• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Z19 Crossover

Yes, please advise when the PCBs are available. I'd like to work up an outboard crossover in a component sized box and the PCBs would make it neater and easier.
 
this is a "so I can find the thread in the speaker forum bump"


For whatever reason, my search is not working. If I type in z19 with or without other terms, the response is no matches found.

Stupid computers, stupider operators...........:stupid::headscrat
 
I believe the search function ignores terms with fewer than four characters. You can do better just doing this google search: "Z19 and site:audiokarma.org."

You might "Subscribe To This Thread" in the "Thread Tools" just below the top of this page. After that, you can find it by hitting "User CP" up top, then "List Subscriptions" on the left.
 
Last edited:
I started athread and today realized it would be better here. I deleted the other thread.
Here is the beggining of my z29 crossovers I am building.

I do have a question about the bi-amping part of this crossver.

It seems to me that it would be better to get the signal from the pre-amp, then feed it into the crossover. Once the crossover breaks the signal into the low and high, feed those signals into the amps.

That make sense? I'd rather do that than feed a full power signal into a the crossover and let it do its thing. I think an amp would be more effeciently utilized if it only had to work on a high or low signal.

So the question, will this change the crossover? I think crossovers are designed to work with a certain impeadance driver, SO I don't think this would work but I would love to hear from the gurus on the board. What d0 you think?

Mark
 
I started athread and today realized it would be better here. I deleted the other thread.
Here is the beggining of my z29 crossovers I am building.

I do have a question about the bi-amping part of this crossver.

It seems to me that it would be better to get the signal from the pre-amp, then feed it into the crossover. Once the crossover breaks the signal into the low and high, feed those signals into the amps.

That make sense? I'd rather do that than feed a full power signal into a the crossover and let it do its thing. I think an amp would be more effeciently utilized if it only had to work on a high or low signal.

So the question, will this change the crossover? I think crossovers are designed to work with a certain impeadance driver, SO I don't think this would work but I would love to hear from the gurus on the board. What d0 you think?

Mark

The short answer is yes, you'll need a line-level crossover. Those can be passive or active, and active can be op-amp based or DSP based. Here's a good primer on bi-amping:

http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm
 
As ininexpensive as electronic xovers are these days, $75~$200, you can get a nice used unit and have a great start! If you do look for a used electronic xover try to get the Rane, Ashley & DBX models for best results. Other models like the Behringer, Furman are good as well with even more features- but the sound may not be as defined as the top models mentioned.

I personally have a Rane 234 that I think highly of, but also did have the Ashley and liked it too. I also have a two way Behringer that performs well, just have not used it much. Finally I have a somewhat rare unit, it is an -18db/octave, two way DOD xover. Many electronic xovers are -24/oct, the "odd" order like -6db & -18db slope types are supposed to offer improved or easier to listen to sosonic qualities- I don't know that to be true as yet.

Anyway I fully endorse electronic xovers as a viable way to get excellent driver responce without phase anomolies and the like. Just be sure you have good amplification to compliment your getter xovers. If you build your own network them even more power to you!
DC
 
Hey Doug,
I gotta say I am really liking this DIY building stuff. It was a dream of mine when I was 16 to buld my own system entirely. Yep, I could buy, but that certainly does not stisify my sense of pride like building my own.

Thanks for the info though................
Mark
 
I do not know if you know much about "slope therory" Mark is why I suggeted differant networks. If you can get your hands on a couple differant types and listen to them then when you go to build your own you can zero in on exacly what you need/ prefere to build.

Many folks are only exposed to the basic -6/db/oct & -12/db/oct passive types, which is fine. BUT when you step into the active xover world then sound takes on a whole new adpect & options! One I hope you will soon explore.

Passive networks, especially like the Z-19's here, do have a valid place and are well suited for a large number of applications. The cost outlay for what you get is a real value and the fact you have the dual function L-Pads to tailor the mid/hi end makes it exceptional for many reasons. While I am a big supporter of the active networking club, I am also sold on the sonic benefits that the Z-19 offer as well- there will always be a place for this network!
DC
 
I know why he used the G,4,3,2,1 notation!

Zilch had a bunch of 5 conductor cable he always used to wire up the L-pads. That cable just happened to be marked green,1,2,3,4. Simple as that.

Cool!



See the top-right L-pad notations on this drawing:

Z1920Board20Layout1.jpg


BUT I see no reason on earth to retain the confusing "G, 4, 2, 1, and 3" designations. I suspect Zilch did that because it made sense to him for other reasons. I think it would be much clearer to discard those designations and simply to label the five points on your top right terminal block as shown in the notations on the margin of the drawing above, that is, M1, M2, H1, H2, and H3, then run those terminals to the corresponding posts on the Mid and High L-pads. That's how I marked my boards.
 
That's a fact. I supplied him with a spool I wasn't using hoping he could put it to good use and he did just that.
 
He offered me 5 feet of it for my FrankenVal project and I said 'I have tons of wire no need' would have been nice to have some real Zilch stuff in my speakers - he did however work on my broken CD the last time I saw him and showed me how to fix it. Of course the entire speaker project was caused by him - and I am very thankful to get back into the whole DIY audio thing and meet some great people along the way.
Steve
 
I thought that I would ask a more knowledgeable group about these Z19's. I read a little bit of conflicting data on this and wanted to make sure that I was doing it right.

If I'm combining two non polarized caps together (example a 20 and a 1 to make a 21), I need to wire them in parallel (same ends together) and not in serial - correct?
 
I thought that I would ask a more knowledgeable group about these Z19's. I read a little bit of conflicting data on this and wanted to make sure that I was doing it right.

If I'm combining two non polarized caps together (example a 20 and a 1 to make a 21), I need to wire them in parallel (same ends together) and not in serial - correct?

Yes; for capacitors in parallel the capacitance adds.
 
The opposite ends to be tied together to get the 21uf value- not one end tied into other end.......I think you are correct if I am understanding correctly
DC
 
The short answer is yes, you'll need a line-level crossover. ...

Actually, Zilch designed the Z-19 as a passive bi-ampable crossover with no need of a line level crossover. When I first read that when he posted it I thought the same thing as you, that won't work! But it does, with just a parallel connection on the amplifier inputs.

And yes, the amplifiers do have a full range signal applied, but the output stage only has a low impedance load in the pass band of the the passive filter in the half of the speaker it is driving. The stop band for the filter is a very high impedance, so hardly any power is wasted.
 
Back
Top Bottom