Dood Posted August 7, 2009 Share Posted August 7, 2009 Hey Alex, I'll insert the following disclaimer that I know nothing about WinISD really, other than making pretty patterns, but I thought I'd have a play anyway! Just a question really - and I suspect the answer is probably down to cost - I'd been reading some stuff posted by Buck Waller about the use of mids instead of tweeters and with your PM's in mind I wondered if it were possible to get the top end out of a midrange without having to resort to using a tweeter at all. I haven't added the specs for the mids you are using so found the ND410 to play with instead. If I added two or more drivers in to a simulation, the HF roll off extended upward, yet the response curve remained relatively flat still.. or in some cases actually flatened out more. - the SPL etc obviously went up too. So using a slightly backward method - and I am thinking a rather expensive way too - If you added more mid drivers but padded them back (and fettled with the crossover) you would indeed keep that nice smooth midrange treble response, that in theory wouldn't go harsh like a tweeter does at high SPL's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexclaber Posted August 7, 2009 Share Posted August 7, 2009 [quote name='dood' post='562602' date='Aug 7 2009, 10:02 AM']If I added two or more drivers in to a simulation, the HF roll off extended upward, yet the response curve remained relatively flat still.. or in some cases actually flatened out more. - the SPL etc obviously went up too. So using a slightly backward method - and I am thinking a rather expensive way too - If you added more mid drivers but padded them back (and fettled with the crossover) you would indeed keep that nice smooth midrange treble response, that in theory wouldn't go harsh like a tweeter does at high SPL's?[/quote] Sadly you can only use WinISD for low frequency modelling where the cone is totally pistonic, so unfortunately adding more midranges doesn't extend the response upwards, in fact it narrows the dispersion and increases the lower midrange so will make the response seem less extended in the highs. There are really three reasons that a tweeter sounds harsh at high SPL - one is a lack of sensitivity/power handling and/or a crossover that doesn't protect the tweeter well enough from lower frequencies, one is the gap in response between woofer and tweeter making the tweeter sound disembodied and making any distortions more obvious, and one is the amplifier running out of power and the tweeter showing that up. Hopefully both my betweetered designs will address that - T'Big One will have the tweeter crossed over very high so it takes over where the midrange stops whilst T'Midget/Double Midget will have the tweeter crossed over lower but with a very steep slope and a coaxial mounting to integrate the sources, whilst the high sensitivity of all three cabs should minimise the chance of amp clipping. Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dood Posted August 7, 2009 Author Share Posted August 7, 2009 I did wonder the other day about WinISD and it's abilities. Especially as the app itself, given that so many seem to rely on it for results, is a bit clunky and free.. So as usual, technical knowledge to decipher the details, as demonstrated in your post is obviously a good thing when the software *shows* you something which isn't necessarily true. Thanks for filling in the gaps, when you put it that way, it's logical and easy to understand. Did I ask you about an ETA for a tweetered Big One? My memory seems to be failing me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexclaber Posted August 7, 2009 Share Posted August 7, 2009 [quote name='dood' post='562633' date='Aug 7 2009, 10:31 AM']Did I ask you about an ETA for a tweetered Big One? My memory seems to be failing me![/quote] Couple of weeks! Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts