Yes.
Depends on how much the room's Q impacts it, but let's say it's minimal, then you'd need to load it in a relatively small box to get its Qtc up to 0.5 for a transient perfect [no 'ringing'] response once any added damping to control any box 'ringing' is accounted for, though 0.5-0.55 Qtc is considered 'close enough'.
Right, you ideally want a transient perfect system in room, which often requires an over-damped speaker due to room loading raising effective Qt.
No clue how to respond to this, only know what happens when the speaker is under [clips]/over ['ringing', 'hangover']/critically damped [transient perfect]
GM
Depends on how much the room's Q impacts it, but let's say it's minimal, then you'd need to load it in a relatively small box to get its Qtc up to 0.5 for a transient perfect [no 'ringing'] response once any added damping to control any box 'ringing' is accounted for, though 0.5-0.55 Qtc is considered 'close enough'.
Right, you ideally want a transient perfect system in room, which often requires an over-damped speaker due to room loading raising effective Qt.
No clue how to respond to this, only know what happens when the speaker is under [clips]/over ['ringing', 'hangover']/critically damped [transient perfect]
GM
The large Boxes I was considering...until now...were around .33-.31
Adjusting fill doesn't move the qtc figure in HR either. This is probably trivial though.
"which often requires an over-damped speaker" - Is .31...crazy damped?
A better question; how can I monitor clipping and overhang....the IR between .5 and .3 are about identical
Adjusting fill doesn't move the qtc figure in HR either. This is probably trivial though.
"which often requires an over-damped speaker" - Is .31...crazy damped?
A better question; how can I monitor clipping and overhang....the IR between .5 and .3 are about identical
Last edited:
Remember, it's the sum of all the Qs that matter, so the lower the better in some cases, in others, not so much as I plan to point out in another response.........
GM
GM
Lot of people confusing Q with compliance...electrical and mechanical compliance, I don't feel are equal, though you can achieve a similar final Q in the response curve, using different portions of each.....
Last edited:
On paper it looks great but in the real world the effects of compliance mechanical vs electrical, I don't believe, are equal...Neither are perfect systems...and have different characteristics and flaws and limitations...You you raise system Qt using electrical compliance factor, you've just raised signal, and heat....Not the same if you raised Qts by raising mechanical Q. Associating the final FR curve Q with Qt...its not equal...
Ok I just realized that I said a bad thing...."Qt using electrical compliance factor, you've just raised signal, and heat" Scratch that...though it might work... if you change the system curve with eq, which implies a different FR curve Q....mechanical Q has not changed. Mechanical Q is going to have a distinct affect on the sound, regardless of the Q of the curve. Thats where the confusing is, the Q of the curve vs Qts...so I miss spoke about what it is I don't think lines up.
Ok I just realized that I said a bad thing...."Qt using electrical compliance factor, you've just raised signal, and heat" Scratch that...though it might work... if you change the system curve with eq, which implies a different FR curve Q....mechanical Q has not changed. Mechanical Q is going to have a distinct affect on the sound, regardless of the Q of the curve. Thats where the confusing is, the Q of the curve vs Qts...so I miss spoke about what it is I don't think lines up.
Last edited:
In the real world you have amplifiers with non-zero output impedance and if that starts climbing up the importance of Qm becomes more important, the Qe starts to become less important. There is more to it than that, but later.
dave
The primary effect is the same. Are you thinking about inconsequential differences, or the subsequent secondary issues such as the distortion mechanisms?
If I change the response using active eq I don't see the connection to system Qts. Maybe on paper but real world results have to differ depending on which route is taken.