Come on, let's give 45 a break. He didn't design the speakers, he only enjoys them, and i suspect that the info he is trying to communicate 2nd hand is losing something.
Just looking at the speaker, and the clues that have been given is very useful food for thot. I for one, would like to see more on the philosophies & designs of the designer. Even if you don't end up subscribing to this beliefs, there are tidbits to be taken away i am sure.
Us FR guys get a lot of the same flack about FR, but they do things typical multiways just fall flat on their face trying to do.
And when talking about FR, there are maybe only a handful here that can create a FR metric that has correlation to what humans perceive... it is a useful tool, but it is just a tool.
dave
I'm with Dave on that one. Very interested to learn more about the speakers that 45 has posted. At first I thought it was a Schroeder diffuser turned into a speaker cabinet, but was surprised to learn that it's all felt.
But shouldn't it get a thread of its own? That would be nice.
--
But shouldn't it get a thread of its own? That would be nice.
--
This is rather relevant to the original topic of this thread. He didn't design/build/measure these loudspeakers (and he has no plans to do so in the future), but he feels that he can speak authoritatively about why they sound like they do... he feels that a diy forum is the place to do this... its not.
By all means I'd like to see more info about the design/er but the name given returns nothing in google. The scope of 45s posting on the subject should have been more along the lines of "I bought these speakers, I like them..." and that should have been the end of it without any data/references/links/anything to back up statements like this:
"To the musical sound as a space-time sequence."
That statement doesn't make any sense. I was asking you what proof you have that your speaker preserves "musical sound as a space-time sequence". You don't have an answer?
I don't want you to convince me of anything. I just want you to offer more than just another belief system. HiFi had enough of such **.
Well, the woofer has a very rigid enclosure.
The drivers are subsonically coupled one to each other.
The stand is a subsonic suspension itself. You can't see the suspensions but there are.
I put a picture on a possible and simple subsonic suspension here: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/tube...sing-anything-other-than-dhts-preamps-17.html
The principle is the same.
Yes, I have already answered. But maybe you didn't catch it.....
I don't need another system. I have also explained why.
Yes.
Why? In this way the system is free from vibrations of any kind, in particular in the audio band.
That is what puts yourself in a situation of minimum error. Systematic errors, more precisely.
I think you are funny. You would argue on subject on which you don't have any practical idea and any experience. So have fun! I think I have written too much....
Anyway your reactions are not new to me..... same old story!
Yes, infrasonic.
No. Damping is minimal. In theory damping is not desirable in order to have an infinite Q at resonance so that all the energy is dissipated at such frequency (or lower, i.e. is a mechanical low pass filter). In practice you have minimal damping.
Damping means just that you dissipate the energy regardless of the frequency or in wide band if you like. Here the target is making a system that has got only subsonic vibration modes. The difference is that when you just damp some part of that energy will influence the spectral balance of your interest. Using the infrasonic suspension you just don't make it happen.
The best way is the air spring that achieves the lowest possible frequency.
Moss has been producing air springs for audio equipment for many years. They can be used with any component from the source to the speakers and come in different sizes.
Cheers,
45
Last edited:
What he means to say is that they are decoupled from each other. I.e. there is a suspension system between the various drivers. And the resonance frequency is very low (as it should be). I.e. somewhere below 20Hz? Hence the term subsonic..... I suppose.
Hence my question concerning how they are damped as I didn't figure he was talking about simply bolting them together.
Cheers.
Cheers.
For free!😎
Yes, I would be surprised of the contrary instead. If you think it's nonsense why are you so interested in reading and posting?
Last edited:
So practical experience to you is buying a speaker and listening to it?
Schadenfreude? There is a certain pleasure in watching deluded people flail around with meaningless terms and phrases to try and assert their opinion as fact.
Seriously... it angers me slightly that you feel you can post pseudo science about why your 'sound field' is so superior to anything anyone else has heard and expect people to believe it, even belittling people for not... thats the point of this thread. You are a prime example of the type of poster that inspired this thread "What happened to diyaudio?".
Anyway... wasted keystrokes...
If you want. But I think I have written a lot so that you can make some experience for free. If you try to understand how it works!
I mean the technical points: vibrations, coupling, decoupling, rigid system, effective bessel alignment, controlling the the back wave, the influence of the room etc.....
Instead it looks like you have nothing to tell except your opinion on what you don't know and understand. Augh!
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.