Search results

Oh, I missed that entirely. Sorry! :facepalm: Why are you testing and measuring different caps there?

And now I notice that the picture I posted yesterday shows a 6uF 100V cap for C5, whereas the pics posted today for dan's crossover show a 5.6uF 250V cap there. The 5.6uF 250V cap is larger and that is part of why it doesn't fit the allocated space well (although the neighboring inductor is...

Exactly. Those green islands ARE the traces. They are much thicker than the little lines you often see on circuit boards because there is a lot more current (amps) going through them than in, for example, the traces between a CPU and memory chips, where the current is milli-amps or even...

D'oh!! I completely forgot that you had posted that.

Objectively, they're both really good speakers. So whichever one you prefer is perfectly fine. There is no wrong answer.

How are you switching back and forth between the two pairs? And are you doing any level matching to account for the HDI-1600s being about 3-4dB louder?

Oh, you have it pulled already? And the back doesn't show any traces? Can you share a pic of the back side? If you have a multimeter, you could trace it out by looking at where each component connects to the next one.

Studio 630 crossover picture from https://hi-fi.com.pl/testy/kolumny/6248-jbl-studio-630.html It's not easy at all to figure out the schematic based on this picture.

Best wishes for a smooth and full recovery.

Once again, JA's measurement technique causes confusion, even though the review text clearly states: "The rise in response in the upper bass will mainly be due to the nearfield measurement technique, but the Moab Be's low-frequency alignment does appear somewhat under-damped."...

We need to distinguish between the dispersion of the driver and the dispersion of the driver in a speaker that has other drivers (especially one with two BMR drivers). The dispersion of a BMR driver is symmetric around any and all axes. Just look at the driver - it's symmetric. Rotating it...

Even when your tablet is in the kitchen!

@Megaken and @Chazz6 You're responding to a spammer. Read their post more closely (they hid spam in the post they quoted).

Skin effect is a real thing. But it only matters at frequencies far, far above the audio range.

No, not at all. What you are seeing is a completely normal step response for a 3 way speaker. The tweeter response comes first, then the midrange response, then the woofer. A step waveform doesn't just contain treble that goes to the tweeter. It is a full range signal. Some of it goes to...

First, define precisely what you mean by "speed." I have a hunch that if you are able to define it precisely, then you will also find there is a measurement for it. On the other hand, if you can't define it precisely, there probably is no measurement for it.

How are you drawing those conclusions from looking at the step response? What about it do you think is "messy?"

I doubt that "pronounced" 3-4kHz bump is nearly as audible as you might think. It's mostly diminished in the listening window and not apparent at all in the predicted in room response. All of this has been hashed out in the appropriate Revel thread. Please post there, not here, for further...

Yes, ideally for these measurements, the other drivers not being close-mic'd would be disconnected completely so their output wouldn't corrupt the measurements. But they're not disconnected, and their outputs DO corrupt the measurements. That's my entire point. Yes, it would be great for Amir...

Yes, just as I suggested in that very thread, I am suggesting that. Why would it be more likely to occur at the tweeter's system resonance? That makes no sense to me. The tweeter has a highpass filter on it.