Three-way floor stander DIY crossover design– help welcome

[Audionaut]

Given the variety of drivers used, I would go for a fully active design. It’s also cheaper these days.
Here you have everything—including four amplifiers, an electronic crossover, and PEQ/DSP (ADAU1701) —all on a single board for just a few dollars.

https://store.sure-electronics.com/product/756

 

[Nik76]

You should just leave the microphone in one position for the reference axis say 1000mm mid point of tw and mid axis and use minimum phase function if you measuring program has such feature, then every next measurement will correspond to the reference axis point and phase will have the correct delay included with increase or decrease in distance (to the reference point).
Remember there's only one valid Reference Point for summation of drivers output on Reference Listening Axis, and for correct simulation 'all drivers phases' have to correspond to the distance from acoustic center of each driver to that point. So while you tweeter might be 1000mm, the midwoofer or mid won't have the same distance unless the tweeters waveguide somehow will move tweeters acoustic center to match That of the Midrange. The correct minimum phase with Delays Included is very important in passive x-o design, if not you can kind of throw all your sims in the garbage. Unless you treat the design like coax driver.
Hopefully if you could assign each driver the height location, and use simple trigonometry to extract the extra difference, the Vituix will also compensate for the delay change.
I usually measure my driver's at mid point between tw and mid, good reference point even if the listening distance/height changes a little.

To be honest I have followed instructions from Vituix cad on how to measure each speaker for the purpose of crossover simulation.
Instructions state that each driver should be measured at the same distance from the center of the driver (on axis, 1000 mm in my case). I measured with REW, and followed instructions how to export the data to vituix cad.
Vertical distance between drivers and reference/listening point is to be accounted for in the "driver layout" part of the software (as per instructions), where vertical location of speaker middle point, relative to listening axis is defined (Z value). For each speaker I have inputted in the software vertical distance from center of the speaker to a designed vertical listening/reference point (in my case listening height is at app 1.05m, so Z values for each speaker are negative). This part would also account for inclination of the drivers, which in my case there is none.
I though that measurements performed in this way would correctly show phase and response of the drivers (with the simulated crossover) at the listening/reference point? My understanding was that the software will correct for the difference in vertical location of each driver in relation to the reff axis. Do you think that I made a mistake and should redo all the measurements?

 

[cochinada]

...
View attachment 520447

Speaker box size is below, together with the image of the test speaker (before baffle edge chamfering):
View attachment 520448View attachment 520450

Hello,
I just saw this thread now and I maybe late but I think the root cause of your problems is the baffle. Look at your response from your Faital Pro 5PR160 which is very different from the manufacturer's one. I'm talking mainly about the peak and dip around 1KHz which is not present in the spec. As you know, this is normally measured on an "infinite" baffle, so IMO this is the result of the reflections you are getting from the close edges of the baffle. It would help to round them. Until you get rid of this anomaly I don't think you'll get the best response.

 

[hex168]

Hello,
I just saw this thread now and I maybe late but I think the root cause of your problems is the baffle. Look at your response from your Faital Pro 5PR160 which is very different from the manufacturer's one. I'm talking mainly about the peak and dip around 1KHz which is not present in the spec. As you know, this is normally measured on an "infinite" baffle, so IMO this is the result of the reflections you are getting from the close edges of the baffle. It would help to round them. Until you get rid of this anomaly I don't think you'll get the best response.

This might help with that:

McMaster-Carr

McMaster-Carr is the complete source for your plant with over 595,000 products. 98% of products ordered ship from stock and deliver same or next day.

www.mcmaster.com

See:

David Ralph's Speaker Pages - Felt Effects on Baffle Diffraction

www.speakerdesign.net

 

[Nik76]

Hello,
I just saw this thread now and I maybe late but I think the root cause of your problems is the baffle. Look at your response from your Faital Pro 5PR160 which is very different from the manufacturer's one. I'm talking mainly about the peak and dip around 1KHz which is not present in the spec. As you know, this is normally measured on an "infinite" baffle, so IMO this is the result of the reflections you are getting from the close edges of the baffle. It would help to round them. Until you get rid of this anomaly I don't think you'll get the best response.

Hello,
I actually rounded the edges before testing, photo from the thread is before this, sorry for the confusion.
I had a test before the rounding of the edges, and the difference wasn't huge. Probably baffle size and location of the midrange could change this peak, but unfortunately, it cannot be less wide because of the size of woofer (12''), and not much bigger (wife is already not liking the size of the speakers . So I realized I will have to correct the peak with the crossover mostly. I will make the final correction with WIIM PEQ together with room response correction.

 

[Nik76]

This might help with that:

McMaster-Carr

McMaster-Carr is the complete source for your plant with over 595,000 products. 98% of products ordered ship from stock and deliver same or next day.

www.mcmaster.com

See:

David Ralph's Speaker Pages - Felt Effects on Baffle Diffraction

www.speakerdesign.net

Hy,
thanks for the link, I was thinking to try something similar, and test how much could it change the peak. If I test I will post the results.
Unfortunately, wife is already not happy about the size and looks of the speaker (they will be living room furniture ), I promised clean looks, with front baffle from wood. Adding black felt will definitely not make her very happy...

 

[Audionaut]

I promised clean looks, with front baffle from wood. Adding black felt will definitely not make her very happy...

Just ask her.
Felt, however, requires additional measurements.

In Germany, there are D-C-Fix films and velour. I’ve used those to cover a few speaker cabinets. Faux leather on the front looks good too, if that’s your style.

Samt- & Veloursfolien ▷ Klebefolien online kaufen | d-c-fix

Samt- & Veloursfolien ➥ selbstklebende d-c-fix Folie mit Effekt ✔ Klebefolien mit samtig weicher Oberfläche ✔ Dekoration ✔ jetzt bestellen!

www.d-c-fix.com

I’ve sometimes covered the sides with granite—it’s incredibly heavy, but it looks very elegant and has excellent acoustic properties.

 

[cochinada]

Hello,
I actually rounded the edges before testing, photo from the thread is before this, sorry for the confusion.
I had a test before the rounding of the edges, and the difference wasn't huge. Probably baffle size and location of the midrange could change this peak, but unfortunately, it cannot be less wide because of the size of woofer (12''), and not much bigger (wife is already not liking the size of the speakers . So I realized I will have to correct the peak with the crossover mostly. I will make the final correction with WIIM PEQ together with room response correction.

I see... When I built my own speakers on my avatar I modeled different rounded radius and if I remember correctly, this made some considerable difference, also depending on the radius size, but I have only 8" on the front and not 12". As for the location of the tweeter and mid-range, mine are not exactly centered as here also there is something to gain by not going horizontally symmetric. There are several examples of brands that did the same. One that come to mind is the Stenheim Reference Ultime Two for instance, which BTW also uses 12" on the front. Perhaps you could try to move both the tweeter and the Faital a bit to the side and see the effect? Just for your reference, on my baffle I have 203mm to the left and 257mm to the right from the center of the tweeter and the radius of my baffle's sides is 109mm for a total width of 460mm.

 

[hex168]

Hy,
thanks for the link, I was thinking to try something similar, and test how much could it change the peak. If I test I will post the results.
Unfortunately, wife is already not happy about the size and looks of the speaker (they will be living room furniture ), I promised clean looks, with front baffle from wood. Adding black felt will definitely not make her very happy...

There are better looking materials than felt, certainly. Not aware of any measurements for this application though, but you can always cut and try. Something else I've wanted to try is a strip of Scotchbrite or similar to spread out the reflections - I've read that can work but have never seen measurements.