Beyond the Ariel - Page 462 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 27th October 2008, 01:42 PM   #4611
soongsc is offline soongsc  Taiwan
diyAudio Member
 
soongsc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Taiwan
Quote:
Originally posted by john k...


Those were interesting simulations Michael. The problem I have is that if I set up an experiment to verify your idea I don't measure anything that looks like that. I think to show what is happening it is necessary to use realistic approximations. Make some measurements and look for HD and IM side bands. These things need to be quantified.
For electrical signals, that's how it's going to look. The problem with acoustic signals is that you can only measure somthing similar when both signals are same ideal wave source. Not many drivers can do that, and you have to pic the right frequencies such that the wave front is the same shape so that it's not dependent on mic location.
__________________
Hear the real thing!
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th October 2008, 01:44 PM   #4612
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
Quote:
Originally posted by mige0
I'm actually not interested what a somebody writes in *any* paper, telling me what I *can't* hear / detect. and again Earl - I am asking you to drop that DampfWalzen habit.

Michael
I don't think that I'm the one being closed minded and obnoxious here!

The data is clear and it wasn't just one person, but about 30 who failed to detect any nonlinearity in a compression driver and some of those were audio engineers. Just because the data is not to your likeing is no reason to reject it and "kill the messanger".

When you have contrary data done in a comparable way then I'd love to see it, but for now rejecting all the data that there is simply because it doesn't fit your position is hardly scientific. Why do scienec at all if thats the way you are going to deal with it?
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th October 2008, 03:11 PM   #4613
mige0 is offline mige0  Austria
diyAudio Member
 
mige0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Austria, at a beautiful place right in the heart of the Alps.
Quote:
Originally posted by john k...


Before I comment further, can you provide a little detail of your sims? Specifically, the source for the VC voltage appears to be a pure sign wave, buy not being familiar with the software you are using would you please explain what the notation SFFM(0 1 2000 1 100) means?

John, the software used here is LT-SPICE / swCAD-III.

I could have used another simu software like ORCAD as well, but LT-SPICE is way good enough for that (and much more) *and* available from LT technologies as freeware.
So everybody easily can verify my simulation.

http://www.linear.com/designtools/so...witchercad.jsp


There are three voltage sources seen on the pix from left to the right :

V2 is a simple sine set to 2kHz at 1V:

Click the image to open in full size.




V1 is a so called "Time-dependent single frequency FM voltage" (syntax outlined in the help menu under "voltage sources") nothing else than a FM modulated sine voltage source - set to 2kHz at 1V with a modulation at 100Hz :

Click the image to open in full size.






V7 is same as V1 set to be of opposite phase and frequency modulation to mimic the mirrored signal :

Click the image to open in full size.





T1 is a delay line set to 4us to mimic the late arrival of the mirrored signal :

Click the image to open in full size.





Well and last but not least the transient command is set to calculate in the time domain at the time frame displayed, rather than in the more usual frequency domain :


Click the image to open in full size.





Thats it
(half an hour to line up the simu / two more hours to set up everything else to have the posting ready).

John, if you like to have the file for a *very* quick start up - I'll email it to you if you send me a PM

Michael
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th October 2008, 03:25 PM   #4614
mige0 is offline mige0  Austria
diyAudio Member
 
mige0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Austria, at a beautiful place right in the heart of the Alps.
Quote:
Originally posted by gedlee


Why do scienec at all if thats the way you are going to deal with it?


You may have noticed that I don't do what I do for the sake of science but rather to get clarification about what *I'm* interested in (and maybe open a door for others as well *if* we are lucky).

As a side note :
remember that "science" was kind of invented by the clergy to support *their* point of view way back in dark times of inquisition and before and sometimes there still is a facet in "science" that reflects that "axiom and belief thing" - not saying "science" hasn't developed, mind you.


Michael
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th October 2008, 03:47 PM   #4615
Sheldon is offline Sheldon  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: San Diego
Quote:
Originally posted by mige0
"science" was kind of invented by the clergy to support *their* point of view way back in dark times of inquisition and before and sometimes there still is a facet in "science" that reflects that "axiom and belief thing"
Adopted by some clergy, yes. Invented? Hardly. Regardless, it's immaterial. Science is not a thing or a collection of things (or facts). It's a process by which we can uncover the underlying rules that govern the physical relationships between things. The only article of faith that the process requires, as far as I can see, is that the physical rules of the universe we study are not whimsical. We expect them to be the same tomorrow as they were yesterday and today, though our knowledge of them will change.

Sheldon
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th October 2008, 04:12 PM   #4616
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
Speaking of Cosmology, we also assume that the laws are independent of location and many physicists agree that there is no reason to make this assumption. But the fact is that all data points to the laws being universal with no variation in time or space.

Are you guys aware that the latest thinking in cosmology is that the univese is digital? Yep, they now believe that time and space are not continous but are in fact discrete. How cool is that? Now we only need to sample at the "universal sample rate" - a Plank-time - and no one could ever argue that we aren't sampling high enough
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th October 2008, 04:19 PM   #4617
mige0 is offline mige0  Austria
diyAudio Member
 
mige0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Austria, at a beautiful place right in the heart of the Alps.
Quote:
Originally posted by gedlee

Are you guys aware that the latest thinking in cosmology is that the univese is digital? Yep, they now believe that time and space are not continous but are in fact discrete. How cool is that? Now we only need to sample at the "universal sample rate" - a Plank-time - and no one could ever argue that we aren't sampling high enough
Lets hope they use a jitter free clock for our universe




Quote:
Originally posted by gedlee
But the fact is that all data points to the laws being universal with no variation in time or space.
*You* know ?!?
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th October 2008, 04:23 PM   #4618
mige0 is offline mige0  Austria
diyAudio Member
 
mige0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Austria, at a beautiful place right in the heart of the Alps.
Quote:
Originally posted by Sheldon


Adopted by some clergy, yes. Invented? Hardly. Regardless, it's immaterial. Science is not a thing or a collection of things (or facts). It's a process by which we can uncover the underlying rules that govern the physical relationships between things. The only article of faith that the process requires, as far as I can see, is that the physical rules of the universe we study are not whimsical. We expect them to be the same tomorrow as they were yesterday and today, though our knowledge of them will change.

Sheldon

There are people and there were times where this is / was perceived differently

Michael
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th October 2008, 04:28 PM   #4619
gedlee is offline gedlee  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Novi, Michigan
Quote:
Originally posted by mige0


Lets hope they use a jitter free clock for that


There is actually a hypothesis that the clocks of each particle do have jitter or at least do not have the same time reference for zero. This would exaplain why we have to view all interactions between particles as random events, because the clocks are not synchronous. But a particle can react with itself in perfect synchronization and as such acts like a wave. In other words, the clock jitter would explain the particle/wave duality and the need for probabilities in Quantum Mechanics that has troubled so many physicists for so long.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th October 2008, 04:59 PM   #4620
diyAudio Member
 
auplater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: KyOhWVa tristate
Default Speaking of OT

maybe the mods should rename this thread "Way, Way, Way... beyond the Ariel... eh?"
__________________
"...His brain is squirming like a toad..." Jim Morrison
  Reply With Quote

Reply


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



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:26 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2