|
|
|||||||
| Home | Forums | Rules | Articles | Store | Gallery | Blogs | Register | Donations | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read | Search |
| 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 |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
diyAudio Member
|
In the thread Dynamics in Loudspeakers Mr. Soongsc wrote interesting hypothesis that hysteresis (which?) is visible on initial curve of an IR thus we can look for a differences between soft and rigid pistons so that the curve shape is related with music details damping - very unusual idea. Measurements tell us it is not the case. You can try yourself but:
1) If you use direct IR measurement method then you can choose short or long stimulus pulse like 50us and 5000us. Where is a border between step and impulse response then? What about FFT spectra? In both cases? 2) Now assume that longer pulse is better because you put more energy and this means more SNR also. With 50us pulse the energy will be so small (I'm not able at the moment to perform such test). Next thing is that you must put microphone close to the transducer because of low SNR in this method. What about reflections? Example - 6.5cm mic position and we have 5kHz resonances seen on appended IR. Soft dome should be well damped so is this a reflection or resonance? I'm not sure - Burst Decay shows something like reflection. Best, Jack |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Switzerland
|
Since we will never achieve a perfect step response nor perfect impulse response we must be able to tell which one is closer to the ideal if comparing several rsponses. And this might be quite tricky.
Which trace is the better response to the input step (blue) ? Regards Charles |
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
diyAudio Member
|
I think red represents improved HF response. Can you comment HF roll-of of both traces?
Heaviside step function is used in microphones time response deconvolution methods. |
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Taiwan
|
Quote:
__________________
Hear the real thing! |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Taiwan
|
Quote:
__________________
Hear the real thing! |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Switzerland
|
Before I comment I will post the response to a 10 kHz rectangular that is bandwidth limited to slightly below 100 kHz by a phase-linear brickwall response. So we will have first, third, fifth, seventh and nineth harmonics.
That approximates somehow a 192 ksamples/s reproduction chain like DVD-A. Regards |
|
|
|
|
#7 | ||
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Switzerland
|
Below you see the group delay (upper plot) and the amplitude response (lower plot). You can see that the red trace has a steeper rolloff but much flatter group delay response within the interesting passband - at the cost of increased group delay.
The red rectangular trace from the former post looks much nicer than the green one IMO despite the bandwidth restrictions. My guess is that, if there is an audible difference, then the red one must be better. I also dare to say that amplifiers with exorbitantly high slew rates don't make any sense at all when they drive tweeters that go up to 40 kHz at best. Optimising group-delay within the passband might be superior to ridiculously fast amplifiers because it can correct timing errors within the audible range what the latter definitely can't - and it can be implemented at lower cost. And in this case another argument against class-d amps might become obsolete. So my comments to the following statements: Quote:
Quote:
Regards Charles |
||
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
diyAudio Member
|
My impulse generators supply Bessel filter only so I have no influence on step shape.
Once I recorded 1KHz sawtooth with ATRAC compression I couldn't tell the difference ![]() Despite SNR issues and step slopes does anyone knows pros and cons in comparison to nowadays MLS and sine sweep methods? |
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Taiwan
|
Quote:
__________________
Hear the real thing! |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Switzerland
|
Quote:
Regards Charles |
|
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Loudspeaker impulse response optimization | thadman | Multi-Way | 7 | 18th April 2009 04:42 PM |
| convolution & Impulse Response file download | HK26147 | Multi-Way | 0 | 8th April 2009 03:13 PM |
| impulse response vs. enclosure size | East | Subwoofers | 5 | 23rd February 2006 12:53 PM |
| Impulse response differences | Sjef | Multi-Way | 6 | 28th August 2005 08:43 PM |
| New To Site? | Need Help? |
| Page generated in 0.13935 seconds (80.55% PHP - 19.45% MySQL) with 11 queries |