Simple 12" Infinity Kappa VQ MidQ Plans

[GTHill]

Would it be ok to add more internal bracing? I'm not worried about increased complexity. Thanks!

Gene

 

[avaserfi]

Would it be ok to add more internal bracing? I'm not worried about increased complexity. Thanks!

Gene

There is no need to add more bracing to this design unless you plan on crossing it over at a higher frequency. If you do plan on doing this there are other issues which you will need to address.

Why exactly do you want to add more bracing?

 

[GTHill]

Sorry, I just saw that it was a "simple design" and I assumed that a more complicated design would have more complicated bracing.

I really appreciate the published design, but I hesitate to build it since it seems as if, from the subject line, there is a better design, albeit more complicated to build. If I am wrong I apologize.

I do very much appreciate the published design, and since I don't have the skill to design my own, I'm sure I will embark on this build within the next few months. Thanks!

Gene

 

[avaserfi]

Sorry, I just saw that it was a "simple design" and I assumed that a more complicated design would have more complicated bracing.

I really appreciate the published design, but I hesitate to build it since it seems as if, from the subject line, there is a better design, albeit more complicated to build. If I am wrong I apologize.

I do very much appreciate the published design, and since I don't have the skill to design my own, I'm sure I will embark on this build within the next few months. Thanks!

Gene

It seems the subject line has mislead you. I outlined changes to the design I posted that can offer increased performance. The build I completed for myself was designed in such a manner to be usable as a typical subwoofer, but also higher while still having inaudible cabinet resonance. This is a non-issue for those who plan on keeping the crossover at or below 100Hz.

 

[GTHill]

It seems the subject line has mislead you. I outlined changes to the design I posted that can offer increased performance. The build I completed for myself was designed in such a manner to be usable as a typical subwoofer, but also higher while still having inaudible cabinet resonance. This is a non-issue for those who plan on keeping the crossover at or below 100Hz.

Thanks for the clarification Andrew. I shouldn't have doubted you!

Gene

 

[jinjuku]

Why is the ULTRACURVE PRO DEQ2496 PEQ not used for subwoofer management vs the ULTRADRIVE PRO DCX2496?

Is it the ability for whatever order slope x-over points and highpass sub-sonic filter?

How close can I get in using something like the eD eQ.2 for sub management?

Would the ideal scenario be to use both Berhinger products and simply let it all manage my 5.1?

 

[avaserfi]

Why is the ULTRACURVE PRO DEQ2496 PEQ not used for subwoofer management vs the ULTRADRIVE PRO DCX2496?

Is it the ability for whatever order slope x-over points and highpass sub-sonic filter?

The ability to implement the protection filter I specify as well as properly integrate ones main speakers with their subwoofer is only possible via the DCX2496 [unless one is willing to spend far more money]. Equalization is yet another ability of the DCX2496.

How close can I get in using something like the eD eQ.2 for sub management?

This unit seems to be severely limited in its function. I would not recommend it over other options at similar price points.

Would the ideal scenario be to use both Berhinger products and simply let it all manage my 5.1?

Simply using as many DCX2496 as required would be the ideal.

 

[jinjuku]

The ability to implement the protection filter I specify as well as properly integrate ones main speakers with their subwoofer is only possible via the DCX2496 [unless one is willing to spend far more money]. Equalization is yet another ability of the DCX2496.

So the DCX2496 is both X-Over and PEQ. Does this have a phase function? I couldn't find it in the user guide.

 

[avaserfi]

So the DCX2496 is both X-Over and PEQ. Does this have a phase function? I couldn't find it in the user guide.

Yes, the DCX2496 is both a crossover and a PEQ. The best way to get familiar with how it works is by downloading the computer interface from Behringer's website for free. This will give you an idea of what it is capable of.

I believe the DCX2496 is capable of adjusting phase under the 'Short Delay' tab, but cannot fully remember.

 

[Haoleb]

You can adjust phase independently for each output, You can select normal or inverted (180 degrees) or you can select anything from 0-180 degrees in 5 degree increments.

 

[Djizasse]

Since you're talking about the DCX I have a very simple question.

The DCX 2496 only has 3 input channels.
This means that I can only control the sub and two other channels (probably FR and FL).
To EQ a full 5.1 system I would need two DCXs, right?

 

[Haoleb]

Since you're talking about the DCX I have a very simple question.

The DCX 2496 only has 3 input channels.
This means that I can only control the sub and two other channels (probably FR and FL).
To EQ a full 5.1 system I would need two DCXs, right?

Yes as far as I can tell. However, I am not sure how much good running your center and surrounds though the DCX would do. In a home theater system I cant see the need to run anything besides the sub through the DCX as you already have a way to crossover the speakers with the reciever. Unless you wanted to EQ your speakers.

In a stereo system like I have though I have no way to crossover my main speakers so that the sub is only handling the bottom end which is why I need the DCX to hook my system up in that fashion. Right now I just have it running my subs but eventually I will hook my main speakers into it as well. I just need some more adapters.

 

[no. 5]

In a home theater system I cant see the need to run anything besides the sub through the DCX as you already have a way to crossover the speakers with the reciever.

Wouldn't the DCX be a much more flexible and useful crossover though?

 

[Haoleb]

Wouldn't the DCX be a much more flexible and useful crossover though?

That is true, You can select many different slopes and crossover points vs whats built into the reciever, however I am not sure if that would constitute the added cost, sound wise. Someone who is using one of these in their theater system, if anybody is. will have to answer that one.

 

[WmAx]

Yes as far as I can tell. However, I am not sure how much good running your center and surrounds though the DCX would do. In a home theater system I cant see the need to run anything besides the sub through the DCX as you already have a way to crossover the speakers with the reciever. Unless you wanted to EQ your speakers.

In a stereo system like I have though I have no way to crossover my main speakers so that the sub is only handling the bottom end which is why I need the DCX to hook my system up in that fashion. Right now I just have it running my subs but eventually I will hook my main speakers into it as well. I just need some more adapters.

The DCX can allow superior integration, if used as the crossover on all of the speakers. It's crossover ability is far beyond what a receiver can accomplish. It also has EQs that can be used to correct issues that most speakers have, such as the baffle step compensation and treble roll off curve. Speakers with passive crossovers have a built in baffle step that is only good for one specific acoustic environment; of course they can not predict many environments. Using a shelving filter on the DCX, you can balance out the compensation to an ideal amount for your specific environment/placement. The same goes for the treble; use a shelving filter on this to find your ideal balance. If one has measurement equipment, they can also go on to correct many flaws in the amplitude response with the DCX.

-Chris

 

[jinjuku]

The DCX can allow superior integration, if used as the crossover on all of the speakers. It's crossover ability is far beyond what a receiver can accomplish. It also has EQs that can be used to correct issues that most speakers have, such as the baffle step compensation and treble roll off curve. Speakers with passive crossovers have a built in baffle step that is only good for one specific acoustic environment; of course they can not predict many environments. Using a shelving filter on the DCX, you can balance out the compensation to an ideal amount for your specific environment/placement. The same goes for the treble; use a shelving filter on this to find your ideal balance. If one has measurement equipment, they can also go on to correct many flaws in the amplitude response with the DCX.

-Chris

Of course to get to this level of flexibility, a 3.5 way (which is really a 4 way) speaker would require as many amps?

 

[Djizasse]

Thanks for the answers. I'm still confused
I'll open another thread to keep this one on topic.

 

[WmAx]

Of course to get to this level of flexibility, a 3.5 way (which is really a 4 way) speaker would require as many amps?

I don't follow. I was not talking about active speakers, if that is what you intend to mean. I was only talking about using the DCX as the crossover between passive main speakers and subwoofer(s).

-Chris

 

[Djizasse]

Can i use 3/4" pine boards for this project? It is harder than the plywood and only a little more expensive.

 

[Djizasse]

I've made a sketchup version (in centimeters):
http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=446eab8b477f4384c3d6b05b41083ec2&prevstart=0

In sketchup, just open the warehouse browser and search for "MidQ".