Some additional insight on my design idea: The expected 30 W output is due to the fact that bi amping provides twice as much effective power then the sum of the 5W + 5W of usable power of the Tripath http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm In addition the typical 5 woofer used in similar consumer speakers has an efficiency of 84-86 SPL versus the 91SPL of the Dayton. I am a little worried about the rigid aluminum cone (this may cause breakup at higher frequencies) but there are some $2000 speakers that use it up to 3000 hz! http://www.hometheatersound.com/equipment/canton_vento_807dc_802_805cm_as800sc.htm The main reason to choose the Dayton is the 91SPL, high quality and relatively low price (if you are lucky youll find this quality on speaker > $1500/pair ). Also I like the phase plug for two reasons: it can not be pushed in by kids and avoids the air spring effect caused by the dust cap compressing air on the core. This is also a non shielded drivers thus higher magnetic flux = higher dampening characteristics (one of my most valued requirements). The TANG BAND 1 silk tweeter is another overachiever of incredible value; the lower sensitivity of 90SPL is not an issue since the expected power requirements is 25% of the woofer.
The ideal (lowest) crossover (using 24 db/octave) frequency is expected to be around 2.4khz. This is based on actual tests on my main tri-amp speakers (tweeter Scan Speak). I choose the lowest possible crossover frequency because at this frequency the sound wave length ~5.5 is still bigger then the driver cone diameter. This is key to obtain a high dispersion source (the so called open soundstage). The other advantages of the Linkwitz-Riley 24 db/octave alignment is that the woofer and tweeter are phase aligned. Also eliminating the passive crossover will provide maximum dampening and power efficiency. The DBX crossover matches well with the SB output (I use the three-way version on my main stereo) and solves the main equalization needs between the woofer and tweeter. In short is like having most of the benefits provided by room correction technology without the complexity (and cost). The actual loudspeaker cabinet can be crafted for optimal interaction with the sound generated by the drivers. In practical terms this translates in flush mounting the drivers, provide smooth edges, minimal baffle (reduce the reflective surfaces around the drivers using violin shaped baffle and sound absorbing felt), avoiding parallel surfaces (specific lengths) inside the case, flared bass reflex port (if needed), creative positioning of the fibers of the acoustic stuffing, is all in the details. Last but not least this can be made to look good. Do I expect these active speakers to perform and look better the any active commercial active speaker in their price range (not counting the many hours of work required for this project)? Of course I do. Speaker building is not an art, just common sense engineering. Software programming on the other hand -- arge ------------------------------------------------------------------------ arge's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=6155 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=30087 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
