There is much in AE's favor. AE has no problem selling drivers. I think people would just like a little more published data. How about a frequency response and impedance curve? AE does offer some more data with a couple of the drivers. Like here:
Acoustic Elegance TD8M high efficiency midrange/midbass driver
FRD and ZMA for the AETD15M here:
Dropbox - Driver Test Files - Simplify your life
There appears to be a database for... data. I can speak with some concern, and like for AE drivers. I own a few of them.
Acoustic Elegance TD8M high efficiency midrange/midbass driver
FRD and ZMA for the AETD15M here:
Dropbox - Driver Test Files - Simplify your life
There appears to be a database for... data. I can speak with some concern, and like for AE drivers. I own a few of them.
Last edited:
When I get the chance I would like to revisit the topic of decay. I think a combination of my increased understanding of the tools I use to analyze these theories and the updates of hornresp and rew are leading me to new horizons....I'm sure somebody somewhere has material covering this topic but I have not seen such.
Burst Decay in rew is my new favorite view point. Thank you to John Malcahy for the addition of that feature. David has added higher resolution to hornresp IR exportation. I cant wait to create a round of scenarios to compare.....within ReW spectrogram, if you increase resolution in the wavelet mode it does not compensate on the time scale. That is an error I have not accounted for in the past....As well, spl isn't represented the same and thus another skew of information. Never the less, if you match resolution of IR to wavelet resolution then things are 1:1 and enough detail as far as I can tell. I found Burst Decay to be the most enlightening though I am not educated enough to say how much "extra" is "too much"...of course at resonate mode of a horn there is going to be exaggerated decay but looking at burst decay it is not as exaggerated as I expected? I pulled up some d ir's generated via HR to compare sealed vs tl vs Br and I cannot create the same views of the spectrograph I okce new, so maybe rews update changed somethings but more importantly I am not seeing a huge difference in the burst decay mode like I anticipated, yet the tunings are pretty low 20-25hz or so. This new first impressions (Which obviously deserve more investigation)... makes me feel that group delay may be the stand out distortion in a "bad" vent tuning choice...but now I have to figure out wavelet resolution further because it was in the highest res that time to peak energy times reflected group delay....which is now causing me to wonder if time scale is truly skewed or the spl scale...
If anyone has information to help on this part of my journey, feel free.
Hopefully this holiday week I can get some screen time
Burst Decay in rew is my new favorite view point. Thank you to John Malcahy for the addition of that feature. David has added higher resolution to hornresp IR exportation. I cant wait to create a round of scenarios to compare.....within ReW spectrogram, if you increase resolution in the wavelet mode it does not compensate on the time scale. That is an error I have not accounted for in the past....As well, spl isn't represented the same and thus another skew of information. Never the less, if you match resolution of IR to wavelet resolution then things are 1:1 and enough detail as far as I can tell. I found Burst Decay to be the most enlightening though I am not educated enough to say how much "extra" is "too much"...of course at resonate mode of a horn there is going to be exaggerated decay but looking at burst decay it is not as exaggerated as I expected? I pulled up some d ir's generated via HR to compare sealed vs tl vs Br and I cannot create the same views of the spectrograph I okce new, so maybe rews update changed somethings but more importantly I am not seeing a huge difference in the burst decay mode like I anticipated, yet the tunings are pretty low 20-25hz or so. This new first impressions (Which obviously deserve more investigation)... makes me feel that group delay may be the stand out distortion in a "bad" vent tuning choice...but now I have to figure out wavelet resolution further because it was in the highest res that time to peak energy times reflected group delay....which is now causing me to wonder if time scale is truly skewed or the spl scale...
If anyone has information to help on this part of my journey, feel free.
Hopefully this holiday week I can get some screen time
Correct, but that is a parameter that is never (almost) declared for any driver... so youare in the blind on that one but could be in control for most the other (bar HD...)
At resonance, just get a Qts driver < 0,5 and you are good to go. If you mean "waterfall" decay - well... almost no one declare it...
Did you get the AEs on waterfall specs?
//
At resonance, just get a Qts driver < 0,5 and you are good to go. If you mean "waterfall" decay - well... almost no one declare it...
Did you get the AEs on waterfall specs?
//
Well for me at this time, I'm looking at the decay characteristics of sealed vs TL/BR/TH
Not looking for opinion but looking to display accurate simulated measurements.
Burst Decay was not available to be before but now it is....as well, my vision of the measurement parameters within rew are a little more clear than when I last visited this subject...the general consensus is that sealed has the tightest decay time but how much tighter?
Not looking for opinion but looking to display accurate simulated measurements.
Burst Decay was not available to be before but now it is....as well, my vision of the measurement parameters within rew are a little more clear than when I last visited this subject...the general consensus is that sealed has the tightest decay time but how much tighter?
You need to put a call into David Gunness and tell him he's got it all wrong
https://www.fulcrum-acoustic.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/improving-loudspeaker-transient-response-with-dsp-2005.pdf
For the correction to be effective it needs to apply to a linear time invariant issue which not all problems are.
Obsessing over anechoic delay in a low frequency speaker without considering the room or playback location seems like a waste of time.
Throwing enough Sd at sealed subwoofers in the right locations with the right EQ seems like the easiest way to me.
You could look at this too
Audibility of group delay at low frequencies – Audio
or this
https://research.aalto.fi/files/52513428/Audibility_of_Loudspeaker_Group_Delay_Characteristics_AAM.pdf
A sealed (and FR compensated) system will *kill* all resonators wrt to "decay" aka. impulse response. Resonators are; all others
i.e. something with any type of opening, small or large... good luck! These openings are there to increase level mostly and perhaps, if one is kind, lower distorsion at resonance frequency (no other places really). //
Im in agreeance with you TNT, but if only for educational purposes, I am here again. Probably inspired by my new found powers of burst decay and accurate rew interpretation....last night I was looking at a vented cab tuned to 22hz and the decay did not appear to be grossly higher than a sealed of the same volume and potentially worth the efficiency gain at the cost of slightly higher group delay.
Fluid - I know you are right but the room can only affect what its fed correct? A shorter decay from the driver still translates into a shorter decay in the room correct?
Fluid - I know you are right but the room can only affect what its fed correct? A shorter decay from the driver still translates into a shorter decay in the room correct?
Last edited:
No, the decay of the room is so long that the decay of any reasonable driver alone makes virtually no difference.
You beat me to this point. Rooms dominate everything at LFs.
That's why I pay no attention to TS specs, tuning alignments, whatever, if they are in a rooms modal region.
And just to reiterate a point, if I correct a LTI system in the frequency domain with a causal filter (IIR) then I also fix everything in the time domain as well. Have a peak, ringing. No peak- no ringing.
Last edited:
When combing through, I recalled noticing the same, and had seen mention of the 15FH530 elsewhere and it seemed to get a favourable opinion. I wondered if the 520 was considered a step down, but had some benefits as a tradeoff? I can't say I understand the reason for the nuances between models sometimes and Faital has a few of the FH series in each size. Are they just refinements on each one like how JBL numbers them? Or did they make 3 different 15" for the series? I realize they are different.
The 15PR400 and 12PR320 definitely have a following and assume it is very justified. Instead of wondering why the FH aren't as popular as the PR series, I wonder if there are aspects of the PR that make those two drivers such standouts over the others?
I always try to keep up with the conversations and keep coming back to "it's about comprises and tradeoffs". There are tons of legendary 2 ways, many different from the other, as you can't make physics etc bend to your will. You'll always have to give a little to take a little. I want to be wrong though... because the idea of this thread makes my nipples hard
If this was true, we could not enjoy replicated music in any room. An improved impulse response form a speaker will be heard even if a room has a much longer decay than a speaker.
//
I think they are saying that the room adds so much decay, that decay as a topic, is a lost cause....this must apply below Schroeder only, I take it but, maybe a better way of putting it is - putting sugar on a turd, its still a turd. The room being a turd.
That leads me to believe that the only reason people use sealed over vented is for improved group delay otherwise whats the point of losing efficiency to run sealed when you can run a BR tuned to 20hz have higher efficiency, and still within margin group delay.
On the other hand I did read that the acoustic suspension (sealed) is much more linear than the suspension of the driver....that must be it.
That leads me to believe that the only reason people use sealed over vented is for improved group delay otherwise whats the point of losing efficiency to run sealed when you can run a BR tuned to 20hz have higher efficiency, and still within margin group delay.
On the other hand I did read that the acoustic suspension (sealed) is much more linear than the suspension of the driver....that must be it.
Last edited:
In other news....I cannot import IR's from HR to Rew and view spectrogram with the newest updates of HR/REW......there goes my burst decay.....I can see everything else but spectrogram...
My first question would of been why doesn't the decay graph line up with CSD wavelet....
My second question would of been why doesn't my HR spectrogram line up with REW spectrogram lol
My first question would of been why doesn't the decay graph line up with CSD wavelet....
My second question would of been why doesn't my HR spectrogram line up with REW spectrogram lol