MG1.6 electrically-flat crossover, revision 3
After listening to the revision 1 crossover for two days, and the revision 2 crossover for a week, I concluded that the revision 2 crossover had an emphasis in the midrange. I noted that if I plotted the sum of the magnitudes of the woofer and tweeter sections without considering phase, the sum had a 1dB rise in the midrange.
I designed a new resistor network that flattens both the complex sum of the woofer/tweeter sections, and the sum of the magnitudes of the woofer/tweeter sections. These are likely indicative of on-axis and room response respectively.
As before, I built the resistor network into a pair of DIY speaker cables. It requires no modifications to the stock crossover. I used 5%, 10W resistors.
The resulting electrical response is as follows (green=woofer, red=tweeter, dark blue=complex sum magnitude, yellow=complex sum phase, light blue=sum of magnitudes).
The effects of the new design are:
The speaker's output level is reduced by 3.5dB.
The woofer section's -3dB point is raised from 200Hz to 330Hz.
The tweeter section's -3dB point is lowered from 1.6KHz to 1.1KHz.
Both the complex sum of the woofer/tweeter sections, and the sum of the magnitudes of the woofer/tweeter sections, are flat to within 1dB. This is electrical response, not acoustic response. I left a slight dip in the midrange in order to avoid a dip in the bass.
The crossover frequency remains unchanged.
As for sound, the revision 3 crossover is inbetween the revision 2 crossover and the stock crossover. Vocals, pianos, and acoustic guitars are improved. I would characterize the sound as fairly neutral.
If you're looking for an upgrade, four resistors can make a big difference. Also, if you have a tube amp, you may want to halve the resistor values because your amp's output impedence is already having a similar effect on the MG1.6 crossover.
Mart, would you like a writeup for the tweaks page? (Give me a week to make sure I don't feel a need for revision 4).
Happy listening!
Ed
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - MG1.6 electrically-flat crossover, revision 3 - EdG 19:41:08 03/24/02 (12)
- thanks for the comments - EdG 18:03:52 03/25/02 (0)
- Re: Electrical flat vs. acoustical flat crossovers - beluga 09:53:30 03/25/02 (8)
- how to measure a planar? - EdG 12:14:03 03/25/02 (5)
- Re: how to measure a planar? - Arbelos 14:30:28 03/25/02 (3)
- Are you sure this is the correct method? - Double Trouble 17:01:17 03/25/02 (2)
- Re: Are you sure this is the correct method? - Davey 19:04:58 03/25/02 (1)
- Re: Are you sure this is the correct method? - Double Trouble 19:26:07 03/25/02 (0)
- Re: how to measure a planar? - Double Trouble 14:15:40 03/25/02 (0)
- Re: Electrical flat vs. acoustical flat crossovers - Arbelos 12:10:05 03/25/02 (0)
- Re: Electrical flat vs. acoustical flat crossovers - Davey 10:03:07 03/25/02 (0)
- Driver acoustic response?? - monk1 23:56:13 03/24/02 (1)
- Re: Driver acoustic response?? - EdG 05:50:52 03/25/02 (0)