cause the high end to roll off even more than the design calls for.
Edited by _djk_ - 23 September 2007 at 1:43pm |
|
djk
|
|
HansA
Registered User Joined: 07 March 2007 Location: Norway Status: Offline Points: 595 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Funny. My fifth edition "loudspeaker design cookbook" mentions nothing about using driver attenuation circuits in any filter.. I don't get it. Why cant you do it in this one? One more time, more detailed :P
further, the schematics are realy bad drawn imho. :P |
|
�*�o�O�o�*�*: HansA, The FUBAR sound technician :*�*�o�O�o�*�
|
|
_djk_
Old Croc Joined: 23 November 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 6002 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
"Id be grateful for an explanation"
A horn woks by adding radiation resistance to the resistance of the driver by itself. With a real horn (finite mouth) we will see a series of cyclical peaks in the impedance due to reflections from the mouth. Corresponding to these impedance peaks we will also see peaks in the acoustic output of the horn, most noticable above the 1/2W point (the finite mouth generally masks the lower frequency peaks).
JBL does not show the impedance of the horns and drivers used in the speakers in question here, but they do show the 2451H (used in the earlier version of the SRX722), but on a bigger horn. The bigger horn will have its peaks at different frequencies, but will serve as an example. The second peak is in the middle of the operating point of the horn (2352 in this example), and the impedance rises from about 12R either side of the peak to about 30R right at the peak (the plot is actually of a J, not an H as specified in the graph). If you were to add an L-pad with some attenuation the impedance peak will be swamped by the parallel resistor in the L-pad. This will now cause excess attenuation in the notch filters and interfere with the crossover point too.
At a bare minimum we will have to adjust the values of the notch attenuation resistors (this will change with the setting of the L-pad), and we will also have to increase the value of the 2.2µF in the 18dB filter (this will also change with the setting of the L-pad). With the L-pad set to about 6dB of loss "pulling everything after the 1.2Khz crossover point back by 6-12db" you will probably need to increase the 2.2µF to 5.6µF (or more). Keep in mind that the textbook 18dB crossover for an 8R resistor would have 10µF, 0.75mH, and 30µF for 1.3Khz (the SRX722 nominal crossover frequency is 1.2Khz).
Edited by _djk_ - 23 September 2007 at 1:51pm |
|
djk
|
|
_djk_
Old Croc Joined: 23 November 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 6002 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Of course the connection dot drawn linking L+ and IN- is an error.
The notch formed by the 16µF and 0.20mH is at about 2.8Khz, and the notch formed by the 3µF and 0.3mH is at about 5.3Khz Edited by _djk_ - 23 September 2007 at 12:42pm |
|
djk
|
|
csg
Old Croc Joined: 17 September 2007 Location: bedford Status: Offline Points: 6086 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
me again.
I just have seen the post above mine.
There is no such thing as a constant resistance driver, therefore the crossover can not be designed that way.
Drivers only have a constant resistance at DC ( 0Hz), which also happens to be very effective at cooking voice coils. Drivers are rated with a nominal impedence ( impedence being dependant on frequency and effected by the inductance of the voice coil)
|
|
csg
Old Croc Joined: 17 September 2007 Location: bedford Status: Offline Points: 6086 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
right, lets get this clear. An L pad, designed correctly, and correctly wired across the comp driver will NOT effect the load the crossover network sees, and will therefore NOT cause any problems or damage to the speaker.
It will however have the following effects:
1) it will increase the apparent power handling of the comp driver as some power is burnt in the l pad
2) It will effect the spectral balance of the speaker as a whole.
Now, the increase in power handling is an advantage, but the effect on spectral balance ( sound) is debatable. If your preference is for less treble, then i suggest you go for it - at worst it will cost you a few quid in resistors and a bit of time.
You will do no damage to the speaker providing you do the job properly.
I have designed many many passive filter networks over the years and can confirm that every passive network can be modified in this way as the nature of the l pad, keeping the load impedence the same from the viewpoint of the crossover network in essence makes the l pad invisible to the crossover. Electrically, the crossover simply doesent know it is there. Anybody who says that you cant add an l pads to this network is incorrect.
let me know how you get on
chris
|
|
jsg mashed
Registered User Joined: 18 May 2007 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 305 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I agree. Looking at the schmatic for the 2*12, I see a couple of notch filters (to get rid of response peaks), a 3rd-order HP and a 1st order LP in the path to the tweeter. There's no driver Z correction that I can see, so it's fair to assume the xover is designed assuming the driver is a constant resistance. So the L pad should be fine. |
|
...because Good is Dumb.
|
|
godathunder
Old Croc Joined: 19 July 2004 Location: wicklow Status: Offline Points: 1833 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
http://www.jblproservice.com/pdf/SRX700%20Series/SRX722F.pdf
Im certainly no expert but I dont understand why its not possible to put an L pad at j2, 1+2, maintaining the same impedence seen by the crossover but diverting some of the power from the driver
Id be grateful for an explanation djk
|
|
LOUDER THAN LOUD
|
|
HansA
Registered User Joined: 07 March 2007 Location: Norway Status: Offline Points: 595 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
_djk_ no. Do you have a link to the schematics?
|
|
�*�o�O�o�*�*: HansA, The FUBAR sound technician :*�*�o�O�o�*�
|
|
_djk_
Old Croc Joined: 23 November 2004 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 6002 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
"There shouldnt be a problem adding a serial and parallel resistor right before the tweeter, conserving the correct impedance.. ?? "
Didn't look at the schematic for the networks, did you?
|
|
djk
|
|
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Tweet |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |