Beyond the Ariel

[mige0]

I *think* we can map patterns found back and forth at will - this is why I bring up "pattern recognition" (though not have any evidence or proof for the topic at hand).


The interesting thing in pattern recognition is that there is kind of intellectual performance involved to put together a "picture" from puzzle pieces.

Even more effective if the final picture is known.

Also - from this process of pattern recognition we are able to detect fine variations that didn't fit into the picture.

Its a slightly differnt form of looking at the topic then from a mere "mechanistic" point of view.

Basically it brings in the "new"element of (complex) memory and the ability to compare by post processing (the highly subjective part).


Michael

[Graham Maynard]

Originally posted by Jmmlc
Hello,
, the sensation of "speed" for a bass drivers ( plus its load) is related to their ability to keep the relative phase between harmonics of a same note the most similar possible as in the recorded note.
This has also consequence on the shape of the impulse and even its rise for sure.
Jean-Michel Le Cléac'h

Also applies to higher ranges, like rim shots.

Originally posted by Elias
Hello,
Duration of the envelope is thus very long compared to the few first reflections so they are summed to the original envelope chancing the relative phases of harmonics because different relation of reflection path length to the wave length.
Due to the room we don't have phase linear bass even with ideal speakers. Sad but true.

- Elias

But we can still determine and appreciate an individual loudspeaker system's accuracy before the room modifies it - as with car audio !
So we cannot use the room as an excuse.

As John k wrote -
> The woofer LP filter sets the "speed" of the impulse rise as used in a speaker. <

Cheers ...... Graham.

[john k...]

Originally posted by serengetiplains


Science forever an enemy? I personally see a complex field of opinions on the usefulness of today's current crop of measurements and measuring tools, but rarely, if ever I should say, have I heard someone say science is forever an enemy (absolutely useless, presumably) to audio advance. Just being scientific about what I see and perceive ...

It was said as a sweeping generality in light of the frequent rejection/misinterpretation of analysis/measurement in favor of subjective opinion and misstated conclusion. Since correct use of science may contradict and discredit the stated opinion/conclusion science is the enemy.

Consider this plot:



The red trace for a 4K Hz LP filter clearly shows a fasted rise than the green trace for a 3 K Hz LP filter. But when either filter is cascaded with a 500 Hz LP filter that difference in rise time is irrelevant. The "speed" is dominated by the bandwidth limitation imposed by the 500 Hz filter.

[soongsc]

Originally posted by john k...


...
But when either filter is cascaded with a 500 Hz LP filter that difference in rise time is irrelevant. The "speed" is dominated by the bandwidth limitation imposed by the 500 Hz filter.

This could be in technical terms, but when you have reflection, combined response of drivers, and many other aspects in combination, the more complicated, the more we will get the impression of a "slow" system.

[soongsc]

Originally posted by john k...


Put a 200 Hz LR4 LP filter on them both and look at it again.

In real application, this would defeat the purpose of using them as full range. My purpose is to just show that using a sleve on the pole piece is not the best solution for all situations.

[gedlee]

Originally posted by john k...
The "speed" is dominated by the bandwidth limitation imposed by the 500 Hz filter.

AHH, but John, thats not what "speed" means - its not the rise time! It means whatever is necessary for your argument to be incorrect. Thats the beauty of ill-defined terms - I can make them mean exactly that which makes my argument correct. One never needs to defend their position when the discussion has no meaning.

[soongsc]

Back in the 80's, I just started working on an aircraft control system in which had a "stability augmentation system". The test pilot was telling the "stability and control" guys that the aircraft was not very precise. So the S&C guys said that they needed to increase the gain of the control system, thus pulled out a box and increased the gain. When the pilot came back and said "it's worse than before", the S&C guys were scratching their heads trying to figure out what was wrong. Out of curiosity, I pulled out the the schematics and browsed though the system. It turned out that the control box they were adjusting was in the feedback path; by increasing the gain there effectively reduced the forward loop gain of the system. I later found out that S&C only understood the aerodynamics and control theory. None could read electrical schematics.

There are just so many things involved in sound reproduction, that it's difficult to figure out what's causes an audiophile to express what he hears, and translate it to technical terms. I would recommend something like the "golden ears training system" as one way to start out in the process of linking the gap between technical and perception.

[gedlee]

The lack of a viable and universal subjective description system is no excuse for the proliferation of new and undefined terms - adding more layers of undefined terms does NOT make clarity better. And the existance of these subjective terms presupposes that adequite objective ones are not available - when, in actuality, for the most part, they are. It a lack of understanding and education regrading the proper use of objective data that causes this situation. The solution IS NOT more terms, but a better understanding of what exists today.

[MBK]

Actually the issue of timing / phase of harmonics vs. fundamentals should not be dismissed out of hand. Years ago I have been told by a violin maker friend, that some instruments appear indeed harder to play than others, reason, the timing of the harmonics - to the musician the sound 'seems to appear before it is played', and it can apparently be shown that this is related to the timing of the harmonics vs. fundamentals (generally it seems it is the harmonic structure of instrument "attack that is responsible for instrument recognition).

Of course this makes things such as Mms or Bl ratios per se an unlikely source for perceived "speed" in woofers. But it does open an avenue for unexpected perception issues that do not show easily in ordinary measurements, especially since it is not clear what kind of delay or phase shift is perceptible, it may well be a window where a longer delay is perceived 'faster' etc.

[soongsc]

Yes, I do recall that the famous violins are more difficult to play than others. Average violins allow you the get the notes right, but in order to master the famous violins, it was necessary to get the feel of how to create pleasing harmonics and use them to enhance the music being played. My niece plays the sax, and she got an old one with all the protective coating removed. It took quite some time for her to pick one she liked and could afford.

I tend to get the feeling that a cleaner sound provides the perception of being faster. This seems consistent with people commenting that sealed boxes provide faster bass, in comparison, ported boxes have resonance point which is perceived to have a more soft bass.