There are errors in the logic leading to erroneous assumptions.
First: why would you measure "small" parameters if you are designing for "Q" at something better than 85 or 90dB SPL output in your finished enclosure..
I measure raw speaker parameters at 2.83 volts input.
First: why would you measure "small" parameters if you are designing for "Q" at something better than 85 or 90dB SPL output in your finished enclosure..
I measure raw speaker parameters at 2.83 volts input.
Tell that to to all the driver manufacturers that do it differently.
It may be in an old AES published paper but that does not make it a codified AES standard.
That is unfortunately 100% true.
Most cherry pick the results to their liking.
I have written a whole post about this somewhere.
little side note:
Also AES is quite vague about this.
In their own papers they don't clarify if that 0.1V is RMS, peak, sine wave or duration.
They call it a standard, that was my typo.
Although if nobody is enforced to comply with it and there are also zero consequences if you don't..........
You end up in chicken-egg discussions with these manufactures.
(I have had my fair share)
At the end of the day consumers as well as system integrators/developers have to either just hope, guess or rely on 3rd party measurements.
Kinda sad anno 2023 (almost 2024).
Relevant measurement levels is context dependent. If I wish to design a near field monitor for my computer setup or if the setup is for a PA system for a large arena the expected power input to the loudspeaker drivers will be two or three orders of magnitude appart.