Doug, calling me a liar is pretty low. It fact, it borders on libel. I am just an old man with a lot of experience. I have worked with John Meyer, know him? We had a lab together in Montreux, Switzerland for 1.5 years. Why don't you contact him and find out for yourself? The speaker that I am referring to, was made after the Institute for Advanced Musical Studies, or IHEM, closed, as we were part of the institute. I then made the loudspeaker, on my own, with a fellow named Gunther Loof, who designed studio equipment for a Paris recording studio. This design was destined for that application. What bothered me, was I did EVERYTHING that I could, and knew to make this speaker as good as possible, but it was a disappointment, not only to me, but to my boss as well. I never attempted to design a loudspeaker, again, apparently not having the 'knack' for it.
Measurements of what? Wires or that speaker that I once designed? As SY well knows, I have always had trouble with posting graphs here, but maybe I might get lucky.
Doug,
Regardless of who's right or wrong, you have accused John of lying which is something you cannot prove and should not ever post here. Believe it or not this is not a sand box and we ask that you be respectful in your posts. Attacking an idea is acceptable, attacking character is not. First warning.
Your speaker measurements. You demanded: what measurements are missing? Put up what you have- maybe something is missing, maybe something wasn't interpreted right. I'm off to bed, but I'm sure any of the other mods can help you post your pix.
He has measurements. It's just that they're worthless.
When other measurements were done, and which were looking more than 20dB below where John's measurements could see, there was no evidence of the distortion products that showed up in John's measurements which he had previously claimed were measurements of so-called "microdiodes" in the wire itself.
se
That only goes to once again prove the fallibility of the human auditory system. I'll make this comparison, you are aware that your hearing can easily be deceived but you insist that it isn't. So what about optical illusions? Let's take for example the series of circles that appears to be moving when it's really stationary. Do you also insist because you can see the circles moving that they must be moving? I mean you've seen it with your own eyes? There's no way that it's possible that you're just tricking your system into thinking you're seeing it and not actually seeing it. There's a illusion where you take a fake hand and do something to associate that hand with yours (usually a series of movements) then you have someone take a hammer and smash the fake hand and you're real hand feels the pain. Does that mean you're actually feeling something? It's easier to write off auditory illusions because you don't have the truth looking you in the face, it doesn't make them any less real.
Once again I want to point out that outside of lowering or increasing the decay rate or FR there won't be a ton of tonal changes when you shift your head. If the tonality changes it's more related to the overall environment, not shifting the position in the same environment. What is more likely happening is a few frequencies will be lowered, a few will be heightened, a few will take longer to decay and ring a little longer and others will decay too fast and get masked easier. If you look at a graph of a song at any given second you're talking about a huge amount of frequencies you could potentially hear, and claiming that nothing changes would be like trying to identify a slight change in and image as it flies by at 600fps. Could you tell me you'd noticed if 290hz was nulled down 40db and 1800hz was ringing a few MS longer then before? I love the arrogance of the pro-cable croud to think that you've got the one pair of ears that really hears every possible change in an environment.
I have, I ran a full battery of tests. However, this once again is an obfuscation and unrelated to the topic at hand. How my speakers preform have nothing to do with peoples inability to hear magic.
Yes, can you don't know unless you gauge it. There is going to be some degree of change regardless, you're talking about a 3D spider web that changes patters at every frequency. I'll ask you what I asked earlier, Could you tell me you'd noticed if 290hz was nulled down 40db and 1800hz was ringing a few MS longer then before?
Sure, I'll give you even more than that. However, I'll do so outside of this thread as it's becoming a point of contention that's unrelated to the subject at hand.
Ah, that I haven't done. Once again, building my own speakers is something I'm new too. I'd be welcome to take some measurements tho. I'll be back on later, I don't have enough time to respond to all the posts I want.
Alright, everyone. I was hoping to show Kareface that he doesn't know 'everything' yet. An inspection of his speaker construction showed almost complete obliviousness to the problems generated by marginal speaker cabinet design. Now, I am not claiming that I knew much when I first finished college. In fact, I probably thought that I knew more than I really did, within the BIG picture of reality, including audio design. However, 44 years later, I have picked up a few pieces of wisdom, since those early days, and cabinet resonance is one of them. I hoped to convey this to Kareface, before he went on with his telling us 'where the bear sits' so to speak. I will bother no more with this question.
When it comes to HK. Now I can really laugh. You see, I worked as a consultant to HK for a couple of years. I have met Dr. Toole, and he and I have conversed, and he and I agree to disagree.
Now, if you want to talk about a 'sell-job'. Well, HK has really done it, big time. They have convinced many here that nothing really matters, except nominal specs, especially in electronics. Does this make their efforts cheaper and more rational? NO! Now they seem to think that they can get away with just about anything. Google Lexicon for proof.
When it comes to HK. Now I can really laugh. You see, I worked as a consultant to HK for a couple of years. I have met Dr. Toole, and he and I have conversed, and he and I agree to disagree.
Now, if you want to talk about a 'sell-job'. Well, HK has really done it, big time. They have convinced many here that nothing really matters, except nominal specs, especially in electronics. Does this make their efforts cheaper and more rational? NO! Now they seem to think that they can get away with just about anything. Google Lexicon for proof.
Does anyone have measurements to prove this one way or another? I am going to go ahead and assume the answer is "NO" since this is on page 442.
*OT*If a speaker plays in an closed chamber, and no-one is there to hear it, does it make a noise?
Zen moment over - as you were...
I once, without thinking, tried to make a test speaker with a cardboard box, thinking that some fiberglas would be enough to make it work OK. Well, it failed. See, I'm finite too! ;-)
Let me clarify, I'm not as young as I think you consider me to be. This will be my second run through, I went to the UW for a CS degree and ran a business I owned for several years after that. Just because I have the goal of working on a maters in acoustical physics doesn't mean I'm fresh out of collage, lol. Second off, I have never once said I know everything on any subject. If anything the more I learn the more I realize how little I truly understand. I've never claimed to be an expert in speaker design, I can understand the principle of cabinet resonance as it's really a smaller dynamic room resonance but I make no claims to expertize of the subject. With that said tho, pointing out I don't know something about an unrelated matter doesn't discredit any of the points I've made. It would be like saying a mechanic doesn't know anything about a car engine if he can't set the clock on the car radio.
I still present the questions I asked before. What exactly do you claim is unmeasurable? If you can't measure it how do you discern it from fantasy or magic?
You mean they DIDN'T saw that lady in half??!!😕😕
well blow me down, I was there and what is more I saw it with MY OWN EYES.😡
So don't go telling me I am imagining things young fella. And guess what. I even saw them put her back together again.
fresh out of school and you know everything.
Last time this angle came up in the thread SY gave us quite a few great you tube links, so looking forward to a new batch SY, thanks.
Didn't Tommy Gold explain to you the difference between a microphone ( a passive receiver ) and the ear ( an interactive/regenerative transceiver ) ? In a very similar way, an eye is not a video camera - together with the brain it actively constructs our visual reality through an interactive process.
Its the brain-ear system where the magic happens for audio. Not either one alone, the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.