Thanks Pete! It all started with my question to you about potential Compression Drivers... thanks for kickstarting this whole thing.
It is a simple slot port design concocted in WinISD. I did try a couple of port sizes and settled on the original suggested dimensions by winISD. I would love to a/b them with my father in law's Forte IV's but he is out of state. Not an a/b comparison but the HF/Mids are similar to my old La Scala's with ALK XO's and the SMAHL tweeter upgrade. At least there is nothing I feel is lacking with the Ewave's from the La Scala in the HF and mids. The La Scala's had no bass, so no comparison there. I know the Forte's go low so that would be a better comparison.
Last edited:
I always like that style.
Nice legs Pete... I should mention I'm talking about the cab pics you sent 
.
Legs are down the road... still have to build the speaker grilles! But probably won't get to the grilles for a bit since I just found a B&C DE250 locally for $50 and it's been weighing on my psyche for the last week. So curious to see how it sounds in my project. It can't be crossed a lot lower than the PRV D230's in there now. And it has to sound a lot better right?
I gave in and pulled out Xsim to see if I could get it to work with the GRS12 and I am flailing. Swapped in the DE250 in the XO that EarlK worked to great results for the PRV D230. Of course it's off. The HF nose dives at 17K and I can't it to work within the same network.
Earl, hoping you can tell me what needs to be changed on the XO to get these 2 drivers to play well together. Your input is always appreciated.
. Legs are down the road... still have to build the speaker grilles! But probably won't get to the grilles for a bit since I just found a B&C DE250 locally for $50 and it's been weighing on my psyche for the last week. So curious to see how it sounds in my project. It can't be crossed a lot lower than the PRV D230's in there now. And it has to sound a lot better right?
I gave in and pulled out Xsim to see if I could get it to work with the GRS12 and I am flailing. Swapped in the DE250 in the XO that EarlK worked to great results for the PRV D230. Of course it's off. The HF nose dives at 17K and I can't it to work within the same network.
Earl, hoping you can tell me what needs to be changed on the XO to get these 2 drivers to play well together. Your input is always appreciated.
@loaded
Thanks for the posted files from yesterday.
So, overall I was disappointed once I realized that these weren't new measurements made by you >> but were instead borrowed files ( iow; .frd + .zma files ) made by Zvu some years back and posted "in this thread over at diyAudio" .
Zvu also posted his solution for creating a flattish response within that thread >> so I don't understand why you didn't just start with those LC values.
Anyways, here again is his solution;
I simply copied the values Zvu posted within the following snipped pic;
The response in my pic is identical to what he did in WinPCD and then displayed within this snipped pic ( also stretched by me );
If you read that thread fully you might get my inference from all my posts , that I don't recommend the de250 for use on the H6512, since one is forced to use an adapter snout ( that somewhat compromises the response of this otherwise useful driver and forces one into "Heroic" measures to fix the response anomalies ).
Thanks for the posted files from yesterday.
So, overall I was disappointed once I realized that these weren't new measurements made by you >> but were instead borrowed files ( iow; .frd + .zma files ) made by Zvu some years back and posted "in this thread over at diyAudio" .
Zvu also posted his solution for creating a flattish response within that thread >> so I don't understand why you didn't just start with those LC values.
Anyways, here again is his solution;
I simply copied the values Zvu posted within the following snipped pic;
The response in my pic is identical to what he did in WinPCD and then displayed within this snipped pic ( also stretched by me );
If you read that thread fully you might get my inference from all my posts , that I don't recommend the de250 for use on the H6512, since one is forced to use an adapter snout ( that somewhat compromises the response of this otherwise useful driver and forces one into "Heroic" measures to fix the response anomalies ).
Last edited:
Did you buy the DE250 yet?
I'm very curious about this Lavoce driver that tested so well here on the XT1086, bolt on version:
You'd need the screw on version of course, unless you want to also change the horn:
I'm very curious about this Lavoce driver that tested so well here on the XT1086, bolt on version:
You'd need the screw on version of course, unless you want to also change the horn:
Last edited:
I did not get the DE250… thankfully. I was trying to see if it would work given it was so cheap and I’ve only heard good things about this driver. I did read about this one… will look into it.
Hey Earl, sorry for the wild goose chase… I had the opportunity to get the DE 250 on the cheap and wanted to see how it would work before buying.@loaded
Thanks for the posted files from yesterday.
So, overall I was disappointed once I realized that these weren't new measurements made by you >> but were instead borrowed files ( iow; .frd + .zma files ) made by Zvu some years back and posted "in this thread over at diyAudio" .
Zvu also posted his solution for creating a flattish response within that thread >> so I don't understand why you didn't just start with those LC values.
Anyways, here again is his solution;
View attachment 3781163
I simply copied the values Zvu posted within the following snipped pic;
View attachment 3781165
The response in my pic is identical to what he did in WinPCD and then displayed within this snipped pic ( also stretched by me );
View attachment 3781168
If you read that thread fully you might get my inference from all my posts , that I don't recommend the de250 for use on the H6512, since one is forced to use an adapter snout ( that somewhat compromises the response of this otherwise useful driver and forces one into "Heroic" measures to fix the response anomalies ).
Thanks for the info.
I’ll be honest… I was just searching for existing FRD/ZMA files since I didn’t have the the driver in hand to measure. Glad I waited to purchase.@loaded
Thanks for the posted files from yesterday.
So, overall I was disappointed once I realized that these weren't new measurements made by you >> but were instead borrowed files ( iow; .frd + .zma files ) made by Zvu some years back and posted "in this thread over at diyAudio" .
Zvu also posted his solution for creating a flattish response within that thread >> so I don't understand why you didn't just start with those LC values.
Anyways, here again is his solution;
View attachment 3781163
I simply copied the values Zvu posted within the following snipped pic;
View attachment 3781165
The response in my pic is identical to what he did in WinPCD and then displayed within this snipped pic ( also stretched by me );
View attachment 3781168
If you read that thread fully you might get my inference from all my posts , that I don't recommend the de250 for use on the H6512, since one is forced to use an adapter snout ( that somewhat compromises the response of this otherwise useful driver and forces one into "Heroic" measures to fix the response anomalies ).
Sorry for the wild goose chase!
grindstone
Well-Known Member
Two hard drives ago, I had that info from somewhere...can't find it in webville, now. Swore it was the redspade guy but it's not or at least I'm not findiing it. I'll dig in a backup later.
IMO, what Earl did with that PRV filter was heroic (I recall vaguely taking a hack and it was a bugger). We don't really know what we have, though, yet. It's just absence of data -- we have ever-more, ever-more-powerful filter tools seemingly by the week these days (but what we had a couple-three years ago was plenty to be able to get filters hatched and optimized). It's always the data...
The way the world is going, I find renewed energy to bust my tail to help anybody trying to make a path that's still economical so people can get ears on. It's still probably the finest gateway drug in bang-per-money terms...and as all good pushers know, the first one needs to be free.
IMO, what Earl did with that PRV filter was heroic (I recall vaguely taking a hack and it was a bugger). We don't really know what we have, though, yet. It's just absence of data -- we have ever-more, ever-more-powerful filter tools seemingly by the week these days (but what we had a couple-three years ago was plenty to be able to get filters hatched and optimized). It's always the data...
The way the world is going, I find renewed energy to bust my tail to help anybody trying to make a path that's still economical so people can get ears on. It's still probably the finest gateway drug in bang-per-money terms...and as all good pushers know, the first one needs to be free.
"That info" how to chop off the threads and make it bolt on?
passaloutre
New Member
I'm not trying to hijack this thread, but since everyone's here I had a quick question. I'm interested in building some Econowaves with the GRS 12PT and the "standard" D220Ti/6512 CD/waveguide. Anyone familiar enough with the original Econowaves and the GRS 12PT think it would go reasonable well with Zilch's original crossover design? I'm not fussy about perfect flat response, and I don't have the patience for endlessly messing with the crossovers. It seems the original Econowave design was for pairing the 220Ti/6512 waveguid with any arbitrary woofer...
grindstone
Well-Known Member
Yeah, somebody did a particularly nice job of it and documented it. There were before and after curves and he might've messed with putty, too (or my recall is faulty twice). All I remember is that I pack-ratted it somewhere. I've since lost literally hours digging for it...and getting sidetracked trying to decode a particularly poor naming/organization (lack of) structure of my own creation.
Last edited: