Recent content by jtalden

I have no personal experience that low.

An asymmetrical SW layout is often advantageous. That works. Your method worked well here and should work well again with the wireless SW. Room or SW related, but that response is very good. If you are sure the SWs are capable that low and want to get there you need to try more SW positions...

I don't know the when and how that control is properly used.

No, the relative timing of the group is lost if this is done on individual measurements. Yes, if done on the first measurement and then that value same value is used as an offset for the rest of the group measurements, i.e., 'shift and update timing offset'. No, When applied only to an...

The posted measurements have the conventional polarity - positive polarity for the tweeter.

I used 2 of your measurements for a new alignment tool analysis. The attached file contains 2 alternative delay settings that I found. They are identical for SPL across the XO range and very similar to the SPL support provided by your current timing. There is thus no reason to assume that either...

Your one chart indicates an active XO. If that XO has delay options, i.e., a DSP XO then the phase can be adjusted as needed by adding delay as needed to one of the drivers. If the XO is analog then the adjustment is by either changing the relative driver offset, or adding an all-pass circuit...

Yes, that is correct. For driver timing in a box use a different channel speaker for the reference.

The window settings are too narrow for this type of measurement. Change the left and right window to 1000 ms to clean up the SPL and GD ripple. I have no insight as to the distortion question.

I would expect the Z offset must be set the same for both drivers if the mic was located at the same distance. We are accounting for the distance to the mic for the sound arrival. If the mic is placed a different distances for the 2 drivers then different Z offsets are needed. Again, just my...

A quick look at your REW impulse indicates it appears to be negative polarity so I inverted the polarity in REW and then reexported the .txt file again. After reloading it into VituixCAD now the minimum phase results are the same. Inversion in VituixCAD does not work the same, but I think that...

Okay, I see that now. Sorry for the misdirect.

I have never used any passive XO design software and haven't studied their procedures so take these general thoughts appropriately: Your measurements look very choppy probably due to excessive room effects. Carefully follow VitiuxCAD measurement instructions. I have seen comments from others...

They look the same to me if the same settings are applied. Top chart is VituixCAD with a 7mm Z offset (distance) and the bottom chart is REW at 1/24 octave smoothing.

Oops wrong thread.