Inherent Design Question: Inherent sonic characteristics that cant be measured? - Page 2 - 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 5th March 2013, 09:16 AM   #11
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kuala Lumpur
I am puzzled at reviews that praise HEIGHT in the stereo image. There is no way two ideal speakers can give height clues that are not there in the original recording (floor and ceiling echoes maybe)
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2013, 03:28 PM   #12
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay1111 View Post
I dont really think the question should be is there something missing from the measurements. What needs to be resolved is, what order(s) of distortion, at what relative level(s), and at which frequency(s) is/are pleasing/displeasing.
Only a few of the things which make a speaker sound pleasing and/or accurate.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2013, 05:17 PM   #13
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joel Wesseling View Post
Is there sonic characteristics generated from a driver that cant be quantified with todays best equipment and software?
What would constitute proof one way or the other? What evidence would convince you that there are unmeasurable characteristics, or that vice versa, all characteristics are measurable?

I see you say you knew the answer already.

1. What was it that convinced you?

2. Why bother asking?

Last edited by counter culture; 5th March 2013 at 05:23 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2013, 05:28 PM   #14
Account disabled at member's request
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Multiple...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joel Wesseling View Post
Is there sonic characteristics generated from a driver that cant be quantified with todays best equipment and software?
No - measurements cannot tell or quantify the sonic performance.
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2013, 01:29 AM   #15
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Courtice, Ontario
My answer is NO.. Todays measurements dont tell the whole story of the sonic characteristics...Some Audible Vibration patterns are to complex to measure in its entirety with todays software and equipment..Those patterns impart a great deal on the sonic characteristics

Well, it all started with an engineer who is very knowlegeable in this area of design and measurement.. He states its all numbers and a great design is simply improving the numbers..

Okay as I go over it, He does state The difference between a good design and and a great design is Diffraction and Compression and that its hard to measure but its the only thing standing in the way between a good and great sounding speaker..

So Enlighten me with your thoughts and expertise..

Lets imagine Diffraction and compression are perfect in 2 speakers each with different driver. Do we still have a considerable sonic difference between the two? will we all hear them as 2 very different sounding speakers?

Just trying to learn
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2013, 02:57 AM   #16
jcx is offline jcx  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ..
Default sonics = sound, physics - perception is another field entirely

if you know how all surfaces move its only a question of computer horsepower to get the sound field in a defined/known environment

several laser tools are availble today

Tools of the trade - laser measurements | Bowers & Wilkins | B&W speakers


microphone arrays, mechanical scanning could be correlated with radiation surface measurements, room multipath/modes/box diffraction...

again the physics isn't hard by PhD/top National Lab standards - the engineering, equipment cost and analysis time are expensive - really only a question of how far can you afford to go


I'm suprised that no one has tossed in an appeal Chaos yet - possible in driven mechancial resonace? - maybe - but sucessful speakers are fairly heavily damped
and proving Chaos in a physical system isn't trivial - it isn't the same as isufficently detailed modeling Chaos (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Last edited by jcx; 6th March 2013 at 03:27 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2013, 07:40 AM   #17
Account disabled at member's request
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Multiple...
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcx View Post
if you know how all surfaces move its only a question of computer horsepower to get the sound field in a defined/known environment
If it was so simple to design the perfect driver..

In my early stages of development I used laser and the other tools.
Without I would not have been able to "see" and rectify the flaws.
When this phase was finished and surround, cone, dust cap and voice coil was performing as wanted I had still not "listened" to the driver.

I now had 10 slightly different surround / cone assemblies that passed the above mentioned tests - 100 pcs of each variant for production variation control. 4 different voice coils. 4 different magnet systems (ferrite, alnico, two different neodym)...

It was at this stage when I tested out the 160 combinations I understood that traditional measurement methods do not tell anything about the sonics.

Later when I tested AMT prototypes I was able to verify that I could deform the diaphragm (with a heat gun) to the point where it was completely defect and no output at all.

It was very easy to listen and hear the drivers sound worse and worse - at some point there was more noise / distortion than sound.
However the measurements of harmonic distortion told that the driver was performing very good even at this point.....
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2013, 08:07 AM   #18
just another
diyAudio Moderator
 
wintermute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sydney
Blog Entries: 22
Personally I don't think it's a case of not being measurable, but more one of not knowing how to interpret or correlate the measurements to the subjective impressions.

Our brain is a supercomputer, and is programmed to pick up differences in sounds for many reasons. Even with enough computing power, we would still need to understand what it is that our brains are doing to be able to have a chance of developing visualisations of measurements that we could reliably point to and say this is a predictor of say phantom image quality.

Where it gets really messy is when we take into account the tricks that our brain can play too. Then it gets really murky.

I've mentioned before that I think it would be great to do controlled experiments with both sighted and blind listening where the subjects brain waves were monitored. I think this could be helpfull in improving the understanding between measurements and listener impressions. Of course interpreting differences in brain waves and what that means is another can of worms as well

Tony.
__________________
Any intelligence I may appear to have is purely artificial!
Some of my photos
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2013, 09:19 AM   #19
diyAudio Member
 
gainphile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Melbourne the sunny city!
Can we measure PRAT ?

Let's say "My speaker's PRAT score is 90" hence it's superior to your speaker's PRAT 75.

__________________
http://gainphile.blogspot.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2013, 10:43 AM   #20
jcx is offline jcx  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ..
what's with the "standard measurements" strawman - I thought the thread title didn't preclude any tech, level of effort, expertise

and again the conflation of "sonics" with human perception - I claim sonics should be the science of sound waves == physics


it should too obvious to anyone here that there's no complete understanding of percption, interpretation of sound fields by diverse ears and brains - not worthy of yet another thread that can't possibly go anywhere

Last edited by jcx; 6th March 2013 at 10:49 AM.
  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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Listening seat against rear-wall - How bad is it? How to reduce inherent problems? keyser Multi-Way 29 13th November 2012 07:14 AM
Class A - Inherent disadvantages ? Borat Solid State 91 11th September 2009 07:00 PM
Any inherent problems with this enclosure design? Lothar34 Subwoofers 21 4th October 2006 10:32 PM
Tube amp design characteristics? NewVintageNut Tubes / Valves 20 30th May 2004 09:07 PM
Sonic characteristics of Leach amp? sobazz Solid State 8 23rd October 2003 12:10 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:37 AM.


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