Why do you need a speaker crossover - discuss

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

You say that putting components in front of the drivers do damage the sound but altering the mechanics of the driver doesn't damage the sound.

Are you saying that when you alter the mechanics you never hear a difference in the music other than the change in bandwidth and frequency roll off? No aspect of the sound is impared when changing these mechanics?

That was a genuine question!

Bloody hell I have answered these in just about every answer on the thread, you are just repeating the same things again.

I think there are two questions
1 Obviously yes.
2 Obviously no.

If that doesn't help then read the thread.

[nat8808]

Anecdotal but I will go ahead anyway

I designed and built a pair of loudspeakers for a DJ pal of mine who was sick of blowing tweeters in budget bookshelf models trying to get a club sound in his large living room. To solve the tweeter issue I used Motorola piezo electric horns - no crossover needed as you cannot blow them.

The cabs were 3 quarter inch plywood, screwed and glued braced internally with pine batons. No wadding - I hate it more than anything it ruins speakers imho - the inside of the cab was lined with Deflex panels instead. Cab was about 60 litres, floorstanding with a port tuned 20-50 hz and an 8 inch kevlar bass/mid.

I was waiting for some custom inductors from Falcon Acoustics to turn up but we built the speakers anyway. The inductors took about another week and a half to arrive but when they did I went round to fit them retrospectively. My mate was not interested - 'they sound brilliant as they are I don't want to mess with them'

I had a demo with some high-octane dance music, they did indeed sound fine, it was not possible to hear the mid/bass breaking up even though on paper it should have been possible. Likewise there was no issue with level difference between the drivers even though spec wise there was (IIRC) a 6db difference in sensitivity. In a large room listening in the far field it simply did not matter in practice.

Worst thing is going over to DIYaudio.com and wanting to discuss modifing or replacing a tweeter on some old speakers and first few posts are from people telling you that you'll ruin the whole design because the impedance curves won't match the crossover and it will all fall apart sonically unless the speaker is completely re-designed or left well alone (on a DIY forum!).

Then someone says they did it blindly with no knowledge and it all sounded fantastic, a brilliant upgrade.. Lots of things that people work out on paper that will or won't work but in reality don't seem to bare out.

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

In every case, I wasn't. I was just trying to make the point to him that a simplistic "less is more" set of choices is not always optimal. My example, was just demonstrating the effect of his pronouncement taken to its logical conclusion, and hence showing how while its presented as a absolute in realty it can only be applied with caution, so is meaningless as the absolute he was trying to suggest it was.

As a more complex but equally valid example of why the absense of something is not always the best solution take a simple two stage valve amplifier. If we decide that capacitors are evil, we remove them, and directly couple the two stages. But doing this means that the op points for the two valves then become compromised, and the net effect is to cause more problems than were solved by the removal of the component.

Jesus this is unbelievable - read the thread. Something that is necessary is necessary until someones finds it may not be necessary or does it differently to make it unnecessary *so it is then no longer necessary*. That cannot and does not extrapolate into everything being unnecessary

And removing anything that becomes unnecessary is of benefit to the music.

[Macca]

Then someone says they did it blindly with no knowledge and it all sounded fantastic, a brilliant upgrade.. Lots of things that people work out on paper that will or won't work but in reality don't seem to bare out.

precisley my point - once you get hands on you find a lot of the theory goes out of the window (true with a lot of things not just loudspeakers). No-one would consider Motorola piezo-electrics as 'proper' tweeters but they are perfectly able to deliver fantastic treble providing that is what is fed to them.

I've heard cheap plastic dome tweeters making a cymbal sound that was so real it was breathtaking - I've heard expensive ribbon tweeters sound like metal bin lids being bashed with a stick. And so on...

[lurcher]

I will put up a statement and see if anyone can knock it down - There is only one thing better than the best component you can buy, and that is no component at all.

Statement was presented as an absolute. No mention of "necessary" or "unnecessary".

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

Statement was presented as an absolute. No mention of "necessary" or "unnecessary".

You are pedantic, and it is blindingly obvious that if you do away with the whole system you don't have any music at all.

[Alan]

Isn't it an advantage for the amplifier to drive the driver directly, rather than having it's interface with the driver semi-decoupled? That is one instance where the best coupling possible is surely needed.

This is one of the reasons why the Epos ES14s sound so good ('for little speakers'), the drivers are engineered with particular qualities that make a crossover redundant. The end result is much the same (as having a well sorted crossover) in terms of measuring response, but the relationship between the amplifier & driver is as close as it can be. There is nothing in between.

I heard a pair of Richard's prototype speakers at home for about six weeks, and they are very exciting, dynamic speakers. Quite a shock in fact in terms of scale, and the way quite subtle detail is thrust under ones nose. Compare this to - say my Dad's B&Ws (heavily engineered with complex crossovers & fancy drivers) and the differences are just gobsmacking.

I have always stuck with 'simple' speakers, that is to say where the differences the designer made are achieved mechanically. My Goodmans Magisters are laughably simple (laugh - until you hear them), my Royds are beautifully engineered but there are few components inside them. They are better than most big speakers (no - really).

The Royds have lots of mechanical engineering going on in the cabinets, the integral stands, the compound bass loading....the crossover has a minimal task to perform. Royd took this approach so seriously that all the drivers they made over the years are uniquely doped. I asked Phil at Phonography about spares, to be told there are none for my model. I cannot swap out drivers from other Royds, even similar sized models, even from the same range - in spite of their using what looks like the same 5 1/2" driver. The doping is unique to each model, weighted so the mass changes the basic driver's characteristics in order to match the crossover (such as it is), and the cabinet.

[Beobloke]

Worst thing is going over to DIYaudio.com and wanting to discuss modifing or replacing a tweeter on some old speakers and first few posts are from people telling you that you'll ruin the whole design because the impedance curves won't match the crossover and it will all fall apart sonically unless the speaker is completely re-designed or left well alone (on a DIY forum!).

Then someone says they did it blindly with no knowledge and it all sounded fantastic, a brilliant upgrade.. Lots of things that people work out on paper that will or won't work but in reality don't seem to bare out.

Replacing a tweeter like this will always make the speaker sound different.

Whether the difference is an improvement or not is purely down to the preferences of the listener.

[nat8808]

You say that putting components in front of the drivers do damage the sound but altering the mechanics of the driver doesn't damage the sound.

Are you saying that when you alter the mechanics you never hear a difference in the music other than the change in bandwidth and frequency roll off? No aspect of the sound is impared when changing these mechanics?

And does this apply to any component, no matter of it's 'quality' or type or construction? And what kind of mechanical adjustments are you making that don't damage the sound? Doping, cone materials (if cones), magnets, surround types, coils, re-inforcement etc etc?

Won't changing the doping for example change things like the impulse characteristics of the cone and so change its response time and ability to respond to quick changes in direction etc?

That was a genuine question!

Bloody hell I have answered these in just about every answer on the thread, you are just repeating the same things again.

I think there are two questions
1 Obviously yes.
2 Obviously no.

If that doesn't help then read the thread.

Well, no you haven't answered these in about every answer in the thread, not at all - more than half are angry rantings or self-defensive for a start, the rest are short and don't really go into any detail.

And no, there weren't just two questions that could be answered with a yes or no - I was trying to tease some of your experience/knowledge out of you and in to this thread.

As I've said already you don't seem to be up for entering into discussion about your own experiences or experiments at all.

You only appear to be up for a fight..


That is why I was asking more specific questions about it to see what you may have tried out and what you may have experienced. But all we get is ego b*ll*cks and attitude.

[Dr Bunsen Honeydew]

Well, no you haven't answered these in about every answer in the thread, not at all - more than half are angry rantings or self-defensive for a start, the rest are short and don't really go into any detail.

And no, there weren't just two questions that could be answered with a yes or no - I was trying to tease some of your experience/knowledge out of you and in to this thread.

As I've said already you don't seem to be up for entering into discussion about your own experiences or experiments at all.

You only appear to be up for a fight..


That is why I was asking more specific questions about it to see what you may have tried out and what you may have experienced. But all we get is ego b*ll*cks and attitude.

My point in the discussion has been explained clearly, you obviously have an agenda not to read it, and now you are being rude and showing your true colours and why you entered into the thread in the first place.

Did I address you or initiate contact with you - no, you initiated it. You asked the same question re-worded at least 3 times with me replying that it was either irrelevant (IMO) or I gave you the answer I wished to give, but no, like an old bone you chew chew and chew and you are still chewing it. If you have a point to make on the subject why not make it and stop all the crap.