Box & Winisd for JL Audio 13.5 W7

[pjoseph]

That should be fine. You will need Eq, boosting 12 db per octave starting at 50 Hz. The Fs of that driver is 27 Hz, so you will need a high pass filter 12 db per octave at 25 Hz.

I know its been a while but recently got everything hooked up, does anyone know how to boost at 50hz using the dcx 2496

 

[TLS Guy]

I know its been a while but recently got everything hooked up, does anyone know how to boost at 50hz using the dcx 2496

That is really an electronic crossover. It does have an Eq function with limited head room. Instructions are on page 12 section 4.3.3 of your manual.

That is not really an optimal unit for this function, but you might be able to get it to work.

 

[pjoseph]

That is really an electronic crossover. It does have an Eq function with limited head room. Instructions are on page 12 section 4.3.3 of your manual.

That is not really an optimal unit for this function, but you might be able to get it to work.

I did it on the output not sure how much gain to start with

thank you for the reply

 

[pjoseph]

I guess I could boost another freq on the input side if needed

 

[highfigh]

Actually it is closer to 0.8 being 0.75. I know that sounds like a small increase but it is significant.

Most people consider the optimal total system Qts being 0.5. Below 0.5 things start sounding over dry and lacking in body. At 0.7 cellos double bases and tymps start to just sound a little tubby and unnatural. Over 0.7 then things start progressing to frankly boomy.

Most systems in my view have total Qts higher than desirable. This also adversely interacts with room modes.

I aim for 0.5 and stick pretty close to it. That is why I really favor TL loading. My Eagan system has a Qts of 0.7 in the sub bass system and the bass spreads around a little compared to here.

If you go to a concert try and remember what the bass string section and tympani really sound like. They are really taught, and quite unlike far too many speakers.

I have always heard and read that .707 was optimal for flat, taut response but classical tends to benefit from it to be lower than other genres.

However, lower Q speakers will allow hearing some of the acoustical problems of the room- if there's overhang, it's the room and its contents.

 

[panteragstk]

I know its been a while but recently got everything hooked up, does anyone know how to boost at 50hz using the dcx 2496

I'm pretty sure that REW has a plugin for the dcx 2496, but I could be wrong. Worth checking out.

 

[ski2xblack]

I have always heard and read that .707 was optimal for flat, taut response but classical tends to benefit from it to be lower than other genres.

However, lower Q speakers will allow hearing some of the acoustical problems of the room- if there's overhang, it's the room and its contents.

.707 I believe is termed "critically damped" rather than optimal, with higher being under-damped (ringy/peaky), and lower being overdamped (tight/dry/resolving). Optimal is rather subjective, but I think the good Doc's preference for the lower side is well informed and the right direction.

 

[highfigh]

.707 I believe is termed "critically damped" rather than optimal, with higher being under-damped (ringy/peaky), and lower being overdamped (tight/dry/resolving). Optimal is rather subjective, but I think the good Doc's preference for the lower side is well informed and the right direction.

He doesn't listen to much/anything but Classical, though. Most other types of music don't benefit from lower Q.

 

[TLS Guy]

He doesn't listen to much/anything but Classical, though. Most other types of music don't benefit from lower Q.

You might say that. I do listen almost exclusively to program that would be considered in the "classical domain." However engineers who produce and mix this stuff that I basically can't abide, want to come here to check their mixes. I had to endure the fruits of a long mixing session about a couple of months ago. Always there seems to be some comment about things not heard on the studio monitors. So I don't know if what you say is actually the correct way to look at it. My view is that they have been using less than optimal speakers and that is what they are used to, and generally expect. If you have higher Q bass tunings then a lot of masking is going to occur.

Yes, I have strived for lower Q designs and a lot of that comes from who I rubbed shoulders with as a youngster. As I said in another thread, Quad ESLs are the ultimate low Q design, and still the truest reference speaker after more than half a century.

 

[highfigh]

You might say that. I do listen almost exclusively to program that would be considered in the "classical domain." However engineers who produce and mix this stuff that I basically can't abide, want to come here to check their mixes. I had to endure the fruits of a long mixing session about a couple of months ago. Always there seems to be some comment about things not heard on the studio monitors. So I don't know if what you say is actually the correct way to look at it. My view is that they have been using less than optimal speakers and that is what they are used to, and generally expect. If you have higher Q bass tunings then a lot of masking is going to occur.

Yes, I have strived for lower Q designs and a lot of that comes from who I rubbed shoulders with as a youngster. As I said in another thread, Quad ESLs are the ultimate low Q design, and still the truest reference speaker after more than half a century.

I don't doubt that others want to check their mixes using your equipment- it's impossible to know how the music will sound in all locations, through all systems, and not all studios/producers use the same monitors although we already discussed the much hated, but almost ubiquitous Yamaha NS-10. Your view is from Classical but the rest of the musical world is different and you can't ignore the importance of other genres, even if you like nothing about them. Seeing everything as 'Classical or garbage' is very closed-minded, but it's your view and that makes it as valid as anyone else's view, regardless of how much you or they dislike each others' preferences. Duke Ellington is credited with saying "There are only two types of music- good music and bad music". It's up to the listener to decide what they like.

Higher Q is often used because the producers "want to give it some punch" because, like it or not, hard-hitting bass is what sells. Not in the Classical world, but it applies to the world that makes a lot of people rich and that's what they care about. Fatiguing, annoying, over the top? Absolutely, especially when it's coming from a car wash more than two blocks away (I hear this far too often).

The monitors used and the mixes that are created don't have anything to do with great sound unless someone wants to use better equipment- for most, it's about getting the punchy sound and making money. "Give 'em what they want" could be modified to add "...even if it's crap" and that applies to anything that is sold.

 

[TLS Guy]

I don't doubt that others want to check their mixes using your equipment- it's impossible to know how the music will sound in all locations, through all systems, and not all studios/producers use the same monitors although we already discussed the much hated, but almost ubiquitous Yamaha NS-10. Your view is from Classical but the rest of the musical world is different and you can't ignore the importance of other genres, even if you like nothing about them. Seeing everything as 'Classical or garbage' is very closed-minded, but it's your view and that makes it as valid as anyone else's view, regardless of how much you or they dislike each others' preferences. Duke Ellington is credited with saying "There are only two types of music- good music and bad music". It's up to the listener to decide what they like.

Higher Q is often used because the producers "want to give it some punch" because, like it or not, hard-hitting bass is what sells. Not in the Classical world, but it applies to the world that makes a lot of people rich and that's what they care about. Fatiguing, annoying, over the top? Absolutely, especially when it's coming from a car wash more than two blocks away (I hear this far too often).

The monitors used and the mixes that are created don't have anything to do with great sound unless someone wants to use better equipment- for most, it's about getting the punchy sound and making money. "Give 'em what they want" could be modified to add "...even if it's crap" and that applies to anything that is sold.

Your post above, makes me all the more relieved I don't have to shop for speakers, and never have!

 

[highfigh]

Your post above, makes me all the more relieved I don't have to shop for speakers, and never have!

I'm glad I don't and I sell this stuff. If I had to go to dealers in order to listen to them in order to make a decision, I might just settle on something, but since we have the ability to build them, it's a luxury many others don't have. I did a direct comparison with some Dynaudio speakers and I have no reason to complain about the ones I built with the crossover design you sent.

As I wrote before, I like being able to listen without thinking about what I'm using for speakers. That removes an obstacle to enjoying the sound of the music or video.

I have posted about being in a studio where they had an old pair of B&W speakers, possibly the 801. I hated the sound and I really don't think it was the room- it was too large and open to make the sound so dry. That place moved after someone bought it and they replaced the monitors with Genelec- much better sound.