Nausious??
Hi there.
Very interesting synergy, I think you'll bring lots of new ideas to this forgotten beast.
I must stress, that when i play the box and listen to music etc, I dont get sick at all, even with the box pumping away heavily sometimes. Its the prolonged exposure that made me feel a bit queezy. Im talking of playing the same low piece on repeat for 2,5 - 3 hours. After that I didnt want to know Graham Holliman or his speakers at all. However, 3 days break, and it was set up nicely, and again, it sounds really really lovely. It doesnt as i said blow me out the room, it just adds a gentle yet very low fr that gives the music a richness ive never heard before.
About a theorietical explanation, look at his entire write up as pointed out earlier in the forum at http://l2.espacenet.com/espacenet/viewer?PN=GB2037534&CY=gb&LG=en&DB=EPD
His theory is very interesting indeed.
The sounds you hear that are so low. I would also like to rip and send to someone. I have 3 in mind 2 from enya as i mentioned but that is easy to come by, and the third is a pipe organ piece that i find is the lowest "nice sounding" bass i have.
Ryan
PS: Thanks to synergy for posting the plans
Hi there.
Very interesting synergy, I think you'll bring lots of new ideas to this forgotten beast.
I must stress, that when i play the box and listen to music etc, I dont get sick at all, even with the box pumping away heavily sometimes. Its the prolonged exposure that made me feel a bit queezy. Im talking of playing the same low piece on repeat for 2,5 - 3 hours. After that I didnt want to know Graham Holliman or his speakers at all. However, 3 days break, and it was set up nicely, and again, it sounds really really lovely. It doesnt as i said blow me out the room, it just adds a gentle yet very low fr that gives the music a richness ive never heard before.
About a theorietical explanation, look at his entire write up as pointed out earlier in the forum at http://l2.espacenet.com/espacenet/viewer?PN=GB2037534&CY=gb&LG=en&DB=EPD
His theory is very interesting indeed.
The sounds you hear that are so low. I would also like to rip and send to someone. I have 3 in mind 2 from enya as i mentioned but that is easy to come by, and the third is a pipe organ piece that i find is the lowest "nice sounding" bass i have.
Ryan
PS: Thanks to synergy for posting the plans
Ryan:
Thanks again for all of your work on this.
Synergy:
Great stuff simulating the design in virtual space!
I think there maybe something of use here.
For example, adding his chamber inside a Bose Cannon to augment the deepest bass segment. IMO the driver should be fully enclosed (ala Bose Cannon or 6th order bandpass) to only perform in the range of say 15hz to 50hz.
BTW, I have the ten page patent as one PDF file if you would like to post it...
Thanks again for all of your work on this.
Synergy:
Great stuff simulating the design in virtual space!
I think there maybe something of use here.
For example, adding his chamber inside a Bose Cannon to augment the deepest bass segment. IMO the driver should be fully enclosed (ala Bose Cannon or 6th order bandpass) to only perform in the range of say 15hz to 50hz.
BTW, I have the ten page patent as one PDF file if you would like to post it...
qi you must be reading my mind mate i've been doing exactly that
interesting you should say about enclosing the driver i tried that and it returned a peak in response around 18Hz but dropped off rapidly either side (20dB down at 10Hz!)
basically i've been mucking about with the idea of blowing air over the top of a helmholtz resonator but firing it out through a t-line tuned either to the same frequency or an octave lower or higher
it's giving some interesting results but i've not tried putting one on both pipes of the cannon yet (wait till i start horn loading it that'll be fun - The Horn Loaded Holy Cannon!
)
the biggest problem as with the cannon seems to be getting the loading right so that the cone excursion is tamed enough to make it usable yet still give a reasonable SPL
send me the pdf i'll put it up - dave at pure-filth.org
interesting you should say about enclosing the driver i tried that and it returned a peak in response around 18Hz but dropped off rapidly either side (20dB down at 10Hz!)
basically i've been mucking about with the idea of blowing air over the top of a helmholtz resonator but firing it out through a t-line tuned either to the same frequency or an octave lower or higher
it's giving some interesting results but i've not tried putting one on both pipes of the cannon yet (wait till i start horn loading it that'll be fun - The Horn Loaded Holy Cannon!
)the biggest problem as with the cannon seems to be getting the loading right so that the cone excursion is tamed enough to make it usable yet still give a reasonable SPL
send me the pdf i'll put it up - dave at pure-filth.org
As an interesting point about material containing infrasound, I submit the "Insomnia" soundtrack by Biosphere. Not the American remake of the movie, but the original Norwegian film.
Track #3 contains a recording at the coast of Norway, and apparently has not been bandwidth limited.
With my own speakers, that are not capable of sensible output in the infrasonic region, you can clearly see them reaching excursion limits before the sounds of the birdcalls get to a natural level. And by visual inspection, I'd say the frequency content is in the 1-3Hz range, consistent with where the majority of the sonic energy in the sea exists.
In order to get real infrasound in a normal room, you will need to do a single pole low-boost below 5Hz, quite simply because of leakage through walls, closed windows, poor paint jobs, etc... according to a Danish university where they are currently researching the audibility of infrasound, and the effect of infrasound on humans (down to about 0.3Hz IIRC).
(In a <10sq.m. room with like 50 pcs 13" long excursion drivers on the front and back walls. Damn.)
Track #3 contains a recording at the coast of Norway, and apparently has not been bandwidth limited.
With my own speakers, that are not capable of sensible output in the infrasonic region, you can clearly see them reaching excursion limits before the sounds of the birdcalls get to a natural level. And by visual inspection, I'd say the frequency content is in the 1-3Hz range, consistent with where the majority of the sonic energy in the sea exists.
In order to get real infrasound in a normal room, you will need to do a single pole low-boost below 5Hz, quite simply because of leakage through walls, closed windows, poor paint jobs, etc... according to a Danish university where they are currently researching the audibility of infrasound, and the effect of infrasound on humans (down to about 0.3Hz IIRC).
(In a <10sq.m. room with like 50 pcs 13" long excursion drivers on the front and back walls. Damn.)
The sea or coast has hugh infra waves, Plus whales have been known to let out a infra burst and it can sound like a cannon firing so am told,i dont know if this is true, maybe somebody can clear this up, but am told that whales can stun prey with a sonar burst that has infrawaves in it?, Water we know can transfer sound waves much better than air, some 1500 m/s and in air i think its only 330m/s but this depends on the the temp and a few other factors, its true most common music does not contain infra sound, it drains power supplies and it can sound strange, but it does at a darkness and richness that just adds to the listening pleasure,angel said:As an interesting point about material containing infrasound, I submit the "Insomnia" soundtrack by Biosphere. Not the American remake of the movie, but the original Norwegian film.
Track #3 contains a recording at the coast of Norway, and apparently has not been bandwidth limited.
, I'd say the frequency content is in the 1-3Hz range, consistent with where the majority of the sonic energy in the sea exists.
In order to get real infrasound in a normal room, you will need to do a single pole low-boost below 5Hz, quite simply because of leakage through walls, closed windows, poor paint jobs, etc... according to a Danish university where they are currently researching the audibility of infrasound, and the effect of infrasound on humans (down to about 0.3Hz IIRC).
Infrasound is still not openly talked about, as it has a dark past and i dont want to say its all bad, it can have a heeling effect if Nicola Tesla is to be believed, also some farmers say that electric wind farms have effects on there animals, it could be the sight of the wind farms or the noise or the magnetic field they project, I honest dont know! some say infra waves are just as harmful as nuclear Radiation, as the effects are the similar, once again i am not sure, this is in the realm of white Science and black Science.
I know for sure that the more low frequency energy is created the futher it travels from source, that is a fact am sure of, these waves are natural and am told even the earth has its own heart beat, Schuman resonances i believe, god why didnt i pay attention in school!
Hi! I can almost 100% g'tee that wilmslow will not be able to help too much only to say the drivers are no longer available..... nor will they be able to supply T/S paramatersRichard Allan "ATLAS" 18" drivers or whatever size they were a rare beast even back in the 70's when the design was published in "Hi-FI answers" one of the haymarket range of audio rags common at the time, cheers TC
P.S; it is possible to build it with alternative drivers as the south african chap proved, [ which was fortuitious for him ] perhaps dropping him a line may ellicit a bit more info to help you........
Paradise_Ice said:
Actually, as I recall, they do not give off a sonar-like burst, but my PC is not connected to the hifi, so I couldn't possibly tell. I do know good reproduction of some whale songs will require relatively good response to about 15Hz or so..
A link to humpback whale song: http://www.oceanmammalinst.org/hmpback1.wav.
IMO, the term infrasound should be used below 14Hz, since that is where the transition between a single tone and discrete pulses occurs as far as our hearing is concerned.
Water transfer sound waves faster. I'd doubt they transfer them better, i.e. more linearly.
As for air as a medium, it is interesting to note how many people tend to disregard the transfer characteristics of air.
Actually, the draining of power supplies isn't as much of an issue as the possible health dangers. But those are also pretty overrated. I mean, a 24Hz tone of sufficient level and duration will induce a potentially fatal bowel condition. Most of us have systems that are easily capable of reproducing such a tone. Extending response another few octaves isn't much of an issue health-wise, IMO. What you do want, however, is a meter showing you the amount of energy below 30Hz in your room.
Anyway... as to the necessity of infrasonic reproduction in a stereo, I would argue that the system does need to be flat well beyond the audible range, since a single pole at 10Hz, like what they use with CD's, will cause significant phase shift at e.g. 40Hz.
IMO, aiming for flat response with minimal group delay to a few hertz, or even 0.1Hz, is worthwhile. Use a Linkwitz transform circuit to move the poles of a sealed enclosure to where the poles from room boundary gain are, and move the ~5Hz leakage pole down to 0.1Hz with a Q of 1/sqrt(10.5)...
On recordings that are not bandlimited, this should give incredible bass, and it doesn't require significant extra energy with normal program material.
The Schuman resonance occurs at 7.8Hz, with a tolerance of 0.3Hz depending on atmospheric conditions. Please refer to this URL: UCLA Berkeley NCEDC.
Oh, and I think it's a magnetic resonance formed in the Earth-Ionosphere cavity, from what the page says.
Hmmm..........
As with all patents its the method you can patent rather than
any intellectual principle, whether it works or not is irrelevant.
Objective evidence is simply not required for a patent, and as
such patents are not a good source of practical implementations.
Now correct me if I'm wrong but if it works as described GH would
have had many manufacturers beating a path to his door to be
able to produce a compact high efficiency HT sub down to 20Hz.
This is patently (sorry....) not the case as far as I'm aware.
His diodic electrical correction of the asymmetry of the compression
of air may work but its irrelevant. Drive unit manufactures arrange
asymmetric magnetic fields to compensate for this, simply claiming
they are ignorant of this fact in the patent is far from the truth,
but in terms of patenting the "method" such claims are simply
ignored, its only the "method" that is examined.
Again you can patent a method, even if a far superior technique
already exists, here your problem is simply selling your method.
I really can't see any advantage over bass "cannons"
and TL's or similar tuned to the relevant frequencies.
sreten.
As with all patents its the method you can patent rather than
any intellectual principle, whether it works or not is irrelevant.
Objective evidence is simply not required for a patent, and as
such patents are not a good source of practical implementations.
Now correct me if I'm wrong but if it works as described GH would
have had many manufacturers beating a path to his door to be
able to produce a compact high efficiency HT sub down to 20Hz.
This is patently (sorry....) not the case as far as I'm aware.
His diodic electrical correction of the asymmetry of the compression
of air may work but its irrelevant. Drive unit manufactures arrange
asymmetric magnetic fields to compensate for this, simply claiming
they are ignorant of this fact in the patent is far from the truth,
but in terms of patenting the "method" such claims are simply
ignored, its only the "method" that is examined.
Again you can patent a method, even if a far superior technique
already exists, here your problem is simply selling your method.
I really can't see any advantage over bass "cannons"
and TL's or similar tuned to the relevant frequencies.
sreten.
I'm inclined to agree with one proviso. The whole issue with bass is not how low it goes, what SPL is achieved or even the distortion levels but what volume it takes to achieve it.sreten said:
My gut feeling is that I'd go with a TL but I'd really like to follow this story and learn more. I'll certainly do some experimenting when I can.
7V said:
Certainly pursue the matter until your curiosity is satisfied.
I lost patience with the patent description when it claimed room
impedance matching only applicable to horn loading, again the
accuracy of such claims is not relevant to the patent, and such
impedance matching is often claimed of TL's.
Except for horns its all BS IMO.
I agree low bass is about volume achieved, but surely low bass
SPL capability must be considered, unless you mean different.
sreten.sreten said:
Certainly pursue the matter until your curiosity is satisfied.
I lost patience with the patent description when it claimed room
impedance matching only applicable to horn loading, again the
accuracy of such claims is not relevant to the patent, and such
impedance matching is often claimed of TL's.
Except for horns its all BS IMO.
I agree low bass is about volume achieved, but surely low bass
SPL capability must be considered, unless you mean different.
i think the SPL of low frequencies must be considered it takes 70+dB at 20Hz to even reach the threshold of hearing yet that only equates to listening to 1KHz at 7 or 8dB
however i don't believe that has to increase in the same direction below 20Hz as it then becomes more about the level needed for your body to feel its presence at level that feels comfortable with the rest of the music
You know the strange part is everybody makes sense!
I personally do not like bass that sticks out like a beer belly,
It should sound natural and dark, the whole point to me is (and i dont care for the patent) to get as close to the original sound! the orginal source would have had these low energy infrawaves, these get lost, Has anybody heard a true infrawave woofer in action? its not some beastly device, its basically a subwoofer with a much greater output at 5 to 23 Hz, most woofers do not have a usable output in this range, and this is why people want more bass and louder bass, IMO, bass is the most irritating, cantankerous thing to listen to if its not in proportion with the rest of the sound. This whale song is to new age for me, Maybe Mike rowland Aeolis could do something with this? As for the whales infra sound, thats not it? for all i know those whales could be drunk, I am not sure once again, but i was told whales could stun sea animals with there infra sounds, i know they could do it with a good wack of its tail too!
I personally do not like bass that sticks out like a beer belly,
It should sound natural and dark, the whole point to me is (and i dont care for the patent) to get as close to the original sound! the orginal source would have had these low energy infrawaves, these get lost, Has anybody heard a true infrawave woofer in action? its not some beastly device, its basically a subwoofer with a much greater output at 5 to 23 Hz, most woofers do not have a usable output in this range, and this is why people want more bass and louder bass, IMO, bass is the most irritating, cantankerous thing to listen to if its not in proportion with the rest of the sound. This whale song is to new age for me, Maybe Mike rowland Aeolis could do something with this? As for the whales infra sound, thats not it? for all i know those whales could be drunk, I am not sure once again, but i was told whales could stun sea animals with there infra sounds, i know they could do it with a good wack of its tail too!
There is so much written on marine sonar and infra wave technology, you could drown in a sea of information!sreten said:As far as I'm aware its Dolphins that use sound waves to
confuse their prey, as an extension of their sonar capabilities,
the whole idea of "stunning" infrasonic soundwaves in water
with practical observation seems ridiculous.
I believe your right about the confusion factor but am not talking about Dolphins, Can you imagine a whale screaming at you under water? Its very well documented that Acoustic weapons use infra sound, . A Major in the pakistan army told me about the use of beam weapons, I was so dismissive about it all, A sound weapon! very unlikly, back then in the 1990 i was not on the internet and there are few books on the subject, But the fact is you guys talk about sound levels, Now at 120 to 130 db that i can reach in the extrem range of what i do, extreme nausea and intestinal pain! I know this for a fact, its just not music at all! at 170 db of infra sound would cause blunt force truma, lucky for me i dont dabble in this range and have no interest at all but i can not back this statement up at all with any impirical say so, i think for music around 80db of infrasound is acceptable and will not cause any problems at all.
I will make a Holliman enclosure, its not that complex and it sounds like it could work. Whats the worst that could happen?
I think its important to understand energy in every medium,sreten said:Acoustic (i.e. air) infra sound weapons have existed since they
where developed but never used by the Germans circa WW2.
The properties of sound in water and air are not remotely similar
and free exchange of concepts between the two is dangerous.
Water and air have obvious differences and am not confusing the two, if scientist do not talk to other scientist, its our loss, why do quantum physicist talk to buddhist monks, all knowledge is power.
"Acoustic (i.e. air) infra sound weapons have existed since they
where developed but never used by the Germans circa WW2"
This may not apply to speakers but might be some insight into infrasonics!
At my place of work a lead(as in the metal)smelter/refinery we use what we call portable burners. They are run on town gas at high pressure and compressed air at 180psi. They are capable of 20ft+ long flames in open air before blowing itself out because the amount of gas/air flow.
We use these to melt lead out of our launders when they block up, launders are U shaped. The flames can go near 40ft once burner is placed in them... until the air is used.
If heard huge pa subs up close, massive db car subs, planes/jets none of them compare in the shear movement of your chest cavitiy like these burners do. You cant hear it(other than a highpressure flame sound, looks like a massive 6ft oxy flame!)but you can sure feel it move your body in a way you've proberly never felt(unless you work in this kind of industry). The whole refinery(huge shed has 6 120ft wide gantry cranes...) just shakes and vibrates... we are talking 1-2" thick steel!
It makes the sound/feel of lighting seem lame and whimpy(for comparsions sake).
But if you put the flame against a flat wall of some sort(so the flame cant blow out)the infrasonics disapear, maybe there's something in the U shape that cause's this...anyone?
Please excuse my spelling!
where developed but never used by the Germans circa WW2"
This may not apply to speakers but might be some insight into infrasonics!
At my place of work a lead(as in the metal)smelter/refinery we use what we call portable burners. They are run on town gas at high pressure and compressed air at 180psi. They are capable of 20ft+ long flames in open air before blowing itself out because the amount of gas/air flow.
We use these to melt lead out of our launders when they block up, launders are U shaped. The flames can go near 40ft once burner is placed in them... until the air is used.
If heard huge pa subs up close, massive db car subs, planes/jets none of them compare in the shear movement of your chest cavitiy like these burners do. You cant hear it(other than a highpressure flame sound, looks like a massive 6ft oxy flame!)but you can sure feel it move your body in a way you've proberly never felt(unless you work in this kind of industry). The whole refinery(huge shed has 6 120ft wide gantry cranes...) just shakes and vibrates... we are talking 1-2" thick steel!
It makes the sound/feel of lighting seem lame and whimpy(for comparsions sake).
But if you put the flame against a flat wall of some sort(so the flame cant blow out)the infrasonics disapear, maybe there's something in the U shape that cause's this...anyone?
Please excuse my spelling!
