Is this a TH?
exactly...
maybe tom or someone can provide some definitive guidelines on what infringes on tom's patent and what doesn't... As I'm unsure of how it is different than decades old alignments.
The one thing that IS different, is the helmholtz resonators to tame the twin peaks. That much I understand.. the rest... not sure about.
So... for clarification... does this infringe on tom's patent? as it is definitely not a 'new' design... and does not include helmholtz resonators to flatten response?
Rademakers said:
exactly...
maybe tom or someone can provide some definitive guidelines on what infringes on tom's patent and what doesn't... As I'm unsure of how it is different than decades old alignments.
The one thing that IS different, is the helmholtz resonators to tame the twin peaks. That much I understand.. the rest... not sure about.
So... for clarification... does this infringe on tom's patent? as it is definitely not a 'new' design... and does not include helmholtz resonators to flatten response?
Attachments
"The one thing that IS different, is the helmholtz resonators to tame the twin peaks. That much I understand.. the rest... not sure about."
They have been used in TQWT in the past, not a new use as far as I am concerned.
"Without giving away too much proprietary information away, Teresonic has designed a number of Helmholtz resonators tuned to different frequencies and placed them within the quarter wave pipe. And guess what, it works! "
They have been used in TQWT in the past, not a new use as far as I am concerned.
"Without giving away too much proprietary information away, Teresonic has designed a number of Helmholtz resonators tuned to different frequencies and placed them within the quarter wave pipe. And guess what, it works! "
ok... so now I'm really confused... I don't want to cross an IP line anymore than the next guy.. but...
I NEED TO KNOW WHERE THAT LINE IS !!!!
If I were to send tom an email, asking if a particular design of mine was infringing or not.. it's in his best interest not to respond. If he responds and says 'that's fine' then he sets a precedent that he doesn't want to set. If he says 'no that's not fine' then he has to say why, and how it's different than VERY similar designs that would have definitely been considered prior art.
I kinda wonder about the USPTO on this one.. My analogy is like a patent on toast, that goes something like this:
I make really good toast and want to patent it...
Well, there are all kinds of toast, wheat, white, sourdough...
yea, but this is REALLY good toast, and mine tastes better than other guys toast.
so it is just bread, right?
yea
and it's toasted, right?
yea
so what do you want to patent?
The taste! I make it taste better than anyone else, because I know how.
so... with the exception of the taste, it's exactly like everyone else's toast.
well, yea...
ok.. if it's really that good... here's your patent.
So.. with that tongue -n- cheek silly argument in mind... is a design that can be modeled in hornresp/akabak/etc as a TH that performs average not crossing the line... but one that has been exhaustively tweaked till it performs as well as tom's designs do... IS crossing that line?
I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just need to know what the rules are, because I've read tom's patent dozen's of times, and I can't figure out how it got granted, considering prior designs...
I NEED TO KNOW WHERE THAT LINE IS !!!!
If I were to send tom an email, asking if a particular design of mine was infringing or not.. it's in his best interest not to respond. If he responds and says 'that's fine' then he sets a precedent that he doesn't want to set. If he says 'no that's not fine' then he has to say why, and how it's different than VERY similar designs that would have definitely been considered prior art.
I kinda wonder about the USPTO on this one.. My analogy is like a patent on toast, that goes something like this:
I make really good toast and want to patent it...
Well, there are all kinds of toast, wheat, white, sourdough...
yea, but this is REALLY good toast, and mine tastes better than other guys toast.
so it is just bread, right?
yea
and it's toasted, right?
yea
so what do you want to patent?
The taste! I make it taste better than anyone else, because I know how.
so... with the exception of the taste, it's exactly like everyone else's toast.
well, yea...
ok.. if it's really that good... here's your patent.
So.. with that tongue -n- cheek silly argument in mind... is a design that can be modeled in hornresp/akabak/etc as a TH that performs average not crossing the line... but one that has been exhaustively tweaked till it performs as well as tom's designs do... IS crossing that line?
I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just need to know what the rules are, because I've read tom's patent dozen's of times, and I can't figure out how it got granted, considering prior designs...
I don't have a clue WRT the law, but as I pointed out when WC posted his original so-called TH findings on the 'collaborative' thread that the acoustic differences between it and a simple end loaded pipe (conic or linear expansion) horn was so negligible as to be moot IMO, so IMO these are neither THs nor worthy of a patent. Ditto even if they have any low and/or high and/or band-pass filters that are used in the best performing simple pipe, BVR or BL horns.
Once you shift one or both 'taps' away from the extreme ends and/or use multiple flare frequency sections though, then IMO it's some form of TH. Not being privy to any of DSL product's internals, I don't know if any of them are just simple driver-in-mouth horns, but even if any are, I wouldn't think twice about building some for personal gain if I was 'in the biz', though what I wouldn't do is try to get a premium by implying or claiming it's a TH since this is part and parcel of any patent AFAIK, instead marketing it for what it is, a folded, end loaded TL, pipe or BL horn depending on its internal configuration.
GM
Once you shift one or both 'taps' away from the extreme ends and/or use multiple flare frequency sections though, then IMO it's some form of TH. Not being privy to any of DSL product's internals, I don't know if any of them are just simple driver-in-mouth horns, but even if any are, I wouldn't think twice about building some for personal gain if I was 'in the biz', though what I wouldn't do is try to get a premium by implying or claiming it's a TH since this is part and parcel of any patent AFAIK, instead marketing it for what it is, a folded, end loaded TL, pipe or BL horn depending on its internal configuration.
GM
GM said:
Here's how the patent system works...
You need to read *exactly* what is claimed in the patent (assuming it's granted) and then see whether what you're looking at infringes any of the claims.
If it does you could be in deep doo-doo regardless of whether you think the claims are valid or *ought* to have been granted -- fighting a patent suit in the US typically costs several million dollars, so you'd better be pretty certain as well as having very deep pockets. And for wilful infringement you could get hit with triple damages (3x the amount the plaintiff lost) as compensation...
If it doesn't -- and you'd better be pretty damn certain about this for the above reasons -- then you're in the clear.
All this assumes that the patent is granted and that Tom decides to come after you in court. This doesn't usually happen unless the amount of money lost is several times bigger than the (high) cost of taking it to court, which guarantees that the lawyers win but very little else. I know for sure (at work) that one of our competitors has ripped off several of my patents, but the risk/reward just doesn't make it worth taking them to court -- we did the usual threatening letters bit, they basically said "so sue us", and we didn't :-(
So unless Danley Sound Labs lose a *lot* of business because you sell tapped horns they're unlikely to sue you -- this is business.
On the other hand since we all know what Tom came up with and popularised and the amount of help he's given to people who want to build their own, you might find yourself the target of a certain amount of disapproval if you took this route -- this is ethics.
Ian
P.S. Yes all this means that the patent system is pretty much broken, only large companies with deep pockets can really use it to defend their IP (and even then not always) -- but unfortunately that's the way it is.
P.P.S. Jbell, the patent hasn't been granted yet, but this doesn't mean it won't be, many patents that people thought blindingly obvious have been granted -- which just means the patent examiners didn't agree with their opinion...
Let me interject some thought.
First, and I have stated this with Screamers design,
is that the TH uses the radiation from the rear of the horn traveling down the path of the Horn to the throat from the mouth and back. SO I would assume the pictured sub (Post 297) isnt a TH as the angle of the driver doesn't allow for this to happen.
Second is that you are not
making a direct copy of a DSL speaker cabinet. And hopefully you don't plan on selling them as TH's but rather a TL as GM stated.
Now of course no one would want
another to build something they sell to sell on their own. But this does happen.
Now if it is the case that you just want to be able to offer someone who here's your system to build one for them is one thing but to openly market it for sale is another. That is if you are planning to make money off of the principles of the design. (ie TH)
Now LETs get this back ON TOPIC.
ScreamerUSA
What design did you finally go with mate?
First, and I have stated this with Screamers design,
is that the TH uses the radiation from the rear of the horn traveling down the path of the Horn to the throat from the mouth and back. SO I would assume the pictured sub (Post 297) isnt a TH as the angle of the driver doesn't allow for this to happen.
Second is that you are not
making a direct copy of a DSL speaker cabinet. And hopefully you don't plan on selling them as TH's but rather a TL as GM stated.
Now of course no one would want
another to build something they sell to sell on their own. But this does happen.
Now if it is the case that you just want to be able to offer someone who here's your system to build one for them is one thing but to openly market it for sale is another. That is if you are planning to make money off of the principles of the design. (ie TH)
Now LETs get this back ON TOPIC.
ScreamerUSA
What design did you finally go with mate?
FlipC said:
Nothing to do with the angle of the driver, bass radiates omnidirectionally from a virtual source at the middle of the cone -- what matters is the position of this (the exposed face of the driver) relative to the mouth of the horn.
In many DSL tapped horns (e.g Th-115) the driver is as close to the mouth of the horn as is physically possible, just like the one pictured. So the difference would be that here there is a short rapidly flared section at the mouth of the horn which DSL tapped horns don't have -- this won't stop some sound from the driver travelling back down the horn
This is one of the big debates about whether the tapped horn patent should be granted or not -- in many cases physically the construction is apparently no different to an old-style scoop as pictured.
You can patent a new way of designing something for a particular purpose (tapped horn using radiation from both sides of driver to fill in the response hole, with both sides of driver entering horn between throat and mouth) even if the result can end up looking like something that exists already (scoop).
The key point which makes the patent valid may be that *both* entry points are effectively between the throat and mouth; with scoops one is effectively before the mouth (like a tapped horn) but the other is at the throat (unlike a tapped horn).
Only the patent examiners can decide (and they may restrict the scope of the claims to avoid such prior art).
Incidentally, from this point of view it's a good thing that the patent is a world/european one, in my experience their examiners are *much* more on the ball about prior art and validity than US ones who'll grant pretty anything...
Ian
http://groups.msn.com/SpeakerBuildingpics/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=92
So does this infringe on the TH idea?
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
What about this (available in singe or dual woofer models)?
djk said:
http://groups.msn.com/SpeakerBuildingpics/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=92
So does this infringe on the TH idea?
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
What about this (available in singe or dual woofer models)?
Probably not -- like I said, the devil is in the details. A patent can't be granted on something that has been previously made public, so if the patent claims try to cover such a speaker the patent claims will have to be modified so they don't (assuming the examiners are aware of this prior art).
Since the patent hasn't been granted yet nobody knows *exactly* what it covers, it's quite possible the examiners will only grant it if the claims are modified or restricted. Until this happens we're all guessing, and no number of "well, does this infringe the patent?" questions will change that.
Unfortunately this process (application to final grant) usually takes several years, so we're likely be guessing for some time yet...
Ian
djk said:
Looks like a driver-in-mouth BLH horn (AKA scoop bin) to me, so not to my way of thinking.
Dunno about the second one since I don't know its inner details, but I assume not.
In each case though I can see someone trying to 'cash in' on Tom's I.P. by implying it's a TH or some-such because it has the 'look' of some of DSL's products. This is where I can see DSL having problems with obtaining a patent that encompasses these particular products.
The DTS-20 and Spud OTOH have the driver far enough up inside the mouth to obviously be a TH and while there's prior art on such a layout, if the patents are expired, then I see no reason why DSL can't 'pick up the ball and run with it'.
Regardless, patent approval or not, WRT immorally using (stealing) Tom's I.P. for financial gain I've drawn my 'line in the sand', not that it matters one whit in today's morally corrupt society as Ian and others have pointed out, so in the scheme of things all it does is keeps me from being more open about about what I think I know about the finer points of TH design.
GM
There were patents for offset drivers as well as ducted ports and IIRC it was either you or Moray James that posted them, though don't know of any actual products. The only 'TH' I was aware of until recently though was the Transflex, which had plenty of acoustic efficiency for a HIFI even today, but I couldn't reconcile/tolerate its excessive time delay, so cut it up to make other speakers. Still got the LS-15 though.
GM
GM
K-Line
I designed and built what I called a K-Line and took it to the first Rocky Mountain Audio show (forget the year). This was a 1/4 Fs wave line behind the driver. The front of the driver fired into what looked like a somewhat conventional karlson coupler section though the tapers are very fore shortened. The coupler section was factored into the line length so 1/4 Fs line length from one side of the driver to the other. Works fairly well though my build at the time was less that fantastic. Though a fullrange driver was used (several units were used) it is very similar to a tapped horn. I sent a copy of the design drawing to Fred and to Dave D. but I have lost track of the drawings (on an old sick hard drive).
I designed and built what I called a K-Line and took it to the first Rocky Mountain Audio show (forget the year). This was a 1/4 Fs wave line behind the driver. The front of the driver fired into what looked like a somewhat conventional karlson coupler section though the tapers are very fore shortened. The coupler section was factored into the line length so 1/4 Fs line length from one side of the driver to the other. Works fairly well though my build at the time was less that fantastic. Though a fullrange driver was used (several units were used) it is very similar to a tapped horn. I sent a copy of the design drawing to Fred and to Dave D. but I have lost track of the drawings (on an old sick hard drive).
Fred did...
Fred must have thought of this long before I did and posted drawings . I hope that he has a copy of my design drawing it is more like a t-line feeding a Karlson coupler where the one Fred designed and posted is more like to what we now know as a Tapped horn.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=106780
Fred must have thought of this long before I did and posted drawings . I hope that he has a copy of my design drawing it is more like a t-line feeding a Karlson coupler where the one Fred designed and posted is more like to what we now know as a Tapped horn.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=106780
Sorry folks.. but I'm busier than the devil on D-Day.
After hitting a finiancial iceburg (a-la the "Titanic") all hell broke loose and I've been scrambling to put systems in clubs.
Given the economy I'll thankfully take what I can get.
TAPPED HORNS IN SMALL CLUBS , about 5000 sq ft or so.
I was very upset the first two nights and regretting building these things as I had already made arrangements to sell my double 15 JBLs. The super lows were kinda there but the bass was lacking overall. Then I remembered that I had decided to use them another way after initial testing. TURN THEM SIDEWAYS!!!!!
Stacked on top of each other, mouths together.
They sound weak side by side with the mouth on the floor in a small space, stacking them sideways is the trick.
They also seem to want more power than the speakers actual rating. Much to my surprise I was pushing about 650w per cab
with 4015's (450w rated) without any problems.
Customer Feedback is the best indicator.....
Over the last three nights in a club where the previous soundguy had JBL MRX system with 4 18", and 4 12"+2" tops:
I recieved close to a hundred remarks such as, "WOW", "This is like a real concert", "It's so clear", "This or that band never sounded that good" etc etc.
DIY TH boxes are a pain to build, they are power hungry, but they do have three very important advantages other than the low end.
1) 4 of them "sound" like a large concert type system normally comprised of at least 8-20 double 18's. This is an advantage as it
makes the event "sound" bigger than it is.
2) The distortion made by double front loaded cabs is GONE.
The low end is punchy and clean.
We were louder than the other guy but the audience and staff didn't notice due to the clarity of the system.
3) Directionality!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The club has just recently recieved a lawsuit from the sushi bar
4 stores away because the bass was chasing away the customers. The owner of the sushi bar actually came to see why the bass problem had stopped this weekend only to find us blasting away. We had people carrying on conversations right behind and off to the side of the TH boxes with the system screaming away. The problem was, the other guys 18 front loads
were making so much uncontrolled noise behind the cab that it was transmitting back through 4 walls and rattling the concrete right into the sushi place. Problem is now......gone
There is much to be said about having control over where the sound goes.
I conclude this by saying I wish I had the cash to buy real ones.
When I can get the chance over the next two weeks I will post the cabs I am using in the hopes someone may be able to improve them for all our DIY benefit.
The 4015 and BTX100 are the preferred speaker for my clumbsy boxes. The 3015 actually sounds much better in a front loaded box ,maybe a BFM titan and tuba, but I'll reuse them in a double 15 ae11 type cab for a drum monitor as soon as I can get my grubby little sawdust and glue stained hands on some more 4015's.
Gotta run to install a reggae system.... Cheers for now.
After hitting a finiancial iceburg (a-la the "Titanic") all hell broke loose and I've been scrambling to put systems in clubs.
Given the economy I'll thankfully take what I can get.
TAPPED HORNS IN SMALL CLUBS , about 5000 sq ft or so.
I was very upset the first two nights and regretting building these things as I had already made arrangements to sell my double 15 JBLs. The super lows were kinda there but the bass was lacking overall. Then I remembered that I had decided to use them another way after initial testing. TURN THEM SIDEWAYS!!!!!
Stacked on top of each other, mouths together.
They sound weak side by side with the mouth on the floor in a small space, stacking them sideways is the trick.
They also seem to want more power than the speakers actual rating. Much to my surprise I was pushing about 650w per cab
with 4015's (450w rated) without any problems.
Customer Feedback is the best indicator.....
Over the last three nights in a club where the previous soundguy had JBL MRX system with 4 18", and 4 12"+2" tops:
I recieved close to a hundred remarks such as, "WOW", "This is like a real concert", "It's so clear", "This or that band never sounded that good" etc etc.
DIY TH boxes are a pain to build, they are power hungry, but they do have three very important advantages other than the low end.
1) 4 of them "sound" like a large concert type system normally comprised of at least 8-20 double 18's. This is an advantage as it
makes the event "sound" bigger than it is.
2) The distortion made by double front loaded cabs is GONE.
The low end is punchy and clean.
We were louder than the other guy but the audience and staff didn't notice due to the clarity of the system.
3) Directionality!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The club has just recently recieved a lawsuit from the sushi bar
4 stores away because the bass was chasing away the customers. The owner of the sushi bar actually came to see why the bass problem had stopped this weekend only to find us blasting away. We had people carrying on conversations right behind and off to the side of the TH boxes with the system screaming away. The problem was, the other guys 18 front loads
were making so much uncontrolled noise behind the cab that it was transmitting back through 4 walls and rattling the concrete right into the sushi place. Problem is now......gone
There is much to be said about having control over where the sound goes.
I conclude this by saying I wish I had the cash to buy real ones.
When I can get the chance over the next two weeks I will post the cabs I am using in the hopes someone may be able to improve them for all our DIY benefit.
The 4015 and BTX100 are the preferred speaker for my clumbsy boxes. The 3015 actually sounds much better in a front loaded box ,maybe a BFM titan and tuba, but I'll reuse them in a double 15 ae11 type cab for a drum monitor as soon as I can get my grubby little sawdust and glue stained hands on some more 4015's.
Gotta run to install a reggae system.... Cheers for now.
I thought you might find this funny....
I caught many musicians and local sound guys sticking thier noses into the boxes. The sideways TH boxes with 4 modded Omnitops on top really make them scratch thier heads.
I get many confused, bewildered, disbelieving looks throughout the night. I kinda enjoy it
I overheard a few "What the He** is that?
I did get a strange comment last night from a band manager.
"Have you hear of Meyer Sound?" "Thier stuff sounds clear like yours"... I know meyer's way better but It was hard to contain the grin.
Pretty satisfying feeling for a DIYer.
I caught many musicians and local sound guys sticking thier noses into the boxes. The sideways TH boxes with 4 modded Omnitops on top really make them scratch thier heads.
I get many confused, bewildered, disbelieving looks throughout the night. I kinda enjoy it
I overheard a few "What the He** is that?
I did get a strange comment last night from a band manager.
"Have you hear of Meyer Sound?" "Thier stuff sounds clear like yours"... I know meyer's way better but It was hard to contain the grin.
Pretty satisfying feeling for a DIYer.
screamersusa said:
amen, and amen.
The thing I noticed in my stadium system was actual directionality of the sound. (which explains why I could measure +2.5 over estimated at 10m)
Almost ZERO bass behind these cabinets outdoors is an experience you have to actually hear to believe.
Congrats screamers on some success.. you've worked hard for it.
Thanks JB.
The cabinets were rushed out so they arn't the best they can be and I'm still only runing the first 3 with a delayed front loaded box filling in the missing cab. I really wanted to let them get tweaked by the community here before I built finals. I'll probably just rebuild them after we all beat the design up a bit to make it better. There are folks here who really know what they are doing and I'd like to let them have at it.
Addition.
As far as this cabinet or that cabinet is concerned:
Each type of speaker box has it's own place in the audio world.
Just like the car you choose or the tool you pick up to get something done. There are no "end all be all" designs, only really good compromises that have thier own advantages and obvious flaws. In addition all sound engineers are like musicians and each has thier own "sound". Regardless of skill level, some are tekkies and do everything "perfect", others are "tone freaks".
Your choice of cabinets depends on what type of shows you do
and what type of sound you wish to present for said shows.
Personally I find that this statement is much more accurate in the DIY and small format arena. That would be the "If it fits in a 20 foot box truck or less category".
The cabinets were rushed out so they arn't the best they can be and I'm still only runing the first 3 with a delayed front loaded box filling in the missing cab. I really wanted to let them get tweaked by the community here before I built finals. I'll probably just rebuild them after we all beat the design up a bit to make it better. There are folks here who really know what they are doing and I'd like to let them have at it.
Addition.
As far as this cabinet or that cabinet is concerned:
Each type of speaker box has it's own place in the audio world.
Just like the car you choose or the tool you pick up to get something done. There are no "end all be all" designs, only really good compromises that have thier own advantages and obvious flaws. In addition all sound engineers are like musicians and each has thier own "sound". Regardless of skill level, some are tekkies and do everything "perfect", others are "tone freaks".
Your choice of cabinets depends on what type of shows you do
and what type of sound you wish to present for said shows.
Personally I find that this statement is much more accurate in the DIY and small format arena. That would be the "If it fits in a 20 foot box truck or less category".