Zilch's AK Design Collaborative - Econowave Speaker

I am looking at an online calculator. And it says R1 is 4.7ohm and R2 is 38.7ohm. :scratch2:

Online calculators do not work for this application. We are attempting to not only provide padding, but also top octave compensation like is shown below. It is providing equalization in addition to matching the level of the tweeter with the woofer.

The only calculator you have for this application is a circuit modeling tool, like Spice.

Top_Octave_Compensation.gif
 
Thanks Wayne

Wayne

Thanks for the post and reply. I have three questions for you.
1. The chart you provided. Is it for 8 ohm or 16ohm or both?
2. The chart starts at 6db attenuation. What if I only want 3db attenuation?
3. I have downloaded your spice program a couple of days ago. To be honest, it was way over my head. So please give me some tips on how to use the program.


Thanks again.
 
Sacrilege!

The pair of LE14H-3's that were going to go into my HT cabinets would require recessing them one half of the front baffle thickness to allow the grilles to fit. Can't do that, so they go into the Sevilles.

Before refoaming the last pair of LE14A's that were bought, I decided to use them in the HT. They were painted black, using a Krylon Satin Black spray can, since the white cones would show through the grille cloth in the HT setup. This would get me disenfranchised at the LH site. The frames need a little touch up, but they should do nicely.

Would James B. forgive me?
 

Attachments

  • blackLE14A's.jpg
    blackLE14A's.jpg
    50.5 KB · Views: 43
Your right Jack that is Sacrilege!

But they do look pretty sweet though!

--------------------------------------------

Here's a few pic's of some funky LE10's I just got in.....:scratch2:
 

Attachments

  • jbllancerwoofers01.jpg
    jbllancerwoofers01.jpg
    99.3 KB · Views: 38
  • jbllancerwoofers04.jpg
    jbllancerwoofers04.jpg
    99.9 KB · Views: 35
  • jbllancerwoofers05.jpg
    jbllancerwoofers05.jpg
    101.7 KB · Views: 17
Your right Jack that is Sacrilege!

But they do look pretty sweet though!

--------------------------------------------

Here's a few pic's of some funky LE10's I just got in.....:scratch2:

If those LE10's sound anything like LE10A's or H's, you are in for a treat. For only 10 inches in diameter, they sure are sweet woofers.

But, they need some paint. Plus they need some new foam surrounds. Go for it. :yes:
 
Good news!

OK, I've run the siumulations with Spice and found that you can use the exact same chart of values I use in my crossover. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but it is indeed good news because now you have a chart to work from.

The only thing is, the nomenclature is different. In my schematic, R1 is the series attenuator, with C1 in shunt across it. R2 is the load resistor. You guys have R2 as the series attenuator, C3 in shunt across it and R1 is the load resistor. So when looking at my chart, interpret it as follows:

Pi value = Ewave value
======
R1 = R2
R2 = R1
C1 = C3
======

The chart then becomes:

dB - R2 - R1 - C3
=========================
06dB - 12 ohm - 30 ohm - 0.47uF
08dB - 12 ohm - 20 ohm - 0.47uF
10dB - 16 ohm - 16 ohm - 0.47uF
12dB - 25 ohm - 16 ohm - 0.47uF
14dB - 30 ohm - 14 ohm - 0.33uF
16dB - 40 ohm - 12 ohm - 0.33uF
18dB - 50 ohm - 12 ohm - 0.22uF
20dB - 75 ohm - 12 ohm - 0.22uF
=========================

The splitter filter values are different, so the R1/R2 loading is different. That's why your filter is damped a little more than the Pi models. This has been retained. The chart of values shown above gives the exact same transfer characteristic you have with the values you've previously used. This just gives you a few more to work with.

As an example, your "high attenuation" version of the crossover originally called for 16/30 values for R1/R2. That's what I would call 12dB padding. My chart uses 16/25, almost the same thing. In the positions they are used, there is very little difference, too small to see, like 0.2dB or something like that. Yours would have a smidge more attenuation, but basically equivalent.

If you need lower values than 6dB, I think what's happening is your Lpad is too big. Think about it. You need at least 8dB in order to get the proper EQ. So remove the Lpad, if this is the case.

Honestly, I can't see any midwoofers that would be so sensitive the circuit should be setup for less than 8dB attenuation. I've personally never used one that had less than 10dB padding, and I'm used to working with woofers like the JBL 2205, 2225 and 2226 - all of them are 98dB/2.83v/M. You're really not going to find a direct radiating midwoofer that is more sensitive than that, unless cone breakup peaks are there, in which case you wouldn't want to use it. The highest you should ever expect to see is 98dB to 100dB, tops.

This chart is for 8 ohm compression drivers. If you need to use a 16 ohm compression driver, see our previous discussions. A 10dB version of the crossover for 16 ohm drivers has R1 = 16, R2 = 50 ohms and C3 = 0.33uF, by your nomenclature. If you need other padding values, you'll need to run Spice to find them.

There are plenty of posts about Spice in the Pi Speakers forum. Do a search there for information about it, tips how to run it. If you download my models, they'll run straight out of the box. Just run Spice, load one of the models and hit the button that looks like a traffic light to start the simulation.

One last thing. You'll notice the top-octave bypass capacitance value is usually about 0.47uF. That's a value I found usually works pretty well. It doesn't need to be large, in fact, should not be. Too large a value and you're basically bypassing all the padding. In truth, voice coil inductance provides a good deal of the CD equalization. It provides increasing load impedance with frequency, providing some natural EQ. So you really don't need a lot of bypass capacitance. I'd be more concerned with making it too large than too small.
 
We ran ANDYMAN's Altec woofer's from the Valencia's using the higher then 95DB
xover of Jacks and felt we needed a hair more top end with the L-Pad all the way
up, I would probably build that version with no L-Pad and tweak as need be. :dunno:

sounds about right. When I had the 2225H installed (97 db efficient) with >95 db crossover, I had it past 1/2 way.

Russellc
 
It would be great to go through the crossover you guys are using and provide a chart of R1/R2 values. If I have some time, I'll try to get around to doing that. You've already made two versions of the crossover, so your chart now includes two value pairs. Maybe now would be a good time to add a few to the list.

Don't be confused, 'cause your crossovers use different values than mine. But again, the topology is the same and the intended results are the same. They're pretty much interchangable crossovers. So you might look at the chart of values I have for the Pi crossover:

If you use my crossover, the chart shows the values of R1 and R2 required for various amounts of attenuation from 6dB to 20dB. I'm not advocating you use my crossover, although the results should be the same. But I am suggesting that you might want to add some additional chart entries. I had the same situation you have here - A desire to make my crossover useful with various woofers. So I made a chart for reference, to allow for flexibility just like you guys need here.

The values must be selected with Spice or with careful measurements. It really is not enough to scale the R1/R2 values. You can move them an ohm or two, but if you need to change much more than that, it really helps to have some visibility, the kind of visibility only Spice or measurement equipment can provide. It is easy, almost expected, that to blindly change R1/R2 values can modify the shape of the curve, perhaps causing an unwanted dip or peak in response.

If you look over the chart of values I use in my crossover, you can see the progression of values that result in the right response. I would expect the same kind of ratios would be useful in your crossover.

The thing is this: There is a balance that must be struck with the values of R1 and R2. If you increase R1, you tend to increase attenuation. If you increase R2, you tend to reduce attenuation, particularly near the crossover frequency. If R2 is too large, a peak forms near the crossover frequency. If R2 is too small, then the octave or so around crossover is too low. So R1 and R2 must be chosen that provide the desired attenuation and provide this transfer shape:

Top_Octave_Compensation.gif

Wow Wayne, I hope you find the spare time to construct such a chart.
I certainly applaud you for your input on this. A chart would greatly add to the flexibility in woofer choice. The under 95 db seems like a little too much attenuation, but the over 95 db version was a bit much. For those of us without measuring equipment, this would be a big help.:thmbsp:

Thanks again,
Russellc
 
Wayne

Thanks for the post and reply. I have three questions for you.
1. The chart you provided. Is it for 8 ohm or 16ohm or both?
2. The chart starts at 6db attenuation. What if I only want 3db attenuation?
3. I have downloaded your spice program a couple of days ago. To be honest, it was way over my head. So please give me some tips on how to use the program.


Thanks again.

I'm getting ready to down load it as well, and would appreciate a "spice for dummies" dumb down as well.:D

Russellc
 
OK, I've run the siumulations with Spice and found that you can use the exact same chart of values I use in my crossover. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but it is indeed good news because now you have a chart to work from.

The only thing is, the nomenclature is different. In my schematic, R1 is the series attenuator, with C1 in shunt across it. R2 is the load resistor. You guys have R2 as the series attenuator, C3 in shunt across it and R1 is the load resistor. So when looking at my chart, interpret it as follows:

Pi value = Ewave value
======
R1 = R2
R2 = R1
C1 = C3
======

The chart then becomes:

dB - R2 - R1 - C3
=========================
06dB - 12 ohm - 30 ohm - 0.47uF
08dB - 12 ohm - 20 ohm - 0.47uF
10dB - 16 ohm - 16 ohm - 0.47uF
12dB - 25 ohm - 16 ohm - 0.47uF
14dB - 30 ohm - 14 ohm - 0.33uF
16dB - 40 ohm - 12 ohm - 0.33uF
18dB - 50 ohm - 12 ohm - 0.22uF
20dB - 75 ohm - 12 ohm - 0.22uF
=========================

The splitter filter values are different, so the R1/R2 loading is different. That's why your filter is damped a little more than the Pi models. This has been retained. The chart of values shown above gives the exact same transfer characteristic you have with the values you've previously used. This just gives you a few more to work with.

As an example, your "high attenuation" version of the crossover originally called for 16/30 values for R1/R2. That's what I would call 12dB padding. My chart uses 16/25, almost the same thing. In the positions they are used, there is very little difference, too small to see, like 0.2dB or something like that. Yours would have a smidge more attenuation, but basically equivalent.

If you need lower values than 6dB, I think what's happening is your Lpad is too big. Think about it. You need at least 8dB in order to get the proper EQ. So remove the Lpad, if this is the case.

Honestly, I can't see any midwoofers that would be so sensitive the circuit should be setup for less than 8dB attenuation. I've personally never used one that had less than 10dB padding, and I'm used to working with woofers like the JBL 2205, 2225 and 2226 - all of them are 98dB/2.83v/M. You're really not going to find a direct radiating midwoofer that is more sensitive than that, unless cone breakup peaks are there, in which case you wouldn't want to use it. The highest you should ever expect to see is 98dB to 100dB, tops.

This chart is for 8 ohm compression drivers. If you need to use a 16 ohm compression driver, see our previous discussions. A 10dB version of the crossover for 16 ohm drivers has R1 = 16, R2 = 50 ohms and C3 = 0.33uF, by your nomenclature. If you need other padding values, you'll need to run Spice to find them.

There are plenty of posts about Spice in the Pi Speakers forum. Do a search there for information about it, tips how to run it. If you download my models, they'll run straight out of the box. Just run Spice, load one of the models and hit the button that looks like a traffic light to start the simulation.

One last thing. You'll notice the top-octave bypass capacitance value is usually about 0.47uF. That's a value I found usually works pretty well. It doesn't need to be large, in fact, should not be. Too large a value and you're basically bypassing all the padding. In truth, voice coil inductance provides a good deal of the CD equalization. It provides increasing load impedance with frequency, providing some natural EQ. So you really don't need a lot of bypass capacitance. I'd be more concerned with making it too large than too small.

Thanks Wayne. I noticed that the cap starts with the .47 value, which is the <95 db version of the econowave crossover? If so, in converting to the >95 bd version, I suppose the cap value would also change? Would the resistor values given change as well? Or do they stay the same? Or do these values work for either, just select the amount of attenuation needed?

Thanks in advance,

Russellc
 
JBL wave guides are in stock I guess!

Just ordered another pair of waveguides, ( from JBL Pro ) and they said they would arrive next week, if anyone was wondering whether they were stocked up right now or not....

Russellc
 
Thanks Wayne!

Russel, just select the attenuation value to match efficiencies.
I'm scrounging around for parts to try this right now.
 
Pair of E'Wave crossovers built by Wiredbecker and the Zilchster using JackLab printed circuit boards made as illustrated in Jackgiff's "Etch yer own" tutorial.

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=191068

Since we're still in prototype mode here ourselves, we added input binding posts in the spare area on the boards provided for an additional capacitor not used with EconoWave. Caps and air-core inductor are mounted with 3M double-side foam tape from the local ACE hardware store:

attachment.php

Tip: Always mount components with the values printed on them facing up so you can read what they are later.... :thmbsp:

Beautiful!
 
This is a great thread.I`ve skimmed through it and have been looking for a post/page with info on which new/modern woofers would be good choices for a pair of these speakers. I looked at some of the B&C line and the JBLs but i don`t really know what sounds good. Any advice?
Many of us are working with woofers we know and/or have on hand. The criterion "What sounds good" is in part a matter of personal taste and listening preference, of course.

A couple of members have built with or suggested some inexpensive new Dayton woofers, a Goldwood, and an Eminence earlier in this thread. I would encourage you to give some thought to what character of bass you want the system to have, make your best educated guess, and give that a try.... :thmbsp:
 
Spice

I guess I'm out of the proceedings for now, the Spice files are .exe and .cir (?),
which I can't open on the Mac.

Need to Bootcamp.
 
OK, I've run the siumulations with Spice and found that you can use the exact same chart of values I use in my crossover. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but it is indeed good news because now you have a chart to work from.
Thanks again, Wayne. That should clear up a bunch of issues for E'Wave highpass tweakers.... :thmbsp:
 
Regarding the value of the bypass capacitor, I suggest you use the values from the chart just as they are. Not just R1 and R2, but also C1 (shown as C3 in your schematic). As I mentioned earlier, the bypass capacitor value does not need to be very large. Voice coil inductance provides a little bit of rising response, because it interacts with the series resistor in the attenuator circuit. You don't need much bypass capacitance. Don't make it too large, because that brings in augmentation too early. If large enough, it essentially removes the padding.

As an aside, the Spice models in the Pi_Crossover_Spice.zip distribution file show a bit more peaking down low than is actually present in my crossovers because one of the capacitors in the core HP splitter was changed from 8.2uF to 6.8uF after the original Spice models were made. I also changed the woofer circuit, which resulted in better summing both on and off axis. The Spice models in the distribution archive were made in the 1990's. Current models have slightly more damping near the crossover frequency.

The changes in the Pi Speakers crossover were the product of my re-evaluating the system with the Smith and Larson WTPro system, by the way. I mentioned that earlier. It takes the Spice model - the exact files from the distribution archive - and makes an active crossover with them. This is called the ICD in the WTPro system, which stands for interactive crossover designer. A digital representation of the circuit is made, so you can actually test a physical speaker with it. I was able to see exactly what the speaker would do with the crossover under evaluation, to measure it both on and off axis. When I was happy with the Spice/ICD crossover, I built physical models and measured them as well. They were exactly as the models described. I ended up having boards etched, because I knew these were spot on and no more tweaking would ever be required.

When I modeled your crossover, it modeled exactly like mine with respect to CD equalization. In many respects, you guys are using the same crossover I do. The only difference is your core splitter filters are second-order and mine are third-order. As a result, I don't know what your nulls look like. Polar response is a function of driver position and directivity and of crossover frequency, phase and slope. But as to your tweeter circuit and its equalization curve, that part is exactly the same as mine. The R1/R2/C1 components are arranged the same way, in the same position and have the same influence. Therefore, the chart of values has proven to work in either circuit.

An L-pad may be useful after that, I don't know. My problem with L-Pads has always been that they don't lock in the R1/R2 values and they take away some of the range. You really need 10dB of fixed padding in the R1/R2/C1 network to get it to work properly. After that, there's not much wiggle room. If you're using a woofer with less than 90dB/2.83v/M sensitivity, then sure, you could tack on an additional 10dB padding by using an Lpad. But woofers like that aren't well suited for this application, in my opinion. I'd suggest using woofers with greater than 90dB/2.83v/M sensitivity, and then choosing the right R1/R2/C1 values to match.

If you must have variable padding in the tweeter circuit, I personally would prefer a stepped attenuator. This way the R1/R2/C1 and driver load relationship is fixed. A switch or jumpers could be used to form a stepped attenuator that retains the fixed relationships while also giving you an attenuator control. That way you know the transfer characteristic is always right.

Then again, to me, it is fine to just swap out R1/R2 to make changes, or to pick the right values to begin with. Make the speaker flat, and if you want to compensate for room conditions, do it elsewhere.

But it's not my call. This is your project. If you want variable padding, cool, just be sure to work out all the details. I'm just here to provide some suggestions, and to help where I can.
 
Thanks Wayne!

Russel, just select the attenuation value to match efficiencies.
I'm scrounging around for parts to try this right now.

Let me make sure I am correct on this: so basically, the < 95 and >95 versions are melded into one, just select the parts for the amount of attenuation that is needed? Or no, I am missing something?

Sorry to slow this down folks, I'm trying! (Shessh! wait till I try spice out.:sigh:)

Russellc
 
Back
Top Bottom