Two-way active front stage

[///M5 2,833]

All up to you, sure could be. The installation will make or break things.

[j-roadtatts 1,129]

All up to you, sure could be. The installation will make or break things.

What would be the most important factors involved in the installation of the line array that "will make or break things"?

[j-roadtatts 1,129]

All up to you, sure could be. The installation will make or break things.

What would be the most important factors involved in the installation of the line array that "will make or break things"?

So as long as the drivers are as vertical as possible in the line array, then the SQ will be there?

this is the caveat that will "make or break" if its SQ I assume.

[abmoore 8]

All up to you, sure could be. The installation will make or break things.

What would be the most important factors involved in the installation of the line array that "will make or break things"?

So as long as the drivers are as vertical as possible in the line array, then the SQ will be there?

this is the caveat that will "make or break" if its SQ I assume.

I am starting to wonder if I am capable of doing this properly. I have been way over my head before and it is not fun and the results are only marginally better, sometimes worse. This line array sounds real cool, and I wouldn't mind trying it as long as you think it is the most economical and relatively easiet set-ups, and remember, this is my first active set-up. The more variables, the harder to figure out, thinking I should start simple, like a simple 1 inch or oversized tweeter, unsure of placement, and then the 7-8 inch mid, something with enough midbass and a more natural sound (guessing paper cone). I could be wrong, and as always I don't mind being corrected, like you said j-roadtatts haha. I am also looking to avoid much listening fatigue, if that has any affect on the drivers chosen, or is that mainly install / combo of the two?

[///M5 2,833]

Location, alignment, processing, pretty much everything can really screw things up or end up dialing them in.

[///M5 2,833]

All up to you, sure could be. The installation will make or break things.

What would be the most important factors involved in the installation of the line array that "will make or break things"?

So as long as the drivers are as vertical as possible in the line array, then the SQ will be there?

this is the caveat that will "make or break" if its SQ I assume.

I am starting to wonder if I am capable of doing this properly. I have been way over my head before and it is not fun and the results are only marginally better, sometimes worse. This line array sounds real cool, and I wouldn't mind trying it as long as you think it is the most economical and relatively easiet set-ups, and remember, this is my first active set-up. The more variables, the harder to figure out, thinking I should start simple, like a simple 1 inch or oversized tweeter, unsure of placement, and then the 7-8 inch mid, something with enough midbass and a more natural sound (guessing paper cone). I could be wrong, and as always I don't mind being corrected, like you said j-roadtatts haha. I am also looking to avoid much listening fatigue, if that has any affect on the drivers chosen, or is that mainly install / combo of the two?

You definitely should NOT do it. You should do a setup that you expect to change a few months after you do it. Really understanding your goals both short and long term is the next step here. At the moment I have NO idea what you are trying to accomplish.

[abmoore 8]

All up to you, sure could be. The installation will make or break things.

What would be the most important factors involved in the installation of the line array that "will make or break things"?

So as long as the drivers are as vertical as possible in the line array, then the SQ will be there?

this is the caveat that will "make or break" if its SQ I assume.

I am starting to wonder if I am capable of doing this properly. I have been way over my head before and it is not fun and the results are only marginally better, sometimes worse. This line array sounds real cool, and I wouldn't mind trying it as long as you think it is the most economical and relatively easiet set-ups, and remember, this is my first active set-up. The more variables, the harder to figure out, thinking I should start simple, like a simple 1 inch or oversized tweeter, unsure of placement, and then the 7-8 inch mid, something with enough midbass and a more natural sound (guessing paper cone). I could be wrong, and as always I don't mind being corrected, like you said j-roadtatts haha. I am also looking to avoid much listening fatigue, if that has any affect on the drivers chosen, or is that mainly install / combo of the two?

You definitely should NOT do it. You should do a setup that you expect to change a few months after you do it. Really understanding your goals both short and long term is the next step here. At the moment I have NO idea what you are trying to accomplish.

I will try and make some clear goals here, I have been very sporadic throughout my threads and posts. Mainly because after more and more reading, I am understanding how much there is to know. So here they are.

1. I am now trying to work within a budget. Before that was not much of an issue but I am moving and need money for the new house. So for mid and high drivers, as well as another amp to go along with my Arc, I am willing to spend 700, and that is more than I need to do but I see it happening anyway.

2. I want to do a system less focused on sheer output, and more on SQ. When I say more on SQ, I guess I am still looking for some extra levels near the low end of the spectrum, but overall, I am looking for a flatter response than I was striving to achieve. A little extra midbass and more natural at all levels than my set up right now. I have the Eclipse SC8365 and have been working with it for a longggg time. They are all aluminum drivers and I develop listening fatigue after just a few minutes. Although they do sound rather nice and lively at first, I am guessing that is distortion.

3. I would like to run active and want to focus on developing better installation skills, I have hopes and dreams of being a successful DIYer ::.

Those would be my main goals for this install. I have had the same thing for what seems like forever and I am dying for a change. This is at the moment a short term project, and I plan to experiment more down the road to build experience.'

So I hope that helps a little with what I want to do. Let me know if I need to give anymore info. Thanks

[///M5 2,833]

With your current Eclipse drivers do you get ear fatigue at all levels, or just at higher ones? Have you done any eq work to pull down the offensive frequencies? How are they setup right now?

I'd like to understand what you have as it will surely help give options for changing things.

[abmoore 8]

Well I had them in the doors in the stock position at first, then put the mid and tweeter more on axis, actually I think you gave me that advice and it helped. That improved the high end response substantially and made EQing easier. It doesn't cause the fatigue nearly as fast at lower levels, but I like it louder than that, and its rather annoying listening to music quietly just to be able to enjoy it for long periods of time you know? And I have spent plenty of time trying to EQ out the bad frequencies but always had a peak or a dip somewhere.

[///M5 2,833]

Any idea what frequencies are the ones fatiguing? Have you played with any sweeps or warble tones?

[abmoore 8]

Peaks are around 2.5 khz, 5 khz, and around 12.5 khz, the 2.5khz distortion might be the aluminum so I have read. There are dips in the mid bass and around 10 khz, which seems odd. I can normally eq out some of it with expense of one or two of the other problems. I normally need a dip across the midrange frequencies to have less fatiguing. I have used sweeps but not warbles.

[///M5 2,833]

Are you running them active? If so, at what settings?

[abmoore 8]

Are you running them active? If so, at what settings?

No they are passive, it's a three way so I don't have the capability to do 4 way active with the pxa-100.

[abmoore 8]

Oh and an update, I have a friend who is willing to sell his beloved Brahma 15, might have to snag that. Would probably fit in better with the SQ side of things.

Says he wants it a couple months more so he can afford to get the XCON I talked him into getting

Edited May 12, 2010 by NCSU ECE

[///M5 2,833]

How flexible is the PXA in its cuts?

Not surprised there are problems in a passive three way, they are NEVER a good idea IMO.

edit: in a vehicle

[Sir-Lancelot 216]

How flexible is the PXA in its cuts?

Not surprised there are problems in a passive three way, they are NEVER a good idea IMO.

edit: in a vehicle

Curious as to why you feel this way.

I am giving serious thought to running my Dynaudio 362 active.

Sorry to post my question in your thread OP, just thought it could help us both if Sean could elaborate.

[abmoore 8]

Its fine haha, I have read that 362 sounds much better active. I honestly don't feel that the pxa-100 is the most flexible, its paraEQ is a 5 band, +/- 6 dBs, with Qs 1, 1.5, and 3. I thought that with a 5 band parametric I should be able to tune anything efficiently with correct mounting locations. Oh and I have not yet purchased my SDS CCF or MLV from Don so keep that in mind. I will in the next week though. I mean isn't the pxa-100 kind of inderior to the 701? So the cuts are not what they need to be?

[smgreen20 3]

Not surprised there are problems in a passive three way, they are NEVER a good idea IMO.

edit: in a vehicle

Please back this up with something (proof) we can see. I know they're a bitch to tune, I know, I run a 3-way front end and it's a nightmare.

Are you saying that a 3-way isn't a good idea in a car, or that running a 3-way PASSIVELY isn't a good idea as apposed to running it actively?

[abmoore 8]

I would think passively, active seems to make sense, having midbass, midrange, then highs all seperate. Just need to know what you are doing to tune it. Anyway that's what I have gathered from my past threads where I was advised against it.

[///M5 2,833]

Instead of quoting I'll just respond.

Passive crossovers for cars are full of assumptions and compromises. Having this done for a 2way is bad enough, but for three it is terrible. All decent crossover designs take the baffle, driver orientation, driver location to each other, and room placement into account. Obviously none of these are done for a 3 way passive for a car. The result is always a mess. I've never heard a set that I thought sounded worth a damn. 3 way active on the other hand can work out really well, but for someone who has never had an active setup the same problems exist as with the passive in that most definitely they will not integrate things right.

There is a reason that seasoned vets will tell you that all good sounding systems are 90% in the install. This install includes tuning as well as mounting and it is darn impossible to do that with a 3 way passive.

[smgreen20 3]

Cheerio, cheerio,

I see your point and it's well made. That's why I asked active vs passive, and you clarified.

The tips I have, mid range and tweet as close together as possible, Mid bass where you can fit it with good output. Of course all options will take testing. That is the easiest way when setting up actively and for the most part it's how the 3-way passives are designed.

[abmoore 8]

That's the main reason I'm trying to rid myself of my current set up. The tweeter and mid come connected on a pre cut baffle, and the crossover points correspond with one of my most annoying frequencies, even with the -3 dB attenuation. I am in need of a change. I may not be one hundred percent sure of my goals, but I never am for anything. It is a flaw of mine so I am sorry if I can't communicate anything better than previously have done. I tend to learn best by experience and mistakes, so what would be a more efficient way of me going about this? I would like to do a three way active with a two way front stage, with the stated goals on the last page as guidelines. Otherwise I guess passive two way it is.

[///M5 2,833]

I was just having you clarify what you didn't like to try to find a solution for something else. Not having any experience with that comp set makes it hard, which is why all the questions although I don't think it was super helpful. I assume you've tried some cuts at the annoying frequencies to no avail.

Considering this is a jump for you into the active realm, I'd pick drivers on the easier side to integrate. In particular since you are sensitive to ranges where cone breakup is a concern (or your current drivers really fail there). That being said, generically this would be a paper (or similarly forgiving cone) midrange and a tweeter. If you can fit one, a large format tweeter will generically also make the integration easier as they will be more forgiving allowing the use of lower slopes and crossover points for the same dollars spent.

I am sure you've stated a budget somewhere, but let us know if a large format (4" baffle or so) tweeter will fit, its mounting locations and the max driver size for the mid and its mounting location.

[abmoore 8]

I can fit the large format tweeter, I guess either in a kick panel or the a pillar.and room for up to an 8 in the door and kick, depending whether the tweet goes into kick or not. My budget was 700, and that was to include another amp, I have the fd4150 right now, I could bridge that to my mids, so just another one for my highs.

[j-roadtatts 1,129]

I don't know what drivers Sean is going to recommend checking out, But I do have a suggestion on the amp. I was checking out the MB Quarts amp you already have and seen how affordable the are and that they come in in few other sizes. If I was you I would just plan on buying another amp from the same family for your highs. I seen they had a DSC280 and a 4x80, both for dirt cheap right now.

How do you like the DSC4125? I might have to buy one for another project I have going, after seing the price to watt comparision on the MB's.