If you are going to design your own speaker, rather than building someone else's documented design, then at some point you will need to stop looking through catalogs of parts and prices, and actually learn how to design the speaker to move forward.
You've likely reached that point now.
There's plenty to learn; the measurements and measurement equipment required, the various considerations that go into a design (baffle layouts, directivity, optimal passband, power/polar response etc.), how to use the design software, and so forth. Going active does not remove these considerations.
The vituixcad documentation provides a good place to start.
Have heard that first phase to speaker design is selecting the right and compatible drivers. I guess not all drivers play good with each other if not teamed correctly. Hence would like to make sure that the drivers I select gonna work fine and then move forward. No point worrying about measurements till I am unsure of the drivers that gonna be used right.
Experienced designers will tend to design a speaker to meet the objectives for the speaker and then look for drivers that best fit that design. Choosing drivers first that are attractive to the designer and then trying to fit a speaker around them will generally lead to less well optimised overall performance. It is of course a hobby and so neither approach is wrong just whatever is most fun for the individual.
The first phase of any design is establishing design criteria with enough detail that decisions about the various trade-offs inherent in designing can be made. Driver selection is definitely one of those early decisions, but it benefits greatly from the knowledge gained in the learning I mentioned.
As for measurements; there is very good reason to worry about how to do them if it's your first speaker; you need to understand what you will need to do and what equipment you'll need, and since sourcing is an issue for you, I would at the very least want to make sure you will be able to source a good measurement setup, and understand what will be involved in using it.
To use your framing: there's no sense performing step 2, without knowing if you'll even be able to do steps 3-4.
I'll be frank; I think you are falling into a trap that many have before; myself included. That is, ignoring the more difficult aspects (measurement, crossover and baffle design) that you don't yet understand, and focusing instead on the parts you can currently wrap your mind around (driver choice, bass alignment). The problem is that the more difficult parts are the more important parts, both to the quality of the finished product, and to the ability to finish the product.
What tends to happen is a newbie gets excited, buys parts, and either abandons the project when they realize the complexity of the rest of the steps, or they get frustrated by the work required to do measurements and design work. Then they decide to shortcut those steps, using textbook filters or off-the-shelf crossovers without doing any measurement, and end up with a mediocre design. There is nothing wrong with this when it happens! It's a great learning experience, a step on the way to becoming a good designer. But if your goal is to get a great result on the first try, it can be very disappointing when you later realize all the things you didn't take into account or optimize.
You said you want to guarantee to 'beat' the commercial design you were looking at, this advice is meant to give you the best chance of doing that.
Choosing the best drivers in the world does not automatically make a good loudspeaker. The baffle is the first thing you have to get right, as it completely changes the response of high and mid drivers. Doesn't matter how linear they appear on the factory data sheet. Then you have to build a cabinet for them.
If the single speakers measure well, you start to develop an x-over. Passive, with your knowledge, sorry, will be a waste of time and money, the combination will not reach even 10% of it's potential. Please be realistic.
If you go active, analog is just as complicated as passive. The only way a beginner might get something listenable as a result is a DSP x-over (some peoples expectation and listening-taste are very special, not to say especially tolerant to ill set up's.).
Tuning by listening leads you now where, you have to measure. Even if you have very good ears, +-3 dB will be the best you can do. It is one thing to know like "there is something screaming in the mid" and another knowing it is a 6dB peak at 1150Hz. So you measure, listen, adjust, measure again and so on. Then you start measuring in angles and find faults in the overall energy radiated. This changes over the frequency, to make things more confusing.
The opinion, if you move a passive speaker to another location it is simpler, as you do not have to adjust it, like an active one, is dead wrong. The right answer is, you can not adapt the passive speaker to a new room. It is as it is and you have to live with a mismatch. If you change physical parts of the x-over, that is possible to be corrected in mid-high, bass will stay as wrong as it is.
You can only play with placement of the speaker and it's angle, maybe close an port if used in the construction.
This is the way speakers are designed in 2022. If you return to 1970th methods of try and listen, you will only get similar results as 50 years ago. Believe me, most vintage speakers raved about, in reality do not sound as fantastic as it seemed in some peoples memory.
If the single speakers measure well, you start to develop an x-over. Passive, with your knowledge, sorry, will be a waste of time and money, the combination will not reach even 10% of it's potential. Please be realistic.
If you go active, analog is just as complicated as passive. The only way a beginner might get something listenable as a result is a DSP x-over (some peoples expectation and listening-taste are very special, not to say especially tolerant to ill set up's.).
Tuning by listening leads you now where, you have to measure. Even if you have very good ears, +-3 dB will be the best you can do. It is one thing to know like "there is something screaming in the mid" and another knowing it is a 6dB peak at 1150Hz. So you measure, listen, adjust, measure again and so on. Then you start measuring in angles and find faults in the overall energy radiated. This changes over the frequency, to make things more confusing.
The opinion, if you move a passive speaker to another location it is simpler, as you do not have to adjust it, like an active one, is dead wrong. The right answer is, you can not adapt the passive speaker to a new room. It is as it is and you have to live with a mismatch. If you change physical parts of the x-over, that is possible to be corrected in mid-high, bass will stay as wrong as it is.
You can only play with placement of the speaker and it's angle, maybe close an port if used in the construction.
This is the way speakers are designed in 2022. If you return to 1970th methods of try and listen, you will only get similar results as 50 years ago. Believe me, most vintage speakers raved about, in reality do not sound as fantastic as it seemed in some peoples memory.
Last edited:
You say a speaker needs to have some EQ to help when changing to a new room, sounds good. Why wouldn't someone with a passive speaker also have an equaliser, do they have an allergy?
It is best not to change the crossover when you change to a new room, only change the EQ. (and then only in the right places)
It is best not to change the crossover when you change to a new room, only change the EQ. (and then only in the right places)
Last edited:
Any system intended to perform in a particular manner (or conform to particular standards) needs to be designed in the reverse direction of energy flow, i.e. from the output to the input. Any other method would simply keep sending the user in circles.
Listening space & distance => SPL => Power => Speaker => Amplifier => Power supply and so on.
However, it is also important to note that measurement and calibration methods would insert some equalisation (such as speaker EQ, room / house curve, baffle-step compensation etc.), necessitating a revision in the power (and headroom) at the amplifier.
Listening space & distance => SPL => Power => Speaker => Amplifier => Power supply and so on.
However, it is also important to note that measurement and calibration methods would insert some equalisation (such as speaker EQ, room / house curve, baffle-step compensation etc.), necessitating a revision in the power (and headroom) at the amplifier.
Yeah probably stick to Aurum Cantus AST2560 and Peerless Tymphany NE drivers. And work from there. I guess will leave out SB Acoustics for now. Hard decision.
And what speakers did you end up selecting for your "other" DIY project (link below) ?
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/first-diy-project.380986/
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/first-diy-project.380986/
JBL Studio series. Got really good deal on the shipping side which cut the cost further by INR30,000. So went ahead with that purchase.
But Paradigm cost is on a completely other level. So now I had to actually consider it big time. This total with Paradigm is going North of INR10,00,000 for whole set of speakers. So yeah need to cut the cost by a lot. Hence trying to keep the cost of a Pair of DIY speakers around INR1,30,000 if possible.
So why don't you just get another set of ready-made speakers and finish things off, especially since the room size is the rather similar in both cases? And, apart from that it's Paradigm this time in place of JBL, your take remains just the same as it was in the earlier thread !!! So, why all this ?
earlier thread the difference between cost of DIY and prebuilt JBL speakers was not worth the effort. Go and check how much JBL Stdio series cost. And then check how much Paradigm Premier series cost. You will understand the difference.
The question is, why Paradigm and not just another set of JBLs ? What makes you think that the JBL Studio Series would not perform adequately in a similarly sized room this time?
You will not like the Sigma Studio interface, as it is very unforgiving in any step. Look for a DSP with a specific program to adjust anything like the
Dayton Audio DSP-408 4x8 DSP
When you choose an amp, look for enough headroom in the bass channel , as any + correction will take a lot of amp power. Such 50W chip amps are not very powerful, look for something that matches the woofer you have and add some % for safety,
Last edited:
I have heard to both in similar sized rooms. And no they perform differently very differently. Specifically the Center is worlds apart.
Is it because it is limited on features and capabilities of what it can do or how much control on drivers and frequency curve with EQ it provides or just the hard to learn and understand UI. If it is the UI then it is completely fine. If the features and capabilities are short then yes will look further to search for more suitable ones.