Same family tree ?.
Elsinore Loudspeaker Project
As usual you put your nose in when you are clueless of what is being discussed now and has been discussed previously, get with the program.
Hey Einstein, this is what Joe and I have been saying all along, Joe has provided a solution, you should read my previous post.
Elsinore Loudspeaker Project
As usual you put your nose in when you are clueless of what is being discussed now and has been discussed previously, get with the program.
More of you UD cr*p. Joe has designed a loudspeaker that has received good reviews, what audio have you designed ?.
Measurements of the difference are awaited, please don't use 1970's SS amplifiers.
To Who It May Concern.
I think we should all calm down a bit. Especially if we end up arguing over semantics.
When trying to shift the goal posts, you have to use language to do it. Go to a lecture where the instructor is trying to extend a subject for his audience to think about, he has to come up with language that will help his listeners. He has to engage them, challenge their thought patterns, and it has to be done with words.
I don't think I am anywhere near as unconventional as some people here want to portray me!
We all know what current is, so we can state it in normal EE language and go back to sleep. Job accomplished, right? I don't think so.
Definition of reactive: Showing a response to a stimulus.
A deviation in the current phase angle certainly qualifies.
Does a reactive load always result in reactive current?
If you think stock EE, what would be your answer? Let me predict that you will say Yes!
But does it always?
So let me be a little provocative, not because I am unconventional, but because I believe that there is something in EE that you have overlooked:
1. The current can only 'react' to the load in that manner with a voltage source.
2. The current does not 'react' to the load in that manner with a current source.
At this point, do not again make the mistake that I am preaching current drive.
I am not a promoter of current drive.
So what I am suggesting is something different (and if you have listened in the past, I would not have to repeat it, or others too have missed it because the the "noise generators" you guys have become - you know who you are):
I am talking about equalising current, so that the current of the amplifier is the same at all frequencies.
Under those circumstances you will always have a zero degree phase angle with any drive, both voltage and current drive.
It also cancels out the output impedance of the amplifier, so that it can be any value.
Dan and I have spoken on the landline and he has understood that. He has also understood about the circulating 'reactive' current when the amplifier is a voltage source. It is the circulating part that is important, because the current of the amplifier, in time and smearing time, is modifying the force that actuates the coil (it is current) and causes undesirable deflection of the coil in the gap and hence displacement (acoustic output) deviations.
If I can come up with a measurement that captures those deviations, then that would be a real achievement. Also, measuring them on the electrical side and get them to correlate with measurements (microphone) on the acoustic side. I intend to find out if equalising the current of the amplifier allows me to capture what we need to find. Will I be successful? I don't know yet, but I have been encouraged to try. If successful, I have three physicists to peer review it plus a number of engineers. This is a scientific endeavour with a reasonable chance of success.
There is a saying: And idea has to find its time. This topic has found its time. Part of it was Esa Meralainen publishing his book on current driving (unlike him, I am not a current drive crusader) and despite the criticism he got, I say the book was important. But Esa is not what you might call an "audiophile" in the way most people understand that word.
There is a movement happening and it started even before Esa's book. I was part of it even before the book. Some have noted that even a small increase in output impedance of an amplifier caused a change for the better in a way that could not be explained away with the freq. response deviations it might cause. But solutions still using voltage sources as amplifiers has to be found. I have some ideas about that. But you have to understand the problem first.
Now the bus arrives at the bus stop. Will you get on board? That is up to you. But do you have a right to criticise those getting on the bus? Not if you have excluded yourself!
.
I think we should all calm down a bit. Especially if we end up arguing over semantics.
When trying to shift the goal posts, you have to use language to do it. Go to a lecture where the instructor is trying to extend a subject for his audience to think about, he has to come up with language that will help his listeners. He has to engage them, challenge their thought patterns, and it has to be done with words.
I don't think I am anywhere near as unconventional as some people here want to portray me!
We all know what current is, so we can state it in normal EE language and go back to sleep. Job accomplished, right? I don't think so.
Definition of reactive: Showing a response to a stimulus.
A deviation in the current phase angle certainly qualifies.
Does a reactive load always result in reactive current?
If you think stock EE, what would be your answer? Let me predict that you will say Yes!
But does it always?
So let me be a little provocative, not because I am unconventional, but because I believe that there is something in EE that you have overlooked:
1. The current can only 'react' to the load in that manner with a voltage source.
2. The current does not 'react' to the load in that manner with a current source.
At this point, do not again make the mistake that I am preaching current drive.
I am not a promoter of current drive.
So what I am suggesting is something different (and if you have listened in the past, I would not have to repeat it, or others too have missed it because the the "noise generators" you guys have become - you know who you are):
I am talking about equalising current, so that the current of the amplifier is the same at all frequencies.
Under those circumstances you will always have a zero degree phase angle with any drive, both voltage and current drive.
It also cancels out the output impedance of the amplifier, so that it can be any value.
Dan and I have spoken on the landline and he has understood that. He has also understood about the circulating 'reactive' current when the amplifier is a voltage source. It is the circulating part that is important, because the current of the amplifier, in time and smearing time, is modifying the force that actuates the coil (it is current) and causes undesirable deflection of the coil in the gap and hence displacement (acoustic output) deviations.
If I can come up with a measurement that captures those deviations, then that would be a real achievement. Also, measuring them on the electrical side and get them to correlate with measurements (microphone) on the acoustic side. I intend to find out if equalising the current of the amplifier allows me to capture what we need to find. Will I be successful? I don't know yet, but I have been encouraged to try. If successful, I have three physicists to peer review it plus a number of engineers. This is a scientific endeavour with a reasonable chance of success.
There is a saying: And idea has to find its time. This topic has found its time. Part of it was Esa Meralainen publishing his book on current driving (unlike him, I am not a current drive crusader) and despite the criticism he got, I say the book was important. But Esa is not what you might call an "audiophile" in the way most people understand that word.
There is a movement happening and it started even before Esa's book. I was part of it even before the book. Some have noted that even a small increase in output impedance of an amplifier caused a change for the better in a way that could not be explained away with the freq. response deviations it might cause. But solutions still using voltage sources as amplifiers has to be found. I have some ideas about that. But you have to understand the problem first.
Now the bus arrives at the bus stop. Will you get on board? That is up to you. But do you have a right to criticise those getting on the bus? Not if you have excluded yourself!
.
Last edited:
Joe, repeating this nonsense won't make it true. In fact it's sort of like passing a story around the room it just keeps getting worse.
Last edited:
What is your specific criticism, what is it to you that is nonsense?
This is doable:
And...
That is true!
That is also true!
In fact, in the past, I have posted examples of this. It means that you can drive the speaker from any source impedance. This is not speculation, this is fact!
Criticising the truth as nonsense, is that not also nonsense?
.
No it isn't. If the amplifier is an ideal voltage source there is nothing to cancel out. I should not bait you with details because since you don't understand you will respond with even more irrelevancies. Joe your friend might have been a really good oil and gas industry engineer and pretty smart but he was not an EE and just an audio hobbyist, the things he wrote about class A/B amplifiers and "inductive back EMF currents" were simply wrong, totally wrong.
Whatever happened to the duct taped Benchmark 3? At least it was real duct tape
Therein lies the confusing part. I suggest you consult your EE friends on the use accepted EE law and terminology. We simply can not understand the gist you want to convey and can not see any difference in current on the coil with and without the impedance correction shunt when driven by a good voltage source amplifier.
I am glad you disagree, can I quote you?
I repeat, equalise the current of the amplifier in relation to the speaker load, so that the amplifier sees the same current at all frequencies, this will cancel out the output impedance of the amplifier. You will of course still be able to measure the output impedance of the amplifier, but whether high or low, the amplifier will produce a current phase angle of zero and the output impedance will not have any affect on the speaker.
This is not speculation. It is fact.
In time, you will see speakers coming to the market that will do this. They can even be driven by trans-amps (current out) amplifiers. It has been done, it is a done deal, it is for real, it works, no junk science, no New Age spookery, no snake oil either, not magic, nothing to hide, no sleight of hand, no wand required, no strange components, no hypnosis... feel free to add to the list.
I am not sure who you are referring to? Hans van Maanen? Yes, I think that is who you are referring. Actually, in this instance , it was not the one I was thinking of. But Hans is a regular contributor to audio and listed by Jan Didden on Linear Audio and has AES papers:
Author | Linear Audio
It seems that Hans made a mistake in having contact with me as in your eyes anybody I connect with is a mistake? I am just asking since that is my impression. I have not met Hans in the flesh, but I have met several who do know him. Generally at the European Triode Festival (I myself and Allen Wright were there in 2002 and voted with original Founder Kurt Steffensen, to change the Aarhus Triode Festival to European Triode Festival - so we collectively founded ETF which has gone on to greater things since. I met Stuart (SY) in 2006 when ETF was held near Eindhoven, Holland).
Not just you, but I do wonder how many here have real experience with loudspeakers beyond what is in EE textbooks? I do think that is fair to ask, and if others here could answer that as well.
I remember when I started to bring up the topic of speakers (in response to something JC posted), that I was almost castigated to bring up the subject, What? Speakers? What I was really posting about was the interface and that, just like the ear is not just an ear, we do in fact listen with our ear-brain, because they cannot be separated (yes Pavel, I saw you call it that too as I have many times) and that hearing is really perception.
I have at least accomplished something, we need to be talking about the amplifier-speaker as a system, one of them is no good without the other, just like the ear and the brain.
I am glad you disagree, can I quote you?
I repeat, equalise the current of the amplifier in relation to the speaker load, so that the amplifier sees the same current at all frequencies, this will cancel out the output impedance of the amplifier.
Keep saying it, cancel out has a meaning not yours. You win, this is really a running joke have fun with it.
Hi Joe,
I can't stress enough how important it is that you learn and use the appropriate terminology the way the rest of the industry does. Otherwise you simply cannot communicate. It is also something that you are judged on. Right or wrong, if you can't use the terminology properly, the conclusion is that you are not trained and do not understand the subject matter.
This is preventing you from having a meaningful discussion with anyone in the field. It's frustrating for all sides.
-Chris
I can't stress enough how important it is that you learn and use the appropriate terminology the way the rest of the industry does. Otherwise you simply cannot communicate. It is also something that you are judged on. Right or wrong, if you can't use the terminology properly, the conclusion is that you are not trained and do not understand the subject matter.
This is preventing you from having a meaningful discussion with anyone in the field. It's frustrating for all sides.
-Chris
Syn08 if I sounded rude and forceful it is because I intended it. I have continued to ignore taunts and to be polite in my communications and have endeavored to discuss audio and not personalities....IOW my post is giving back finally to the rudeness and bullying that keeps coming from particular sources you included Syn08. Also Syn08, such comment from you reinforces my experience that it is the bullies/sociopaths and those lacking fundamental intelligence who are always the first to scream 'not fair' when receiving a dose of their own medicine.
I venture that the heckling types you lead who so boldly hide behind their online pseudonyms when invited out to the car park for a 'little chat' would in an instant turn to water and run home crying to mummy. If Joe for example has his terminologies wrong that does not mean that he does not understand concepts, smart readers will read between the lines and interpret what he is saying and compassionate readers will endeavor to explain the correct terminologies as I have done. So the lot of you, it's time to man up, grow some balls and quit the libelous accusations and plain disrespectful taunts directed at the likes of JC, Joe, myself, and a few others, ie lift your game and help to lift this thread out of the mire it is currently in. Community mindedness means helping your fellow man, and if you do not understand him you should politely ask of him and never ridicule. This thread has plenty of good members and their inputs are much appreciated, the ones who bring negative egos please learn to leave them out of the discussions.
Fair enough comment, but I say that testing using the likes of modern AVR is entirely appropriate and is very much the music/movie enthusiast market that Joe's speakers are aimed at.
In my experience such AVR's are quite load dependent and do not cope well with reactance return energies and this is where Joe's impedance eq will yield greatest benefit.
If we all had JC's best offerings or the best of Pass Labs ($$$$
) then Joe's technique is not so required but it will still have influence.
You made my day/night/whatever Max It's not as easy as you might think it is. Electronics already have confusing 'terminologies' that don't make sense if you look at it from general perspective. They make sense only because everyone is using the terms. If your terms sound strange and only you who use it, you can imagine the confusion.
If your mother tongue is not English, you might have studied electronics using different terminologies (due to different language) and when writing/speaking English while you're not fluent with it you might have difficulties to recall the proper terminologies quickly. But Joe is an Aussie isn't he? Where did he get his knowledge from? Did he read less (English) electronics books but doing hands-on projects a lot?
Ahem....I explained to you about circulating/harmonic currents and tried to explain the concept of admittance and critical importance of correct terminologies but to no avail.
You need to measure changes in 'Sound Floor'.
Yes, consumer amplifiers measuring 0.05% or better are common but are badly load sensitive, Elsinore cures this.
Yes Richard Marsh has mentioned series resistance improving sound.
Yes, Joe is copping flak because of using wrong terms.
I understand that languages may not translate correctly but the knowledgeable reader is usually able to 'decipher' the message.
Correct terms are mission critical in any discipline and misuse causes confusion as we know.
Joe is Aussie raised I think so there should be no language barriers. Yes Joe, what is your electronics/electrics formal training, polite question ?.
Sure there is nothing else? Some effects due to resonance in wires perhaps? Shown measurements are not conclusive and nothing is clear from his explanation.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.