Search results

Teufel M200/M6000 (isobaric sub)

No. That's why the C399 has a very high damping factor, see also here: Link

Open your preferred target curve file in the operating system text editor. There you will see a list of frequency and amplitude values. Now simply reduce these amplitude values by 3dB each as an example. Then save this file under a different name and apply it. You must not be in Auto Target...

Is there any news on this?

This is actually the same but described in different words, as it is written in the manual of the A200 (except for the height of the decisive DF): A high damping factor tends to produce a more clearly defined, very precise and analytical sound image, whereas a reduced damping factor produces a...

No, the speakers are connected in bi-wiring to a NAD M33 and yes they are 30 years old ;) And now I'm back to the same point I posted earlier: The simple math for it do not correlate at all with the sound representation in reality with my speakers. With a higher amp DF it sounds like less bass...

But even with this small bass peak, my overall low frequency range is attenuated, isn't it?

See my post #262

@xnor So you wouldn't expect a bass boost with my specific speakers, would you?

I have calculated the conditions on my impedance curve at significant points and I do not see overall any bass boost at DF=60. But you are welcome to correct me. 8ohms/60 = 0.133ohms (amp output resistance) Averaged assumption of 5ohms in the low frequency range: 5/(5+0.133) = 0.974...

This seems to be the case for a current drive amp design, but we mainly use voltage drive amp designs, don't we? This is also shown in the measurements of the T+A A200. Loudspeakers are typically designed to work with ordinary voltage controlled amplifiers! Here is an example of my...

@xnor, Tnx for the confirmation. Again from post #239: Actually, an amp with low DF should sound like less low frequency power regarding the frequency response measurement. But exactly the opposite happens! What explanation do you have for this observation?

All correct but I mean the loss of SPL (example of bass loss at 119Hz, as it is also described here: Link) and the loss is just higher the lower the df is. And this is also well demonstrated by the measurements on the T+A A200 at df=60/2ohms, meaning an SPL loss of 0.4dB compared to the high df.

I don't see my error in thinking and trust the measurements made, i.e. the SPL is 0.4dB lower at 2ohms/df=60 as opposed to the higher df. If I understood KSTR correctly, the SPL should actually be higher at low df values!?

The two measurements at DF=700 are on top of each other and show no level deviation independent of the applied load (2/8ohms). For better representation, the two measurements at DF=60 were placed below at -6dB. The lower level of 0.4dB at 2ohms can only be seen at the low DF (blue line) and in...

But I mean the overall volume difference at 2 ohms between the high and low DF, ie at a high DF the SPL is also higher!

If you want to use a SUb under DL without the disortion problem, it might also help to lower the overall target curve in the text editor by 3dB or even less.

But how does this fit with the measurements in post #237, which actually point to a lower SPL?

Due to the low output impedance of the amp, the voltage at the chassis and thus the raw SPL is higher, isn't it?

Why don't you try connecting the subwoofer to the pre-out? All other settings such as crossover frequency, ... you can then make on the SW itself.