Hah, as a business owner myself, that was a nightmare customer. At least it’s been handled.
Ah so It wasn’t frame motor vibration y’all think, interesting then that it seems to show up in most speaker designs irrespective of box shape. Just a box standing wave, easily provable by throwing stuffing in the box. But I don’t have the time at the moment.
Ah so It wasn’t frame motor vibration y’all think, interesting then that it seems to show up in most speaker designs irrespective of box shape. Just a box standing wave, easily provable by throwing stuffing in the box. But I don’t have the time at the moment.
Alan,
I recommend, in sted of trying argue with the buyer(s) of your products, inform them and other readers how to rectify the problems with correct torque settings, pictures of correct fill material amount and correct cabling procedure.
Edit: You do not need to reply to this comment.
@lrisbo I expect Purifi-Audio will inform via your speaker datasheets about correct mounting procedure (and correct torque) to prevent and limit speaker resonance?
I recommend, in sted of trying argue with the buyer(s) of your products, inform them and other readers how to rectify the problems with correct torque settings, pictures of correct fill material amount and correct cabling procedure.
Edit: You do not need to reply to this comment.
@lrisbo I expect Purifi-Audio will inform via your speaker datasheets about correct mounting procedure (and correct torque) to prevent and limit speaker resonance?
It appears the buyer is not the reviewer. I indeed informed the buyer and the reviewer of the technical points which the reviewer decided to ignore.
There was only one problem to rectify; the lack of sealant on the binding posts. The rest was caused by the reviewers "tinkering".
Why would we inform customers (or reviewers) of the exact technical details of fill and cabling. They shouldnt be "tinkering" or dismantling products when they dont have the necessary knowledge.
I’m pretty convinced the distortion is inherently the driver. It can be seen everywhere.
The frame has been changed from the early paper models.
Also, it’s not an audible problem and I’m not going to throw my purifis in the bin because of it.
The frame has been changed from the early paper models.
Also, it’s not an audible problem and I’m not going to throw my purifis in the bin because of it.
I'm doing active with a FA253 plate Amp along with my passive twin notch for the Bliesma M74B and a cap (2.7 uF) for the T25B + waveguide.
I do not plan a BR box but a sealed one with around 54 liters for the pair of 8 inch drivers. The box has already been build but I do not attach the front plate yet and will wait for the drivers before cutting holes. I had bad experience in the past and don't want to compromise my all work with holes slightly too big or too small... DSP will allow me to fine tune the combo drivers/bow volume.
And so you shouldn't throw them out, they are some of the best drivers out there.
It should be noted that the reviewer has basically contradicted himself. To use a Shakespeare quote “hoist with his own petard” 😊
He says Speaker A showed a distortion issue and speaker B did not.
Both speakers have the same amount of fill material and both suffered air leaks through the binding posts.
So logically, how can the distortion issue be caused by air leaks or lack of fill material as he claims?
Both speakers are the same in this respect. If it was due to either of those issues both speakers would show the same distortion.
at what distance and in infinite baffle (2pi) or full space free standing (4pi), mono or stereo?
Taking the spl_max.xls from linkwitzlab for calculation, it shows, that you will achieve about 101dB with the PTT6.5X04/08 (Sd=133cm² / linear xmax=9.8mm) and about 105dB with the PTT8.0X04-NAB-02 (Sd=235cm² / linear xmax=9.3mm) in a closed box / monopole at 1m distance on-axis, in free space.
This calculation is only based on excursion limits, not on power handling.
BR
Matthias
Hi Allen
I did send through a contact message to do so last night. I want to be clear about my identity on the forum so as not to create issues with perceive conflicts of interest.
Good old Siegfried has some excellent notes about driver Newton forces and panel/mounting resonances: https://www.linkwitzlab.com/frontiers_2.htm#N
Magnet brace and a strut- well there's a business idea that can only be 100% better than cable risers...
Add an aluminium mass decoupled with a complaint material to the magnet, tune it to the resonant mode, problem solved.This has been done before, Naim audio for instance did this on their original speakers.
@lrisbo any news on smaller paper midrange driver for us? Maybe 4.5” dedicated midrange analogous to what you did with 6.5 version? Thank you!
the coming 4” alu cone version has a very nice frequency response. Looking into a short coil M version currently. At some point you in the future we do a grounds up development of some mids
are you still working on a 5" mid as mentioned earlier in the thread, this is the one that really interests me and does it have the same frame o/ dia as the base mid, it'll be a drop in fit for me.Currently use the Scan 5" sliced paper and never had an inclination to change till you mentioned this option.
that is my goal too. Can’t say when at this point - some projects are ahead in the pipeline. 5.25” is the classical mid so I think it is a must