BudP said:
It has nothing to do with Rayleigh waves. Why is it that you "have no idea", then postulate on something that has nothing to do with it? Then you again hypothesize on some non-existent room propogation changes. What in room propogation benefits would that be? Is there some change to the physics of air modified by the driver? Your post is certainly unequivocal about that propogation benefit. Please detail the physics of the air that you believe is altered by enable. You must have some concrete evidence or theory to support that given your surety.
Dave
Slicing of the cone and using damping material in the slice helps reduce breakup modes in the cone. It also helps dissipation of stored energy on the cone. However, still it's necessary to excercise care not to destry the integity of the basic cone shape and weight, othwise you may end up with rubbing VC and/or reduced effeciency.LilMik said:
I heard Link Wray and Ray Davies used to slice up their speaker cones to enhance the distortion.
scott wurcer said:
Hi,
True but in those cases the slices are not glued back together.
"EnaBL has in room propogation benefits", pseudotechnobabble.
"eliminates Raleigh wave propagation", more pseudotechnobabble.
🙂/sreten.
Raleigh waves are surface waves which have a penetration depth on the order of a wave length. What we have here is plain vanilla bending waves.
I can't believe this nonsense has risen from the dead. Bud's distortion of physics remains as prevalent as ever. I guess it's just Bud's need for attention, not unlike that other long thread that appeared a couple of years ago and has produced nothing but entropy.
I can't believe this nonsense has risen from the dead. Bud's distortion of physics remains as prevalent as ever. I guess it's just Bud's need for attention, not unlike that other long thread that appeared a couple of years ago and has produced nothing but entropy.
LilMik,
After some discussion with folks who actually make cones for a living, I think you should abandon the project of cone slitting. The comments that turned negative were based upon doubt about you being able to balance the shrinkage of damping material in each slit without a controlled dispenser and a controlled aging environment. Failure to control these will distort the voice coil, even if you have removed the dust cover and provided shim stock support to maintain an even gap between voice coil former and center plug of the magnetic circuit. Soongsc's comment about rubbing due to possible cone deformity was also spoken of.
So, while EnABL will not be affected by the slits, you are likely to ruin the drivers due to lack of proper tools and environment.
Bud
After some discussion with folks who actually make cones for a living, I think you should abandon the project of cone slitting. The comments that turned negative were based upon doubt about you being able to balance the shrinkage of damping material in each slit without a controlled dispenser and a controlled aging environment. Failure to control these will distort the voice coil, even if you have removed the dust cover and provided shim stock support to maintain an even gap between voice coil former and center plug of the magnetic circuit. Soongsc's comment about rubbing due to possible cone deformity was also spoken of.
So, while EnABL will not be affected by the slits, you are likely to ruin the drivers due to lack of proper tools and environment.
Bud
MisterTwister,
Yes, I agree. When I worked for Nestorovic Labs in the late 80's and early 90's, we used PVA as a coating over the entire cone surface, including the surround, with RTV globed and smushed around on the back side of the dust cap to help damp the entire structure. While we did not actively try to imbalance the mass we added, we did not make any special attempt at balance either. Never a rubbing problem from those very long throw woofers we built up either.
What the cone mfg people I spoke with were aiming at was deformation occurring as the glue/damping material cured. Without there being any controls over these materials for absorption, application evenness and irregular curing times, they thought the hope for success to be very slim and that voice coil deformation would be inevitable.
So, not really a problem involving large masses being poorly distributed. Rather one of poor normalization controls for the resultant cone stresses on the voice coil former.
Bud
Yes, I agree. When I worked for Nestorovic Labs in the late 80's and early 90's, we used PVA as a coating over the entire cone surface, including the surround, with RTV globed and smushed around on the back side of the dust cap to help damp the entire structure. While we did not actively try to imbalance the mass we added, we did not make any special attempt at balance either. Never a rubbing problem from those very long throw woofers we built up either.
What the cone mfg people I spoke with were aiming at was deformation occurring as the glue/damping material cured. Without there being any controls over these materials for absorption, application evenness and irregular curing times, they thought the hope for success to be very slim and that voice coil deformation would be inevitable.
So, not really a problem involving large masses being poorly distributed. Rather one of poor normalization controls for the resultant cone stresses on the voice coil former.
Bud
this thread has been enabled to death.
In order for a breakwater (BudP's analogy, I believe) to have any useful effect, it must be sized on the order of a wavelength, what is the wavelength (in the cone material) of the frequency ranges in question?. Imagine an ocean breakwater with a 6" surface contour....not much better than a wall. Perhaps looks neat though.
One "inventor" purports that painting a cone has dramatic effects and then doesn't know (or even have a vague intuitive notion of) what slitting is supposed to do? That is really bizarre.
In order for a breakwater (BudP's analogy, I believe) to have any useful effect, it must be sized on the order of a wavelength, what is the wavelength (in the cone material) of the frequency ranges in question?. Imagine an ocean breakwater with a 6" surface contour....not much better than a wall. Perhaps looks neat though.
One "inventor" purports that painting a cone has dramatic effects and then doesn't know (or even have a vague intuitive notion of) what slitting is supposed to do? That is really bizarre.
Ron E said:
Hi,
What is bizarre is said inventor admits that the operation of EnaBL
as described in the patent is nonsense but nevertheless insists
subjectively it "sounds" like it does all the technical things claimed.
At this point go to the subjective thread to be taken seriously.
🙂/sreten.
sreten said:
Yes it's true! Those seeking the truth about EnABL are taken seriously!
Actually it's called EnABL - Listening impressions & techniques - "This thread is for listening impressions and questions concerning applications."
Here's what you will find there:
- practical, helpful answers from forum members with hands-on EnABL experience
- listening impressions from those who have heard EnABL for themselves
- detailed EnABL application techniques for drivers
- EnABL techniques for baffles, ports and cabinets
Our enthusiastic forum members are standing by ready for your post...
Cheers,
Alex
It is the dearth of measurement and lack of TECHNICAL discussion plus the high fanboi noise floor that makes the other thread a waste of time.
Quote from the first post on the EnABL - Listening impressions & techniques:
In fact, the original thread was split so people didn't have to waste time wading through pages of endless technical argument to get to the 'how to' stuff.
Technical discussion on the listening thread is focussed on practical application of EnABL - and it serves that purpose well.
Those inexperienced with EnABL might struggle to comprehend the "high fanboi noise floor".
For those who have heard EnABL'd drivers for themselves, over-exuberance is an inevitable consequence.
Cheers,
Alex
In fact, the original thread was split so people didn't have to waste time wading through pages of endless technical argument to get to the 'how to' stuff.
Technical discussion on the listening thread is focussed on practical application of EnABL - and it serves that purpose well.
Those inexperienced with EnABL might struggle to comprehend the "high fanboi noise floor".
For those who have heard EnABL'd drivers for themselves, over-exuberance is an inevitable consequence.
Cheers,
Alex
So why are you adding noise here? Your posts have no technical information to add to discover how, if at all, this mystical technique actually works.
So far, it is BS in the absence of any measured results. I am not the least bit interested in your perceptions, give me data.
So far, it is BS in the absence of any measured results. I am not the least bit interested in your perceptions, give me data.
Technical and "technique are two different concepts. Not much of any technical merit here, as usual. The other thread, well, that's "technique"... not technical.
Fanboi's often get this wrong...
Fanboi's often get this wrong...
Actually, this is the personal attacks thread, though done highly technically. Amusing to sit on the sidelines and watch.
Folks, the thread split was intended to split out objective and subjective points of view. This thread is for measurements, and discussion of those measurements. Any other topics would be better off in the other thread.
Thanks
pinkmouse said:
Folks, the thread split was intended to split out objective and subjective points of view. This thread is for measurements, and discussion of those measurements. Any other topics would be better off in the other thread.
Thanks
I would suggest being careful when saying "any other topics" other than measurements. This thread, as for the original thread, was largely devoid of measurements by proponents, so other technical aspects became paramount. They could not provide, to date have not provided and apparently cannot provide any substantive measurements, much less any resembling competent measurements. The purpose of this thread could not be considered to be for measurements, much as the proponents were asked to provide them, they being so sure of themselves and the "technical merits".
Technical thread, yes. Competent measurements and analyses, never going to be provided by proponents.
Dave
Cone Calculator
I made this simple excel calculator when I wanted to make a cone-shaped stencil (for EnABL pattern) from a flat material.
You can input some easily measurable dimensions, and it will tell you the "pie-slice" angle, and disc diameter you need to make a cone from flat material (i.e. - paper).
I have not yet read through the entire EnABL-Processes thread (120+ pages!), so perhaps I missed something someone has already done.
Anyhow, I hope it's useful.
BudP was using something else here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=100399&perpage=25&pagenumber=1
I made this simple excel calculator when I wanted to make a cone-shaped stencil (for EnABL pattern) from a flat material.
You can input some easily measurable dimensions, and it will tell you the "pie-slice" angle, and disc diameter you need to make a cone from flat material (i.e. - paper).
I have not yet read through the entire EnABL-Processes thread (120+ pages!), so perhaps I missed something someone has already done.
Anyhow, I hope it's useful.
BudP was using something else here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=100399&perpage=25&pagenumber=1