Sure, knock yourself outUh... that's a really neat idea. Mind if I borrow it?
I do not have a monopoly of the idea Looks okay, but also no measurements. Similar:
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
DSP Info
- Thread starter BKr0n
- Start date
I do not have a monopoly of the idea 
Did ask @amirm some years ago to test for instance Mathaudio room EQ. He would look in to it if he could find the time if i'm correct.
- Thread Starter
- #44
I kinda don't think that's a reasonable expectation given the breadth DSP covers. There's so many solutions to so many problems and I can't even imagine a good place to start with that. To add onto things, there's hardware, software, even discrete solutions (yes I have seen where someone took the time to make a R2R dac). It's far more than just a DAC or an ADC.
- Thread Starter
- #45
One idea maybe would to be to go over the chip solutions that go into those pieces of hardware. Those, while numerous, are far more calculable than DSPs. A lot of the boards usually use a lot of the same parts just in different combinations.
Agreed it is a challenge an on top quite subjective to determine quality because subjective use of (personal) target curves. . Reason i choose for Mathaudio room EQ is because of it simplicity (REW APO in one solution) and it is incombination with foobar2000 for Free. I also make use of the paid systemwide solution for eliminating (damaging) gain differences. An DSP app for tech dummies like me.
Last edited:
- Thread Starter
- #47
Try building one. Way less funAgreed it is a challenge an on top quite subjective to determine quality. Reason i choose for Mathaudio room EQ is because of it simplicity (REW APO in one solution) and it is incombination with foobar2000 for Free. I also make use of the paid systemwide solution for eliminating (damaging) gain differences. An DSP app for tech dummies like me.
The payoff is probably going to be great but right now it's kinda crap.- Thread Starter
- #48
Now if I could find something to distribute i2s channels then I would be in good shape.
To what end? And remember, no measurements, so this could very well measure terribly.
- Thread Starter
- #50
Yeah I kind of just realized I just ran in the same circle I did before lol
Conclusion: Just get a DAC from topping and do the speaker in analog. I'm probably going render the interior pretty much inert so whatever I set my crossover to should stay. From there it's just tweaking it. That should be simple enough if I breadboard everything first. I also just found some old project speakers from a while ago so now I can even build a test rig
Why not just get a Hypex Fusion amp?
- Thread Starter
- #52
Here is the loop: Sure, but the amp portion is meh. I could do better. Wait why is the chip in the dsp meh? Maybe I can find a decent codec board. *spends a few hours exploring aliexpress and the internet at large for a dev board*. Hmm well if I'm gonna get the adc in I guess I need to find something real time ish. Wait a sec... I've been here before. Loop complete. I am dumb
lolAll kidding aside after comparing everything, I'm fairly certain the dev board for Sharc from analog may be a winner. Either that or a dev board for a decent codec.
You’ll be very hard pressed to get a TPA3255 implementation with better performance.
- Thread Starter
- #54
Oh absolutely. I could just get the hypex dsp. I just have a very hard time believing that this is such an original problem that no high end brand hasn't tackled it and then some off brand has copied. Only way to get around that is to just make the damn board and that's a whole different can of worms.
At first You should focus on the speaker: what driver, what enclosure (width? higth?), what damping ...., and what about directivity.
That's the physics, and is not done on an evening of Webcrawling. Interpretating data of drivers is science of it's own.
Talking about X-over, the passive design is obsolete (except there's need of use of higher resistance in woofer's coil to extend bass FR or of one special amp to drive the speaker), and active x-over today is called DSP.
If You want to go passive, I may send You a ton of coils, caps and resistors for exploration.
Hated this way I had to go 30 years ago when first DSP came up but unavailable, but today going for hypex plates simplyfies a lot - would not want to miss it.
I may be wrong, but based on Your posts there's wide lack of expertise on constructing loudspeakers.
That is no wrong, but maybe some basic information may help at first, so have a look at something like this:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...active-speaker-with-software-crossover.48035/
That's the physics, and is not done on an evening of Webcrawling. Interpretating data of drivers is science of it's own.
Talking about X-over, the passive design is obsolete (except there's need of use of higher resistance in woofer's coil to extend bass FR or of one special amp to drive the speaker), and active x-over today is called DSP.
If You want to go passive, I may send You a ton of coils, caps and resistors for exploration.
Hated this way I had to go 30 years ago when first DSP came up but unavailable, but today going for hypex plates simplyfies a lot - would not want to miss it.
I may be wrong, but based on Your posts there's wide lack of expertise on constructing loudspeakers.
That is no wrong, but maybe some basic information may help at first, so have a look at something like this:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...active-speaker-with-software-crossover.48035/
- Thread Starter
- #56
Drivers are 2 PTT6.5X04-NAA-08 with corresponding PRs and a KEF SP1632. Still deciding on material for the enclosure, but from the TSPs on purifi's site, that driver with 2 PRs needs 11 liters of space. As such I merely doubled it. The enclosure is looking so far to be 8" wide 21" tall and 8" deep which gets me roughly to the 22 liters I need. Still deciding on materials for the insulation, but I do know that I will more than likely put in two shelf braces as well as corner bracing according to the same style as the Loudspeaker Cookbook. I will also be looking into the possbility of adding something into the gaps of the shelf braces in order to break up the turbulance as the air travels toward the center of the main cavity.
Can't argue with you there. Tech has evolved to the point it amazes me more processing isn't more involved than it already is. Keep in mind though that digital will never top the response of good ole analog. You also have to worry about things like timings, audible artifacts, and even distances between the electronics which can add onto delay that's already there.
My guy, I just picked up the hobby 6 months ago lol (the speaker building part not the audio part. I've been into audio since high school). I'm not going to know everything right off the bat.
First of Your attempt was to replicate KEF, now it's downsized to bookshelf .... what's next?
Go on and dig the rabbit hole of speaker building .... and, btw, I'm not (as far as now) your guy.
- Thread Starter
- #58
I'll be sure to tell Alice you said hello
I meant more applications like Dirac, Mathaudio room EQ, Lyngdorf and others.
- Thread Starter
- #60
Again, as various as the stars. Those are only the ones that are widely commercially available. But hey, never hurts to ask.
