• Welcome to ASR. 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!

Simple Inexpensive Passive 2-way with Dayton and SB drivers.

Ktacos

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
May 28, 2024
Messages
885
Likes
1,466
I'd like to share my a speaker I recently completed with everyone. This would mark my first passive speaker, while I have made many active speakers, I felt my life demanded a bit of simplicity. I was hesitant to try passive filtering as I didn't want to buy a bunch of components I might not use, but I ended up using exactly what I purchased for the first filter iteration. I was a little surprised at how my vituix cad simulated xover just didn't sound very good. There was a large difference above 5khz which I attribute to my measurement mic (cal file was used but still off). My crossovers topology didn't change at all, but I had to swap around some of the components.

Overall I am fairly pleased with the end result. Subjectively speaker is very inoffensive to listen to, nothing bad sticks out and the tonality is neutral with a stable and engaging soundstage. My general criteria for a succesful passive speaker is that aside from room EQ, it just just needs a high and/or low shelf filter for preference. This speaker certainly meets that criteria. The overall cost of drivers and crossover components was around $200 USD. I'm pretty sure my round over bit used on this cabinet was the most expensive part used.

As far as cons, this speaker I beleive has quite a low sensitivity. I have not taken SPL calibrated measurements but based on the gain increases I need to get this speaker to a volume I want, it seems apparent that it's probably fairly low. I have plenty of amp power so this isn't a problem for me. The port tuning is also a bit higher than I would've like, but unfortunately the port I already had cut a hole for was limited to 4". Vcad's enclosure tool tells me a 5-6" port would extend the low end. It's also a bit hard to make a comment on bass extension as I have the box stuffed full of dampening materal which is likely reducing the ports effectivenss quite significantly. I plan on alleviating this issue in the future.

The cabinet is 9 liters ported for the Dayton DSA135 woofer. The tweeter is an SB Acoustics 26STCN. I intended to veneer these speakers but the money just wasn't there and I thought paint would help keep overall costs down. I suppose I got about as good of results as one can get with a spray can, I can easily achieve professional results with veneer but paint seems a lot harder to get right. Color is Rustoleum Maui Blue which I quite enjoy looking at, vibrant but not distracting. I'd like to thank my gf for pushing me away from the orange I was originally going to go with.


20250623_120044.jpg



On axis response taken in room (lots of room reflection issues below 600hz). Green is taken with a class A/B crown xli800, brown is wiring the tweeter in reverse polarity. I also tested the speaker with an Aiyima a07, and amplifier that for me has unfortunately responded pretty poorly in regards to load dependency with certain speakers. I wanted this speaker to behave well with load dependent amplifiers and it appears to behave fine.

final filters an amp test.png


edit - forgot to add dispersion. Not sure how accurate this is. I could only capture out to 90 degrees. I live next to a highway and it is very noisy outside.

Two Way Passive Filters Directivity (hor).png


Crossover schematic is as follows. Driver is the woofer, driver 2 is the tweeter. All values should remain static aside from the final 7.5uf capacitor in parallel with the tweeter. This component is responsible for tilting the upper end of the tweeter down and can be adjusted to taste, lower values will raise the tweeters upper range response. I simply chose a value that sounded fine to me subjectively, I may adjust the value myself in the future.


crossover schematic.png


Speaker electrical impedance. One could argue it's on the low side, but I haven't run into issues with any of the amplifiers I've used the speaker with.

Two Way Passive Filters Impedance.png


Overall I'm glad I took the passive plunge, I feel more equipped and confident to handle future passive speakers and have a better understanding of the shortcomings of my analysis process. I have these entered for this years speaker competition run by Parts Express.
 
Last edited:
I'm going to try and get some outdoor measurements of the completed speaker so I'll get back to you on that.

I will add that after some time listening, I find that this speakers DI blooms out around 4-5khz and I find it bothersome at times. A peak filter at 5khz -1db with a Q of 1 seems to help. This is just an unfortunate side effect of a DI mismatch and no waveguide on the tweeter.
 
The 7.5uF is why the topend takes a nosedive.
 
The 7.5uF is why the topend takes a nosedive.

I covered that in my original post.

"All values should remain static aside from the final 7.5uf capacitor in parallel with the tweeter. This component is responsible for tilting the upper end of the tweeter down and can be adjusted to taste, lower values will raise the tweeters upper range response."

I tend to apply a roll off up there with DSP so I figured I'd just do it passively. I mentioned that I'm not entirely set on this value. It may change. At times I find the speaker lacks air, but then there are some recordings that just blast you with +10khz HF information. It's really track dependent. If you attend the competition feel free to ask me what my final decision was ;)
 
Last edited:
I thought I read all of it, guess I missed that.
Even so, this is not an unheard of preference. Jon Marsh over at htguide has a line level passive EQ he applies to between preamp and amp. It has been described in detail and preferred by quite a few builders.
 
I thought I read all of it, guess I missed that.
Even so, this is not an unheard of preference. Jon Marsh over at htguide has a line level passive EQ he applies to between preamp and amp. It has been described in detail and preferred by quite a few builders.

I did end up toying with the cap and chose a smaller value to bring back more top end. I had a 3.3uf cap around and that sounded fine.

For anyone looking this is the updated xover schematic, nothing changed but the last cap in the tweeter circuit. I can no longer edit the OP.

New xover schematic.png



My impedance graph in the OP is also wrong. I had a port measurement in there that was usually muted but when left on, it tanks the overall impedance. Not really sure why but after muting it the graph looks correct now. I was initially confused as to why the impedance didn't get close to 8 ohms when the woofer is an 8ohm model.

Two Way Passive Filters Impedance corrected.png
 
Very nice! What was the cabinet material (mdf?) and how did you prime it before the Rustoleum paint? Did you round the edges yourself?
 
Cabinet is 3/4" MDF. I spent a whole week just spraying with primer and sanding, using wood fill where needed which basically ended up being the entire dang thing. Even then lots of issues show through in the paint. Wonder what the process is for companies like ascilab.
 
Cabinet is 3/4" MDF. I spent a whole week just spraying with primer and sanding, using wood fill where needed which basically ended up being the entire dang thing. Even then lots of issues show through in the paint. Wonder what the process is for companies like ascilab.
Thanks! I am about to finish my first DIY bookshelf speaker made from a CSS kit which included an MDF flat pack. I've been watching a ton of Youtube videos on finishing techniques, all of which involve patience and time. From your photos, your speakers look lovely!!
 
Thanks! I am about to finish my first DIY bookshelf speaker made from a CSS kit which included an MDF flat pack. I've been watching a ton of Youtube videos on finishing techniques, all of which involve patience and time. From your photos, your speakers look lovely!!

Appreciate the kind words. Do you plan on painting your speakers? Personally I find veneer to be better looking and a bit more timeless if you will. I also think it's easier to get good results. I can veneer a cabinet and have a finish on it, ready to go in about a day, but painting took a week to get what is IMO worse results. Granted my standards are kind of high and I'm going to be my harshest critic.

This is a speaker I did last year. If you end up veneering feel free to message me and I can go over my process.

ldTYK7G.jpg


mupiEoQ.jpg


CQi9th0.jpg
 
Appreciate the kind words. Do you plan on painting your speakers? Personally I find veneer to be better looking and a bit more timeless if you will. I also think it's easier to get good results. I can veneer a cabinet and have a finish on it, ready to go in about a day, but painting took a week to get what is IMO worse results. Granted my standards are kind of high and I'm going to be my harshest critic.

This is a speaker I did last year. If you end up veneering feel free to message me and I can go over my process.

View attachment 459641

View attachment 459642

View attachment 459640
You clearly have excellent woodworking skills! I was planning on painting mine with a white finish, but I am still debating matte vs. gloss (and yes, the latter is much harder to achieve good results!). My concern about veneer is that I am rounding the edges, which reduces the edge diffraction. And I was not certain how hard it is to veneer non-flat surfaces. I noticed you did this on your blue bookshelf speakers. I am debating my next DIY project using the AudioFirst kit which has a waveguide front and sharp edges on the box. That should probably be easier to veneer.
 
Appreciate the kind words. Do you plan on painting your speakers? Personally I find veneer to be better looking and a bit more timeless if you will. I also think it's easier to get good results. I can veneer a cabinet and have a finish on it, ready to go in about a day, but painting took a week to get what is IMO worse results. Granted my standards are kind of high and I'm going to be my harshest critic.

This is a speaker I did last year. If you end up veneering feel free to message me and I can go over my process.

View attachment 459641

View attachment 459642

View attachment 459640
That is awesome. I've been envisioning something like that for a future project.
 
It would have been "boring" but you could have gone flat black. Your flat black baffles look flawless.

It's a nice finish but it's not very durable.

I hooked up my Kali LP-6 today for a comparison with my speakers. Honest opinion from me about my speakers, not good lol. I would not suggest building them. It's evident that my speaker is quite bass deficient as it needs about +4-6db low freq shelf to bring it up to same level as the Kali. I considered trying some passive radiators instead of the port but it doesn't make sense to me to spend an extra $70+ on those. The port resonance for this speaker is around 1000hz and it's pretty noticable when playing piano. The imaging on mine seems worse, it overall just feels like a far less coherent speaker, I've certainly never been a fan of speakers with tweeter not time aligned with the woofer and I feel that annoys me here. There's definitely just something off with the speaker. Despite the on axis appearing quite flat on my speaker, the mid range sounds scooped. I assume this has to do with the speakers DI. If it is to believed, it's too wide in all the wrong places. I can listen to Kali all day with no complaints, they actually make me want to listen to music, my speakers, not so much. My speakers seem to just lose entire layers of the music that the Kali represents very well.

I'm a little disappointed but not surprised. It's not easy making a passive speaker and the benefits of active were certainly made even more apparent than they already were. Thought I could make something pretty good but at least to my standards I didn't get it right. I think the lack of a waveguide really hurts the speaker for instance.

Here's the DI from my sim (tweeter's upper range not accurate).

Two Way Passive Filters CTA-2034.png


So yeah, little bummed to say the least. Thankfully I didn't spend too much money on these but I did lose a good bit of time. Definitely has put a damper in my DIY efforts but I feel it's important to be as honest with everyone here as well as myself so I wanted to share my feelings about the speaker. Granted, I'm a mix engineer and musician who is typically using stuff like genelec and nuemann monitors so perhaps I'm being a bit hard on myself. I think the average person would find the speakers to be fine, but I want to do better than fine.
 
I'd like to share my a speaker I recently completed …
On a rush, two points. You bypass the woofer‘s inductor with a capacitor. The by-passed energy is then lead through another cap to ground directly. I expect very low impedance at some higher frequency beyond the range you tested, but the (digital) amp might still ‚see‘ it. A small resistor might help without sacrifice.

The vertical dispersion could be of some interest.

The bass tuning is a bit high, maybe an extended bass shelf is more desirable.
 
On a rush, …
On a second view the tweeter x/o is strange. First of all the x/o frequency is too high. It would perfectly serve well at 1kHz, no jokes! The achievable level is limited hard by the bass/mid. The box is going to be linear/flat, and so the tweet is limited likewise. Don‘t worry to burn it, even distortion won‘t be an issue.

That would solve probs with directivity, and may rendern the nasty cap parallel to the tweet obsolete.

Don‘t give up, looks too nice for that.
 
Back
Top Bottom