Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
The range for the woofers (subs) that I'm using is 25Hz - 2,800Hz if that helps?
There's NO WAY that driver is reaching 2.8khz in an effective sense. If that driver was still flat at 500hz, I'd be shocked. And it's not designed for those frequencies, either.
That may be its advertized absolute frequency range. But +/- 3db from nominal, which is how speakers are employed - NO WAY. Many tweeters are capable of emitting a 20hz signal, but at levels so far below their nominal that they are virtually inaudible. That's the roll off point of which I was referring above. And you don't want that driver working that far down, even if it could. The same applies to LF drivers.
What a crossover does is roll off the signal electronically, so the driver is not forced to reproduce frequencies that it is not designed for, and which adversely affects output at design frequencies. You don't want tweeters working bass, and you don't want woofers working treble. You certainly don't want a subwoofer working at 2.8khz . . . or even 280hz for that matter.
The original CV woofer I'm sure didn't extend as low, but was able to reach higher, to cover the Xover gap into the mids a little better. I suspect that the designer gave up a little on the bottom, like good designers do with their budget.
The best speaker designers will tell you that the only difference from their entry level models and their better ones are added extension at the bottom. Building a seamless QUALITY response in a single array from 20khz to 20hz is very expensive. Bass extension in particular is expensive to achieve. Cheaper speakers attempting it usually fail miserably everywhere - the "jack of all trades" syndrome, if you will. A good two-way design will sacrifice the bottom to cover the middle better. At the end of the day, most speaker systems are a controlled exercise in compromises.
Fact is, few people can reliably hear 20khz. And 20hz is more felt than heard. As I said before, when people hear "bass" they are hearing 100-250hz. What I always try to steer folks to is the midrange, where most of the music takes place. If on a budget, it is sometimes best to get a very capable bookshelf/monitor with a strong midrange (good treble is usually included, as it is relatively inexpensive). If more bass is needed, a subwoofer can then be considered. You'd be surprised that most are very happy without the latter.
You've already got an outboard subwoofer working the sub 100hz range. I'm still scratching my head over why you are using two more in your main speakers. The upper bass and mids are shortchanged as a result.
On top of everything else discussed, if these speakers are really that important to you, if you wish to invest more into them than they are worth (which is ok), might I suggest also upgrading/correcting the one element that is doing the most work, and which you haven't touched - the midrange.
The range for the woofers (subs) that I'm using is 25Hz - 2,800Hz if that helps?
There's NO WAY that driver is reaching 2.8khz in an effective sense. If that driver was still flat at 500hz, I'd be shocked. And it's not designed for those frequencies, either.
That may be its advertized absolute frequency range. But +/- 3db from nominal, which is how speakers are employed - NO WAY. Many tweeters are capable of emitting a 20hz signal, but at levels so far below their nominal that they are virtually inaudible. That's the roll off point of which I was referring above. And you don't want that driver working that far down, even if it could. The same applies to LF drivers.
What a crossover does is roll off the signal electronically, so the driver is not forced to reproduce frequencies that it is not designed for, and which adversely affects output at design frequencies. You don't want tweeters working bass, and you don't want woofers working treble. You certainly don't want a subwoofer working at 2.8khz . . . or even 280hz for that matter.
The original CV woofer I'm sure didn't extend as low, but was able to reach higher, to cover the Xover gap into the mids a little better. I suspect that the designer gave up a little on the bottom, like good designers do with their budget.
The best speaker designers will tell you that the only difference from their entry level models and their better ones are added extension at the bottom. Building a seamless QUALITY response in a single array from 20khz to 20hz is very expensive. Bass extension in particular is expensive to achieve. Cheaper speakers attempting it usually fail miserably everywhere - the "jack of all trades" syndrome, if you will. A good two-way design will sacrifice the bottom to cover the middle better. At the end of the day, most speaker systems are a controlled exercise in compromises.
Fact is, few people can reliably hear 20khz. And 20hz is more felt than heard. As I said before, when people hear "bass" they are hearing 100-250hz. What I always try to steer folks to is the midrange, where most of the music takes place. If on a budget, it is sometimes best to get a very capable bookshelf/monitor with a strong midrange (good treble is usually included, as it is relatively inexpensive). If more bass is needed, a subwoofer can then be considered. You'd be surprised that most are very happy without the latter.
You've already got an outboard subwoofer working the sub 100hz range. I'm still scratching my head over why you are using two more in your main speakers. The upper bass and mids are shortchanged as a result.
On top of everything else discussed, if these speakers are really that important to you, if you wish to invest more into them than they are worth (which is ok), might I suggest also upgrading/correcting the one element that is doing the most work, and which you haven't touched - the midrange.
