hey don't go crazy with your plasma dude!
i got a plasma cutter also!!
Plasma is more of an eccentric technology!
it is not an "easy" source of sound
wich seems to require knowledge time and consumables
thylantyr:
I get your point, and you are right.
BUT
There has beel already plenty of posts about this subject, so i was trying to get more into data and objective kinda thread..wich makes for a change
don't you think ?
i love wine, and i don't choose it by it's chemical constitution
BUT
i'd however would be interested to know it precisly just for the kowledge and pleasure
i got a plasma cutter also!!
Plasma is more of an eccentric technology!
it is not an "easy" source of sound
wich seems to require knowledge time and consumables
thylantyr:
I get your point, and you are right.
BUT
There has beel already plenty of posts about this subject, so i was trying to get more into data and objective kinda thread..wich makes for a change
don't you think ?
i love wine, and i don't choose it by it's chemical constitution
BUT
i'd however would be interested to know it precisly just for the kowledge and pleasure
Hi,
@Nixie
comparing a tiny flame against a huge diaphragm. Congratulations for this apple-peas thing
At least can You build excellent, marketable and safe systems with this principle and You don´t need complex electronics. And best of all it has proven its qualities in several thousands of applications whereas the plasma is still kind of freaky with laboratory status. Something that imho prevents this system from becoming the best (at least with the momentary state of art).
jauu
Calvin
btw. an Hello and a signature makes a post a bit friendlier
@Nixie
comparing a tiny flame against a huge diaphragm. Congratulations for this apple-peas thing
At least can You build excellent, marketable and safe systems with this principle and You don´t need complex electronics. And best of all it has proven its qualities in several thousands of applications whereas the plasma is still kind of freaky with laboratory status. Something that imho prevents this system from becoming the best (at least with the momentary state of art).
jauu
Calvin
btw. an Hello and a signature makes a post a bit friendlier
No consumables. I've written plenty of how to do it without the helium that the Plasmatronics used. As for knowledge -- that goes towards properly designing any sound driver.JinMTVT said:
I posted frequency, phase, and pulse response, as well as a waterfall plot of the Plasmatronics in the other thread. Can't get much more objective than that.
So? I'm comparing two drivers that cover the same frequency range, so it's very much a valid comparison. Additionally, I replied to and falsified specific points that you made regarding mass and resonance.
Quit making excuses. First you say the membrane is lighter than the plasma, and now when I proved you far, far off the mark, you try to weasel out of it by claiming invalid a comparison that you yourself made. That's intellectually dishonest.
The fact is, the comparison is valid by virtue of the two drivers serving the exact same purpose.
Notice this is diyaudio, not commercialaudio. In the three points above, the plasma obviously wins in excellence, as I've shown in my posts here, as well as the graphs I posted in the other thread. Marketability is absolutely irrelevant for DIYers; please quit attacking strawmen in your argument. As for safe -- it can be made as safe as the high-voltage ESL by the simple use of a small grounded grid around the small plasma chamber.
No more complex than the ESL panels. I'm referring to a DC glow discharge, driven by a linear power supply and a linear amplifier -- the same class of designs as you would use to drive a directly coupled ESL.
The Plasmatronics was quite successful, with the only limiting factor the need for refilling the helium tank -- and this is something that can be avoided today, as I've shown elsewhere in the forums. Most people that have heard it regard it as the best driver in its frequency range. Acapella still sells other types of ionic tweeters in their high-end horn speakers.
As I've explained, there is nothing that prevents it, and indeed nothing does -- it still is the best, and will remain until we begin directly interfacing to the auditory nerves.
Hey Nixie
could you please post some links to your threads and information about ur device.
I always thought that Plasma/ionic tweeters required some gazeous matter ( helium ? ) to be feed non stop
so i am interested for more intormation
And you are also 100% right to be claiming your solution
as the only valid point is making sound
and if it does then we can compare the quality of the output ...
could you please post some links to your threads and information about ur device.
I always thought that Plasma/ionic tweeters required some gazeous matter ( helium ? ) to be feed non stop
so i am interested for more intormation
And you are also 100% right to be claiming your solution
as the only valid point is making sound
and if it does then we can compare the quality of the output ...
more things to consider...
Quote: "as the only valid point is making sound
and if it does then we can compare the quality of the output"
there are more things to consider when choosing a loudspeaker driver/s than this. You need to be concerned with what it is you need/want the driver/s to do and you also need to consider the enviornment in which you intend to have the driver/s do that job. Dispersion caracteristics are of major concern. Driver directivity is a very important consideration and will often determine what driver/s you can use or need to use to achieve your intended goal. Playback level and your design specific distortion level will also impact your choice of driver/s. Perfect for your living room and perfect for small hall are two different things. If all you really want to listen to is small acoustic recordings then you might find "perfect" in a small size quality fullrange driver. But if you want to play electronic music or full scale symphony you will find that your "perfect" choice will look a little bit different. It's a big fish kettle! Regards Moray James.
Quote: "as the only valid point is making sound
and if it does then we can compare the quality of the output"
there are more things to consider when choosing a loudspeaker driver/s than this. You need to be concerned with what it is you need/want the driver/s to do and you also need to consider the enviornment in which you intend to have the driver/s do that job. Dispersion caracteristics are of major concern. Driver directivity is a very important consideration and will often determine what driver/s you can use or need to use to achieve your intended goal. Playback level and your design specific distortion level will also impact your choice of driver/s. Perfect for your living room and perfect for small hall are two different things. If all you really want to listen to is small acoustic recordings then you might find "perfect" in a small size quality fullrange driver. But if you want to play electronic music or full scale symphony you will find that your "perfect" choice will look a little bit different. It's a big fish kettle! Regards Moray James.
Re: more things to consider...
LOL, there are many places around the forums I've written about this. I started the discussion about two years ago while I was under the nick Prune. The basics are this: most ionic drivers are tweeters that simply audio-modulate a tesla coil-driven corona discharge. However, one commercial design had used a very different approach, that of Dr. Alan Hill (which, by the way, is not purely a tweeter as it extends down to 500 Hz). Though it's hard to find much information as there were only several hundred Plasmatronic speakers produced, I had some correspondence with an owner, as well as tracked down Hill's patent describing the technology -- a DC glow discharge. The patent, US 4,219,705 has very detailed calculations and discussion about the benefits of using a glow discharge, how to set up an optimal shape and envirornment, and so on. The commercial product corresponds to Fig.8 in the patent. Hill used helium gas as the medium for its low electrical breakdown point, improved discharge stability, and avoiding ozone and nitrogen oxide production. Subsequent to the Plasmatronics, a new plasma technology appeared that allows plain air to serve as the medium without the first two issues (breakdown voltage and stability). As for the ozone and nitrogen dioxide, there is a way to deal with them (hint: every street legal car does).JinMTVT said:
Hemispherical towards the front. Can be easily restricted to a conical region by altering the plasma shape. That's sufficient flexibility in my opinion.moray james said:
Both of these are a function of power level for the plasma, and one can be traded for the other for any given power available.
It's flexible enough for either application. The real drawbacks have to do with issues such as somewhat increased complexity and expense, and, potentially, maintenance (may need occasional cleaning of electrodes, or replacement of the airflow filter). Power efficiency is fine: the original Plasmatronics managed 107 dB @ 3 meters with 165 W plasma power per channel, which with a good power supply means drawing maybe 10% more power from the mains.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.