Clarity on Seas Thor Kit - Page 8 - 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 30th September 2005, 04:09 AM   #71
Byrd is offline Byrd  South Africa
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Send a message via MSN to Byrd
"His results are incorrect." If you make a statement as absolute as this you are under obligation to prove it. If you had said "My belief is that his results are incorrect" you would then be entitled to your opinion

As to subjectivity - there are numerous reports indicating that bass is quite sufficient
__________________
Ross Saunders
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th September 2005, 04:11 AM   #72
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
Quote:
Originally posted by Byrd
Again I ask you for proof that you know for a fact that the measurements provided by Joe d'Appolito are incorrect. Simply because Seas measured one speaker correctly does not mean that they did so with the Thor.
Come on... only Joe knows and we don't really care. We know you want to build these -- you may even have bought the bits -- and it must be unsettling to see the unresolved issues surrounding the Thor.

The drivers are outstanding (if you like the Danish school of drivers). Build the box & see.... you can always build a different box if needed.

personally, from ScottMoose sims, a bipole of close to 2x the volume of the Thor would be a safer bet (you wouldn't catch me buying those drivers thou -- even if i could afford them)

dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com, frugal-phile.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi
p10-hifi forum here at diyA
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th September 2005, 04:21 AM   #73
Byrd is offline Byrd  South Africa
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Send a message via MSN to Byrd
Planet - Until it is proven that Joe's results are incorrect a statement such as "His results are incorrect" without proof is non factual as it is an absolute statement.

I was under the impression that "Posting non factual information" was frowned upon by the moderators?

If read post #6 - My intention all along was to build 2 prototypes.
__________________
Ross Saunders
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th September 2005, 04:45 AM   #74
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Planet Earth
One last time and I'm done with this tar baby. Measuring in an anechoic chamber is always superior to trying to "fake it" with mathematics and in-room measurements. Bjorn Idland, the Seas tech in charge of measuring speakers and drivers, is quite competent and I trust his results over anybody's "quasi-anechoic" measurements. There is simply very little to go wrong if you have a chamber at your disposal. Joe does not have chamber and his results are therefore suspect. I won't venture a guess about where he went wrong but there are many places along the line where it could have happened. Turn the question around, other than stubbornness and blind faith in a "guru", why are you so sure the measurements in the article are right when all the evidence indicates otherwise?

You can lead a horse to water......
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th September 2005, 05:02 AM   #75
Byrd is offline Byrd  South Africa
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Send a message via MSN to Byrd
This is still not proof. It is supposition based on your assumption that Bjorn is competant. This may well not be the case in this instance.

By "in -room" measurements - you are refering to CLIO of course.

I have not once stated that d'Appolito's measurements are accurate, nor has anybody else stated that his measurements are innacurate for that matter. They may have suggested it - but did not state it as fact.

"All the evidence" does not correlate. Joe's shows one version, MK's calcs show another and so does the Seas measurement. BTW the official response from Seas - who you trust - is "No attempt was made in that measurement to splice the port output with the woofer output". As the port is rear facing measurement of port output would have been severly diminished
__________________
Ross Saunders
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th September 2005, 05:09 AM   #76
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Planet Earth
Quote:
As the port is rear facing measurement of port output would have been severly diminished
Oh, please. You're just displaying your ignorance now. Bass doesn't care which direction it is "pointed." I'm finding it hard to be polite so I'll just sign off. Enjoy your speakers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th September 2005, 06:57 AM   #77
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
Quote:
Originally posted by Byrd
was under the impression that "Posting non factual information" was frowned upon by the moderators?
If the mods were to polic every instance of someone saying, "X is" instead of what they really meany, "it is my opinion, X is" we'd need 10x as many mods... you just have to read between the lines....

dave

__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com, frugal-phile.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi
p10-hifi forum here at diyA
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th September 2005, 08:01 AM   #78
frugal-phile(tm)
diyAudio Moderator
 
planet10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Victoria, BC, NA, Sol III
Blog Entries: 5
Quote:
Originally posted by Byrd
Until it is proven that Joe's results are incorrect a statement such as "His results are incorrect" without proof is non factual as it is an absolute statement.
No one is going to prove anything wrt this. Give catapult the benefit of the doubt. Joe's results are certainly suspect -- i was suspicious of them since i 1st read the article. Can't remember where but i've seen other Thor measures -- they are closer to SEAS results than Joe's.

On another point. The SEAS results -- and Joe's statement -- indicate that these have been stuffed to the point of being aperiodic. That means that response will be substantially similar to a sealed box of the same size (but with less time-smear from back re-radiation and a smaller impedance peak).

dave
__________________
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com, frugal-phile.com ........ commercial site planet10-HiFi
p10-hifi forum here at diyA
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th September 2005, 10:49 AM   #79
bidland is offline bidland  Norway
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Oslo, Norway
Hello,

I got an e-mail from Ross Saunders about this ongoing discussion and I see my name has been mentioned earlier in this thread.

I think D'Appolito's work is well documented in his AudioXpress article and I hope you understand that I cannot answer on behalf of him as a designer of the Thor speaker.

I can confirm that the measurement of the Thor speaker found on our web page is done in a 4pi anechoic chamber.
http://www.seas.no/kit/thor.m%E5ling.pdf

Measurement conditions:
Our chamber have these inside dimensions: L: 960cm x W: 650cm x H: 755cm. All walls, floor and roof is covered with 1m long absorbents (leaving 5cm of air between the wall and the absorbents). The room weighs 200 tonnes and is decoupled from the ground with steel springs. We have an absorption factor higher than 0.99 down to 70Hz. We use a Bruel & Kjaer 4133 mic capsule and a Type 2606 mic amp.

I have attached a measurement of another Thor speaker that also shows the nearfield output of the woofer and port. The level of the nearfield measurements are offset from the 1meter anechoic response.

I have not done any correction of the port output level, as D'Appolito has done in his article.

Hope this helps, but if you need other measurements I'll try to find the time to do this.

Martin King's spreadsheet looks like a very good tool for calculationg TL's. Has anybody built a TL with the W18E001 using his spreadsheet?

Bjorn Idland
Lab tech.
Seas
  Reply With Quote
Old 30th September 2005, 11:13 AM   #80
JDeV is offline JDeV  South Africa
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Cape Town
Quote:
Originally posted by bidland
I can confirm that the measurement of the Thor speaker found on our web page is done in a 4pi anechoic chamber.
http://www.seas.no/kit/thor.m%E5ling.pdf


I have attached a measurement of another Thor speaker that also shows the nearfield output of the woofer and port. The level of the nearfield measurements are offset from the 1meter anechoic response.

Bjorn Idland
Lab tech.
Seas

Hi Bjorn,
Thanx for your assistance in this matter. Although I did not really participate in this discussions, I also completed a Thor about 5 days ago and am interrested in the outcome.

The attachement (of the other Thor ) you are talking about, is it the pdf on the Seas website, or are you still going to post it?

Thanx again.
__________________
"Be carefull who's advice you buy, but be patient with those who supply it."
From Baz Luhrmann's - Everybody’s Free (To Wear Sunscreen)
  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
Seas Thor vs Seas Excellence phillfyspoon Multi-Way 1 31st March 2007 08:24 PM
seas thor?? twenty Multi-Way 8 20th August 2006 01:22 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:46 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