advertisement


Building the Ergo E-IX mini-monitor loudspeaker system

I'm preparing to switch the Ergo IX to this stand. (It's currently sitting on top of the Royd RR3.)

I didn't feel it was fair to do a direct comparison when I first hooked the Ergo IX up after assembly. Today was the first time I switched the cables back to the RR3. The performance from both is definitely impressive. I would say that the RR3 sounds more sweet, composed and refined. In contrast, the Ergo is more dynamic and plucky. If I had to choose which sounds "better", the RR3 might be slightly ahead, but it really comes down to what you want from a speaker. Given I like engagement, I'll probably end up leaving the Ergo IX in my office (where I listen all the time by myself), and move the RR3 to the family room, where music is not supposed to dominate everyone's attention. :D

I will say that even after breaking in, the Ergo is still more "shouty" than I like. However, I remind myself that they're sitting on the RR3, further from the wall than they'll be on their own stands, and this is the "boundary crossover". Once I get them further back in the corner, I'll reassess and decide whether to tweak the crossover.
 
Mine are tight against the wall teetering on Linn Kan stands. I have to say that I don't find them shouty at all...
 
Shouty is not how I'd describe my (free-space) E-IXs either. Mike, you might like to check the wiring of your crossovers when you get a chance.

The E-IX respond well to a proper set of stands, and set at a height so the listeners' ears are level with the tweeter.
 
I'm probably exaggerating a bit by saying, "shouty". A better term might be "edgy" or "insistent". The RR3 is very composed, sweet, balanced and smooth. However, it isn't "bouncy" and "driven" like the Ergo IX, which which has a speed and immediacy that's quite engaging.

Ultimately, I don't think it's miswired. Also, both speakers sound the same in this regard, so if Stefan wired them wrong, then they would both have to be wrong, and I doubt that's the case.

At this point I've become hypersensitive to that aspect, so I'm probably noticing it more that most would. I'll probably make that change to the crossover to turn it into the free space version. Do you have the specs for that handy?
 
Yes, I do. But the Free space version is more than just a resistor change. I'll post the schematic when I'm on my home network.
 
Yes, I do. But the Free space version is more than just a resistor change. I'll post the schematic when I'm on my home network.
Hmmm. I'll have to see how significant the changes are. It might be better to build the complete crossover, then do a "quick" swap to see if I like it.
 
Mike, here is the free space XO schematic:

ACtC-3dqL-V6dMf5CMQxhpt9A6fasMvOcDg-viq_hN31LShDOG1Z5wO0pq2r4Kj07SaGsvpTdMWRrFwfjRwgq5X01yaQ8o0anX_RiF7XiE64Rx7kQuEqpQADGH4fciSSbF3tVN0yLM6nMHIU8t-g-4BNDYRR=w679-h377-no


The 2.5uF caps for C2011 and C2211 can be replaced with the more common 2.7uF values.

Cheers,
James
 
James . Ergos fully run in and sounding great . I have a pretty reflective room and still prefer the 7.5 ohm resistor. I have tried a range of resistors and come back to the 7.5 Personal taste and all that .
I have made the often fatal mistake of looking at pink fish. Specifically the Naim SBL crossover thread as I have a pair in the main room. . In it Mills resistors are being extolled as the thing to fit. Other than price £2.11 vrs £5.04 do you have any views as to the fitment to the Ergo or naim vrs the Jantzen resistors we fitted .. Similarly we ended up using the Jantzen Cross Cap . Do you think there is any great benefit to the Jantzen Std caps for the LF side of the crossover . Looking at the price of the Superior caps I can fully understand why you avoided them .
 
James . Ergos fully run in and sounding great . I have a pretty reflective room and still prefer the 7.5 ohm resistor. I have tried a range of resistors and come back to the 7.5 Personal taste and all that .
I have made the often fatal mistake of looking at pink fish. Specifically the Naim SBL crossover thread as I have a pair in the main room. . In it Mills resistors are being extolled as the thing to fit. Other than price £2.11 vrs £5.04 do you have any views as to the fitment to the Ergo or naim vrs the Jantzen resistors we fitted .. Similarly we ended up using the Jantzen Cross Cap . Do you think there is any great benefit to the Jantzen Std caps for the LF side of the crossover . Looking at the price of the Superior caps I can fully understand why you avoided them .
Glad to hear your E-IXs are doing the biz for you.

I have used Mills and Jantzen resistors, and don't have any preference for one or the other. I don't think they make that much of a difference, compared to caps for example. You could quite easily go nuts on boutique caps, but I personally draw the value line at Z-Superiors. You could try a better cap on the LF section, and tell us if you think it makes a difference.
 
The think that's irritating is that most recordings sound just perfect and completely engaging. However, some records sound a bit too "hot". If I play that "hot" recording through the Royd RR3, it sounds much more palatable, but the RR3 doesn't grab me as much as the Ergo IX.

I'm concerned that if I change the crossover, I'll lose some of that engaging quality that I like. I'm tempted to add another set of binding points, then use two external crossovers, with some type of 4PDT switch or relays. :D

Actually, if I go that route, I'm more likely to replace the existing binding posts with a 4-pole SpeakON connector. I'm using Canare Star-Quad cables, so I could rewire those to run lows and highs separately, and safely connect them with the SpeakON.

Or I may just leave well enough alone. :rolleyes:
 
It would be interesting to measure the FR of the E-IX against the RR3. It sounds like the latter has a slight downward tilt with rising frequency.

Mike, have you tried playing with toe angle?
 
It would be interesting to measure the FR of the E-IX against the RR3. It sounds like the latter has a slight downward tilt with rising frequency.
Yeah, I'm curious as well. As I mentioned earlier, once I build the PFM special with a passive crossover, I'm strongly considering going active. At that time I'll have to get the gear to to measurements, so I'll put some of my speakers through their paces. (Perhaps I'll get that gear sooner rather than later, just to satisfy my curiosity. ;) )

Mike, have you tried playing with toe angle?
That's an interesting question, as my setup is somewhat unusual. My office is smallish (perhaps 11x12ft), and my desk is against the same wall as the speakers. I'm about 1-2 feet from the midpoint between the speakers, with the speakers fairly close to the corners. The RR1 (and Ergo IX, when it was sitting astride it) were focused on a point about 4-5 feet behind me. (I could move my chair back to sit directly in the line of fire, but that almost never happens.)

Now the Ergo IX is on its own stand, and a bit further into the corner (although it didn't have far to go). It's toed in even more, so that the focal point is perhaps 2-3 feet behind me now. The bass is a bit fuller, but highs are the same.

Here's the really interesting bit: In both configurations my line of sight (and listening) is blocked by a 30" monitor on each side, so all high frequency is indirect. This should take the edge off the hotness, but the attenuation is barely discernible (compared to when I roll the chair back to see the speakers).

Audio is a funny thing.
 
As I mentioned earlier, once I build the PFM special with a passive crossover, I'm strongly considering going active. At that time I'll have to get the gear to to measurements, so I'll put some of my speakers through their paces. (Perhaps I'll get that gear sooner rather than later, just to satisfy my curiosity. ;)
Just a word of caution about "going active". The E-IX, for example, have 4th order Linkwitz-Riley acoustic crossover that is effected by 2nd and 3rd order electrical filters. It won't be a simple matter of strapping on a digital or electronic crossover with standard LR4 transfer and expect seamless XO. In fact, I guarantee it won't be. Active XO done properly will still need to take the native response of the drivers into consideration. Acoustic = electrical + mechanical.

Loudspeaker design is a complicated thing.
 
Just a word of caution about "going active". The E-IX, for example, have 4th order Linkwitz-Riley acoustic crossover that is effected by 2nd and 3rd order electrical filters. It won't be a simple matter of strapping on a digital or electronic crossover with standard LR4 transfer and expect seamless XO. In fact, I guarantee it won't be. Active XO done properly will still need to take the native response of the drivers into consideration. Acoustic = electrical + mechanical.

Loudspeaker design is a complicated thing.
I'll admit that I haven't looked into it deeply. I was thinking to use the MiniDSP, and was assuming it could use a frequency scan to determine which frequencies needed to be boosted or attenuated. It would then do that magic in the digital domain, where all things are possible.
 
FWIW, I once ran a pair of IX as actives. Pretty easy with the Mini DSP stuff. I basically replicated the transfer functions James mentions above with a few extra tweaks to suits taste and room etc. The really were great.

Edit - Oh and can sell the mini DSP stuff as well :) and multi channel amps of course :)
 
This is an interesting decision point for me. I was considering upgrading to a Benchmark DAC3 (from the DAC2). However, if I use the MiniDSP, then I no longer have need for a Benchmark DAC in my system.

Currently I'm making use of the both analog inputs on my Benchmark (for occasional vinyl and very occasional cassette use). If I went with the MiniDSP 4x8, it has only one analog input, so I would have to swap analog inputs occasionally. The 10x10 is not much more.

Ultimately, if I don't go active with any of my speakers, then the MiniDSP is unnecessary. I don't even have all the amps built, nor the PFM Special.

Decisions, decisions...
 


advertisement


Back
Top