They are ported, 1 cubic foot volume (28.75 liter?) for the 12" and 1.5 cubic foot for the 15". My monitor rack consists of 6 - Crown XTI4000's. I run the wedges bi-amped, one per amp, using the DSP in the amp. Both crossover at 1200 per the manufacture's recommendation.Can you share some details about them?
Box size, processing, power etc
Excellent drivers - here is a crossover design:I'm toying with an idea for a pair of fill/delayspeakers based around a B&C coaxial in a sealed box.
I had a look at the 15HCX76 and the 12HCX76, anybody tested/tried these and can offer some comments on them?
I always high-pass fill/delays somewhere between 100-160hz, so I don't need that much low end. I'm thinking I don't need that extra low end a reflex design offers if I'm going to high pass it anyway.What factor has you looking at a sealed box?
Can recommend the 14CXN76, the HF dispersion is much smoother than the 12CXN76 ( I own ten of these ).I always high-pass fill/delays somewhere between 100-160hz, so I don't need that much low end. I'm thinking I don't need that extra low end a reflex design offers if I'm going to high pass it anyway.
Do you think the smoothness is related to driver size? I'm leaning towards a 12" because of the 1.2KHz crossover point. IME 15" drivers get's quite "beamy" when you get close to 1KHz.
Both crossovers use similar topology and jet the 15" coax HF driver is wired with polarity reversed while 12" is wired +to+. Can someone with more knowledge explain?Excellent drivers - here is a crossover design:
Can recommend the 14CXN76, the HF dispersion is much smoother than the 12CXN76 ( I own ten of these ).
My passive crossover ended a little bit more complex than the M4 crossover and still need 8 PEQs to flatten the response.
Why do you want to use the horn versions, for Fills/Delays Im pretty happy with the 80 degree dispersion of the non horn versions.
Regarding the B&C suggested design:
Has anyone checked the actual slopes of the HF crossovers.Seems pretty shallow at a quick glance ( less than 12dB/Oct ).
Well, it depends how you look at it.It’s nominally 18 dB/Oct for the HF and 12dB for the LF. (seriescap – parallel inductor – series cap for the HF) It’s also got a bit of CD horn correction and PEQ as well.
I didn’t know B&C had released the 14CXN76 … looks great, perhaps the best of both worlds (12 &15)??
To see why one is positive and the other negative you probably need to model or measure everything, but it will be to do with the different phase response of the components; in particular the crossover.Both crossovers use similar topology and jet the 15" coax HF driver is wired with polarity reversed while 12" is wired +to+. Can someone with more knowledge explain?
After closer inspection you may be right.To see why one is positive and the other negative you probably need to model or measure everything, but it will be to do with the different phase response of the components; in particular the crossover.
The crossovers while fundamentally similar have quite different component values and as such will have different phase responses. The phase response of the 12” and 15” will also be different at the crossover point. I assume the physical time alignment between the horn and LF driver will be the same for both drivers ... but it may not be.
It’s a compromise to get the LF and HF to sum nicely, but I suspect B&C have found quite a good one.
Hey, Riley. I've been eyeing the 14CXN88 for a wedge design for a few years now. I'd love to compare notes and or take a listen to what you have. I'll be in town Friday and Saturday this week if you're interested.Hey, lets resurrect an old thread! Not sure how I missed this thread ( especially since I commented in it ) in my searches for info on the B&C 14CXN88s. I've got one in the shop right now ( thanks Bennett ) running a little monitor wedge shoot out with my existing wedges ( I have four different brands and models in stock, time to get rational here ). I've installed the 1488 in an existing single 15 wedge on an adaptor board mainly to evaluate the mid to high performance and coverage pattern. LF performance will be addressed when I design some boxes, compared to the performance in the voice range thats a second tier consideration . Doing a round robin of filter tweeks, Smaart TF curves and listening with a variety of tracks. So far the 1488 sounds quite good. Certainly better than two out of the four wedges I'm testing against and on a par with the other two. Testing has been with a pair of Lab Gruppen IPD amps using the internal DSP all with LR 24db / oct filters. As part of my testing I've also tried some second and third order filters trying to emulate possible passive crossovers as having at least a few wedges with internal crossovers would be handy. My tests with the lower order filters thus far have not turned out nearly as well. Use, would you be interested in sharing what sort of box and passive filter design you went with?