golden ratio. I dont get it
 User Name Stay logged in? Password
 Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki 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
 6th December 2012, 12:24 AM #51 PeteMcK diyAudio Member   Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Western Sydney __________________ Impedance varies with frequency, use impedance plots of your drivers and make crossover calculations using the actual impedance of the driver at the crossover frequency
 6th December 2012, 02:25 AM #52 theaudiophile   Banned   Join Date: May 2012 mathematically what numbers do you want for the dimensions? What should the numbers satisfy?
Keriwena
diyAudio Member

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: in half space
Quote:
 Originally Posted by speaker dave As such, looking at the longest dimension, we should strive to have the 2nd and third modes equally spaced between the long dimension first mode and its second harmonic. The only approach that guarantees that is the cube root of 2 approach. It places the three dimension's fundamental modes 1/3 Octave apart in the first Octave.
Not sure I agree with you, Dave. Even spacing will get you some cancellation, but you will end up with an augmented sequence and those chord tones often sound dissonant.

I'd rather go with Jean-Michel's 1:1.5:2, which apparently causes a lot more cancellation, and produces a dyadic "power chord" which is less likely to generate unpleasant overtones in whatever resonances remain undamped.

Quote:
 Originally Posted by speaker dave And I still don't think it matters if the cabinet is well damped!
Well, no, but I'm thinking of all those people who won't listen to you about damping.

Jmmlc
R.I.P.

Join Date: Oct 2005
Hello David,

The ratio on the graph are just the ratio between the combined L, W and H in Rayleigh's formula :

http://www.bobgolds.com/Tangental/Ev...deEquation.GIF

Taking a given dimension as 1 allows to apply the formula whatever the size of the resonator, so the formula applies for parallelipipedic enclosures as well as parallelepipedic auditoriums (only the values frequencies are differents but not their progression).

Comparisons with Louden's real measurements and classification of the best shapes of auditorium is excellent.

Best regards from Paris, France

Jean-Michel Le Cléac'h

Quote:
 Originally Posted by speaker dave But it looks like that approach compares the first dimension to the second and the second to the third, but not the first to the third. As an example 1:1.5:2 would have lots of overlapping modes from the 1 and 2 dimensions. Isn't the cube root of 2 approach guaranteed to be the most uniform distribution? (Not that I still think any of this matters when damping is applied.) David

Last edited by Jmmlc; 6th December 2012 at 07:11 AM.

speaker dave
diyAudio Member

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: The Mountain, Framingham
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Jmmlc Hello David, The ratio on the graph are just the ratio between the combined L, W and H in Rayleigh's formula ....... Jean-Michel Le Cléac'h
Yes, I understand the origins of the formula, but you are comparing dimension 1 to dimension 2, then dimension 2 to dimension 3, while ignoring the 1 to 3 comparison. Optimizing those two while ignoring the third has taken you down a wrong path.

Clearly for the case of 1:1.5:2, the 2 to 1 dimensions will have every one of the short dimensions resonances coincident wth half of the long dimension's resonances. Not exactly the solution for optimum spacing.

I've worked in the field of architectural acoustics. Unlike small room acoustics, nobody talks of room dimension ratios. Dimensions are relatively long and standing waves hence are dense and not a consideration. (i'd be happy to read a contrary reference if you can find one.)

Room length and width are determined by audience considerations ( seat count, sight lines, legal requirements for exit rows, distance to stage) and then the ceiling is raised until he RT is to target.

David

speaker dave
diyAudio Member

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: The Mountain, Framingham
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Keriwena Not sure I agree with you, Dave. Even spacing will get you some cancellation, but you will end up with an augmented sequence and those chord tones often sound dissonant. I'd rather go with Jean-Michel's 1:1.5:2, which apparently causes a lot more cancellation, and produces a dyadic "power chord" which is less likely to generate unpleasant overtones in whatever resonances remain undamped.
You have made a huge jump to saying we perceive chords in resonances. I'd ask you to substantiate that. Even in rooms were the resonances are relatively undamped and high Q nobody suggests that chordal qualites are perceived.

Getting a little absurd...

David

Jmmlc
R.I.P.

Join Date: Oct 2005
Hello Dave,

Sorry to have to say that but your question is a silly question,

You have to think more about the problem... (think 1 degree of freedom... so it is obvious ration between dimension 1 and 3 is perfectly defined knowing the ratio D1/D2 and D2/D3...).

From the point of view of resoannt frequencies, it doesn't matter if the room is elongated along x, y ou z...

Best regards from Paris

Jean-Michel Le Cléac'h

Quote:
 Originally Posted by speaker dave Yes, I understand the origins of the formula, but you are comparing dimension 1 to dimension 2, then dimension 2 to dimension 3, while ignoring the 1 to 3 comparison. Optimizing those two while ignoring the third has taken you down a wrong path. Clearly for the case of 1:1.5:2, the 2 to 1 dimensions will have every one of the short dimensions resonances coincident wth half of the long dimension's resonances. Not exactly the solution for optimum spacing. I've worked in the field of architectural acoustics. Unlike small room acoustics, nobody talks of room dimension ratios. Dimensions are relatively long and standing waves hence are dense and not a consideration. (i'd be happy to read a contrary reference if you can find one.) Room length and width are determined by audience considerations ( seat count, sight lines, legal requirements for exit rows, distance to stage) and then the ceiling is raised until he RT is to target. David

speaker dave
diyAudio Member

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: The Mountain, Framingham
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Jmmlc You have to think more about the problem... (think 1 degree of freedom... so it is obvious ration between dimension 1 and 3 is perfectly defined knowing the ratio D1/D2 and D2/D3...). Best regards from Paris Jean-Michel Le Cléac'h
Of course. But a dimension ratio of 2 to 1 is clearly the worst possible choice if well spaced harmonics are desired.

You do understand that, right?

Keriwena
diyAudio Member

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: in half space
Quote:
 Originally Posted by speaker dave You have made a huge jump to saying we perceive chords in resonances. I'd ask you to substantiate that. Even in rooms were the resonances are relatively undamped and high Q nobody suggests that chordal qualites are perceived. Getting a little absurd...
Probably absurd, yeh, I'm working with musicians!

I can build two pine guitar cabinets of different dimensions that resonate noticeably, and one will be preferred to the other. They'll say it sounds "sweeter".

It's known that some concert halls sound better than others, no? And they're not dead. I don't think it's just the RT60, I think content matters, as well.

Granted, I'm talking euphonics on a hifi forum, and that's always thin ice.

speaker dave
diyAudio Member

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: The Mountain, Framingham
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Keriwena It's known that some concert halls sound better than others, no? And they're not dead. I don't think it's just the RT60, I think content matters, as well.
O yeah, lots of factors beyond RT60 are considered important. Most have to do with signal difference between the ears, strength of direct signal, RT balance from low to high, early reflection patterns, etc. But nobody looks at standing waves due to hall dimensions because the dimensions tend to be big and the modes start very low.

Quote:
 Granted, I'm talking euphonics on a hifi forum, and that's always thin ice.
But it is nice to think about music every once in a while, and consonance and dissonance related to intervals is worth knowing about.

David

 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 Forum Rules
 Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Site     Site Announcements     Forum Problems Amplifiers     Solid State     Pass Labs     Tubes / Valves     Chip Amps     Class D     Power Supplies     Headphone Systems Source & Line     Analogue Source     Analog Line Level     Digital Source     Digital Line Level     PC Based Loudspeakers     Multi-Way     Full Range     Subwoofers     Planars & Exotics Live Sound     PA Systems     Instruments and Amps Design & Build     Parts     Equipment & Tools     Construction Tips     Software Tools General Interest     Car Audio     diyAudio.com Articles     Music     Everything Else Member Areas     Introductions     The Lounge     Clubs & Events     In Memoriam The Moving Image Commercial Sector     Swap Meet     Group Buys     The diyAudio Store     Vendor Forums         Vendor's Bazaar         Sonic Craft         Apex Jr         Audio Sector         Acoustic Fun         Chipamp         DIY HiFi Supply         Elekit         Elektor         Mains Cables R Us         Parts Connexion         Planet 10 hifi         Quanghao Audio Design         Siliconray Online Electronics Store         Tubelab     Manufacturers         AKSA         Audio Poutine         Musicaltech         Holton Precision Audio         CSS         Dx Classic Amplifiers         exaDevices         Feastrex         GedLee         Head 'n' HiFi - Walter         Heatsink USA         miniDSP         SITO Audio         Twin Audio         Twisted Pear         Wild Burro Audio

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post PrecisionAudio Multi-Way 43 11th October 2012 03:15 PM Stee Solid State 7 22nd February 2009 08:46 PM edjosh23 Full Range 13 3rd February 2009 09:52 PM Ornlu Subwoofers 5 27th May 2005 06:52 AM icebear Multi-Way 5 17th April 2004 08:40 PM

 New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:18 PM.

Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.