Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Phil Graham" data-source="post: 100061" data-attributes="member: 430">Re: Help with EAW SM122&#039;s.Marsellus,It is pretty hard to say anything concrete with such a smoothed SMAART curve. Especially for controlled shop measurements, 1/24th smoothing for the Magnitude, and 1/12 smoothing for the phase is plenty. I&#039;ll typically use unsmoothed mag and 1/24 phase smoothing during design, and 1/48 mag smoothing during voicing.It would appear that you have a level problem, as Rob mentions, Also, it would appear that might have a polarity inversion at the HF XO point. It is hard to say with 100% certainty, given the amount of smoothing, but if the null was much deeper when viewed without smoothing, then that would indicate more clearly the possibility of a polarity inversion.It is possible that EAW intentionally left the polarity &quot;incorrect&quot; to maximize the null in a region where feedback was an issue, but that seems unlikely. It is also possible that this dip is merely a design feature of the crossover. Again it is hard to say definitively with so much smoothing.Can you map out the passive XO schematic and post it? That would be most revealing, and help figure out what is going on and where to proceed.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Phil Graham, post: 100061, member: 430"] Re: Help with EAW SM122's. Marsellus, It is pretty hard to say anything concrete with such a smoothed SMAART curve. Especially for controlled shop measurements, 1/24th smoothing for the Magnitude, and 1/12 smoothing for the phase is plenty. I'll typically use unsmoothed mag and 1/24 phase smoothing during design, and 1/48 mag smoothing during voicing. It would appear that you have a level problem, as Rob mentions, Also, it would appear that might have a polarity inversion at the HF XO point. It is hard to say with 100% certainty, given the amount of smoothing, but if the null was much deeper when viewed without smoothing, then that would indicate more clearly the possibility of a polarity inversion. It is possible that EAW intentionally left the polarity "incorrect" to maximize the null in a region where feedback was an issue, but that seems unlikely. It is also possible that this dip is merely a design feature of the crossover. Again it is hard to say definitively with so much smoothing. Can you map out the passive XO schematic and post it? That would be most revealing, and help figure out what is going on and where to proceed. [/QUOTE]

Verification