Hi skeptic. I just went and grabbed my "testing loudspeakers" and no cd 🙁 Unless it was separate (ie not fixed to the back cover like most books) and I've stashed it somewhere...
ahh found them http://www.audioxpress.com/magsdirx/ax/addenda/media/dappolito2959.pdf http://www.audioxpress.com/magsdirx/ax/addenda/media/dappolito2960.pdf
No wonder they didn't come with my book, they are dated 2009, and I bought mine in 2005 🙂
Tony.
ahh found them http://www.audioxpress.com/magsdirx/ax/addenda/media/dappolito2959.pdf http://www.audioxpress.com/magsdirx/ax/addenda/media/dappolito2960.pdf
No wonder they didn't come with my book, they are dated 2009, and I bought mine in 2005 🙂
Tony.
Last edited:
Doug, I don't agree w/ Soongsc, but I appreciate his understanding and DATA. You catch my drift. Empty statements are just that.
Dan
Dan
It's really appreciated if someone can provide a different perspective other than the old "don't agree" thing. I was under the impression that this is what the thread is about, and hoping to see something more positive. Seems like up to now, I've been the only one to specify what measurements I see important to determine how well a speaker performs.
My CD's came with my book I bought just last year from Madisound. They are a blessing because I felt the book was far too technical with no help with interpreting test data (i.e. what's good and what's bad). The CD's go a long wasy towards that.
Polar response is also very important form of measurement in terms of how well the speaker performs when one is not listening on axis. Many instruments cover a vast frequency spectrum. The polar response will help identify how these instruments may shift around when playing through the notes.
How many nit-picking audiophile engineer are around here? This is really what it takes to be able to find what measurements more appropriately represent the sound quality of an audio system. Back in the aircraft design days, I was required to go through test pilot training so that I could fully understand what pilots feel, and how they express what they feel about the aircraft. I assume the car designers would go though something similar.
How many nit-picking audiophile engineer are around here? This is really what it takes to be able to find what measurements more appropriately represent the sound quality of an audio system. Back in the aircraft design days, I was required to go through test pilot training so that I could fully understand what pilots feel, and how they express what they feel about the aircraft. I assume the car designers would go though something similar.
Last edited:
Only if you accept Joe's position as the end-all. I don't. He gets a lot right, but he is seriously remiss in evaluating the polar response and I am unconvinced that ground plane is the correct approach.
I found Songsc's complete omission of the polar response enlightening. I do nothing that he does and he does nothing that I do. Worlds apart ...
All this thread shows me is that people want to argue about whats right and wrong but no concensus ever gets reached and hence no standard format can ever be decided. Hence no comparisons are possible and the arguments go on endlessly and audio marketing lives to fool another day.
Even when one IS listening on axis. The direct sound from the speaker is only ONE aspect of its performance and not a dominate one either.
Isn't it just a realization that speaker building is still considered an art form? Definitely a lot of science involved but everyone can choose a slightly different path and have still have great success.
Not everyone is building speakers for the same reasons either so specific measurements may not mean much to from one build to the next build. A lot of it is splitting hairs with a lot of intent lost in the debate Like the silly "CSDs are not usefull" stuff. The CSD is just another way to look at the impulse and to say it isnt meaningful is to conclude the impulse isnt meangingful or the FR plot isnt meaningful since they are all derived from the same source. Dr. Geddes, I really think its unfair that you stating that the CSD is useless ( I know that was not your intent) has confused noobs like Dan but so be it....if someone follows only one expert they are bound to get burned.
I then end there are a lot of expert speaker builders from Jed, Curt C, Jon Marsh (others there too) over on HTguide.com to yourself Dr. Geddes and other international experts. Everyone is going to have a differening opinion....Look at the horns vs waveguides stuff that never ends. Even you and Tom Danley argue over nitpicky stuff in some threads and you both build incredible speakers.
Remember the success of a speaker is simply how it sounds and how many people like it sometimes marketing it is more important than the cost of the science to properly build it. The success of a speaker company is built on marketing and proper distribution channels. BOSE may be a crap speaker but they are a very successful speaker company.
Last edited:
You will not get it from Dan. I tried for 20 pages to get him to post why the CSD isnt worth while...he is just reading something from Dr. Geddes and believing it 🙁
Last edited:
doug, perhaps you ca tell us what you see in the CSD that you don't see in the impulse response or frequency response. To get the CSD you have to first get the impulse response, what justifies the extra effort for you?
I wouldn't say that CSD is useless, but I do think a lot of people read a lot more into it than makes sense - just because the data is shown as a 3D surface all sorts of things are read into it. Visual appeal doesn't just translate into audible magic all the time.
I wouldn't say that CSD is useless, but I do think a lot of people read a lot more into it than makes sense - just because the data is shown as a 3D surface all sorts of things are read into it. Visual appeal doesn't just translate into audible magic all the time.
doug I virtually never agree with your posts and your last one is no exception.
- Loudspeaker design is not an art
- Tom Danley and I disagree on almost nothing, a few little things - "nitpicking" to you
- I never said CSD was "useless" - another bogus claim you put in my mouth
- sound quality has almost nothing to do with commercial success - cabinetry is far more important
- I've never even heard of your other so-called "experts"
I'd much rather converse with Dan the "nob" than you
- Loudspeaker design is not an art
- Tom Danley and I disagree on almost nothing, a few little things - "nitpicking" to you
- I never said CSD was "useless" - another bogus claim you put in my mouth
- sound quality has almost nothing to do with commercial success - cabinetry is far more important
- I've never even heard of your other so-called "experts"
I'd much rather converse with Dan the "nob" than you
Here's why. I can make a really good sounding speaker and never even look at a CSD plot. It simply is not necessary. Same thing with time alignment. I look at the step response and try to get it to look as best as I can but I never hear a difference. I use frequency response on axis, measurements in a listening window and design for CD response but don't verify it with polars.
Rob🙂
While this is true, unless the design is for a specific room with know characteristics, we can have very limited control of the indirect sound because different in-room material have different absorption spectrums.
Live would be really dull if someone could not call a good speaker a piece of art. 😉
Let's not forget that in any discussion, we get bits and pieces of information along this learning process. Even if we don't fully agree on some aspects, they certainly will inspire additional thoughts. I've sorted out what I can see as important measurement data to represent the sound quality of speakers from the information, papers, and books that I have read, and I'm sure others may have a different view which is what I'd like to hear about.
Lol,
You more or less said CSDs are useless by posting several times statements like this "I'm not a fan of CSD, doesn't tell you very much." Which is silly because you love the Impulse measurement and the CSD tells you as much as the impulse does. You can twist that around and nitpick (you guys love to do that) but you are science guy and there is only two answers. Its useful or useless, there is no grey area in your world so which one is it? 😉
As for Danley, nitpicking as in 20 pages of back and forth over very small differences. Its the same as your opinion on LeCleach designs and the back and forth that has gone on for years.
Loudspeakers are a work of art, you thinking its all science is nothing new and the lack of concerns for looks is well known. Loudspeakers will always be more about art then what you think is important because like you posted the world does care about style as much as they do SQ, yes people care about SQ they just are never exposed to quality SQ enough.
You know you could higher a graphics designer type guy to make your speakers look better and still use your great expertise.
You have never heard of some of the builders over on HTGuide? Im sure they appreciate your professional comments of "so called experts" considering they build and sell speakers, many brands over your same style (three different sizes, lack any imagination there? 😉 ). They even have websites that are far superior to what you call a website (example http://clearwaveloudspeaker.com/products.html) but I guess again you care little about style from your "This isn't art" attitude.
Im okay with you choosing Dan over me, why would you pick a guy that disagrees with you over someone that bows at your feet. I would do the same thing.
Last edited:
If you can see stored energy issues in a impulse response more power too you, its hard to see them in some published impulses or response measurements but the CSDs published show things better. I like the CSD, its easy to spot some issues when comparing 20 different drivers. I would never use it alone but its an incorrect opinion to post its not useful as a general statement because its very misleading for others trying to learn.
You can post "I do not use it" and that would be fine but others do like and do use it. The new Wavelets (Thanks to members on this forum) is another tool to spot possible waveguide issues. Again, no one is forcing anyone else to use any tool and everyone has their own favorite choices.
Its silly and boring to think everyone should conform (Geddes would like speakers to be less about art....yawn). There are enough books out there and measurements done that anyone can build a damn good speaker so what really are we missing?
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.