I have a test CD that has bands for frequencies from 20 to 20k Hz.
I have a lot of organ music that hits the lowest octave. I would say that the Kube tames an upper midrange peak (or possibly it compensates by elevating the bass and treble. My own experience is that it is subtle and is not immediately noticeable on all music. My wife, who has better hearing than I do, said the difference made by the Kube was a dramatic improvement. There are two sets of outputs for the amps, and one has a level control, so you can use two different amps that have different sensitivity or gain. The Kube 200 has exceptional support for this, as outlined in the instructions. One reason might be that the 105.3s can be bi-amped simply by removing jumpers between the connectors. The only speaker model specifically mentioned in the Kube instructions is the 105.3.
#Richard kubes pdf
There's a pdf instruction manual for the Kube available online. On a side note, this October is KEF's 50th anniversary! Get ready to wish them happy birthday! The circuit for the bass correction was certainly not a simple humped 2nd order filter, but was variously at least one "Friend Biquad" topology or a "Double Integrator Loop Biquad", the former very tricky to design without access to the computer program we wrote to help with the design (thanks Ric!). I have attempted to get this myself from time to time but with limited success. You could attempt to compensate this by tone controls or an equaliser, but you are not likely to readily get the correct compensation without measurement tools.ĭocumentation on all the different KUBEs is sparse. This was done so as to maximise the available midrange efficiency of the system that normally gets "thrown away" in the xover.Īs Dave says, without the KUBE, not only will the bass response be mis-aligned, but the midrange will sound "forward", being too strong by typically at least 6dB. I designed most of the KUBE EQ's, and other than the KUBE for the 104.2, most of them applied midrange EQ in addition to bass extension. The benefit of the Kube is that the system efficiency could be maximized rather than thrown away to extend the bass. It really depends on how loud you like to listen, how far from the speakers you are, how dead your room is, etc. 5 or 10 watts is usually way more than you need, but some times 300 watts isn't nearly enough. Regarding power, give your NAD a try before you discard it. I think speakerguru has even been able to link some people up with missing Kubes, so it doesn't hurt to ask. If you can find a graph of the Kube curve you will be that far ahead in creating the right curve, even with a graphic EQ just trying to approximate it. I would still urge you to visit the KEF site. You can have the extended bass as well, with some modest EQ at a frequency just below the natural rolloff. If you set up and equalizer with the opposite of that curve, that is a good start. So the 102 will rise considerably in the mids (say around 2k) and will be soft in the bass.
By the way, this is not much different than the original Bose 901 and its EQ. The addition of the Kube then flattened the response. The systems that used the Kube were generally designed for maximum efficiency rather than flat response.
0 kommentar(er)
