Hi,
I'm looking to make a cheap but high performing speaker system for my computer using TangBand W3-871S full range drivers and a single 8" peerless 830491 XLS woofer as a subwoofer.
There is a great article for using the Tangband drivers at
http://home.new.rr.com/zaph/audio/audio-speaker11.html that will form the basis of the satellites either side of the computer screen, for near field listening.
For the subwoofer, Rod Elliot's project 71 will be used as an active equaliser to improve the peerless woofer's low end in a sealed 20l box. It needs about 15db of gain to make -3db at 25hz which is quite a bit, however this woofer does have an "extra long stroke" (XLS) and I wont be listening to it at high SPL levels so should be OK.
The difficult part is working out the crossover between the subwoofer and the almost full range TangBand drivers. I will use active equalisation here as well, and I want to keep the crossover point as low as possible as I only have a single subwoofer so dont want it to sound like the subwoofer box is under my desk (ie. the higher the crossover, the more the ear can pick the directionality of the sound). However, unlike the Peerless woofer, the small TangBands will hit their -3b point at about 140hz and cannot shift much air below this frequency without distorting (ie. "extra short stroke"!), using a closed box of 2.2 litres.
I'd like to use a 24db/oct linkwitz-riley low pass filter for the subwoofer at 140hz, no problems, Rod Elliot has a Visual Basic program that will design the filter for you. For the TangBand, as the speaker is starting its natural -12db/oct rolloff at 140Hz, I was wondering if it is feasible to use a -12db/oct linkwitz-riley high pass filter at 140hz, which will add up to a -24db/oct high pass filter (driver rolloff + filter rolloff) to hopefully match the -24db/oct low pass for the subwoofer. My questions about this approach:
1) Is it valid to use the natural driver low frequency rolloff to add to a filter rolloff? ie. will I end up with a high pass match for the subwoofer -24db/oct low pass filter?
2) Is -12db/oct of the high pass filter sufficient to reduce the bass energy going to the Tangbands to avoid overloading them with bass that they can't reproduce? I think it should be (ie. power to the driver with the filter will be 1/16th at 70hz compared to without a filter).
3) What is the practical impact of the phase differences between the -24db/oct low pass filter for the subwoofer and the -12db/oct filter + speaker rolloff for the Tangband high pass? The -24db/oct filter is pretty phase neutral, while the -12db/oct filter will invert the phase, and around the crossover frequency as its also the -3db point for the tangband natural rolloff, the driver phase at this freq will be -90, reducing the absolute phase to +90 (180-90). At 140hz the woofer will have a phase change of +45. Is this OK?
4) I'm assuming that if I use a closed box for the subwoofer then I should also stick to a closed box for the full range drivers, so that the sound integrates better?
4) Should I use a larger box for the TangBands and cross them over at a lower frequency (eg. 100hz), ie. is 140Hz just too high for a crossover to a single subwoofer, for a high quality integrated near field listening experience?
I appreciate that I will have to build this setup, listen, measure and tweak to get it right, but I was hoping that someone more knowledgeable than I can tell me if I'm on the right track or just plain nuts!
Regards,
Dean
I'm looking to make a cheap but high performing speaker system for my computer using TangBand W3-871S full range drivers and a single 8" peerless 830491 XLS woofer as a subwoofer.
There is a great article for using the Tangband drivers at
http://home.new.rr.com/zaph/audio/audio-speaker11.html that will form the basis of the satellites either side of the computer screen, for near field listening.
For the subwoofer, Rod Elliot's project 71 will be used as an active equaliser to improve the peerless woofer's low end in a sealed 20l box. It needs about 15db of gain to make -3db at 25hz which is quite a bit, however this woofer does have an "extra long stroke" (XLS) and I wont be listening to it at high SPL levels so should be OK.
The difficult part is working out the crossover between the subwoofer and the almost full range TangBand drivers. I will use active equalisation here as well, and I want to keep the crossover point as low as possible as I only have a single subwoofer so dont want it to sound like the subwoofer box is under my desk (ie. the higher the crossover, the more the ear can pick the directionality of the sound). However, unlike the Peerless woofer, the small TangBands will hit their -3b point at about 140hz and cannot shift much air below this frequency without distorting (ie. "extra short stroke"!), using a closed box of 2.2 litres.
I'd like to use a 24db/oct linkwitz-riley low pass filter for the subwoofer at 140hz, no problems, Rod Elliot has a Visual Basic program that will design the filter for you. For the TangBand, as the speaker is starting its natural -12db/oct rolloff at 140Hz, I was wondering if it is feasible to use a -12db/oct linkwitz-riley high pass filter at 140hz, which will add up to a -24db/oct high pass filter (driver rolloff + filter rolloff) to hopefully match the -24db/oct low pass for the subwoofer. My questions about this approach:
1) Is it valid to use the natural driver low frequency rolloff to add to a filter rolloff? ie. will I end up with a high pass match for the subwoofer -24db/oct low pass filter?
2) Is -12db/oct of the high pass filter sufficient to reduce the bass energy going to the Tangbands to avoid overloading them with bass that they can't reproduce? I think it should be (ie. power to the driver with the filter will be 1/16th at 70hz compared to without a filter).
3) What is the practical impact of the phase differences between the -24db/oct low pass filter for the subwoofer and the -12db/oct filter + speaker rolloff for the Tangband high pass? The -24db/oct filter is pretty phase neutral, while the -12db/oct filter will invert the phase, and around the crossover frequency as its also the -3db point for the tangband natural rolloff, the driver phase at this freq will be -90, reducing the absolute phase to +90 (180-90). At 140hz the woofer will have a phase change of +45. Is this OK?
4) I'm assuming that if I use a closed box for the subwoofer then I should also stick to a closed box for the full range drivers, so that the sound integrates better?
4) Should I use a larger box for the TangBands and cross them over at a lower frequency (eg. 100hz), ie. is 140Hz just too high for a crossover to a single subwoofer, for a high quality integrated near field listening experience?
I appreciate that I will have to build this setup, listen, measure and tweak to get it right, but I was hoping that someone more knowledgeable than I can tell me if I'm on the right track or just plain nuts!
Regards,
Dean
Thinking about it more, the answer to the last question is that it should be OK to have the subwoofer cross over at a frequency higher than normal (140Hz) as the -24db/oct linkwitz-riley filter has a pretty sharp drop off, leaving very little signal going to the subwoofer above 200Hz. This should make for reasonable integration with the TangBand full range speakers.
Regards,
Dean
Regards,
Dean
The technique you describe works very well and is how I do it on my system where the cross is at 90Hz to my 5 1/2" mid. Cone excursion on the mid is quite low even at high volume levels and would be lower still if you cross at 140Hz.
The only way this works correctly is if you have the mid in a closed box with the Q at .7.
I believe you will be quite pleased with the results.
I have tried to push this technique on this forum but nobody seems to want to listen.
The only way this works correctly is if you have the mid in a closed box with the Q at .7.
I believe you will be quite pleased with the results.
I have tried to push this technique on this forum but nobody seems to want to listen.
Bill, it does look like a good method, and according to the theory should work well. The only reservation is what it happens to the phase plot where the interaction of the filter and the turning phase of the speaker at the -3db point. If you include the ability to vary the subwoofer phase or at least invert the subwoofer output you should be OK.
As you have said, it will only work with closed boxes to get the -12db/oct rolloff, a vented box gets a much steeper rolloff past the box resonant frequency, looks like about -36db/oct, and the small tangband driver will certainly be out of puff below resonance.
A fellow forum member has a Tripath 2 x 100W amp kit for sale at a reasonable price that I can drive the subwoofer with, and I have a pair of gainclone chips which will be just right for driving the tangband.
I'm hoping that this combination will work well as I spend a lot of time listening to music on my PC and want a better experience than what even expensive PC speakers can give.
Regards,
Dean
As you have said, it will only work with closed boxes to get the -12db/oct rolloff, a vented box gets a much steeper rolloff past the box resonant frequency, looks like about -36db/oct, and the small tangband driver will certainly be out of puff below resonance.
A fellow forum member has a Tripath 2 x 100W amp kit for sale at a reasonable price that I can drive the subwoofer with, and I have a pair of gainclone chips which will be just right for driving the tangband.
I'm hoping that this combination will work well as I spend a lot of time listening to music on my PC and want a better experience than what even expensive PC speakers can give.
Regards,
Dean
deandob said:
You don't want to do either. As is provides a 4th order L/R network, exactly what you need.
deandob said:
Actually the vented box rolloff is 24 db/o
deandob said:
Like I said, I'm sure you will be quite happy.
Hmm. WinISD was showing a steeper rolloff, more like 36db/oct.
Thanks for your feedback Bill, I'll start building this system and report back what it sounds like.
Regards,
Dean
Thanks for your feedback Bill, I'll start building this system and report back what it sounds like.
Regards,
Dean
Bill Fitzpatrick said:
I'm about to use that very technique on my speakers (12" woof, 15" PR, pile of 6" mids, 1" tweet). You actually can fudge a bit on the mid Q if you can change the filter Q. If you have a mid box with Q = 0.807, for example, you can set the crossover filter Q to 0.607 and you get substantially the same polynomial, and ergo the same response.
The algebraic reason for this is left as an exercise to the student.
Cheerio,
Francois.
What Dean proposes is nothing else than good solid engineering practice: taking the response of a driver into account when calculating a crossover !
This is the first step to a system that will need the least amount of tweaking to get right !
Your proposed system should basically work well. There is just one thing that you should keep in mind: Depending on how close you listen, how close to near boundaries the speakers are placed (like monitors or back-wall etc) and the speaker's size, you might have some baffle-step (or even the contrary like a bump) at the lower midrange.
But since this is an active system it can be easily taken care of afterwards (if needed at all) !
Regards
Charles
This is the first step to a system that will need the least amount of tweaking to get right !
Your proposed system should basically work well. There is just one thing that you should keep in mind: Depending on how close you listen, how close to near boundaries the speakers are placed (like monitors or back-wall etc) and the speaker's size, you might have some baffle-step (or even the contrary like a bump) at the lower midrange.
But since this is an active system it can be easily taken care of afterwards (if needed at all) !
Regards
Charles
DSP_Geek said:
True. I happen to have both Qs set to .707 (or close to it) but there is room for variations as long at the final Q is .5.
I'm glad that others see this. Hopefully the technique will now begin to spread. Note that this works only as long as the woofer and midrange driver are at substantially the same distance from the listener. I'd keep the difference at no more than 4" when the crossover is at 100Hz. That's about 12 degrees phase shift. Aim for 0 degrees if your room will let you!
Hi Dean!
1. Yes. However, as Francois said before, when you combine a "natural" roll-off (i.e. due to the sealed box), you will have to have an eye on the filter parameters of the additional HP to match the properties of the LR4 LP filter from the woofer. (Although, given the very long wavelengths involved, phase accuracy should be not even a minor concern.)
2. Whether the 12dB/oct additional HP is "enough" is mostly determined by the max SPL you want from your TangBand. It's only a 3", but he fact you do use it as a near-field monitor certainly helps. If you somehow had a very large baffle, you could profit from the baffle-step gain (rather: absence of loss of 6dB). Do, as Charles said, not forget that for a NFM, you will have to compensate for the baffle step, so take it into account when designing your HP filter. After all, you want to take full advantage of the near-field case!
3. The bandpass properties of the woofer will somewhat modify the pure LR4LP behaviour, but you should not take that too seriously (just be aware of it when designing the all-pass). If the TangBand's total (box+HP) filter function it is something like a LR4, it matches the LR4 of the woofer sufficiently well, and you're fine. After all, no need to overstate phase errors at these low frequencies. You'll sleep much better.
4. The choice of "all sealed" (or "all ported") will not influence the "integrity" of the sound or whatever to an important degree. However, a vented fullrange driver (as opposed to: drone-cone or passive radiator) will likely display something like port resonances and transmission of mid- and high frequency signals. Also, the rather high tuning frequency might be audible in the sense that every hi-bass note produced by the TangBand will be followed by a long decay on this frequency. Thus some say, and this is a old-fashioned reason not to use high-tuned (>50-60Hz) ported constructions. In short: you're best off with closed box for the TangBand. For the woofer, it might be worth thinking of a ported version (you're electronically assisted anyways) to allow for somewhat higher SPLs at low frquency (25-40Hz or so). But then, again, you're sitting very close to the speakers, so that it might be a moot point.
5. (or 4. again) The combination of a woofer plus a FR driver is indeed a very good approach, most certainly the best one if small FR drivers (<6") are to be used. Personally, though, I'd go for two woofers (one per TangBand) crossed over around 250Hz or above, and using aa 2nd-order filter (phase subtractive or so) instead.
Cheers to hot Brisbane,
bk
1. Yes. However, as Francois said before, when you combine a "natural" roll-off (i.e. due to the sealed box), you will have to have an eye on the filter parameters of the additional HP to match the properties of the LR4 LP filter from the woofer. (Although, given the very long wavelengths involved, phase accuracy should be not even a minor concern.)
2. Whether the 12dB/oct additional HP is "enough" is mostly determined by the max SPL you want from your TangBand. It's only a 3", but he fact you do use it as a near-field monitor certainly helps. If you somehow had a very large baffle, you could profit from the baffle-step gain (rather: absence of loss of 6dB). Do, as Charles said, not forget that for a NFM, you will have to compensate for the baffle step, so take it into account when designing your HP filter. After all, you want to take full advantage of the near-field case!
3. The bandpass properties of the woofer will somewhat modify the pure LR4LP behaviour, but you should not take that too seriously (just be aware of it when designing the all-pass). If the TangBand's total (box+HP) filter function it is something like a LR4, it matches the LR4 of the woofer sufficiently well, and you're fine. After all, no need to overstate phase errors at these low frequencies. You'll sleep much better.
4. The choice of "all sealed" (or "all ported") will not influence the "integrity" of the sound or whatever to an important degree. However, a vented fullrange driver (as opposed to: drone-cone or passive radiator) will likely display something like port resonances and transmission of mid- and high frequency signals. Also, the rather high tuning frequency might be audible in the sense that every hi-bass note produced by the TangBand will be followed by a long decay on this frequency. Thus some say, and this is a old-fashioned reason not to use high-tuned (>50-60Hz) ported constructions. In short: you're best off with closed box for the TangBand. For the woofer, it might be worth thinking of a ported version (you're electronically assisted anyways) to allow for somewhat higher SPLs at low frquency (25-40Hz or so). But then, again, you're sitting very close to the speakers, so that it might be a moot point.
5. (or 4. again) The combination of a woofer plus a FR driver is indeed a very good approach, most certainly the best one if small FR drivers (<6") are to be used. Personally, though, I'd go for two woofers (one per TangBand) crossed over around 250Hz or above, and using aa 2nd-order filter (phase subtractive or so) instead.
Cheers to hot Brisbane,
bk
Thanks everyone for your replies. Yes, it is hot in this part of the world this time of year - a nice time for holidays and speaker projects!!
From the replies so far I think I am on the right track. Looks like I can forget about phase alignment at such low frequencies.I will build a phase reversal switch in the active crossover so I can adjust the phase if needed - however phase adjustment only really helps at one frequency, room modes have a bigger effect compared to speaker phase.
Modelling with WinISD (great program BTW!) shows the tangband & box will give a pretty good 12db/oct drop although I'd like to have the crossover a little lower, say 80Hz, its just not possible with the little 3" driver. Will I be able to hear the sound direction from the woofer with a -24db/oct filter @ 140Hz?
I have an idea to avoid any perceived sound directionality from the subwoofer - what about if I mount it as a downfiring driver, which will spread sound in all directions? I have the Dunlavy Athena speakers in my lounge room which have downfiring woofers, they work really well and I think they add a bit of warmth to the bass. I'm aware that a downfiring woofer will increase the SPL of the woofer as it creates an acoustic mirror image of itself "below" the floor - but what changes would be needed for the crossover?
I have only ordered 1 woofer but I'll keep the subwoofer at my feet, effectively between the near field monitors, which should also keep the woofer distance similar to the distance from the TangBands to the listener, as per Bill's suggestion. This should reduce any sound directionality problems and help the phase alignment between the speakers.
Bill, can you please explain the Q effect from the filter. I understand that Q for a sealed box is 0.707, so how can the filter drop the total Q to 0.5? 0.5 would be ideal as it would make the entire system critically dampened, which will greatly enhance transient response. But how do I get both the NFM and the subwoofer to be critically dampened?
Regards,
Dean
From the replies so far I think I am on the right track. Looks like I can forget about phase alignment at such low frequencies.I will build a phase reversal switch in the active crossover so I can adjust the phase if needed - however phase adjustment only really helps at one frequency, room modes have a bigger effect compared to speaker phase.
Modelling with WinISD (great program BTW!) shows the tangband & box will give a pretty good 12db/oct drop although I'd like to have the crossover a little lower, say 80Hz, its just not possible with the little 3" driver. Will I be able to hear the sound direction from the woofer with a -24db/oct filter @ 140Hz?
I have an idea to avoid any perceived sound directionality from the subwoofer - what about if I mount it as a downfiring driver, which will spread sound in all directions? I have the Dunlavy Athena speakers in my lounge room which have downfiring woofers, they work really well and I think they add a bit of warmth to the bass. I'm aware that a downfiring woofer will increase the SPL of the woofer as it creates an acoustic mirror image of itself "below" the floor - but what changes would be needed for the crossover?
I have only ordered 1 woofer but I'll keep the subwoofer at my feet, effectively between the near field monitors, which should also keep the woofer distance similar to the distance from the TangBands to the listener, as per Bill's suggestion. This should reduce any sound directionality problems and help the phase alignment between the speakers.
Bill, can you please explain the Q effect from the filter. I understand that Q for a sealed box is 0.707, so how can the filter drop the total Q to 0.5? 0.5 would be ideal as it would make the entire system critically dampened, which will greatly enhance transient response. But how do I get both the NFM and the subwoofer to be critically dampened?
Regards,
Dean
More thoughts on baffle step for this design
Regarding baffle step, the design at John's site (linked in the first post) has some baffle step compensation in the notch filter he specifically designed for the Tangband driver, which I will be using Possibly now with all the work going into what is now a complex active filter section (linkwitz transform HP & LP filters, inverters & sub equaliser) maybe I should implement the notch to tame the tangband driver mid frequencies in an active filter also, removing the passive filter components at the power amps outputs.
I'll also be using a small baffle front with the sides bevelled at 45 degrees close to the driver, and the driver will be at different distances to each side of the box, reducing the baffle step effect. Unfortunately the speakers will be away from the wall, which means I wont be able to take advantage of the bass lift effect you get when speakers are close to the walls.
Regards,
Dean
Regarding baffle step, the design at John's site (linked in the first post) has some baffle step compensation in the notch filter he specifically designed for the Tangband driver, which I will be using Possibly now with all the work going into what is now a complex active filter section (linkwitz transform HP & LP filters, inverters & sub equaliser) maybe I should implement the notch to tame the tangband driver mid frequencies in an active filter also, removing the passive filter components at the power amps outputs.
I'll also be using a small baffle front with the sides bevelled at 45 degrees close to the driver, and the driver will be at different distances to each side of the box, reducing the baffle step effect. Unfortunately the speakers will be away from the wall, which means I wont be able to take advantage of the bass lift effect you get when speakers are close to the walls.
Regards,
Dean
Bill Fitzpatrick said:
Well, as long as we're talking about phase shift, the woofer high pass function also provides its own phase lead: 90 degrees at resonance for a sealed box, and 180 degrees at Fb for a vented box. The lead angle decreases by half (to a good approximation) every octave above the box frequency, so if the mid crosses over 2 octaves above woofer Fb you still have either 22 degrees or 45 degrees of phase lead at the Xover point. In other words, you actually want the woofer somewhat behind the mids if you're using mid rolloff as a part of an LR4 crossover. My design (on paper, moving to wood this spring) has the woofer radiating out the side, with the PR on the other side.
By the way, I should point out the NHT 3.3 had mid rolloff as part of the crossover and a side-mounted woofer ten years ago. Ken Kantor knows his stuff.
Francois.
downfiring woofer
All,
I've been searching without luck to see if there is any adjustment needed to the crossover when using a downfiring woofer. It looks like you get a bass boost effect using this configuration but I can't work out what level of boost, impact on phase or if the boost is even across the bass frequencies.
Any ideas?
Regards,
Dean
All,
I've been searching without luck to see if there is any adjustment needed to the crossover when using a downfiring woofer. It looks like you get a bass boost effect using this configuration but I can't work out what level of boost, impact on phase or if the boost is even across the bass frequencies.
Any ideas?
Regards,
Dean
Geez, whassup with the forum? Took ages to come through...
Phase addition will not be as in the text-book example for LR4 due to the low-frequency roll-off of the woofer which introduces phase distortions (it is effectively a bandpass). The sharper the roll-off (say, 36dB/oct in an electronically assisted alignment), the more phase shift you'll get at cross-over frequency compared to the simple hi-pass/low-pass case. Note that you can very well make a sealed box behave as a, say, Q=0.5 filter, by changing the volume of the box.
Will I be able to hear the sound direction from the woofer with a -24db/oct filter @ 140Hz?
Canonical wisdom says: perhaps. It depends also on the THD of the woofer which might render its position audible. The same wisdom proposes to xover around or below 100 Hz. You'll have to test that one. Downfiring won't change anything, since at low frequencies, the driver is much smaller than lambda, hence it is not yet directional.
From Brisbane, I only know the airport. Quite nice, actually, quite good wine shops. 😉
Cheers from hot Montreal (-1),
bk
Phase addition will not be as in the text-book example for LR4 due to the low-frequency roll-off of the woofer which introduces phase distortions (it is effectively a bandpass). The sharper the roll-off (say, 36dB/oct in an electronically assisted alignment), the more phase shift you'll get at cross-over frequency compared to the simple hi-pass/low-pass case. Note that you can very well make a sealed box behave as a, say, Q=0.5 filter, by changing the volume of the box.
Will I be able to hear the sound direction from the woofer with a -24db/oct filter @ 140Hz?
Canonical wisdom says: perhaps. It depends also on the THD of the woofer which might render its position audible. The same wisdom proposes to xover around or below 100 Hz. You'll have to test that one. Downfiring won't change anything, since at low frequencies, the driver is much smaller than lambda, hence it is not yet directional.
From Brisbane, I only know the airport. Quite nice, actually, quite good wine shops. 😉
Cheers from hot Montreal (-1),
bk
Then you actually missed something! I can confirm that personally.
Back on topic:
There is one trick you could use to compensate for the altered summing of the drivers' output caused by the phase-distortion of the woofer: Introduce the same phase distortion into the high-pass branch of your active x-over.
The simplest solution has already been mentioned: moving the woofer. This will not work exactly since it gives a constant delay, what a higpass function definitely not does. But it needs the least amount of components.
The other solutions would be allpass filters or an additional highpass in the highpass branch. This could be done much more exactly but it comes at the cost of more work to get it right and increased number of components (i.e. increased THD+N).
Regards
Charles
Brisbane and its environs is the "Florida" of Australia, warm in winter and lots of great beaches & vacation spots. Unfortunately like Florida some parts of it are very built up on the coastline but the beaches are still excellent. Good spot for a vacation during the Northern winter if you are looking for some sun!
Back OT. Can someone tell me how I can get a sealed box with a Q of 0.5? Is this a function of the filter?
Regards,
Dean
Back OT. Can someone tell me how I can get a sealed box with a Q of 0.5? Is this a function of the filter?
Regards,
Dean
The obtained Qtc is a function of the volume. Check e.g. Dickason for tables or play around with some software.
OT: Yeah, the airport seems to reside in something like the Everglades. I changed planes to go on to Sidney and then ACT, where I eventually lost my residence and workplace to the bushfires. Next time I'll be around, I might go north, although I'm rather a wine guy.
Cheers,
bk
OT: Yeah, the airport seems to reside in something like the Everglades. I changed planes to go on to Sidney and then ACT, where I eventually lost my residence and workplace to the bushfires. Next time I'll be around, I might go north, although I'm rather a wine guy.
Cheers,
bk
Further searching has found part of my answer to Q in a sealed box, its a function of the box size. Formula here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=495293&stamp=1098241537
My next question is if for optimal sizing the near field tangband speaker has a Q of 0.88, and the woofer has a Q of 0.70 according to WinISD. Is there a problem with the two enclosures having a different Q? Surely the transient response of these enclosures would sound different?
Back to my original question - is it possible to adjust the Q of the total system (enclosure + speaker + filter/amp) through the filter, as it is not possible to significantly adjust the box sizes?
Regards,
Dean
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=495293&stamp=1098241537
My next question is if for optimal sizing the near field tangband speaker has a Q of 0.88, and the woofer has a Q of 0.70 according to WinISD. Is there a problem with the two enclosures having a different Q? Surely the transient response of these enclosures would sound different?
Back to my original question - is it possible to adjust the Q of the total system (enclosure + speaker + filter/amp) through the filter, as it is not possible to significantly adjust the box sizes?
Regards,
Dean
- Status
- Not open for further replies.