• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Zilch's AK Design Collaborative - Econowave Speaker

marantzfan said:
I didn't see him, do you remember his user name?
Click to expand...
http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=211440

Robh3606 said:
Hello Zilch

Have you tried any 2118/WaveGuide combo's?? I tried them with larger 1.5" drivers not the smaller waveguides. If so what did you think??
Click to expand...
Never have, Rob, but I believe Kegger's working with them, and Ross is sniffin' around for some. ;)

C'mon, Rob, play E'Wave with us here; the waveguides are only $20 a pair, and the filter's simple and solid.... :thmbsp:
 
Inquiries:

1) For an 8" grille-fabric covered cube or trapezoid HF to sit atop JBL Aquarius S2s and convert them from Omni to CD imaging, the 6" square PT-B99HF, four drivers on E'Wave crossover:

attachment.php


2) BMS on 1" and 1.5" PT-F95HF, 4550 = Lt. Grey, and 4555 = Black, repectively, E'Wave crossover, ref. D220Ti, Cyan:

attachment.php


3) D220Ti on 4425's 2342 "Butt-cheek" horn, Violet, and standard E'Wave, E'Wave crossover, Cyan:

attachment.php


4) JBL drivers on E'Waveguide, E'Wave crossover, 2416H-1 = Orange, 2418H-1 = Yellow, 2426H = Grey, ref. D220Ti, Cyan:

attachment.php


What's it mean:

1) As both Jackgiff and Skywave-rider have already demonstrated, D220Ti on the 6" square PT waveguide works with the standard E'Wave crossover. Much as we'd like it to be otherwise, HF compensation is specific to the particular driver used.

2) Whether they're on a 1" or a 1.5" PT waveguide, BMS drivers require different HF comp than the Selenium D220Ti. I have earlier demonstrated that the bridged "T" filter used in Altec Model 19 works well with them.

3) D220Ti in combination with the JBL 2342 "Butt-cheek" plays reasonably well using the standard E'Wave highpass filter.

4) Confirming an earlier determination, this time with several different models, common JBL compression drivers are not "Plug-and-Play" in E'Wave; additional HF comp is required for extended VHF.
 

Attachments

  • PT-B99HFx4.jpg
    PT-B99HFx4.jpg
    71 KB · Views: 300
  • BMSs.jpg
    BMSs.jpg
    65.9 KB · Views: 296
  • 2342.jpg
    2342.jpg
    64.9 KB · Views: 297
  • JBLs.jpg
    JBLs.jpg
    66.5 KB · Views: 306
Am I to understand that the d220ti is performing better than the JBL drivers, or is this due to the crossover being optimized for the d220?

I was up really late last night reading more of the QuickNDirty 4430 thread on the LHF - holy smokes Zilch, have you tried every horn and driver JBL ever made? OK, maybe not all of them - I didn't see any potato mashers or slant plates getting tried out!
 
Zilch said:
1) For an 8" grille-fabric covered cube or trapezoid HF to sit atop JBL Aquarius S2s and convert them from Omni to CD imaging, the 6" square PT-B99HF, four drivers on E'Wave crossover:

attachment.php


2) BMS on 1" and 1.5" PT-F95HF, 4550 = Lt. Grey, and 4555 = Black, repectively, E'Wave crossover, ref. D220Ti, Cyan:

attachment.php


3) D220Ti on 4425's 2342 "Butt-cheek" horn, Violet, and standard E'Wave, E'Wave crossover, Cyan:

attachment.php


4) JBL drivers on E'Waveguide, E'Wave crossover, 2416H-1 = Orange, 2418H-1 = Yellow, 2426H = Grey, ref. D220Ti, Cyan:

attachment.php


What's it mean:

1) As both Jackgiff and Skywave-rider have already demonstrated, D220Ti on the 6" square PT waveguide works with the standard E'Wave crossover. Much as we'd like it to be otherwise, HF compensation is specific to the particular driver used.

2) Whether they're on a 1" or a 1.5" PT waveguide, BMS drivers require different HF comp than the Selenium D220Ti. I have earlier demonstrated that the bridged "T" filter used in Altec Model 19 works well with them.

3) D220Ti in combination with the JBL 2342 "Butt-cheek" plays reasonably well using the standard E'Wave highpass filter.

4) Confirming an earlier determination, this time with several different models, common JBL compression drivers are not "Plug-and-Play" in E'Wave; additional HF comp is required for extended VHF.
Click to expand...

Zilch, On your final chart, is the light grey, (which I believe is 2426H) on the standard e'wave crossover? And the most extended line, which is blue or turquiose is the 220 Ti? If so, I am amazed at the difference between the two. According to Wayne's chart, for 12 db the components of the compensation are not that different, but he did tell me that this would be the minimum amount and it might need more, I'm guessing maybe 14 db or so.

With the crossover as is, my subjective evaluation is that is sounds better than the 220Ti in many ways, but the little 220 ti is so close and sounds so good, its just amazing that the entire driver (heck, both of them!) costs less than a single diapraghm for the 2425H! Quite an over achiever to be sure!:yes:

Now to finish the other CC crossover!

Russellc
 
packrat said:
Am I to understand that the d220ti is performing better than the JBL drivers, or is this due to the crossover being optimized for the d220?
Click to expand...
The latter. The designs of the drivers and their native responses are different, which is easily seen in the uncompensated curves. The only way to compare that meaningfully is to measure on a Plane Wave Tube (PWT). Once they're mounted on a horn/waveguide, the differential interaction between the driver and that come into play.

"Better's" a tough one; according to what criteria? If flat frequency response is the objective, you've got to get that first, and THEN compare. When doing that, it's instructive that JBL quit at 16 kHz in 4430 using 2344(A), and the reason is apparent in the un-compensated curves; there's a secondary breakpoint occurring in the slope in that region. Push that combo flat to 20 kHz, and you'll have some sonic unpleasantries to deal with.

packrat said:
I was up really late last night reading more of the QuickNDirty 4430 thread on the LHF - holy smokes Zilch, have you tried every horn and driver JBL ever made? OK, maybe not all of them - I didn't see any potato mashers or slant plates getting tried out!
Click to expand...
You'll find those in other threads, as they're off-topic in the 4430 one, which explores the fundamental principles of that particular design, constant directivity and HF comp, primarily. It's easy to see how E'Wave grew out of that work; PT waveguides were cooking there from the very beginning, and Jackgiff makes a cameo appearance, even.... :thmbsp:

Russellc said:
Zilch, On your final chart, is the light grey, (which I believe is 2426H) on the standard e'wave crossover? And the most extended line, which is blue or turquiose is the 220 Ti? If so, I am amazed at the difference between the two. According to Wayne's chart, for 12 db the components of the compensation are not that different, but he did tell me that this would be the minimum amount and it might need more, I'm guessing maybe 14 db or so.

With the crossover as is, my subjective evaluation is that is sounds better than the 220Ti in many ways, but the little 220 ti is so close and sounds so good, its just amazing that the entire driver (heck, both of them!) costs less than a single diapraghm for the 2425H! Quite an over achiever to be sure!:yes:
Click to expand...
Yes, you are reading it correctly. I believe most everyone who tried them recognized that the Seleniums were conceptually "different" is some significant design respect, even before we developed E'Wave using them. We don't yet fully understand that, but I'm not sure that we much care, even; E'Wave has a life of its own.... :music:


Edit: Here are the JBL results from three months ago. Two of these are 16-Ohms, and two have Aquaplas'd diaphragms, but the VHF results are substantially the same as yesterday's findings:

attachment.php
 
It has indeed began a "life of its own" and is going in many differing directions.
I now have both Charge coupled crossovers hooked up, double checking all the connections, its Zilch nutted together and kind of sloppy. Then I will put the Seleniums back in the system and listen for a while.:music: First blush doesnt seem much different, but I've only listen to a few mins. of FM. Need some time with familiar tunes to sort this out, as well as the E'wave drivers of course.:yes:

Russellc
 
Robh, Zilch, Bauhausler, Kegger, thank you very much for the technical explanation of how a CC circuit doesn't go to zero.. I think I understand. :-)

Now, the next logical question... (at least logical in my mind):

I think it has been stated that the most significant improvement of a CC network is in higher frequencies. If you are looking at a 2, 3 or 4 way (250Ti) crossover, couldn't you implement the change and get the best bang for the buck on just the tweeter and upper mids without the cost of doubling and doubling the bigger caps on the woofer and low mids?

I have contemplated building new crossovers for my 250Ti-LE, but the cost (especially of those big caps) and lack of confidence of a significant improvement has held me at bay..

Further, I might try it on my homemade Martin Logan crossovers and EWG crossover on the HF pass side..
 
CC E'Wave and see if you perceive a difference.

I have built full-bore CC'd 4430 XOs, and it's not a trivial endeavor.

Do just the HF, if you like, yes.... :yes:
 
Listening to both sides charge coupled now. Had to really go through the circuit for mistakes, at first the whole range seemed a little fizzy sounding. Checking all my connections, ( with the backwards wired L-pad in mind) I find nothing loose or missing. All the Zilch nuts are tight and wires firmly attached.
The Bass seems to have returned and the fizzyness has left for the most part.
The longer it plays, it is getting more clear higher up. Seems like there are a few more details coming through in the mids I hadnt previously noticed.

I did use all new components in this crossover except for the small coils in the high frequency section, perhaps a small amount of breakin is required. Here's a pic of this birds nest:
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2000.jpg
    IMG_2000.jpg
    51.3 KB · Views: 80
HEH!

Looks just like ZilchLab! :thmbsp:

I don't generally buy the "break-in" thing, but if Timbers says that's required, as he does, then it applies.

He also says you can't just pull the battery to hear the difference. The only way is to have two crossovers and A/B them, with a switch, preferably.

Have I ever done that?

Nope.... :dunno:
 
Zilch said:
HEH!

Looks just like ZilchLab! :thmbsp:

I don't generally buy the "break-in" thing, but if Timbers says that's required, as he does, then it applies.

He also says you can't just pull the battery to hear the difference. The only way is to have two crossovers and A/B them, with a switch, preferably.

Have I ever done that?

Nope.... :dunno:
Click to expand...

No, but that's likely to be the best way ( with a switch), I dont think the brain, well my brain can "retain the "sound" of one and then physically change out the crossover
out and compare. I didnt realize Timbers claimed that breakin was required. I'm not a big break in believer, but I have noticed any freshly wired tube amps seem to have a little excessive "zingyness" until run for a while. Here, It did sound "Fizzy/tizzy" across the spectrum for the first couple of cds, with bass a little weak. This caused me to eyeball the circuit carefully, and finding nothing, went back to listening. Having now played some very familiar female vocalist tracks, i found that throughout the cuts I kept noticing details that previously didnt really stand out...Not an earth shocking difference, but I can definately say it doesnt sound any worse! I really am liking the effect, I'll continue to listen to familiar favs and in a week or two switch back to the original crossover and see if I feel I'm missing anything.

Maybe I'm kidding myself, and on the other hand maybe it should come as no surprise based on the ideas endorsements both here and on Lansing Heritage Forums, that I think there is an improvement. And, right now it seems like not only in the high frequency, but the entire range. I may be hypnotising myself, we'll see.

One other thing, it didnt seem to do what I had feared, revealing more breakup modes in some negative way. Pretty sure we have more clarity across the board, and I did CC both High and Low frequencys. :thmbsp:

Russellc
 
Back home again.

Myrna and I just returned yesterday from spending 2 weeks in Israel. Fantastic trip. I would return in a heartbeat. It is a trip of a lifetime whether you are Jewish, Christian, or Moslem. All three groups have important ties to the region (sons of Abraham), and just seeing the places where history happened makes me feel so insignificant. We were blessed to be able to see it.

Now I need to catch up on the EconoWave thread and complete some projects. It is good to see the growing number of projects here. I am very interested to see how the three way system proposed by Bauhausler turns out. I tried a simple three way using a 104H for the midrange, and was stunned at it's performance. An 8 or 10 inch would obviously be a better choice. Go Ross.

E'Wave rules!
 
Russellc said:
The driver I really want to try is the B&C DE 250. But I am torn between that and going to the larger format drivers.

Russellc
Click to expand...

That does look like a nice driver...

I am not much of a pioneer when it comes to these things, I prefer to use something that is well proven. Of course it looks like there is a lot of good feedback for these B&C drivers.

I guess what I really love(as far as sound goes) is the clean, clear and effortless presentation. I think the Seleniums are excellent performers, but of course with a severe and chronic case of "audiophilia nervosa" I have to keep searching for the next best thing. I can't help but think a larger diaphragm compression driver would just sound a lot more effortless at a given volume.

The other component is that I have decided to run everything off of one amp instead of biamping. The 2A3 amp I had on the Seleniums previously went a long way towards ameliorating their slight tendency towards stridency. In an effort towards simplicity(HA!) I am running my sources directly into my Behringer A500, and running the E-waves full range from it. This really gives a squeaky clean and very extended sound but I think one of the mylar type diaphragm compression drivers might work better with solid state amplification.

I suppose I could play with caps in the crossover, maybe try some paper in oil types as a sort of tonal adjustment. Something about that bothers me though.
 
The DE250 is definitely proven outside of the realm of ewaving. It would be interesting to see what it takes to make it work well on the JBL waveguide.
 
Russellc said:
The driver I really want to try is the B&C DE 250. But I am torn between that and going to the larger format drivers.
Click to expand...
I'm aware of only one large-format driver that'll "push" to play the VHF, 2452H-SL.

Well, 476Be and Mg, apparently, also, but they're unobtanium.

jackgiff said:
Myrna and I just returned yesterday from spending 2 weeks in Israel. Fantastic trip.
Click to expand...
Welcome back Jack! You have been missed here; we look forward to your report of the completion of your E'Wave HT.

dnewma04 said:
The DE250 is definitely proven outside of the realm of ewaving. It would be interesting to see what it takes to make it work well on the JBL waveguide.
Click to expand...
Somebody send me a pair, and I'll work out the HF comp.... :thmbsp:
 
I've been thinking (always a bad sign). I think I'd like to try the ewave on top of a Lowther. I had a pair that I sold, which are still around and available. They have significant drawbacks at both ends of the spectrum but there's a lot going on from 100 hz to 2K that's pretty good. It will be a worthwhile experiment.
I think I'd like to try the ewave on top of a variety of unlikely things before deciding what to permanently install in the valencia cabs.
Partial list:
Kef B110 (maybe in MTM, contrary to sense and geometry)
LE10
2118
LE8
Altec 406
B&W DM610
Lowther DX3
AR4
<EDIT> also EV SP12B
Just to collect information before deciding.
 
Originally Posted by dnewma04 View Post
The DE250 is definitely proven outside of the realm of ewaving. It would be interesting to see what it takes to make it work well on the JBL waveguide.


Somebody send me a pair, and I'll work out the HF comp....
__________________
PM me and I will bring a pair by.
 
900ss said:
Originally Posted by dnewma04 View Post
The DE250 is definitely proven outside of the realm of ewaving. It would be interesting to see what it takes to make it work well on the JBL waveguide.


Somebody send me a pair, and I'll work out the HF comp....
__________________
PM me and I will bring a pair by.
Click to expand...

Cool! If this doesnt work out, I'll buy a pair and have them sent out to ya.

russellc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom