High Q or low DF Effects the same? ATTN NP & MJK - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Subwoofers
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Gallery Wiki Blogs Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

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
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 2nd March 2010, 12:18 AM   #1
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Indiana
Default High Q or low DF Effects the same? ATTN NP & MJK

I have been musing a bit on Nelson Pass' work with transconductance amplifiers with high efficiency FR drivers. I am intrigued by the inter-relationship of driver Q and amplifier Zout. Mr. Pass' paper deals with full range drivers with strong motors relative to their moving mass (at least that is the way I interpret it). It seem that this also could apply then to low Q professional bass drivers as well.

This line of thinking brings me to Martin King's work with high Q helper woofers in open baffle systems (and this is how it relates to subwoofers). Lets look just at the open baffle situation for a moment. The highish Qt drivers that are indicated for this application arrive at their high Q I believe primarily due to their high Qes related to relative motor strength compared with cone mass. The high Zout amplifier is often analyzed as an increase in Qes brought on by a resistance in series with a voltage source amplifier.

Now if this is really an increase in Qes the question becomes is a low Q speaker with transconductance amp completely analogous to a high Qes speaker with a voltage amplifier? That is to say is the resulting Q the only factor or are there factors (other than cost) that would argue for the use of one approach or the other being preferred?
Generic Signature
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd March 2010, 11:43 AM   #2
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Originally Posted by mashaffer View Post
The high Zout amplifier is often analyzed as an increase in Qes brought on by a resistance in series with a voltage source amplifier.
For the frequency range around fs i would consider both ways as
equivalent, as you described it.

In the range where VC inductivity comes into play, current lowers
with rising frequency, when a voltage conroled amp is used.

With a constant current amp there will be relatively more
output in the middle frequencies. That will IMO lead to different
alignments of crossover and correction networks.

In cases where the VC inductivity is equalized, there should be
indeed no difference between both approaches.

Kind Regards
Oliver, RFZ believer (?)
  Reply With Quote


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
What is SI T-Amp DF (damping factor)? skrstic Class D 1 23rd April 2008 09:49 PM
DIY-AMP <ZAS> Low THD & IM high bandwith murphy Solid State 18 30th December 2005 10:28 AM
variable Low-Cut, High-Pass & High-Cuts TobWen Solid State 3 14th September 2004 09:40 PM
Effects of high heater voltage? JoeBob Tubes / Valves 34 18th April 2003 03:21 PM

New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:01 AM.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2017 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2