rti a9

devoooo0

Has anyone changed the crossover on the rti a9. I was thinking of change the mid to bass to the 250 300 range. With the sub playing below 60 or 80. So the three 7 inch play more then just 120 to 60.

Inspector 24

Why?

You'd probably end up with some pretty boomy boxy sounding speakers....

And oh more questions like do you even have enough power to extract their potential? If you ask those drivers to do even more work you'll need more power.

devoooo0

i have an outlaw audio amp 200wpc powing them and since i have a sub too. i was thinking why are the 3 7inch driver only playing 120hz down to 60 and the mids getting 1.8 kHz to 120 hz such a large amount. I was thinking the mids would sound better and the lows would sound not that much different cause of the sub.

jeremymarcinko

But the cabinet and those drivers were not designed for it...leave it alone, you would not only bloat the midrange but those hz would also cancel out or boost the multiples of those hz that frequently intersect along the same wavelength. You can't alter one hz without affecting the behavior of at least one other.

gp4jesus

What's your goal by changing XO frequencies?

and...

Have you considered bi-amping w/active filtering - the easy way to tweak to your heart's content. To get there takes $ & work. You'll need...

1. four more channels (amps) of equal SQ to what you have
2. a stereo electronic XO w/variable frequency and outputs.
3. bypass* the HP* filter* to the mids.
4. bypass the LP filter to the 7" subs

Speaking from experience**, if the 'A9 XO is like the 'A7**, taking out the 7" LP filter is piece of cake & the mids may not have** HP filters. Otherwise you may have to duplicate the LP & HP filtering to your mids & tweets to accomplish same*.

** The 'A7s don't! Mids & subs share the same space - no divider between them contrary to website info. I plan to change that one day

Good Luck, Tony

gp4jesus

kevintomb wrote: »

...But his idea is simply not really an issue.

Check the website. It says, the '7’s mids, like the '9s, have their "own space." Truth be known, the '9s do, the '7s don't but should. The Rti A3s purportedly use the same driver. That said, if the ‘A7’s mid had their “own space” approximately that of the ‘3, w/OUT a pair of much larger drivers pushing against them, wouldn’t have the popping problems I and other owners have experienced.

kevintomb wrote: »

...He is assuming the "Mid" drivers are actually mid-range speakers …

They’re the only driver producing the "mid range," hence the name. That makes protecting their primary function just that more important. That, and the lower drivers are far more qualified to what they do… …by themselves. Asking the mid to also carry the bottom two octaves loads them down, drops the load impedance to 4 ohms - loading the amp/AVR & defeats those lower driver's primary function: reducing Doppler distortion to the mid range.

kevintomb wrote: »

...in reality they are simply smaller woofers, that are merely being used as a mid in this design. They are not "dedicated" mid-range speakers.

Sorry. I fail to see the dif when compared to the ‘9s or any similar 3 way design.

kevintomb wrote: »

They were designed to operate full range, and do on other Rti speakers rather effortlessly...

’9s aside & my apologies for “beating a dead horse”, other Rti designs have smaller space behind their respective mids and, as I said above, don’t have a pair of much larger drivers pushing against them.

kevintomb wrote: »

...By using the lower woofers only under 120hz, that relieves the smaller woofers (used as mids) of all the lower bass...

After I had about 200 hours on them I cranked up Donald Fagen's "Nightfly," driving them full range w/a Belles Series One, no sub. During heavier passages the "mids" would "****" & sometimes "pop" obnoxiously while the lower drivers that, in your words Kevin, are supposed to "relieve the smaller woofer (the mid?!) of all lower bass," didn't seem to break a sweat.

kevintomb wrote: »

...and frankly they sound great*, as is.

In my experience only true w/a sub to do the “heaviest lifting” "reliev[ing] the smaller woofer (the mids?!) of the lowest bass" or if the source isn’t real “heavy” & you’re mindful w/the V knob.

kevintomb wrote: »

There are other mods that might make them slightly better…

Such as? I’ve used (active) HP filtering. That’s fixed the popping but those lower drivers still cause interferences,

kevintomb wrote: »

…but this idea is barking up the wrong tree.

Having read this far, why is isolating the mid from the lower** drivers** such a bad idea***? That, along w/the aforementioned HP filtering, won’t be the final step to eliminate their** interference?
*** re-read my RTi A3 reference

tonyb

Run them full range....problem solved.

scotvl

if your receiver has a bass+ or similar setting that lets both the A9s and the sub play the lows I would try that. Might as well let the A9s help with the bass or you could have saved money and picked up the A7s instead. I don't even use my sub, my A9s dig deep enough for me.

gp4jesus

kevintomb wrote: »

.. I did not see where he said that was his goal* though.

gp4jesus wrote: »

...Mids & subs share the same space - no divider* between them... ...I plan to change* that one day

JCsound

I would say, run a good powerful amp through them. Use something like 250wpc or more and you'll probably realize that the speakers sound much better that way. If you are still unsatisfied and want to do the crossovers....then buy nicer capacitors and resistors of the same value as the original crossovers and swap them. I did that to mine.

mikeyb128

It took my sunfire to really get those rtia9's to sing. We are taking 400 watts with 120 amps of current peak to peak per channel.

pitdogg2

JCsound wrote: »

I would say, run a good powerful amp through them. Use something like 250wpc or more and you'll probably realize that the speakers sound much better that way. If you are still unsatisfied and want to do the crossovers....then buy nicer capacitors and resistors of the same value as the original crossovers and swap them. I did that to mine.

THIS^^^^^

gp4jesus

While I don't 100% agree to this approach, I recall from several years ago someone running a PAIR of Mackie 1400s for their LRs! Can't recall the config, either mono or passive bi-amp, but regardless easily good for 600+(!) per side?!!

The glossed-over, ignored really, challange of the 'A9s, & to a lessor degree the 'A7s along w/other multi-driver speakers, is the back EMF* from 5 & 3 drivers respectively. Higher quality amps and their frequent "byproducted" higher outputs "handle it*" better than those in most AVRs.