Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site
In the Forum: Horn-Loaded Speakers
In the Thread: Engaging the David Haigner’s ideas
Post Subject: Acoustic equalization vs. Electronic equalizationPosted by Romy the Cat on: 10/11/2009
fiogf49gjkf0d
 Reno wrote: |
| ok. maybe we have a different understanding of "electronic equalization". We do not use active (i.e. electronic) equalization in the amplification chain. There is of course some equalization in the passive crossover but I really don't see what's wrong with that. Sensitivity is still at 104dB/W/m and the construction gets me a convenient wide sweet spot, which is a fact everybody who listened to the Alpha has noticed. |
|
Reno, there is acoustic equalization and there is electronic equalization. The acoustic equalization is shrinking the horns profile, use phase plug, front chambers and many other things. The electronic equalization is a use of inductive and capacitive elements in crossover in order to write curve in band-pass of the horn. Of cause, if you use CD concept, then you use “some equalization in the passive crossover” and you burn the sensitivity. I did not say that it is “wrong” if it done properly, I just insisted that you do it. Would it be better avoid doing it? Pay attention that this equalization is necessary ONLY because you guys decided to take all that sound from one horn. Theoretically if you EQ more then you can get even bass from the same horn – way don’t you do it?
Furthermore, let me to stress it again: the “convenient wide sweet spot, which is a fact everybody who listened to the Alpha has noticed” HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO with extended directivity. This is a purely BS notion that you guys spread as a fraudulent marketing. If it is your true conviction then I would encourage you to reexamine your concussion.
The CatRerurn to Romy the Cat's Site