Thanks for your information on the baffle step, loved it. If one goes fullrange, consider relatively cheap and easy to build enclosures like TQWT/ML-TL/ML-Voight /TWTD sweet spot 4" - 5" driver. From 6" and up you get a lower Fs
That is a good quality FR driver. But with cheapies you usually get a rolling off after 10 khz, especially the larger cheap FR drivers. They are a bit "muffly". To fix that I do exactly what you said in this video (an inductor in parl with a resistor) but I also add a 1.5 mf cap in parl with the other two components. It makes cheap FR drivers sound like way more expensive ones. I came to the 1.5 mf through experimenting and listening. I tried 2 mf and 1 mf and found that 1.5 is best. It "boosts" treble without making them sound "chiffy" (an inherent problem with FR drivers). The trick is to go higher than the "chiff" so the "chiff" won't be let in but the upper "tizz" is let in..
Put a high pass filter on the full range at about 90 Hz and use a sub. Preventing the full range driver from flapping ineffectually in the deep bass greatly reduces distortion. I disconnected the baffle step circuit on mine in favor of a good 31 band equalizer. That can take care of baffle step, floor bounce, a live or dead room, and imponderables.
I was just thinking it would be much better to just use a good equalizer them mess around with that stuff. My pc is the sound source anyway so there is lot of free programs with really good EQ and my Hardman Kardon AMP can also do autmatic EQ (but it is real bad for the hi end so only really usable for bass and sub) .
Thanks so much, this and the other part of the video explain my long wait mystery of the functions of the components in the crossover. Thanks thanks thanks!!!
Thanks for the video. It seems like this whole process lowered the overall mid and treble to match the base. Overall sensitivity went down a fair amount. I'm sure it will sound more balanced. I always hate adding crossover components to a fullrange driver, unless it is high pass to limit excursion.
A basic 31 band EQ is much easier to just cut the peaks to smooth out the curve. I did this all the time with a Focal demo disk (I believe it was #2?) that had the test tones on it. I'd simply go from one frequency up to the next, making sure it sounded smooth. If something seemed too loud, I'd just cut it and keep moving to the next. Worked amazingly well to give a smooth response.
I have VIFA TG9FD10-04 3.5" full range drivers in the sealed box + I use one 8" subwoofer. I really like how these full range drivers sound without any crossover other than the mild 100Hz high pass filter. Trying to get any bass from these tiny speakers is pointless for me. I have room what eats bass. So I need subwoofer even with large bookshelf speakers. Only problem with these full ranges is that they can sound too forward with some recordings and they definitely need to be aimed towards listener. What I mean is that I don't think that I need this kind of correction. However I love your videos and maybe I am too sceptical :)
If you have a dsp with a good range of eq options, is it better to solve some of the problems in the signal rather than adding a lot of chokes and caps? This would make for an interesting video. The availability of DSP with items like the miniDSP 2x4 is a game changer. It's not as cheap as passive components, but it's not that expensive and it gives you a lot of tuning options to deal with both intrinsic and environmental challenges you don't get with a passive fixed network, plus the power losses associated with caps and coils. Thoughts?
@@westelaudio943 You could do a simple digital EQ and not completely flatten the response curve. Then it wouldn't sound "dead". Keep the quirks of the driver, do a simple low pass, high pass, or variable Q band pass to fix the large range of a problem, keep the other quirks. That's how I see it. I agree, having 15+ bands of EQ and getting a speaker to measure flat on a microphone makes it sound dead, but it's not the only digital solution. I think I would rather do digital filtering than have a choke and resistor in the signal chain.
Wow,so glad to find this video, I like the sound of full range speakers,but always a little something wrong. This video solve the question that bother me for a long time.
You've come to the right place to learn something good ... but ... actually baffle step is an acoustical phenomenon that (in general) applies to multi-way speakers just the same. You might just have a little more flexibility dealing with it in 3-(or-more-)way designs. OTOH there are successful full-range designs relying on flat wide cabinets to overcome the problem. Many ways to skin the cat.
I've seen this over 30 years ago but with slight difference . A capacitor in parallel with inductor was also fitted and a variable resistance.. This allowed the middle to be adjusted . I believe the title of article was " How to make a bad speaker sound better ".
At what frequency should you be concerned about a baffle step? For example, if you are going to high pass at 300 HZ to run it as a mid tweeter only. Do you still need a BSC?
Dude, your videos are great. I would just recommend you to check a bit more about AC circuits - if you haven't done so already since this is from 2018.
I worked my ass off to make a bluetooth speaker and turned out super nice looking but lackin some bass. I tried a 1 mH inductor and a 4.7 5watt resistor and what a diference!! Anyway to show you some pics?? Thanks
Great video. Full range drivers are a great option for a lot of applications. Hopefully this opens some eyes that it's not always a matter of trying to boost the lows through processing, and that stomping on the highs a bit to bring them down TO the lows is a perfect solution. I gather you'll be building this? Would love to see it measured up when you're done! Seriously, great video!
I enjoy watching your videos. I plan to make medium sized boxes and keep them on the appropriate stands, but those are minor concerns. The idea of a DIY speaker with full range drivers has always interested me, especially since I've had the opportunity to listen to Tanoy (although they have a coax radiator), Pearl Audio, etc. I see that everyone is mostly concerned with bass reflex port solutions or pipe systems. I am interested in a closed box system using a passive bass radiator. Here I am faced with the dilemma, perhaps a trilemma, of whether to use Tang Band or Mark Audio radiators, or even some more expensive Supravox or Lowther. The size of the full range driver I intend to use is up to a maximum of 6.5 inches, while the passive radiator should be at least the same size as the main speaker. Do you have experience with such solutions, full range with passive radiator?
Great video. Linearisation - just an important part, and what you think about phase distortions? Correction circuits (crossovers) have the "phase shift" , so the "localisation" could be an issue....
Hi I'm thinking of building a pair of full range speaker's using Tang band W8-1772 8inch would I need a crossover and any help what I would need would be very helpful cheers
Your calculations are assuming your box is floating in mid air with nothing around it. If your boxes are say sitting of your large desk or mounted on a wall, you would need much less attenuation of your highs. Am I correct?
Nice introductory video to show a few components of a passive filter, ...but...your actual adjustment (i.e. the selected coil and resistor values) will certainly need verification! Unless you have the cabinet built and the driver measured in there, this exercise here is merely of intellectual value. You may also use a software that _can_ simulate the influence of a baffle step. Check out for instances Boxsim.
Hi I have markaudio full range 10 p. Can I add a Baffle step xover circuit to get get the best from the full range But doesn’t that defeat the hole point of a full range or do you get the best of both worlds?
Ive bern been looking into full range and its the first time I've seen this Db bass drop mentiomed and using ctossovers its kind of disappointing, as i I thought the main point of them as a diy project was that crossoovers are not needed...
I want to put together a stereo system on a 1995 Del Sol with the most perfect frequency range I can conjure up. Something like a 6 1/2 woofer and a 6 1/2 sub on each door and a 4 inch mid range and a combination of tweeters. It’s gonna take a lot of time with research but I just wanted to ask you to see what you thought about it.
Since you don't have much interior space I would do it this way: 1) wide band driver on the a-pillar, playing from 200hz and up, Audible Physics makes a great wide band, you can put them in pods, look on ebay for pods 2) Audio Development sw600 in the doors, from 40-200hz, serious bass kick 3) Dayton Audio dsp, or something better, but get a dsp
Fullrange are great BUT only up to a certain size; 13cm are the sweetspot, 17cm are still kinda OK but the directivity is pretty bad, the sweetspot very small, atleast as expensive as 2Ways, the enclosure has to be big and Bass is very limited. A 20cm Woofer plus a Tweeter in Waveguide is the better choice if you compare it to 20cm Fullrange.
Personally I've not tried it, but it is on my 'buy and try' list, but for the price, they've gotta be worth a shot! Part of my story: I went from Dynaudio speakers, and Dynaudio are not shabby by any stretch, (back) to diy and I've not looked back since. I would only endorse to commercial loudspeaker brands and Dynaudio is one of them. I have bought commercial speaker to compare and IMO the don't compare! So far my Mark Audio's has been a good investment. The closest commercial speaker i have to compare my sub £69 CHN-70 drivers with is my £250 Monitor Audio BX2, and I don't miss my Monitor Audio BX2 speakers at all. Not saying my 4" are bass monsters, but the clarity of sound that comes from the Mark's are far and away better than the Monitors. You can do a lot with a 4" driver ua-cam.com/video/hIwZjJanXag/v-deo.html but for the most part people fall for the; more $ = better ... which is far from the truth. Acoustics don't care about money! Money is an emotional/business parameter placed by (mostly) unscrupulous people in my experience, but money has little to do with acoustics.
This is a manufacturers graph, so it’s not taking into account baffle step. No matter what you would add a baffle step compensation circuit. Otherwise, this would play entirely too bright.
Great work man. Thanks a lot. I'm a beginner kindly do a video of some basics of speaker design like what is impedance, what is crossover, what is frequency responce and what is tuning of subwoofer; though internet has lot of information on it but you seems to be quite excellent in explaining these things . Do listen to my comment Thank You.
I've done quite a few of those videos already. If you look through my videos on my channel come when you'll see I have done an entire series on how to design a crossover and how To create a properly size Box using the program winisd. There's also videos on what do you use of 4 ohm driver with an 8 Ω driver among other things. Check out the other videos by clicking on my name.
@@Toid Apparently I have been through your videos and been exploring them for deep understanding thank you. will let you ask if needed man . Thanks a lot for your quick responce.
Aren't most car speakers fullrange ? I know you can get separate tweeters to mount higher up etc, but for the cheap and cheerful brigade, it was usually just two 6" drivers in the parcel shelf and another pair in the front doors.
I can understand what you are on about but I can't understand how you are implying that the results of just putting it in a box would be different (and less bass) than what the graph says. After all isn't it a frequency curve for a driver just put in a box, so how could it be any different? Is the graph for a bass horn or something and not just a small bass reflex box? Can you please explain.
The frequency response you see me working with was from a manufacturers graph that they run in free air on an infinite baffle. Once you put it in the box, the low frequency (which have longer wavelengths) will start to go around the back side of the box. While the higher frequencies stay projecting toward the listener. Where this happens depends on the size of the box. This is called baffle step loss. If you took this measurement in a box then you would see this loss and create the filter like shown.
Hi, maybe a stupid question, but the the frequency response you calculate with Xsim, is that with the driver in open air, no speaker cabinet at all, what? What i mean is that the frequency responds, specially, in the low end, must very depend on cabinet size, ported or sealed, transmission line ect? So the example you show, under what driver cabinet (or none) conditions is that, and can similar excersise be done where a certain cabinet design are incoorperated in the calculation when searching for optimal linarity? By the way, super nice videos :-)
Martin, good question. We are mainly just taking care of the high end in this video. In order to take care of the low end you would want to use a program like WinISD to help you get the response you want. I did a series on that program here: ua-cam.com/play/PL6hjpiCHZmIOAv44PCreW5KlI35h1mTZK.html
Really interested video! Thank you. But I have one general question. Do you need a special design for a full range speaker enclosure? Or can you just start designing without any special needs?
Νice video ! Please, if you can, suggest me a Dayton full range 3.5" or 4" or another of the same category to match it with a Peerless 6.5" woofer, no tweeter, I want to make experimental studio monitors, just for fun ! Thank you very much !
I have a question... If I'm making a bluetooth speaker that is going to sit horizontal, what dimension do I use for the width? Is it the shortest dimension, or the actual width? Watched the old video and looked around a bit, but couldn't find the answer. Thanks for your help.
123Toid With the calculations though, there is a pretty big difference. My box is going to be about 5H x 14w x 10D. Using the 5" gives about 900hz where the 14" gives around 300hz. Pretty big difference there, I think. I'm new to this and I'm not looking at X-sim so I'm not sure. Thanks again for your help.
@@kennethlegendre ah, you're talking about the baffle step. I didn't understand what you were asking. You will use the shorter of the two measurements. In this case 5".
That is a good quality FR driver. But with cheapies you usually get a rolling off after 10 khz, especially the larger cheap FR drivers. They are a bit "muffly". To fix that I do exactly what you said in this video (an inductor in parl with a resistor) but I also add a 1.5 mf cap in parl with the other two components. It makes cheap FR drivers sound like way more expensive ones. I came to the 1.5 mf through experimenting and listening. I tried 2 mf and 1 mf and found that 1.5 is best. It "boosts" treble without making them sound "chiffy" (an inherent problem with FR drivers). The trick is to go higher than the "chiff" so the "chiff" won't be let in but the upper "tizz" is let in..
I downloaded Xsim and input my FRD and ZMA but it seems to not work and give me an accurate reading for my Full range drivers. The Dayton Audio PA130-8 5" Full Range PA Driver
Ach was. Hier ging es nicht darum, ob der unglaublich gute Dayton Audio RS100-4 eine Entzerrung benötigt. Hier ging es darum, wie man bei irgendeinem Breitbandlautsprecher in einem relativ schmalen Gehäuse den Tieftonabfall im Vergleich zur unendlichen Schallwand kompensieren kann.
@@TOM_78 You also see bass speakers which can handle the Middletone, being filter that area away. Fulltone does Sound Better if bass and highnotes are filtered away. Does not mean it can be used as fulltone. In general i think fulltones are Better speakers than middletones. You also have the advantage that You can use first order filters, which is more transparent. Btw the best sounding speakers i ever had. Had 6 4inch fulltones. Pointing in different direction.
80dB sensitivity is not "really good" This is a tr... The world is divided into two parts: those who believe they can push x100 watts into a driver and everything will be all right, and those who listen to the first watt with high sensitivity drivers. Cheers.
@@Toid Baffle step only affects tweeters on a baffle which is more than 10 inches wide. Baffle step does not affect bass. 2:02 Putting a speaker in a box does not decrease the bass, putting a speaker in a box increases the bass. You are playing with computer programs but it is obvious you have not actually built the speakers and tested/listened to them.
@@dreamdiction you really need to stop trolling and start learning. You have no idea what you're talking about. Instead of explaining it to you, just go to impulse audio's page and listen to his explanation of baffle step. Then feel free to erase any messages that make you look ignorant.
@@Toid Everything I said is factual so I'm not trolling. Baffle Step only applies to tweeter frequencies where half the wave length is shorter than half the width of the baffle front of cabinet. Putting a speaker in a box increases the bass below 300hz because frequencies below 300hz are omni-directional so they wrap around the speaker and self-cancel because the front and rear speaker radiations are 180 degrees out of phase. Putting a speaker in a box absorbs the rear sound wave radiations so they can't cancel the front radiations, therefore increasing the bass. All the frequency response graphs published by manufacturers test the speaker using the standard method of mounting the speaker in a one cubic meter sealed box to adsorb the rear radiations, so the graphs you look at are for a speaker in a box. You will not find any impulse audio video which agrees with what you are saying.
@@dreamdiction almost everything you said was incorrect. You obviously have your mind made up that you are correct, so I'll leave you alone. Feel free to read up on these things that you are very much ignorant of. Just in case I'm wrong, here's a good video for you. ua-cam.com/video/sttbT1ONP80/v-deo.html
Thanks for your information on the baffle step, loved it. If one goes fullrange, consider relatively cheap and easy to build enclosures like TQWT/ML-TL/ML-Voight /TWTD sweet spot 4" - 5" driver. From 6" and up you get a lower Fs
This is great, I was really into speaker design a few years ago but I forgot so much these video's are saving me a lot of time refreshing my memory.
That is a good quality FR driver. But with cheapies you usually get a rolling off after 10 khz, especially the larger cheap FR drivers. They are a bit "muffly". To fix that I do exactly what you said in this video (an inductor in parl with a resistor) but I also add a 1.5 mf cap in parl with the other two components. It makes cheap FR drivers sound like way more expensive ones. I came to the 1.5 mf through experimenting and listening. I tried 2 mf and 1 mf and found that 1.5 is best. It "boosts" treble without making them sound "chiffy" (an inherent problem with FR drivers). The trick is to go higher than the "chiff" so the "chiff" won't be let in but the upper "tizz" is let in..
Dayton Audio DATS V3 is invaluable for this work.
Greaaaaat info, cant believe this is the first time seeing your channel, i look at DIY audio stuff alll the time..
Put a high pass filter on the full range at about 90 Hz and use a sub. Preventing the full range driver from flapping ineffectually in the deep bass greatly reduces distortion. I disconnected the baffle step circuit on mine in favor of a good 31 band equalizer. That can take care of baffle step, floor bounce, a live or dead room, and imponderables.
I was just thinking it would be much better to just use a good equalizer them mess around with that stuff. My pc is the sound source anyway so there is lot of free programs with really good EQ and my Hardman Kardon AMP can also do autmatic EQ (but it is real bad for the hi end so only really usable for bass and sub) .
Good idea too, will it sound better than passive crossover?
Generally speaking subs or helper woofs would be used with small FR drivers but quarter wave cabinets are also often used to deal with this issue.
Thanks so much, this and the other part of the video explain my long wait mystery of the functions of the components in the crossover. Thanks thanks thanks!!!
Thanks for the video. It seems like this whole process lowered the overall mid and treble to match the base. Overall sensitivity went down a fair amount. I'm sure it will sound more balanced. I always hate adding crossover components to a fullrange driver, unless it is high pass to limit excursion.
A basic 31 band EQ is much easier to just cut the peaks to smooth out the curve. I did this all the time with a Focal demo disk (I believe it was #2?) that had the test tones on it. I'd simply go from one frequency up to the next, making sure it sounded smooth. If something seemed too loud, I'd just cut it and keep moving to the next. Worked amazingly well to give a smooth response.
I used my old Yamaha equaliser to try some open baffle speakers.
Ultimately, I prefer a parametric equaliser.
If you haven't tried it, I much prefer Vitruix CAD to xsim. Thanks for the video!
I have VIFA TG9FD10-04 3.5" full range drivers in the sealed box + I use one 8" subwoofer. I really like how these full range drivers sound without any crossover other than the mild 100Hz high pass filter. Trying to get any bass from these tiny speakers is pointless for me. I have room what eats bass. So I need subwoofer even with large bookshelf speakers. Only problem with these full ranges is that they can sound too forward with some recordings and they definitely need to be aimed towards listener. What I mean is that I don't think that I need this kind of correction.
However I love your videos and maybe I am too sceptical :)
If you have a dsp with a good range of eq options, is it better to solve some of the problems in the signal rather than adding a lot of chokes and caps? This would make for an interesting video. The availability of DSP with items like the miniDSP 2x4 is a game changer. It's not as cheap as passive components, but it's not that expensive and it gives you a lot of tuning options to deal with both intrinsic and environmental challenges you don't get with a passive fixed network, plus the power losses associated with caps and coils. Thoughts?
No, because it sounds dead, the speaker isn't meant to sound flat in a room.
@@westelaudio943 You could do a simple digital EQ and not completely flatten the response curve. Then it wouldn't sound "dead". Keep the quirks of the driver, do a simple low pass, high pass, or variable Q band pass to fix the large range of a problem, keep the other quirks. That's how I see it. I agree, having 15+ bands of EQ and getting a speaker to measure flat on a microphone makes it sound dead, but it's not the only digital solution. I think I would rather do digital filtering than have a choke and resistor in the signal chain.
Sounds right, I'll think about it
I filtered a pair of fidelio with a minidsp shd and Dirac with a great result
Wow,so glad to find this video,
I like the sound of full range speakers,but always a little something wrong.
This video solve the question that bother me for a long time.
You've come to the right place to learn something good ... but ... actually baffle step is an acoustical phenomenon that (in general) applies to multi-way speakers just the same. You might just have a little more flexibility dealing with it in 3-(or-more-)way designs. OTOH there are successful full-range designs relying on flat wide cabinets to overcome the problem.
Many ways to skin the cat.
Perfect timing, I'm just about to start a small bluetooth speaker build using a PS95, excellent video and great channel, thanks! :)
fullere nice dude post a video about it and I'll subscribe
I've seen this over 30 years ago but with slight difference . A capacitor in parallel with inductor was also fitted and a variable resistance..
This allowed the middle to be adjusted . I believe the title of article was " How to make a bad speaker sound better ".
I recon I’ve seen that before too … gives it more like a traditional smile FR response that a lot of people enjoy for every day listening
@fullsendmarinedarwin7244 The article most likely was in " Silicon Chip "
@@chuckmaddison2924 Rings a bell!
thanks looking forward to trying this
At what frequency should you be concerned about a baffle step? For example, if you are going to high pass at 300 HZ to run it as a mid tweeter only. Do you still need a BSC?
Dude, your videos are great. I would just recommend you to check a bit more about AC circuits - if you haven't done so already since this is from 2018.
I worked my ass off to make a bluetooth speaker and turned out super nice looking but lackin some bass. I tried a 1 mH inductor and a 4.7 5watt resistor and what a diference!! Anyway to show you some pics?? Thanks
Thank you ! Instant sub 👌🏼
Oh noice. You guys got me saying
go ahead and.
What application are you using for this demonstration?
Can I get a better sound ( lower frequenses) from my Audio Nirvana 12" cast frame ?
If I am using a 3 way crossover.. Do I need this ? Thanks.
Great video. Full range drivers are a great option for a lot of applications.
Hopefully this opens some eyes that it's not always a matter of trying to boost the lows through processing, and that stomping on the highs a bit to bring them down TO the lows is a perfect solution.
I gather you'll be building this? Would love to see it measured up when you're done!
Seriously, great video!
I will be building a version of this. Although, I will probably use the 8 ohm version.
Using FR drivers for lows is not optimal anyways, when you turn it up you get a lot of Doppler... Better to use them as midtweeters.
@@westelaudio943 maybe the lows of a FR are sufficient for a small room without boost but always with a baffle step correction.
I enjoy watching your videos.
I plan to make medium sized boxes and keep them on the appropriate stands, but those are minor concerns. The idea of a DIY speaker with full range drivers has always interested me, especially since I've had the opportunity to listen to Tanoy (although they have a coax radiator), Pearl Audio, etc. I see that everyone is mostly concerned with bass reflex port solutions or pipe systems. I am interested in a closed box system using a passive bass radiator. Here I am faced with the dilemma, perhaps a trilemma, of whether to use Tang Band or Mark Audio radiators, or even some more expensive Supravox or Lowther. The size of the full range driver I intend to use is up to a maximum of 6.5 inches, while the passive radiator should be at least the same size as the main speaker. Do you have experience with such solutions, full range with passive radiator?
Can you build a 3way open baffle design ?
Great video. Linearisation - just an important part, and what you think about phase distortions? Correction circuits (crossovers) have the "phase shift" , so the "localisation" could be an issue....
No. Phase shift is not a issue if both drivers are shifted the same.
Hi I'm thinking of building a pair of full range speaker's using Tang band W8-1772 8inch would I need a crossover and any help what I would need would be very helpful cheers
what is h bst amp for a full range driver
Your calculations are assuming your box is floating in mid air with nothing around it. If your boxes are say sitting of your large desk or mounted on a wall, you would need much less attenuation of your highs. Am I correct?
Nice introductory video to show a few components of a passive filter, ...but...your actual adjustment (i.e. the selected coil and resistor values) will certainly need verification! Unless you have the cabinet built and the driver measured in there, this exercise here is merely of intellectual value.
You may also use a software that _can_ simulate the influence of a baffle step. Check out for instances Boxsim.
Especially finding the required values could prove difficult but I think he did a great job explaining what is going on here.
Do you loose bass if it is ported?
Hi I have markaudio full range 10 p.
Can I add a Baffle step xover circuit to get get the best from the full range
But doesn’t that defeat the hole point of a full range or do you get the best of both worlds?
Ive bern been looking into full range and its the first time I've seen this Db bass drop mentiomed and using ctossovers its kind of disappointing, as i I thought the main point of them as a diy project was that crossoovers are not needed...
Not to take anything from what you are saying, but have you considered recording this in an acoustically treated room? :D
Yes!
How to choose your frequencies and amount of attenuation?
I want to put together a stereo system on a 1995 Del Sol with the most perfect frequency range I can conjure up. Something like a 6 1/2 woofer and a 6 1/2 sub on each door and a 4 inch mid range and a combination of tweeters. It’s gonna take a lot of time with research but I just wanted to ask you to see what you thought about it.
Since you don't have much interior space I would do it this way:
1) wide band driver on the a-pillar, playing from 200hz and up, Audible Physics makes a great wide band, you can put them in pods, look on ebay for pods
2) Audio Development sw600 in the doors, from 40-200hz, serious bass kick
3) Dayton Audio dsp, or something better, but get a dsp
Fullrange are great BUT only up to a certain size; 13cm are the sweetspot, 17cm are still kinda OK but the directivity is pretty bad, the sweetspot very small, atleast as expensive as 2Ways, the enclosure has to be big and Bass is very limited. A 20cm Woofer plus a Tweeter in Waveguide is the better choice if you compare it to 20cm Fullrange.
What do you have to say about the Dayton reference series 4" full range?
Personally I've not tried it, but it is on my 'buy and try' list, but for the price, they've gotta be worth a shot!
Part of my story:
I went from Dynaudio speakers, and Dynaudio are not shabby by any stretch, (back) to diy and I've not looked back since. I would only endorse to commercial loudspeaker brands and Dynaudio is one of them.
I have bought commercial speaker to compare and IMO the don't compare! So far my Mark Audio's has been a good investment. The closest commercial speaker i have to compare my sub £69 CHN-70 drivers with is my £250 Monitor Audio BX2, and I don't miss my Monitor Audio BX2 speakers at all. Not saying my 4" are bass monsters, but the clarity of sound that comes from the Mark's are far and away better than the Monitors.
You can do a lot with a 4" driver ua-cam.com/video/hIwZjJanXag/v-deo.html but for the most part people fall for the; more $ = better ... which is far from the truth. Acoustics don't care about money! Money is an emotional/business parameter placed by (mostly) unscrupulous people in my experience, but money has little to do with acoustics.
Kenrick sound in Japan builds high-end speakers and he uses 15 inch JBL full.range drivers.
...with that initial response for that FR driver used, I wouldn't have added any crossover. Leave it alone.
This is a manufacturers graph, so it’s not taking into account baffle step. No matter what you would add a baffle step compensation circuit. Otherwise, this would play entirely too bright.
Great work man. Thanks a lot.
I'm a beginner kindly do a video of some basics of speaker design like what is impedance, what is crossover, what is frequency responce and what is tuning of subwoofer; though internet has lot of information on it but you seems to be quite excellent in explaining these things . Do listen to my comment Thank You.
I've done quite a few of those videos already. If you look through my videos on my channel come when you'll see I have done an entire series on how to design a crossover and how To create a properly size Box using the program winisd. There's also videos on what do you use of 4 ohm driver with an 8 Ω driver among other things. Check out the other videos by clicking on my name.
@@Toid Apparently I have been through your videos and been exploring them for deep understanding thank you. will let you ask if needed man . Thanks a lot for your quick responce.
The _assumption_ is that the spec sheet, the datafiles, are... for infinite baffle?
Do you happen to know why this software will only let me upload one frd file and not all four at once?
Aren't most car speakers fullrange ? I know you can get separate tweeters to mount higher up etc, but for the cheap and cheerful brigade, it was usually just two 6" drivers in the parcel shelf and another pair in the front doors.
Yes they are typically considered full-range
....and why most base models have no response above 8k. Even if it has a wizzer cone...its not doing alot
the speakers that im going to use dont have that files
I can understand what you are on about but I can't understand how you are implying that the results of just putting it in a box would be different (and less bass) than what the graph says. After all isn't it a frequency curve for a driver just put in a box, so how could it be any different? Is the graph for a bass horn or something and not just a small bass reflex box? Can you please explain.
The frequency response you see me working with was from a manufacturers graph that they run in free air on an infinite baffle. Once you put it in the box, the low frequency (which have longer wavelengths) will start to go around the back side of the box. While the higher frequencies stay projecting toward the listener. Where this happens depends on the size of the box. This is called baffle step loss. If you took this measurement in a box then you would see this loss and create the filter like shown.
@@Toid Thanks (the penny drops) mystery solved!
Hi, maybe a stupid question, but the the frequency response you calculate with Xsim, is that with the driver in open air, no speaker cabinet at all, what?
What i mean is that the frequency responds, specially, in the low end, must very depend on cabinet size, ported or sealed, transmission line ect?
So the example you show, under what driver cabinet (or none) conditions is that, and can similar excersise be done where a certain cabinet design are incoorperated in the calculation when searching for optimal linarity?
By the way, super nice videos :-)
Martin, good question. We are mainly just taking care of the high end in this video. In order to take care of the low end you would want to use a program like WinISD to help you get the response you want. I did a series on that program here: ua-cam.com/play/PL6hjpiCHZmIOAv44PCreW5KlI35h1mTZK.html
Buy a Mark Audio one 😅
Really interested video! Thank you. But I have one general question. Do you need a special design for a full range speaker enclosure? Or can you just start designing without any special needs?
You would just design for the bass response. Though you have to keep in mind the power handling as must full range have limited xmax.
How do I contact you?...I have a project to discuss
Νice video !
Please, if you can, suggest me a Dayton full range 3.5" or 4" or another of the same category to match it with a Peerless 6.5" woofer, no tweeter, I want to make experimental studio monitors, just for fun !
Thank you very much !
Does xsim not have a simulation for baffles?
It does not. It just offers crossover simulation
I have a question... If I'm making a bluetooth speaker that is going to sit horizontal, what dimension do I use for the width? Is it the shortest dimension, or the actual width? Watched the old video and looked around a bit, but couldn't find the answer. Thanks for your help.
It doesn't matter. Any if the sides can be interchanged
123Toid With the calculations though, there is a pretty big difference. My box is going to be about 5H x 14w x 10D. Using the 5" gives about 900hz where the 14" gives around 300hz. Pretty big difference there, I think. I'm new to this and I'm not looking at X-sim so I'm not sure. Thanks again for your help.
@@kennethlegendre ah, you're talking about the baffle step. I didn't understand what you were asking. You will use the shorter of the two measurements. In this case 5".
@@Toid Thanks. Sorry I wasn't clear enough on my question. Keep up the great work. I'm going to play around with this tonight.
@@kennethlegendre you're welcome. I hope everything goes well
BUILD STUDIO MONITORS FARFIELD
That is a good quality FR driver. But with cheapies you usually get a rolling off after 10 khz, especially the larger cheap FR drivers. They are a bit "muffly". To fix that I do exactly what you said in this video (an inductor in parl with a resistor) but I also add a 1.5 mf cap in parl with the other two components. It makes cheap FR drivers sound like way more expensive ones. I came to the 1.5 mf through experimenting and listening. I tried 2 mf and 1 mf and found that 1.5 is best. It "boosts" treble without making them sound "chiffy" (an inherent problem with FR drivers). The trick is to go higher than the "chiff" so the "chiff" won't be let in but the upper "tizz" is let in..
Can you get the same effect my tuning a port to get a little boost on the low end?
No. BSC boosts everything below bafflestep frequency, which can be 400Hz or higher. You can't tune a port to boost such a wide frequency range.
The rs100 is DEFINATELY the smallest 4" driver ever. Closer to 3. I've got a pair of 4" tang bands and they are probably 25% bigger if not more
I downloaded Xsim and input my FRD and ZMA but it seems to not work and give me an accurate reading for my Full range drivers. The Dayton Audio PA130-8 5" Full Range PA Driver
What do you mean by the question that you asked?
how does this compare to the Dayton Audio PS95
I'm actually using this right now in a build for Joe N Tell. I personally really like this. It has a really nice linear response.
Boundary gain will be 12 Db...
No sound test. For all we know the speaker might burn out in less than 3 min ..Sorry
Where's the $300 build ?
ua-cam.com/video/L6-lc4Ouoc4/v-deo.html
No compensation circuit will ever fix the pretty bad directivity of the full-range drivers.
So sit in front of the speakers.
Better buy a fostex driver. No correction Parts necessary.
Ach was. Hier ging es nicht darum, ob der unglaublich gute Dayton Audio RS100-4 eine Entzerrung benötigt. Hier ging es darum, wie man bei irgendeinem Breitbandlautsprecher in einem relativ schmalen Gehäuse den Tieftonabfall im Vergleich zur unendlichen Schallwand kompensieren kann.
That is not a "baffle step", but a shelving filter.
Feel free to research baffle step compensation circuit. You might be surprised at what you find.
@@Toid It can be used to compensate baffle step and / or other things, right. But it is correctly called shelving filter!
How to get the Best Sound from a Full-Range Driver= Give it a crossover filter.
Papers are the best.
Yeah add another full range and add a lowpass to one
Fullrange means no crossover. Because its used over the whole range. Where do you want to cross ? To what ?
@@TOM_78 You also see bass speakers which can handle the Middletone, being filter that area away. Fulltone does Sound Better if bass and highnotes are filtered away. Does not mean it can be used as fulltone. In general i think fulltones are Better speakers than middletones. You also have the advantage that You can use first order filters, which is more transparent.
Btw the best sounding speakers i ever had. Had 6 4inch fulltones. Pointing in different direction.
Yes just because it says full range driver doesn't mean you have to only use it that way.
Oh and the circuit he installed is not a crossover
80dB sensitivity is not "really good" This is a tr... The world is divided into two parts: those who believe they can push x100 watts into a driver and everything will be all right, and those who listen to the first watt with high sensitivity drivers. Cheers.
You could more easily just have turned up the bass on the amplifier.
That's not how baffle step compensation works or a bass knob
@@Toid Baffle step only affects tweeters on a baffle which is more than 10 inches wide. Baffle step does not affect bass. 2:02 Putting a speaker in a box does not decrease the bass, putting a speaker in a box increases the bass. You are playing with computer programs but it is obvious you have not actually built the speakers and tested/listened to them.
@@dreamdiction you really need to stop trolling and start learning. You have no idea what you're talking about. Instead of explaining it to you, just go to impulse audio's page and listen to his explanation of baffle step. Then feel free to erase any messages that make you look ignorant.
@@Toid Everything I said is factual so I'm not trolling. Baffle Step only applies to tweeter frequencies where half the wave length is shorter than half the width of the baffle front of cabinet. Putting a speaker in a box increases the bass below 300hz because frequencies below 300hz are omni-directional so they wrap around the speaker and self-cancel because the front and rear speaker radiations are 180 degrees out of phase. Putting a speaker in a box absorbs the rear sound wave radiations so they can't cancel the front radiations, therefore increasing the bass. All the frequency response graphs published by manufacturers test the speaker using the standard method of mounting the speaker in a one cubic meter sealed box to adsorb the rear radiations, so the graphs you look at are for a speaker in a box. You will not find any impulse audio video which agrees with what you are saying.
@@dreamdiction almost everything you said was incorrect. You obviously have your mind made up that you are correct, so I'll leave you alone. Feel free to read up on these things that you are very much ignorant of. Just in case I'm wrong, here's a good video for you. ua-cam.com/video/sttbT1ONP80/v-deo.html
Too much echo.
Another video of graphs ..yawn