When will we get CHS-70? - Page 3 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Commercial Sector > Manufacturers > Markaudio

Markaudio Designers and builders of audiophile grade drivers

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 19th April 2012, 06:29 PM   #21
diyAudio Member
markaudio's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2008
Hi Tux,
We'll deal with this issue first. You made this recent comment:

"This isn't going to make me very popular, but all the measurements I've seen of Mark's stuff differs from his. Which is ironic because he's so nutty about measurements and likes to take jabs at DIY'er who measure".

Your intension was to cast doubt on me and my work by innuendo. You incorrectly assume that all tests should be the same and when they differ, you implied the problem is mine. I don't take "jabs". Your word choice was poor, designed to trivialise me and the issue.

On the Markaudio section, its fine all guys (me included) to debate their differences and agree or disagree, so long as its done with respect. . No more below the belt pot shots.


Last edited by markaudio; 19th April 2012 at 06:40 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2012, 06:50 PM   #22
diyAudio Member
tuxedocivic's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ladysmith, BC
Ya know, you're right. Sorry. Reading that back, that was much to strong. I didn't even remember it being said that way. You know when you just type away without thinking... But that doesn't excuse it, my wording was to strong.

Just to clarify, what I meant by jabs (again, to strong of word) is that you often mention the use of inferior mics and lack of anechoic isolation in DIY measurements. It is true that you've done that, which is fair sometimes. I do remember that clearly was my intent when writing that. My intention definetely wasn't to cast doubt on your work.

I followed that statement by saying something like, the alp7 sounds incredible. Implying if there was a high frequency problem in the 3rd party measurements, it's probably incorrect, or inconsequential.

Anyways, thanks for offering a platform to debate with respect. Again, sorry for the overly strong language in that statement.
  Reply With Quote
Old 19th April 2012, 06:59 PM   #23
diyAudio Member
markaudio's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2008
Hi Tux,
Its no worries, appreciate your latest reply. Forums are open public spaces so its not always easy raise issues while keeping folks on board. But we all have to try (me included). I'll take a look at your latest posts soonest possible and do my best to offer further explanation.

  Reply With Quote
Old 20th April 2012, 07:47 PM   #24
diyAudio Member
markaudio's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2008
Originally Posted by tuxedocivic View Post
Which is why I think you may have reacted the way you did to my enquiry. Much the same Chris did, but Chris understood what I meant once I explained myself more clearly.

Every measurement has reflections. You know this. Perhpas there was a reflection that corresponds to 500hz? If not, great, easy for you to answer. In which case the saw teeth are a real part of the drivers performance. That's all I wondered.

The unfortunate part of Bob's measurements is, I too believe they are raw, but they're in room. In room measurements shouldn't be raw unless certain techniques are implemented (close mic, measuring in a very large room, etc.). They're impossible to read and include the effects of the room. Move the mic or speaker and the measurement changes dramatically. Even at 1/2m like Bob did. Measuring a complete speaker at 1/2m introduces other issues also.

What I mean is, this is a bad example of your drivers frequency response, imo.
Hi Tux,
I appreciate your thinking. We know Bob does good work so, far as I know his data is used as "indicative" rather than "absolute" given the challenges of measurement. From my interest. I was concentrating on the general frequency trend - see my anechoic frequency data super-imposed on Bob's graph. Quite encouraging to see the similarity despite the in-room challenges.

I'm hoping to get time to split most of this off onto a new thread as we've moved away from the CHS topic.

Attached Images
File Type: jpg brines-t7-a7-1.jpg (231.8 KB, 133 views)

Last edited by markaudio; 20th April 2012 at 07:53 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st April 2012, 08:08 AM   #25
diyAudio Member
wushuliu's Avatar
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Hi Mark, maybe you could distill some of your posts regarding this oft-repeated subject of measurements into a sticky (and then lock it!).
  Reply With Quote


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CHP-70, CHR-70 package size & weight nightuser Markaudio 11 14th March 2012 09:45 PM
CHBW-70 and CHP-70 mixed in a Lotus^2 cabinet KrunktheMadMan Full Range 1 29th August 2011 07:07 PM
FS: GM70 ( GM-70 ГМ-70 ) Russian audio triode radiostar Vendor's Bazaar 0 23rd February 2011 07:12 PM
CHR-70, CHP-70, Alpair 7 Desktops - Japan markaudio Full Range 4 1st February 2010 02:42 AM

New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:59 PM.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2015 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2015 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2