Thanks for the compliments…
The 'road test' at the beginning of the week was OK, though not too demanding re. levels and quality so not really true test.
This morning I arranged a test set-up. Measurement mic. placed like this:
Here shown the 'natural' response of the WH10 elements (Bypassing the internal passive crossover filters):
When connected through the X-over, I noticed two problematic points:
First, the HF/Piezos section was too dominant so it was attenuated by about 3dB (as suggested in the plan).
Secondly, the 2kHz hump in the woofer's response was still prominent despite the roll off of the filter at 1.5kHz, so I modified the roll off point to 1kHz.
This smoothed the hump considerably.
Here are the response plots of the complete WH10:
Some notes: Don’t be bothered by the seemingly rough trace. This is because of the high resolution (1/24 octave) that was left on purpose.
Although less smooth and appealing then say 1/3 octave, it is the true response picture and shows the offending points more clearly.
The SPL levels are not absolute but only relative within each plot. Offsetting the plots was done only for viewing purpose.
The top two traces are direct feed (PC/sound card -> amp -> WH10) with no EQ
The bottom trace is with EQ correction applied (LS9-16 rack EQ inserted on output mix):
Here a shot of the EQ corrections on the LS9:
