from the link to the 6moons interview with mr. Salabert in the previous post
Sounds a bit like the effect of the ENABL process, or is it something completely different ?
when reading trough this interview with mr. Salabert (the Phy-Hp founder) you could get the feeling that the driver is allready optimized in every possible way you can imagine, but I think that's what any manufacturer wants you to believe, isn't it ? But at the same time I also think that mr. Salabert, Auditorium 23 in Germany; Musical Affairs in Holland; Ocellia in France; and Tonian Labs in the US never listen to hip-hop, electronic music, rock and punk etc. like I do besides only jazz and classical stuff. The phy are very well capable of doing these types of music but not as full range and certainly not in the vibrating type of enclosure I heard them in (I have heard all except the tonian labs) , very terrible on a nice piece of raw hip-hop I can tell you, and no, that was not the fault of the recording.
I want my speakers to be capable of playing anything I throw at them and that's why I want them to be clean with good tone, firm bottom extension and dynamics but not as steril and boring sounding as the majority of high-end loudspeakers I have heard but on the other hand also not as raw as a cheap P.A. speaker
Sounds a bit like the effect of the ENABL process, or is it something completely different ?
when reading trough this interview with mr. Salabert (the Phy-Hp founder) you could get the feeling that the driver is allready optimized in every possible way you can imagine, but I think that's what any manufacturer wants you to believe, isn't it ? But at the same time I also think that mr. Salabert, Auditorium 23 in Germany; Musical Affairs in Holland; Ocellia in France; and Tonian Labs in the US never listen to hip-hop, electronic music, rock and punk etc. like I do besides only jazz and classical stuff. The phy are very well capable of doing these types of music but not as full range and certainly not in the vibrating type of enclosure I heard them in (I have heard all except the tonian labs) , very terrible on a nice piece of raw hip-hop I can tell you, and no, that was not the fault of the recording.
I want my speakers to be capable of playing anything I throw at them and that's why I want them to be clean with good tone, firm bottom extension and dynamics but not as steril and boring sounding as the majority of high-end loudspeakers I have heard but on the other hand also not as raw as a cheap P.A. speaker
Yes to both, except EnABL eliminates them, from all of the borders, restores phase above 1kHz to nominal, adds about plus 9 dB of clear, uncompressed head room for complex wave forms and adds about -50 dB of clear unmuddied sound below the normal signal dynamic bandwidth.
You can even put the pattern onto the brass ring for additional benefit.
For the most part, driver designers and manufacturers are a very conservative lot. They stick to what is proven within the history of loudspeaker design. Nothing wrong with this, drivers have improved tremendously since 1969, when I first applied this process to an Ohm F Walsh driver. However, even the prime text book, Baranek's "Acoustics" states very clearly that the piston model being shown there and being used to develop test methods to improve drivers working as pistons, was in error, when this piston model was compared to real world results. This chapter is ignored because a simple, easily modeled solution to the problem of these discrepancies was not provided.
EnABL does provide the solution. Unfortunately there are no piston based test procedures to show what it is doing, once the driver has had a device applied to it that solves the transverse wave termination problems that give rise to the additional corruptions of the piston based compression waves, being measured out in the free air. These corruptions are very easily heard, once you have heard a driver with them removed. But, you are not going to find them with the tools currently available, on objective test suites designed to measure corruptions based solely upon piston model termination schemes.
This is why I always ask folks who are going to learn to EnABL their drivers, to start with cheap speakers first. The audible differences are just as breathtaking for them, as for expensive drivers. The provided clarity makes a boom box, or computer, or car speakers perform to an astonishing level of clarity, volume, tone and depth of information. So, if you decide to treat your PHY drivers, treat some other drivers first and improve your total sonic environment.
Bud
Hmmm, sound very interesting. Still there will be the problem to know what pattern to use on wich part of the cone as it seems to vary from driver to driver. What are the chances to screw up ? What kind of coating would be best for these cones, they seem very absorbant to me (long fiber paper). As said before I have tried to read the ENABL thread but it is way too long to jump in and the information is not always very clear.
So far I understand that the whole process is about coating a pattern of rectangular blocks of about 1mm thickness on the inner and outer ring of the cone with some micro-gloss (?) coating. Is it possible to do other cone treatments like the c37 laquer after the ENABL process or should it be done before that ?
So far I understand that the whole process is about coating a pattern of rectangular blocks of about 1mm thickness on the inner and outer ring of the cone with some micro-gloss (?) coating. Is it possible to do other cone treatments like the c37 laquer after the ENABL process or should it be done before that ?
Sjef,
The pattern placement and block size is far from haphazard. They are based upon the geometry of the driver.
I use a lisp routine I wrote many years ago, within Auto Cad 14, to generate appropriate pattern placement from cone inner and outer edge diameter, material thickness and radial distance between the edges.
As a geometrical solution, if you divide the edge diameter into 36 sectors you will have blocks that are 4 degrees long by two degrees wide with a 2 degree square between them. Then a 2 degree width will separate the upper 18 block sets from the lower 18 block sets. The lower individual blocks are again made from 4 degrees of this new diameter. This gives you an overall width, of both rings of blocks, of 6 degrees. This entire package is then moved down the width of 4 degrees and recalculated.
All of this is performed by the Lisp routine, thankfully. The need for this precision is due to the needs of the computer, not the needs of the pattern. A very great tolerance in block ring position, and precision of workmanship, is actually allowed, all with essentially the same audible results.
If you look at these pictures from the link below, this Fostex driver has the simplest, most straight forward EnABL pattern sets. Yours could look very much like this, with a phase plug. Were you to keep the foam in place, or use a phase plug, then the inner ring would only have two rings, rather than three.
http://picasaweb.google.com/hpurvine/Fostex127ETreatment
If you have access to Auto cad 14, or Corel Draw or, Adobe Illustrator I can provide you with the EnABL lisp portion or vector based generic ring sets you can scale to size.
I would always put EnABL on last. The other materials will offer certain smoothing or tonal improvements that will be completely untouched by what EnABL provides. The better the driver to begin with, the more interesting will be the final sound. It really does not alter anything but upper frequency phase lag to nominal and a vast amount more, clear information. Your favorite sounding speakers will still sound just like themselves.
It is a rare case of, being to good to be true, not really describing just how good it is. Plus, the needed tools, though a bit arduous to get, are inexpensive, really inexpensive.
Bud
The pattern placement and block size is far from haphazard. They are based upon the geometry of the driver.
I use a lisp routine I wrote many years ago, within Auto Cad 14, to generate appropriate pattern placement from cone inner and outer edge diameter, material thickness and radial distance between the edges.
As a geometrical solution, if you divide the edge diameter into 36 sectors you will have blocks that are 4 degrees long by two degrees wide with a 2 degree square between them. Then a 2 degree width will separate the upper 18 block sets from the lower 18 block sets. The lower individual blocks are again made from 4 degrees of this new diameter. This gives you an overall width, of both rings of blocks, of 6 degrees. This entire package is then moved down the width of 4 degrees and recalculated.
All of this is performed by the Lisp routine, thankfully. The need for this precision is due to the needs of the computer, not the needs of the pattern. A very great tolerance in block ring position, and precision of workmanship, is actually allowed, all with essentially the same audible results.
If you look at these pictures from the link below, this Fostex driver has the simplest, most straight forward EnABL pattern sets. Yours could look very much like this, with a phase plug. Were you to keep the foam in place, or use a phase plug, then the inner ring would only have two rings, rather than three.
http://picasaweb.google.com/hpurvine/Fostex127ETreatment
If you have access to Auto cad 14, or Corel Draw or, Adobe Illustrator I can provide you with the EnABL lisp portion or vector based generic ring sets you can scale to size.
I would always put EnABL on last. The other materials will offer certain smoothing or tonal improvements that will be completely untouched by what EnABL provides. The better the driver to begin with, the more interesting will be the final sound. It really does not alter anything but upper frequency phase lag to nominal and a vast amount more, clear information. Your favorite sounding speakers will still sound just like themselves.
It is a rare case of, being to good to be true, not really describing just how good it is. Plus, the needed tools, though a bit arduous to get, are inexpensive, really inexpensive.
Bud
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.