EnABL Processes

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#2,361
MJL21193 said:



Hi,
You have confidence that painting the pattern on the plastic ring that surrounds the driver will make a difference?
THAT would really be something.
Click to expand...


G'day MJL21193,

Not paint, aluminium kitchen foil and double sided tape.
See here.

My first experience of EnABL was to put the pattern only on the baffle immediately around the driver.
Yes it did make an audible difference and that is why I progressed to EnABLing the driver cone.

Why not try EnABL for yourself?
 
#2,363
MJL21193 said:



Hi,
I did, about a month ago. See here.

I didn't hear a difference then and that was on the cone. The idea that this block pattern applied to the flat baffle or ring around the driver could make a difference, is ludicrous to me.
Click to expand...

From what I can see, the block or dot size you used on the outside of the cone is too small.
The EnABL pattern should always consist of 18 block pairs around the circumference - the block size will change according to the circumference size.

This is Buds template post #14 for reference.

If you haven't already got it, the patent can be donwloaded in pdf from here. It's heavy reading but worth it.

I'm sorry that you put in the effort without reward, but I would encourage you to revisit the EnABL block size before writing it off completely.

Cheers,

Alex
 
#2,364
MJL21193,

Truly John, you were guaranteed to fail when you put 50 blocks on the outer ring and 25 on the inner. If you really want to try this, with at least a slight hope of success, please post a 15 degree, or so, off axis pic of a cone or dome or flat panel, you want to try out, I will be happy to provide a virtual pattern placement.

I think you already knew all of this though, you are quite a smart guy when you aren't feeling threatened. By the way, Alex is actually describing exactly what an EnABL'd baffle works like. And really, who cares why it works? All any of us really care about is making our pet projects sound more true to the source.

Bud
 
#2,365
Alex from Oz said:


From what I can see, the block or dot size you used on the outside of the cone is too small.
The EnABL pattern should always consist of 18 block pairs around the circumference - the block size will change according to the circumference size.

If you haven't already got it, the patent can be donwloaded in pdf from here. It's heavy reading but worth it.
Click to expand...


Hi Alex,
Here is Bud's pattern from post#14, it has quite a lot more than 18 block pairs.

I already did the "heavy" reading in the patent and Bud's article in Positive Feedback when this thread first started.
 
#2,366
BudP said:
MJL21193,

Truly John, you were guaranteed to fail when you put 50 blocks on the outer ring and 25 on the inner.
Click to expand...


Hi Bud,
This is quite the circus you have happening here. I'd wager this has exceeded your wildest dreams - 95 pages, 2400 posts and growing.
A monster, and you are the architect.:up:

With all due respect, I don't think you would find fault with my method if I'd heard a difference. Similar to how you don't have anything negative to say when one of the converted uses toothpaste, or tin foil, or masking tape. No criticism of the block pattern size, block shape or block frequency when the listening experience is a positive one.

I think, beyond the "defects" in my treatment, the biggest reason why I didn't hear a difference is because I didn't expect to hear one.
 
#2,367
MJL21193 said:



Hi Bud,
This is quite the circus you have happening here. I'd wager this has exceeded your wildest dreams - 95 pages, 2400 posts and growing.
A monster, and you are the architect.:up:

With all due respect, I don't think you would find fault with my method if I'd heard a difference. Similar to how you don't have anything negative to say when one of the converted uses toothpaste, or tin foil, or masking tape. No criticism of the block pattern size, block shape or block frequency when the listening experience is a positive one.

I think, beyond the "defects" in my treatment, the biggest reason why I didn't hear a difference is because I didn't expect to hear one.
Click to expand...
I'm sure it's not a personal thing, but rather, since other things work regardless whether they follow the exact pattern or not, why is yours not working is the important issue. I have not counted the patterns in your application, but if one ring contains more rectangles than what is specified in the patent, then it's bad news.

Additionally, I'm sure nobody knows how much material you used during application. I recall Bud mentioning that sometimes he listens as he applies the pattern quite often to determine when the change in sound occurs.
 
#2,368
MJL21193,

Expectation is a funny thing...works both ways...many have listened without expectation, and most of those have heard a positive, audible change. At least one was literally blind...no way to be misled by visual cues or expectation...

18 block pairs = 36 blocks per ... if you count, buds pattern is 36 blocks (both outer and inner rings). one 'block' is a pair+space=10 degrees x 36 = 360 degrees of arc.

t
 
#2,369
John, John, John...

I think you may have missed an important part of information regarding Bud's post #14 that you referenced. There ARE, as t-head points out, the correct number of blocks on the pattern. What may not be obvious is that the pattern is intended to be cut out and have the free ends joined. The pattern is a development, which when the ends are joined, will form a cone intended to conform to the speaker cone it is tailored to.

Hope that helps.
 
#2,373
soongsc said:

I have not counted the patterns in your application, but if one ring contains more rectangles than what is specified in the patent, then it's bad news.

Additionally, I'm sure nobody knows how much material you used during application.
Click to expand...



t-head said:
MJL21193,

Expectation is a funny thing...works both ways...
Click to expand...


Ed LaFontaine said:
John, John, John...
Click to expand...


Hey guys,
I was just pulling your leg(s), I did hear a positive difference! I'm on board!
Now is my pattern acceptable?

🙂
 
#2,375
John, 'Now is my pattern acceptable?'

No...


For others...nobody here expects all to hear the same...not hearing a difference is perfectly acceptable, although using the actual pattern may give a more predictable result, regardless of perceived audibility...

t
 
#2,376
Re: 4.5" hempcone drivers offer

t-head said:

MJL21193,

Expectation is a funny thing...works both ways...
Click to expand...



t-head said:
Bud,

I tried to email you, but am not yet allowed...

I have read all the threads...(?/!)

You have my sincere regards...as well as all others involved...

I offer drivers for your attention and machinations...

I assume you can contact me via e-mail/PM...

Richard

or FE126E
Click to expand...

Hi,
Above is your second ever post on this forum. Seems you were a believer from the get-go.
 
#2,379
John,

No, not a 'believer'...I had read enough to be interested and wanted to hear for myself...I sent the drivers to BudP to be sure I was hearing what the 'authentic' pattern was all about. I have since applied EnABL to 24 drivers, many were practice tear-outs from old radios, etc.

The old 'post period' were heady days...cooperation and upbeat posts...people in the thick of discovery and experimentation...far different from now, with cynicism and personal attack the rule...

In point of fact, I am no longer listeneng to those hemp drivers...a friend has them and enjoys them immensely...I am exploring soongscs' pattern for the Jordan JX92S, my present FR driver of choice...a different beast entirely...

t (Richard)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom