I didn't call him a liar in that post. I said his claims just aren't true. Enable doesn't elimate room modes. He said that it does. There is a distinct difference between saying someone has made a false statement and calling someone a liar. The later speaks to the persons character. The former a persons action. Big difference. Bud said I called him a liar from that post. I even then said I didn't consider it personal.
I would think with all your life experience you would understand this distinction.
Please stop. If you were to re-read what ive said throughout both threads, it would be hard for you to claim I am what you think. It is you who owes me an apology.
Edit - BTW, if you've followed this thread, you know that others have said much worse than I have. But the mods around here delete all the harsh comments (fairly). Mine have been preserved because I choose my words carefully and objectively.
I would think with all your life experience you would understand this distinction.
Please stop. If you were to re-read what ive said throughout both threads, it would be hard for you to claim I am what you think. It is you who owes me an apology.
Edit - BTW, if you've followed this thread, you know that others have said much worse than I have. But the mods around here delete all the harsh comments (fairly). Mine have been preserved because I choose my words carefully and objectively.
Last edited:
It is your tone of complete disrespect that really offended me. Then finding that you didn't even have a system that would be capable of resolving the information needed to display the differences is what really tore it for me. Bud is too kind and generous a person to deserve that, considering everything he has contributed to the thread. You think I'm being mean to you because you didn't personally assault me verbally.
Well, at my age I believe in paying it forward, both good and bad. I'm generous with people who are generous to others. And I'm not to those who aren't. Take a lesson lad.
Well, at my age I believe in paying it forward, both good and bad. I'm generous with people who are generous to others. And I'm not to those who aren't. Take a lesson lad.
Stop the bickering please.Chill. Everyone has made their point. Reiteratting is not necessary.
If it dorsn't i'll call Cal in and heads will roll.
dave
If it dorsn't i'll call Cal in and heads will roll.
dave
someone could just do the cymatics test with an standard + EnABL'd surface, that would give a fairly obvious visual representation showing if the process did actually do anything useful.
i'd be happy to try and do it myself but i'd need some help in setting everything up.
ok i am 100% sure on the locations on the whizzer now.
the location of the rings from the origin of the cone (base) are as follow.
1st (lowest) - 7mm
2nd - 11mm
^these^ coincide with being either side of the remnants of the glue used to attached the dustcap so will need to be fairly small i think.
3rd - 32mm
4th - 57mm
thanks for your help.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
gafhenderson,
I will not be able to touch this until this coming weekend. Business has increased yet again and after 5 years of slump we are having difficulty keeping up, really, I have no hope. But I will get to this for you.
Bud
I will not be able to touch this until this coming weekend. Business has increased yet again and after 5 years of slump we are having difficulty keeping up, really, I have no hope. But I will get to this for you.
Bud
this is my attempt at putting the EnABL rings where they need to be. they're slightly different to the old ones as i finally got the strip of glue off the cone surface and it changed the locations of the anomalies on the whizzer slightly.
i couldn't get the scalable vector file i found somewhere to open, so i have to use a guestimate with GIMP so its not very sharp, nor do i think its completely centralised. will they be the correct size, spacing etc?
what exactly do i do with these now?
i've seen the trifoil pattern mentioned, do i need to use this?
i couldn't get the scalable vector file i found somewhere to open, so i have to use a guestimate with GIMP so its not very sharp, nor do i think its completely centralised. will they be the correct size, spacing etc?
what exactly do i do with these now?
i've seen the trifoil pattern mentioned, do i need to use this?
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Last edited:
gafhenderson
You use the attached pattern guides, which should drop onto the cone just inside of what would be the bottom ring of patterns applied to the cone. Cut them out on the provided lines and be very particular about getting the outer cutting circle as regular as possible. Print these with no sizing, centering or rotation in the Acrobat print window.
These should be good enough to get your patterns very near where they need to be. Do allow a bit of distance between pattern edge, where it meets the cone and where the bottom edge of your inner ring block row is placed. This has been allowed for in these pattern sets. Just the space between blocks above the pattern contact point should do fine.
You do not need the trifoil pattern on this driver. However, applying it to the whizzer may help matters. It should fit between upper and lower pattern rings as they are applied to the whizzer. Dave will know much more about this than I do as the trifoil pattern is his.
After you have completed the patterns wait a day or two and listen very carefully to music with sharp transients. Jessica Williams at Yoshi's is particularly useful. Listen for hard key strokes in the upper piano range. If there seems to be a sharp cover or blur to what should be the same sort of note structure as is found in lower mid register notes, you will need some Zig 2 way glue.
However, for now just apply the patterns and we can correct what they uncover in latter editions.
By the way, who made this driver, or rather who sells it and what is the model number?
Bud
You use the attached pattern guides, which should drop onto the cone just inside of what would be the bottom ring of patterns applied to the cone. Cut them out on the provided lines and be very particular about getting the outer cutting circle as regular as possible. Print these with no sizing, centering or rotation in the Acrobat print window.
These should be good enough to get your patterns very near where they need to be. Do allow a bit of distance between pattern edge, where it meets the cone and where the bottom edge of your inner ring block row is placed. This has been allowed for in these pattern sets. Just the space between blocks above the pattern contact point should do fine.
You do not need the trifoil pattern on this driver. However, applying it to the whizzer may help matters. It should fit between upper and lower pattern rings as they are applied to the whizzer. Dave will know much more about this than I do as the trifoil pattern is his.
After you have completed the patterns wait a day or two and listen very carefully to music with sharp transients. Jessica Williams at Yoshi's is particularly useful. Listen for hard key strokes in the upper piano range. If there seems to be a sharp cover or blur to what should be the same sort of note structure as is found in lower mid register notes, you will need some Zig 2 way glue.
However, for now just apply the patterns and we can correct what they uncover in latter editions.
By the way, who made this driver, or rather who sells it and what is the model number?
Bud
many thanks bud.
its the fane sovereign 12-200lt.
http://www.fane-acoustics.com/downloads/FANE_Sovereign_12200LT_Specs.pdf
it was the closest i could get to the eminence 12" extended range driver without actually spending a bunch of real money on it. looked like a good candidate for the EnABL process i thought as it has some lumpy response as it reaches its maximum frequency. its also a completely untreated cone so applying the PVA mix alone should bring about some sound improvements. felt like a fairly good starter driver to break before i order my EMS LB12 drivers and proceed to go playschool on those.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
i found ^this^ for a real world frequency measure of the driver. i've only done a quick frequency test for myself but it was pretty similar from memory (however i only have an non-calibrated mic, so can only really compare improvements VS stock driver with any certainty). i will be trying to find time to test the change between stock and phase-plugged drivers, as i'm sure that has helped the upper mids considerably. it sounds a completely different driver from a hearing test alone. i will then apply the EnABL process and take readings at each step with comparisons to a vanilla driver with equal play time. i will then apply EnABL process to the vanilla driver only without phase plug modification and compare the relative changes that occur.
one concern i do have is cone weight. the driver already has a fairly heavy cone mass. with its large surface area, do i run the risk of adding too much extra relative weight to the entire mechanism? thus dragging its frequency response right into the critical zone which i was trying to avoid a crossover in? are there light weight alternatives, or stronger materials per unit weight that i can use as an alternative to try and keep the added weight to a minimum? or will the extra mass added be insignificant?
sorry for the wall of garbled text 🙁
I wouldn't consider using PVA anywhere but the whizzer cone. I would only use the Modge Podge that Dave uses, along with the oil based material that creates the trifoil pattern. A single coat of Modge Podge and the trifoil will be a negligible weight for such a large overall cone mass.
The EnABL patterns are also a negligible addition in mass, as would be a single coat of Gloss and additions of Zig 2 way glue.
The patterns actually have as much or more to do with lifting the phase in upper range FR response, relative to the minimum phase portion of the FR. This minimum phase portion appears to end at ~ 1 kHz on this driver. A typical EnABL'd FR plot and derived CSD generally show a "sharper" peak to an FR anomaly, unless it is completely dispersed.
As difficult as it is for many people to imagine how a FR plot would not be important, it really is not for EnABL's purpose. These are not usually changes in gross FR, except for a peak or valley dispersal, which is not a typical occurrence. We are just limiting the "reprinting" of sounds into the air, that occur due to various mechanisms. This is all occurring down in the 4ms range and while not long enough in duration to be comprehensible as an individual, specific set of informative sounds, these reprints into air are at the root of the "hall of mirrors" and 40 db down information coherence floor, that most drivers exhibit.
EnABL is about making the drivers output more informative, as opposed to "smoother" or with better renditions of the other "audio" characteristics that are currently in vogue. As an indicator of this, the typical listener comment from an A / B comparison is that the untreated driver sounds "confused" in comparison. Not worse or inadequate or even with a different "character", just confused.
Bud
The EnABL patterns are also a negligible addition in mass, as would be a single coat of Gloss and additions of Zig 2 way glue.
The patterns actually have as much or more to do with lifting the phase in upper range FR response, relative to the minimum phase portion of the FR. This minimum phase portion appears to end at ~ 1 kHz on this driver. A typical EnABL'd FR plot and derived CSD generally show a "sharper" peak to an FR anomaly, unless it is completely dispersed.
As difficult as it is for many people to imagine how a FR plot would not be important, it really is not for EnABL's purpose. These are not usually changes in gross FR, except for a peak or valley dispersal, which is not a typical occurrence. We are just limiting the "reprinting" of sounds into the air, that occur due to various mechanisms. This is all occurring down in the 4ms range and while not long enough in duration to be comprehensible as an individual, specific set of informative sounds, these reprints into air are at the root of the "hall of mirrors" and 40 db down information coherence floor, that most drivers exhibit.
EnABL is about making the drivers output more informative, as opposed to "smoother" or with better renditions of the other "audio" characteristics that are currently in vogue. As an indicator of this, the typical listener comment from an A / B comparison is that the untreated driver sounds "confused" in comparison. Not worse or inadequate or even with a different "character", just confused.
Bud
first ring done, does this look ok?
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
This is fine. On the next few try to keep the space between block pairs at 1/2 the block length. You might also look at using a slightly narrower tip than the width of the block, on the guide sheet in question. If you are already doing this then make sure you drag both sides of the tip on the glass jar to drain a bit off, that will otherwise spread out from the sides.
I assume you are using the pen tip upside down?
As for your plan to listen to one treated and one untreated be aware that the untreated will sound louder and more prominent, just as distorting drivers do. Listen for the lack of confusion and depth of information and don't be concerned about the other things you don't hear.
Bud
I assume you are using the pen tip upside down?
As for your plan to listen to one treated and one untreated be aware that the untreated will sound louder and more prominent, just as distorting drivers do. Listen for the lack of confusion and depth of information and don't be concerned about the other things you don't hear.
Bud
this did not go so well. the thing is sooooo big its very hard to get in a position to apply the patterns without wobbles. the template also slipped as i moved the cone and smudged a few of the dots :S
just waiting for the gloss to dry to have a listen. i had a listen without the gloss but i don't want to comment until i listen against the stock driver for comparison.
just waiting for the gloss to dry to have a listen. i had a listen without the gloss but i don't want to comment until i listen against the stock driver for comparison.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
The puzzlecoats give you some recovery. If still wet, you cab suck up and clean with a q-tip (dry 1st and then wet). If partly dry the excess sout can be shaped, if dry you can sometimes scrape away the excess (careful)
dave
i tried, i picked the highest particle count acrylic i could find on the interweb, the stuff dried quicker than i could notice. its only a few smudges so it hopefully won't do a lot, the smudge is fairly thin compared to the main pattern that produced it. its not like it needs to impress anyone visually, it also fairly hard to notice when you stare at it head on due to the contrast and a weird optical illusion going on where the pattern looks like its moving.
OOOOOOOOOOH creepy crawly patternitis..... know it well.
Actually you did yeoman work overall. Do be aware that the gloss and pattern material will change sonic character as they dry. You can expect that what it sounds like right after you apply is pretty close to what you will have 24 hours or three years later. I am 98% positive you are going to need the Zig 2 way glue on these beasts, but we will know soon enough.
Bud
Actually you did yeoman work overall. Do be aware that the gloss and pattern material will change sonic character as they dry. You can expect that what it sounds like right after you apply is pretty close to what you will have 24 hours or three years later. I am 98% positive you are going to need the Zig 2 way glue on these beasts, but we will know soon enough.
Bud
what does the zig-zag glue thinger entail and look like please?
initial impression after the 2nd blitz of micro gloss is similar to my first initial impression with just the EnABL pattern on (no gloss), but seemingly amplified.
strings have more T-ing to them.
percussion has more C-usssh
lingering harmonies or resonances in strings or voices seems more clear.
the biggest difference seems to be the ability to hear the background of the music clearer. i can seemingly pick out individual sonic layers from different instruments as different instruments instead of just a single noise.
its kinda like the noise has been brought into focus, whereas before is was like looking at the world through warped or frosted glass.
they're still rubbish drivers, no mistaking that. they have gained a little bit of polish to their otherwise vagrant nature.
EDIT: is there still the possibility of adding a few more rings to this driver? i really feel that one on the lip of the whizzer would be beneficial.
Last edited: