From rafael2pop@yahoo.com.ar Fri Dec 05 03:37:57 2008
Subject:Re: re Speakeasy needs advice




Re: re Speakeasy needs advice
Posted by: "Jason" jblann1@yahoo.com jblann1
Wed Dec 3, 2008 8:05 pm (PST)

I'm guessing Steve isn't going to build an electronic lower rotor sim.

The FlatPack system is the most efficient design I have seen. but to
offer different options or features for the upper and lower cabinets
may be the way to go. Perhaps each cabinet will have its own tube
amp, or solid state amp if you choose.

Example:

1. Upper horn cabinet: horn and driver and motor stack -- no amp/passive.

2. Lower rotor cabinet: rotor assembly and driver and motor stack --
no amp/passive

Of course the big challenge is balancing power to the horn cabinet vs.
the lower cabinet, obviously you would want 5-10X the output power to
the lower end than the higher cab. Summed mono amp with passive
crossover and then feed to both rotor cabinets?



Usually built passive crossovers sends 60% to the woofer , 30& to mids and 10% to highs.

That means 2X for the woofer if compared with horn driver (mids).

So for getting 5-10X power to the lower end then a biamp schema should be needed.

In such case would seem than the distinctive rotary sound can sound attenuated if compared with woofer power.

I.e. an Eminence Delta (400W/500W rms models) would be nominally 4 times the power of usual 100/150W horn drivers but those specs IMO shouldn't mean to put woofer 'to the maximum'.

Just my 2 cents.

Best,

Rafael


Yahoo! Cocina
Recetas prácticas y comida saludable
http://ar.mujer.yahoo.com/cocina/