The TL worksheets, the closed and ported box worksheets, the DBR worksheet, and the BLH worksheet are completely upgraded and checked. I can tell you that the BLH worksheet correlates extremely well with some impedance and acoustic measurements of a commercial system I found on the Internet. The DBR worksheet also looks like an interesting option for a full range design that does not require a correction circuit. The other less popular worksheets will follow later as time permits along with OB and bipole worksheets.
I have set up a secure page on my site to attempt to control access and am writing the interface now. I am also going to need to update the documentation a little so it is clear how to use the new worksheets. I am on track to upload this month, probably in two or three weeks if things go very well. Maybe April 1st is a fitting date for this foolish effort on my part.
I have set up a secure page on my site to attempt to control access and am writing the interface now. I am also going to need to update the documentation a little so it is clear how to use the new worksheets. I am on track to upload this month, probably in two or three weeks if things go very well. Maybe April 1st is a fitting date for this foolish effort on my part.
No tips yet. I was studying the Fostex DBR design (default configuration for the worksheet) and had compared the results to an independent study I was sent for the same enclosure and it looked promising. When I added in the advances in the new worksheet it looks even more interesting. When I get everything uploaded and running smoothly I am going to look at the DBR concept very closely for a pair of my Lowther drivers without a circuit required.
a slight diversion
I would like to encourage MathCad users to complain to MathCad about the limitation of their implementation of .wav file import/export to 16 bits max
please point out to them that 24 bit hd audio chipsets have been shipping in consumer pc's for a few years now!
32 bit resolution is the minimum you might use to explore dsp sound processing
If no one complains they won't change
sorry for the thread jacking
I would like to encourage MathCad users to complain to MathCad about the limitation of their implementation of .wav file import/export to 16 bits max
please point out to them that 24 bit hd audio chipsets have been shipping in consumer pc's for a few years now!
32 bit resolution is the minimum you might use to explore dsp sound processing
If no one complains they won't change
sorry for the thread jacking
New worksheets are available as of now guys. I look forward with keen anticipation to seeing a few jaws drop.
Those wondering -is it worth the fee: yes. I can promise you that as I've had a test version of one since before Christmas. This is a quantum leap forward in speaker design software and the modelling of an enclosure's behaviour (in-room). And I'll stress this again just to make it clear: I have no personal interest in the matter. I'm simply giving my honest opinion. Martin's not asking for very much (which gives him something in return for all he's done, and hopefully will stop it being used commercially as the early sheets were), and for that, you get the most advanced speaker design software available and updates and upgrades to it through the year. Dipole and Bipole sheets are already in the pipeline.
Happy designing!
Scott
Those wondering -is it worth the fee: yes. I can promise you that as I've had a test version of one since before Christmas. This is a quantum leap forward in speaker design software and the modelling of an enclosure's behaviour (in-room). And I'll stress this again just to make it clear: I have no personal interest in the matter. I'm simply giving my honest opinion. Martin's not asking for very much (which gives him something in return for all he's done, and hopefully will stop it being used commercially as the early sheets were), and for that, you get the most advanced speaker design software available and updates and upgrades to it through the year. Dipole and Bipole sheets are already in the pipeline.
Happy designing!
Scott
Scottmoose said:
Now since there is a fee involved, perhaps there should be some description about it's features. How is it different from before? Who does it compare against some of the other commercial products like SoundEasy design features.
Are there any differences in capability between the Commercial and DIY version? The previous worksheets don't go full audio range, doe the new ones do it?
If you look at the Models page there are a few things that will help you determine if this is the right tool for you and if it is worth the asking price.
1. Look at the Sample Problem description and read the text I have added to each page to try and describe what is being calculated.
2. Download and run the sample problem to see how/if it will run on your machine and what type of time it takes to do all of the calculations.
3. Look at the competition, I have two links to what I consider to be the best software similar to my MathCad worksheets.
4. The only difference in the DIY and commercial license is the price and the intended use.
5. Read what you get and what you don't get for the license fee. Read the terms and conditions page, I am serious about these statements.
Do what is right for you and your situation, the choice is yours alone.
1. Look at the Sample Problem description and read the text I have added to each page to try and describe what is being calculated.
2. Download and run the sample problem to see how/if it will run on your machine and what type of time it takes to do all of the calculations.
3. Look at the competition, I have two links to what I consider to be the best software similar to my MathCad worksheets.
4. The only difference in the DIY and commercial license is the price and the intended use.
5. Read what you get and what you don't get for the license fee. Read the terms and conditions page, I am serious about these statements.
Do what is right for you and your situation, the choice is yours alone.
Today I tried to purchase worksheets, but PAYPAL is not so fast. Now I have to wait for those 4 digits to complete my transfer.
I used MJK worsheets in past and I can tell that they are the best simulation software available. I have made about 5 projects using worksheets and they allways corelate very good.
I can't wait for dipole worksheets.
Is there a posibility to simulate JENSEN TRANSFLEX enclosure with combination of several worksheets. I've tried this with offset driver WS but I don't know if I understand adding and substracting dbs very well.
Mr. King Thank You for beautiful software and It was about time to start receiving some reward for extremely hard work.
Cheers
Bostjan Skok
Ps. Sorry for my English (I think much faster than I am able to type in English)
I used MJK worsheets in past and I can tell that they are the best simulation software available. I have made about 5 projects using worksheets and they allways corelate very good.
I can't wait for dipole worksheets.
Is there a posibility to simulate JENSEN TRANSFLEX enclosure with combination of several worksheets. I've tried this with offset driver WS but I don't know if I understand adding and substracting dbs very well.
Mr. King Thank You for beautiful software and It was about time to start receiving some reward for extremely hard work.
Cheers
Bostjan Skok
Ps. Sorry for my English (I think much faster than I am able to type in English)
Hello Bostjan,
Thanks for the positive feedback.
To be honest, I do not know what a JENSEN TRANSFLEX enclosure looks like, based on the name alone it sounds complicated. If you have a picture or drawing I might be able to provide a few hints, if you post it here I am sure others might also chime in. You probably should start a new thread.
No apologies needed, your English is just fine.
Me to.
Thanks for the positive feedback.
To be honest, I do not know what a JENSEN TRANSFLEX enclosure looks like, based on the name alone it sounds complicated. If you have a picture or drawing I might be able to provide a few hints, if you post it here I am sure others might also chime in. You probably should start a new thread.
No apologies needed, your English is just fine.
Me to.
Hi lovechild,
You probably can simulate an aperiodic enclosure in MathCad. My guess would be to use a port length equal to the wall thinkness of the enclosure and specify 1 lb/ft^3 of fiber stuffing. You can't go higher then 1 lb/ft^3 or the curve fit goes unstable and your results will get really weird. Then you would need to vary the diameter of the port until you achieve an aperiodic response typical of whatever venting arrangement you are using. The port diameter would have no physical relationship with the real vent size and is kind of an answer after the fact. But I think that this would work and maybe you could apply what you learn to other designs using the same damped vent arrangement.
You probably can simulate an aperiodic enclosure in MathCad. My guess would be to use a port length equal to the wall thinkness of the enclosure and specify 1 lb/ft^3 of fiber stuffing. You can't go higher then 1 lb/ft^3 or the curve fit goes unstable and your results will get really weird. Then you would need to vary the diameter of the port until you achieve an aperiodic response typical of whatever venting arrangement you are using. The port diameter would have no physical relationship with the real vent size and is kind of an answer after the fact. But I think that this would work and maybe you could apply what you learn to other designs using the same damped vent arrangement.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.