The problem here is a gigantic semantic confusion that was caused by SL when he (in all his glory) re-labeled the technically well defined term or "energy storage".
Basically - there is always "energy storage" and hence „stored energy“ in any real world speaker system as I have laid out here:
and here:
These are the rock solid meanings with respect to „storage“ based on technical laws.
SL obviously was not aware of these (as seemingly many others never have given a thought on this as well).
So he simply took what he felt like and tagged the label „stored energy“ to a behaviour he didn't care to further analyze.
So - now that all the followers of SL nomenclature have totally destroyed any technical meaning of „stored energy“ the mess is complete !
As pointed out in my paper - *if* SL would have given his measurements any further analysis
1.) we would have been saved from that B**S mess - and –
2.) we possibly would know if the effects he thought he pinned down by what he liked to call „stored energy“ are mere min phase resonance effects – or – if what he measured was caused by delay / CMP effects
To get this interesting point any pinned down – one obviously first has to give CMP concept a thought or two, though.
Michael
Last edited:
you certainly made it as clear as ...😱
Sorry I was not aware of this - does this link directly to the PDF version work for you?
http://www.kinotechnik.edis.at/page...ine/CMP_Behaviour–Bridging_Points_of_View.pdf
Michael
George, given we went through this already several times and given you being obviously grown up in a part of the world where "enlightening" (or more profane put: understanding) is gained by different techniques than where I come from – may I suggest you to try by *extended* meditation to possibly grasp the point?
You may focus on the complex of “knowledge, wisdom, understanding”
To answer the most certainly upcoming follow-up question regarding “what good is it for, then” right now - please take the same advice and possibly add to the complex to focus on : “understanding , knowledge, wisdom” and in case *you* may have any interest in this specific direction: “money making, selling, richness”
I'm pretty sure you will come up with pleasing result a few years or decades ahead
🙂
Michael
Last edited:
The problem is, IMO, the conflation of plain old potential energy with non-minimum phase stuff. It's worth reviewing the physics of simple harmonic oscillators and their response to forcing functions. That can remove much mystery.
Frankly, the posturing and bickering over terminology is so overwhelming, I have difficulty making sense of most of the arguments. So let's keep it simple- if one applies a step forcing function (let's make it a unity step of width to, where 1/to is large compared to wo) to an ideal harmonic oscillator with a linear loss term, what is the response (without putting a label on it)? Now, if we look at the experimental response of a speaker to an impulse like that, how does it deviate from the simple harmonic oscillator model? What are the sources of the deviation?
Well, I already know the phenomena, all I see is a funny term surrounding it. There are many drivers based on that kind of phenomena. I'm sure I'm not the only one that understands it this way.
Yes, of course, that's the basis of my complaints. Its just redefining a well known principle into a new set of terms with an ill-defined meaning. STandard practice for audiophilles.
Hello SY,
You are right on target.
You are talking about a standardized test that is repeatable and has discriminating results. Apply the test to the standard fare of candidate drivers and hopefully the results are meaningful in selecting a driver for your application.
DT
All just for fun!
I would say "maybe not." See below:
Is that what's important to us? How the driver behaves in a way that isn't simple oscillation. And what are the causes and remedies?
OK, now I'm lost.
I think that the concensus is that a loudspeaker is linear and that only linear distortion needs to be considered. That elliminates Klippel.
So "does it behave as a simple oscillator"? Well yes, within a certain frequency range.
"When does it NOT act like a simple oscillator." When it is no longer pistonic.
"What are the remidies for that?" Well IMO, there aren't any. Once a speaker becomes non-pistonic it is no longer of much use. One can often use a driver into maybe its first mode, which is always a rim resonance, but after that everything goes all to heii and I would never use a driver that high.
I think that the concensus is that a loudspeaker is linear and that only linear distortion needs to be considered. That elliminates Klippel.
So "does it behave as a simple oscillator"? Well yes, within a certain frequency range.
"When does it NOT act like a simple oscillator." When it is no longer pistonic.
"What are the remidies for that?" Well IMO, there aren't any. Once a speaker becomes non-pistonic it is no longer of much use. One can often use a driver into maybe its first mode, which is always a rim resonance, but after that everything goes all to heii and I would never use a driver that high.
I will use the bass and the midrange for the ZDL in the pistonoc range if i can. The tweeter is a different story. A softdome breaks up somewhere, say at 10kHz but this region over 10kHz is usable because it goes into bending wave mode. The breakup is so well controlled that the transfer function remains flat. The membrane is now controled resistively. Am i wrong ?
Some time ago – before forest was "invented" – people loved to think that there are just trees
Some time ago – before e=mc^2 was "invented" – people loved to think that there is just mass, velocity and energy
It's all just about putting things into context.
🙂
no wonder, have there been many speakers built with pronounced CMP effects over decades now.
I'll bet – but this will change (LOL ...most certainly)
Funny ? why ?
I mean – Consecutive Min Phase behaviour is what it is – and luckily this semantic term is not any occupied by any other meaning / definition (in contrast to the mad story regarding "stored energy").
Don't go wrong about me having had fun in putting up this concept and also writing that paper with humor -
- regarding the core statement of CMP I'm dead serious.
Michael
Some time ago – before e=mc^2 was "invented" – people loved to think that there is just mass, velocity and energy
It's all just about putting things into context.
🙂
no wonder, have there been many speakers built with pronounced CMP effects over decades now.
I'll bet – but this will change (LOL ...most certainly)
Funny ? why ?
I mean – Consecutive Min Phase behaviour is what it is – and luckily this semantic term is not any occupied by any other meaning / definition (in contrast to the mad story regarding "stored energy").
Don't go wrong about me having had fun in putting up this concept and also writing that paper with humor -
- regarding the core statement of CMP I'm dead serious.
Michael
someone linked me to this thread as they know I am working on making a test apparatus for driver testing of my own.
Personally, I'm intrigued by the relationship of harmonic distortion and how a driver sounds. Can HD results give you an inclination of the sound a driver has. A specific example is one of scan speak revelator drivers, where it is often read that their odd order harmonics yield its "warm" sound (whether that is valid or not is not my concern). The notion is there.
I've been reading D'Appolito's book "Testing Loudspeakers" and in it, I found the following:
What does this tell me?
Well, if the above is valid, and there is little correlation between harmonic distortion and what you prefer to hear, and if a preference correlation isn't found, then it seems to say that you can't hear a difference... otherwise, subjectivity would leak in and you would then prefer a certain driver over another. I also have to think that measuring drivers at a fixed output in order to compare distortion levels at X volume is moot .
Of course, maybe I'm putting words into his mouth or I'm misunderstanding him altogether.
Any input on this?
Personally, I'm intrigued by the relationship of harmonic distortion and how a driver sounds. Can HD results give you an inclination of the sound a driver has. A specific example is one of scan speak revelator drivers, where it is often read that their odd order harmonics yield its "warm" sound (whether that is valid or not is not my concern). The notion is there.
I've been reading D'Appolito's book "Testing Loudspeakers" and in it, I found the following:
What does this tell me?
Well, if the above is valid, and there is little correlation between harmonic distortion and what you prefer to hear, and if a preference correlation isn't found, then it seems to say that you can't hear a difference... otherwise, subjectivity would leak in and you would then prefer a certain driver over another. I also have to think that measuring drivers at a fixed output in order to compare distortion levels at X volume is moot .
Of course, maybe I'm putting words into his mouth or I'm misunderstanding him altogether.
Any input on this?
Last edited:
There has to be a CIS (consecutive input series) for a "consecutive minimum phase" based on the "minimum phase definition. Since "minimum phase is a one to one i/o relation, how do you match them so show "minimum phase"?
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.