Poindexter said:
Yeah, I'd be nervous about a "rice paper" driver, period.
Fortunately they're made with "tough as nails" mulberry paper . . . What makes Clark nervous are the references he has seen mentioning the affixing of modeling clay to the cone. That is a great idea -- but only if you are testing a subwoofer with a cone that bears more similarity to a motorcycle helmet than to a tiny paper whizzer cone fullrange driver.
-- Chris
cdwitmer said:
I was Mr. Teramoto's interpreter when he was trained by Keith Larson (of Smith & Larson, the makers of Woofer Tester) in how to use Woofer Tester Pro, and Keith used a single coin (I think it was a penny, but it might have been a nickel) when he was doing measurements of a D5nf driver. Mr. Teramoto didn't have a problem with that at all.
Also, Mr. Teramoto brought along several pieces of the cone paper left over from making cones (which he sometimes wads up and uses as damping material in enclosures), and that stuff is amazingly tough--it's even difficult to tear it when you're deliberately trying. So, there's no way a coin or two on the cone is going to do any damage. Chris is right, this mulberry paper is tough as nails. They call it "paper," and it does look like paper, but it's unlike any other paper I've ever seen.
Mike
Re: well, along that route...
First, if you want a good measurements reference book, get a copy of D'Appolito's TESTING LOUDSPEAKERS.
Right, once broken in a bit, For standard small signal T/S you want to measure them at room temp with a tiny signal since any VC heating will raise Qes, Qts. Better is to measure them at a higher signal level that more realistically represents its in-use parameters.
WRT measuring Vas, if you're going to use the added mass method, I recommend you have someone make you a ring with a little grab handle for each type of driver to ~evenly distribute the weight and so you don't have to dink with stuff moving around/whatever.
WRT any phase plug/whatever leaks, for this reason I recommend using the closed box method outlined in D'Appolito's book since it more accurately represents how Vas will affect cab design/tuning. Obviously, this is the way to do higher power measurement. If you want to be anal about it, do both added mass and closed box, which will also allow you to accurately calc Sd.
WRT "Seeing that these drivers are at the leading edge of cone driver technology (and especially magnetic circuit quality and raw evenly distributed power at VC gap) the proper way of measuring them might not have even been invented yet.", if its impedance can be measured, so can its T/S specs. Alan Babb tried to convince us that his drivers (now 'DC Gold' branded) were 'special' in this way, which was eventually proven to be pure BS, so you're going to have a tough 'row to hoe' if you let your current ignorance of driver design/measurement hold sway over the physics of the situation.
WRT the ".......generally held belief that a powerful magnetic circuit mated to a lightweight paper cone yields a lack of bass response. These drivers are simply impossible according to that traditional logic.", what really matters here is that Qes tells us what the driver's relative motor strength is, so regardless of how powerful or lightweight its components may be, the fact of the matter is that if it has a medium Qes of ~0.43 as the D9NF apparently does, then all else being equal one could argue that the only thing 'special' about its powerful motor/low mass diaphragm design is that it's not a well designed system by traditional standards, instead being geared more for car audio apps than ultra wide BW HIFI and why it has more bass response.
Sorry if I busted any 'bubbles', but there's no defying the electro-mechanical resonant laws of physics, no 'magic', no 'special'/whatever involved in its basic design, just a balancing of design trade-offs, i.e. the standard of trading efficiency for BW, which when coupled to a high output impedance amp as I imagine most will, yields a ~maximally flat half space response to well below the driver's Fs if the cab is big enough and tuned low enough.
WRT any 'special' Feastrex measurements, these will need to be done with a TEF or similar system to measure its various acoustic properties in its mass controlled and breakup modes BW since this is where any 'magic' may be, i.e. 'God' is in the finer details of motor, diaphragm, suspension, etc. design, construction, so if it does have some new, special VC/gap and/or cone design that has an audible effect, then here's where it should show up, not down in its pistonic BW around Fs where T/S specs reside.
GM
blumenco said:
First, if you want a good measurements reference book, get a copy of D'Appolito's TESTING LOUDSPEAKERS.
Right, once broken in a bit, For standard small signal T/S you want to measure them at room temp with a tiny signal since any VC heating will raise Qes, Qts. Better is to measure them at a higher signal level that more realistically represents its in-use parameters.
WRT measuring Vas, if you're going to use the added mass method, I recommend you have someone make you a ring with a little grab handle for each type of driver to ~evenly distribute the weight and so you don't have to dink with stuff moving around/whatever.
WRT any phase plug/whatever leaks, for this reason I recommend using the closed box method outlined in D'Appolito's book since it more accurately represents how Vas will affect cab design/tuning. Obviously, this is the way to do higher power measurement. If you want to be anal about it, do both added mass and closed box, which will also allow you to accurately calc Sd.
WRT "Seeing that these drivers are at the leading edge of cone driver technology (and especially magnetic circuit quality and raw evenly distributed power at VC gap) the proper way of measuring them might not have even been invented yet.", if its impedance can be measured, so can its T/S specs. Alan Babb tried to convince us that his drivers (now 'DC Gold' branded) were 'special' in this way, which was eventually proven to be pure BS, so you're going to have a tough 'row to hoe' if you let your current ignorance of driver design/measurement hold sway over the physics of the situation.
WRT the ".......generally held belief that a powerful magnetic circuit mated to a lightweight paper cone yields a lack of bass response. These drivers are simply impossible according to that traditional logic.", what really matters here is that Qes tells us what the driver's relative motor strength is, so regardless of how powerful or lightweight its components may be, the fact of the matter is that if it has a medium Qes of ~0.43 as the D9NF apparently does, then all else being equal one could argue that the only thing 'special' about its powerful motor/low mass diaphragm design is that it's not a well designed system by traditional standards, instead being geared more for car audio apps than ultra wide BW HIFI and why it has more bass response.
Sorry if I busted any 'bubbles', but there's no defying the electro-mechanical resonant laws of physics, no 'magic', no 'special'/whatever involved in its basic design, just a balancing of design trade-offs, i.e. the standard of trading efficiency for BW, which when coupled to a high output impedance amp as I imagine most will, yields a ~maximally flat half space response to well below the driver's Fs if the cab is big enough and tuned low enough.
WRT any 'special' Feastrex measurements, these will need to be done with a TEF or similar system to measure its various acoustic properties in its mass controlled and breakup modes BW since this is where any 'magic' may be, i.e. 'God' is in the finer details of motor, diaphragm, suspension, etc. design, construction, so if it does have some new, special VC/gap and/or cone design that has an audible effect, then here's where it should show up, not down in its pistonic BW around Fs where T/S specs reside.
GM
I tend to agree, most of our instruments and our understanding of loudspeaker theory resides from a pistonic model of how loudspeakers work. I guess these instruments tends to give up on us when confronting with devices that work out of their pistonic modes... like fullranges. Probably most of our subjective evaluations of sound could have an answer in this non-pistonic puzzle..
Gm,
Points well taken. I will be the first to admit my ignorance of driver measurement, and of the long established science behind it, and of my ignorance of anything really. Idiots call themselves experts.
My whole point is that "god" or whatever IS in the finer details, just as you say. Looking at the history of science, it is usually observations of the deeper down details that were not being measured before or were being conveniently ignored that eventually unravels the grander "framework" of previous "established" knowledge.
My dad is a bio-statistician, actually. I grew up around his anecdotal stories about the history of science. Contemporary stories of pharmaceutical companies trying all sorts of ways to BS their way to cancer drug approval by the FDA by presenting their data in a statistically dishonest (or underinformed) fashion. In the face of commercial motivation, he always preached honesty and undying skepticism regarding the presentation of a product.
And trust me, I am hardly "bringing" that attitude to Feastrex. Considering Dr. Akiyama's scientific background, and Mr. Teramoto's own scientific/aesthetic development of the drivers by a mind boggling trial and error process. Incredible honesty, a "battling with oneself" has been there all along. I am just joining a team of life long researchers. If this apprenticeship works long term, I feel that it is our shared notions of being painfully honest with ourselves which is our greatest trait in common. Language barrier? Ha!
We do not claim to be "above the laws of physics." Or as "special." Hardly. I brought up these notions because it had been used in other posts. I realize now that I was not specific enough in my qualifications. I was meaning to express a scientific curiosity. NOT as a claim to having found the land of milk and honey.
If anything, what distinguishes the designs of Feastrex is not their extremities of aspects of spec'ed performance, but as an incredible balancing act of all these resources. A cohesiveness and singularity of single driver design. It all ends up behaving more like a formula one car (paradoxally having the same ride comfort of a Bently) and less like a "hot rod."
Considering the fact that there is the rampant practice of medical research companies trying to get a return on their investment by rushing a "promising" treatment to market without even considering that their treatment might actually HURT people, the notion of speaker companies gussying up specs a bit to sell drivers follows an even less infuriating line of logic. So hence my hesitancy with a fairly commercially motivated "science," historically speaking. At my level of ignorance in the field, I find it hard to separate out all the marketing BS while reading most companies' "driver specs." or of figuring out ways to properly and honestly measure them. This is incredibly annoying to me, and to many customers trying to do legitimate product comparison within the speaker industry, car audio, headphone industry. You name it.
It is the underlying paradox: companies make drivers. Just like companies make drugs. But what regulatory commission is in place to make sure that drivers are spec'ed honestly and free in that sense from purely commercial motivation? Who do you trust?
YOU. (plural) I trust you. Hence why I am posting here. So many here have (from what little I understand) dealt with the wobbly wheel of common practice measurable data within the speaker industry and turned it into a legitimately useful tool for speaker design on a wide scale. The virtues of this pursuit are undeniable. In the midst of all that, it is Feastrex's desire to provide as honest of a picture of their product as possible given current readily available (hence repeatable) measurement technology.
For now, it is my motivation to simply get some measurements (that are very accurate) by widely used techniques as it seems that this will actually help people know the Thiele-Small piece of the larger picture of what they are getting as customers (which they have every right to), and also for the many talented designers out there to be better able to design enclosures. Simple simple simple.
Again, it is not my intention to "curse" the Thiele-Small paradigm any more than it already has been. Just to throw that little plug in there for street cred, ya dig? It is a fight for aesthetics our old friend Terry Cain used to fight. Had to carry the torch a bit.
Regarding the "TEF testing," it seems like an interesting place to go eventually, and thanks for the tip, GM. I know nothing about it, but it seems to be a good start into discovering the finer performance details of these drivers, which are no doubt where alot of their ultimate performance (and distinction from other drivers) comes into play.
Ok, now on to my issue with the delta mass testing. I tried the nickels, I tried many different weights (on the FE87). Everything came out whacked each time. So some are telling me that the added weight is OK, others are saying that the closed box method is good. Use both?
Calculating the area of the drivers is super easy given the cad drawings. Or we could just try water immersion in a graduated cylinder. Any takers?
But why was the mass test on the FE87 failing every time? Perhaps that is a better question for customer service.
Thanks so much everyone for all the info.
And yes, washi paper is CRAZY stuff. Rice paper is edible. Mulberry paper is VERY different. It is super strong. When ripped, (which is difficult even for someone with a strong grip), it expands in volume by roughly 15 times and turns into this cottony fluff which floats in the air for several minutes before finally falling to the floor. And this stuff regularly lasts for 500 years? Only in Japan...
-Clark
Points well taken. I will be the first to admit my ignorance of driver measurement, and of the long established science behind it, and of my ignorance of anything really. Idiots call themselves experts.
My whole point is that "god" or whatever IS in the finer details, just as you say. Looking at the history of science, it is usually observations of the deeper down details that were not being measured before or were being conveniently ignored that eventually unravels the grander "framework" of previous "established" knowledge.
My dad is a bio-statistician, actually. I grew up around his anecdotal stories about the history of science. Contemporary stories of pharmaceutical companies trying all sorts of ways to BS their way to cancer drug approval by the FDA by presenting their data in a statistically dishonest (or underinformed) fashion. In the face of commercial motivation, he always preached honesty and undying skepticism regarding the presentation of a product.
And trust me, I am hardly "bringing" that attitude to Feastrex. Considering Dr. Akiyama's scientific background, and Mr. Teramoto's own scientific/aesthetic development of the drivers by a mind boggling trial and error process. Incredible honesty, a "battling with oneself" has been there all along. I am just joining a team of life long researchers. If this apprenticeship works long term, I feel that it is our shared notions of being painfully honest with ourselves which is our greatest trait in common. Language barrier? Ha!
We do not claim to be "above the laws of physics." Or as "special." Hardly. I brought up these notions because it had been used in other posts. I realize now that I was not specific enough in my qualifications. I was meaning to express a scientific curiosity. NOT as a claim to having found the land of milk and honey.
If anything, what distinguishes the designs of Feastrex is not their extremities of aspects of spec'ed performance, but as an incredible balancing act of all these resources. A cohesiveness and singularity of single driver design. It all ends up behaving more like a formula one car (paradoxally having the same ride comfort of a Bently) and less like a "hot rod."
Considering the fact that there is the rampant practice of medical research companies trying to get a return on their investment by rushing a "promising" treatment to market without even considering that their treatment might actually HURT people, the notion of speaker companies gussying up specs a bit to sell drivers follows an even less infuriating line of logic. So hence my hesitancy with a fairly commercially motivated "science," historically speaking. At my level of ignorance in the field, I find it hard to separate out all the marketing BS while reading most companies' "driver specs." or of figuring out ways to properly and honestly measure them. This is incredibly annoying to me, and to many customers trying to do legitimate product comparison within the speaker industry, car audio, headphone industry. You name it.
It is the underlying paradox: companies make drivers. Just like companies make drugs. But what regulatory commission is in place to make sure that drivers are spec'ed honestly and free in that sense from purely commercial motivation? Who do you trust?
YOU. (plural) I trust you. Hence why I am posting here. So many here have (from what little I understand) dealt with the wobbly wheel of common practice measurable data within the speaker industry and turned it into a legitimately useful tool for speaker design on a wide scale. The virtues of this pursuit are undeniable. In the midst of all that, it is Feastrex's desire to provide as honest of a picture of their product as possible given current readily available (hence repeatable) measurement technology.
For now, it is my motivation to simply get some measurements (that are very accurate) by widely used techniques as it seems that this will actually help people know the Thiele-Small piece of the larger picture of what they are getting as customers (which they have every right to), and also for the many talented designers out there to be better able to design enclosures. Simple simple simple.
Again, it is not my intention to "curse" the Thiele-Small paradigm any more than it already has been. Just to throw that little plug in there for street cred, ya dig? It is a fight for aesthetics our old friend Terry Cain used to fight. Had to carry the torch a bit.
Regarding the "TEF testing," it seems like an interesting place to go eventually, and thanks for the tip, GM. I know nothing about it, but it seems to be a good start into discovering the finer performance details of these drivers, which are no doubt where alot of their ultimate performance (and distinction from other drivers) comes into play.
Ok, now on to my issue with the delta mass testing. I tried the nickels, I tried many different weights (on the FE87). Everything came out whacked each time. So some are telling me that the added weight is OK, others are saying that the closed box method is good. Use both?
Calculating the area of the drivers is super easy given the cad drawings. Or we could just try water immersion in a graduated cylinder. Any takers?
But why was the mass test on the FE87 failing every time? Perhaps that is a better question for customer service.
Thanks so much everyone for all the info.
And yes, washi paper is CRAZY stuff. Rice paper is edible. Mulberry paper is VERY different. It is super strong. When ripped, (which is difficult even for someone with a strong grip), it expands in volume by roughly 15 times and turns into this cottony fluff which floats in the air for several minutes before finally falling to the floor. And this stuff regularly lasts for 500 years? Only in Japan...
-Clark
To echo part of what Clark was saying above, and add one further thought of my own, I am convinced that Feastrex would definitely not be where it is now -- it simply would not be, period -- if not for the Internet and the various people who have come together through forums like this one to discuss, praise and criticize Feastrex speakers, and occasionally complain, give a needed kick in the seat of the pants, and provide reality checks. This community is an essential ingredient in Feastrex's success. As good as Feastrex speakers are now, I think they will continue to improve quite a bit more over time through this community's sharing of opinions and knowledge, and unflagging encouragement. Feastrex has already accumulated tremendous knowledge and experience, as evidenced by the good quality of the products themselves, but there are also still significant gaps in their expertise and know-how, and the market's patience -- generously "cutting them slack" regarding their somewhat idiosyncratic approach to speaker building -- is something for which Feastrex should be very grateful. I know you've made Mr. Teramoto one happy fellow, as he is able to continue doing what makes him happiest of all -- building fullrange drivers.
-- Chris
-- Chris
That is really a "Yes" or "No" question. Either you are gaining something financially or not from discussing and working with Feastrix products. Based on this morning's rereading of a few of Clark's posts above, I am suspecting the answer will be "Yes". If it is not "Yes", then I am very confused by the wording of these posts and maybe a little further explanation would help.
Re: Gm,
Simple enough IMO, he's soliciting the DIY community for info that potentially financially benefits Feastrex and its marketing/distribution chain, so as far as I'm concerned he works for them whether he's reimbursed for his time in some way or not. Since what he wants (so far) potentially helps the DIY community (though it be only a small minority) I don't mind regurgitating info me and many others have already posted in one form or another across the net.
As always though, YMMV.
GM
cdwitmer said:
Simple enough IMO, he's soliciting the DIY community for info that potentially financially benefits Feastrex and its marketing/distribution chain, so as far as I'm concerned he works for them whether he's reimbursed for his time in some way or not. Since what he wants (so far) potentially helps the DIY community (though it be only a small minority) I don't mind regurgitating info me and many others have already posted in one form or another across the net.
As always though, YMMV.
GM
I have just recently come to Japan at Feastrex's invitation to become Mr. Teramoto's apprentice. I am here initially on a three-month tourist visa and I am not receiving any salary during these three months, which are an opportunity for us to simply get to know each other. Despite the language barrier we have hit it off very well and as far as I am concerned I definitely feel I want to move ahead into formal employment -- I very much want to master the art of the handmade fullrange driver. I think the feeling is mutual -- everyone at Feastrex recognizes the need for an apprentice to Mr. Teramoto -- but we still have more than two months remaining during this initial phase. Without going into a lot of details here, for now it is still a provisional arrangement, with the finer bits like a work visa to be hammered out later.
If it has not already been made obvious already by previous posts, let me state that I was struck hard by the Feastrex sound and technique long before employment was even on anyone's mind. I am honored to be able to participate in all this.
For the sake of clarity, I have been meaning to give the "full update" on my situation for a few weeks now, but I still have had a lot of things swimming around in my head from not only the residual difficulty of the move socially, logistically, and financially, but I'm also going through culture shock, and most profoundly, I have to deal with Feastrex-shock too. This is bolstered by Teramoto-san occasionally pumping me full of coffee, not to mention adventures in Japanese eating . . . and then being sat down in front of Miles Davis on master tape run through some crazy prototype tube amps into the Feastrex field coil drivers. For lack of a better way of putting it: Jeemus!
It is a different world over here. As far as I am concerned so far, for my personality it is a good fit. There are a lot of challenges, but it is really great being part of the Feastrex team. They are delightful people and I am glad to see their work be so well received by audiophiles and the DIY community. Like attracts like, and Feastrex has attracted simply wonderful people worldwide at all levels of commitment to make this whole thing happen. We owe everyone a lot for this continued support.
I especially want to thank all who have given me moral support so far during this transition (and really for all other times of support, particularly when things were at their most difficult for Terry Cain last year).
As this employment opportunity moves into the next stage, and with my solo efforts as Blumenstein Ultra-Fi fading into the past, I plan to start putting into the public domain the various designs and construction techniques I used at BUF for the benefit of DIYers. Of course, many of my techniques are rather obvious, merely requiring patience to be able to implement. But, I did have a few not so obvious tricks up my sleeve. Hopefully by this I'll be able to slightly enrich the DIY world that has helped me grow so much over the years. (As always, YMMV.)
Well, that's where things stand right now. It wasn't in 25 wolds or ress, Chlis, but I hope everything is now sufficiently clear. When appropriate I will continue to give updates regarding any changes in my status at Feastrex. Until you hear otherwise, you may assume that I am part of the Feastrex team here in Yamanashi, Japan.
Thanks,
Clark
If it has not already been made obvious already by previous posts, let me state that I was struck hard by the Feastrex sound and technique long before employment was even on anyone's mind. I am honored to be able to participate in all this.
For the sake of clarity, I have been meaning to give the "full update" on my situation for a few weeks now, but I still have had a lot of things swimming around in my head from not only the residual difficulty of the move socially, logistically, and financially, but I'm also going through culture shock, and most profoundly, I have to deal with Feastrex-shock too. This is bolstered by Teramoto-san occasionally pumping me full of coffee, not to mention adventures in Japanese eating . . . and then being sat down in front of Miles Davis on master tape run through some crazy prototype tube amps into the Feastrex field coil drivers. For lack of a better way of putting it: Jeemus!
It is a different world over here. As far as I am concerned so far, for my personality it is a good fit. There are a lot of challenges, but it is really great being part of the Feastrex team. They are delightful people and I am glad to see their work be so well received by audiophiles and the DIY community. Like attracts like, and Feastrex has attracted simply wonderful people worldwide at all levels of commitment to make this whole thing happen. We owe everyone a lot for this continued support.
I especially want to thank all who have given me moral support so far during this transition (and really for all other times of support, particularly when things were at their most difficult for Terry Cain last year).
As this employment opportunity moves into the next stage, and with my solo efforts as Blumenstein Ultra-Fi fading into the past, I plan to start putting into the public domain the various designs and construction techniques I used at BUF for the benefit of DIYers. Of course, many of my techniques are rather obvious, merely requiring patience to be able to implement. But, I did have a few not so obvious tricks up my sleeve. Hopefully by this I'll be able to slightly enrich the DIY world that has helped me grow so much over the years. (As always, YMMV.)
Well, that's where things stand right now. It wasn't in 25 wolds or ress, Chlis, but I hope everything is now sufficiently clear. When appropriate I will continue to give updates regarding any changes in my status at Feastrex. Until you hear otherwise, you may assume that I am part of the Feastrex team here in Yamanashi, Japan.
Thanks,
Clark
blumenco said:
Velly well said . . .
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
-- Chris
Hello,
I hope this is not too off-topic, but I don't think there is a better place to ask. I know there where some pictures on the web with Mr's Sano 30cm full range driver. I remember that maybe BTW, member on this forum may have posted them, but I am not sure. If you now something about this, could you please post a link or something?
Thank you!
"Can you describe the sound of a third hand clapping", that was hilarious
Congratulations Clark for what's about to be a long journey with Feastrex!
I hope this is not too off-topic, but I don't think there is a better place to ask. I know there where some pictures on the web with Mr's Sano 30cm full range driver. I remember that maybe BTW, member on this forum may have posted them, but I am not sure. If you now something about this, could you please post a link or something?
Thank you!
"Can you describe the sound of a third hand clapping", that was hilarious
Congratulations Clark for what's about to be a long journey with Feastrex!
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.