You’re welcome vac. Your test looks good indeed.
Just a note, the JBL FE series is cleaner than the 2216 sheet that I posted and the Al series is cleaner still.
I will dig them up if someone bests the 2216 with a valid test sheet. Should 100dB @1M be the standard?
On the topic of distortions, one that the 2216 excells at mitigating is thermal compression. I believe this is but one of the reasons it was selected for use in the M2. In a professional large format high level monitor, power compression is a distortion that is audible. The 2216 was the right tool for this job.
This comes back around to how we weigh the many parameters of a driver for a particular employ. But I digress, this thread is about low distortion speakers.
Barry.
Just a note, the JBL FE series is cleaner than the 2216 sheet that I posted and the Al series is cleaner still.
I will dig them up if someone bests the 2216 with a valid test sheet. Should 100dB @1M be the standard?
On the topic of distortions, one that the 2216 excells at mitigating is thermal compression. I believe this is but one of the reasons it was selected for use in the M2. In a professional large format high level monitor, power compression is a distortion that is audible. The 2216 was the right tool for this job.
This comes back around to how we weigh the many parameters of a driver for a particular employ. But I digress, this thread is about low distortion speakers.
Barry.
turk 182:
Not sure what you mean by "ordered relationship."
When I previously used the word "order," it was intended to be more or less synonymous with the idea of "temporal sequence." In other words, if there is more than one source, or mechanism, causing non-linear distortion, as time goes by the signal may pass through more and more sources of distortion, first through one, then through the next one, etc. That's the order than matters for producing a particular end result.
On the other hand, a single source, or mechanism, causing non-linear distortion can produce many harmonics of an original signal all at once.
Not sure what you mean by "ordered relationship."
When I previously used the word "order," it was intended to be more or less synonymous with the idea of "temporal sequence." In other words, if there is more than one source, or mechanism, causing non-linear distortion, as time goes by the signal may pass through more and more sources of distortion, first through one, then through the next one, etc. That's the order than matters for producing a particular end result.
On the other hand, a single source, or mechanism, causing non-linear distortion can produce many harmonics of an original signal all at once.
Oh you went all the way! I was going to sand bag and beat them just a bit at a time.
Barry.
This is physically impossible except under extremely pathological conditions. You should really try harder to understand Mark's and other's explanations. I don't particularly like the term "linear distortion" either, but start out thinking of a speaker playing two tones one at 100Hz and one at 1kHz and sitting in one spot the have exactly the same amplitude. Now move a few feet from where you are and one is 1/2 the amplitude of the other. There are still only 100Hz and 1KHz tones, NO new frequencies.
The word linear is defined in a special way when used for engineering purposes. It's not the same as the normal dictionary definition.
The word distortion is also defined in a particular way in engineering that may differ from some other definition found in a normal dictionary.
Maybe the first thing to do is get very clear on what the words mean to engineers when used technically.
Sometimes engineers may use words like linear both in the technical sense one moment and in the normal non-engineering sense the next moment. One has to learn how to understand which definition to apply depending on context. This is the same as with many other words that have more than one possible meaning or definition.
The word distortion is also defined in a particular way in engineering that may differ from some other definition found in a normal dictionary.
Maybe the first thing to do is get very clear on what the words mean to engineers when used technically.
Sometimes engineers may use words like linear both in the technical sense one moment and in the normal non-engineering sense the next moment. One has to learn how to understand which definition to apply depending on context. This is the same as with many other words that have more than one possible meaning or definition.
Last edited:
Think more not uniform but also does not vary (in general) in a directly linear relationship with angle especially across the frequency spectrum. Neither waterfall plots or polar response plots need the concept of new frequencies.
I take distortion as any difference between input and output after adjusting for amplitude.
Harmonic distortion because the distortion products are harmonically related to the input signal ie whole number multiples thereof.
Linear distortion as distortion that is present under all conditions.
Non linear distortion as distortion which changes in magnitude due to other changes in the system like increased amplitude/volume or heat (for example power compression in a driver).
Am I anywhere near?
That non linear thing is confusing...
Some of the engineering definitions come from control theory, where linear and non-linear are defined the way they are because the math for them is very different.
That's why we just need to learn the definitions as given, while understanding they may be different from what might be found in Webster's or OED.
Sometimes we may be speaking using one definition or the other, or even both in the same sentence. Once the engineering definitions are learned and understood, the brain should get pretty good at figuring out what is meant from the surrounding context.
That's why we just need to learn the definitions as given, while understanding they may be different from what might be found in Webster's or OED.
Sometimes we may be speaking using one definition or the other, or even both in the same sentence. Once the engineering definitions are learned and understood, the brain should get pretty good at figuring out what is meant from the surrounding context.
Last edited:
Not really, there is a huge body of engineering literature based on existing definitions. To state the obvious, they're just not going to change it or rewrite it all to satisfy someone's preferences on an internet forum. We have to learn it if we want to speak the same language. Of course, we can always refer to types of distortion as well, but what's most appropriate in a given situation depends on the context.
