I couldn't find that article to read it in context. Designing a speaker and concentrating solely on any one curve in particular is not the best approach.How do you personally feel about power response...the article the above pic is from, suggest that, some say it is an outdated concept. "Outdated" sometimes can seen as "neglected" lol so I tread lightly
Yea, I think that it doesn't make sense unless you relate the power response to something, from an absolute value standpoint it doesn't matter much, in which case I might have meant the DI. Hence the statement(s) should be:"The lower the power response the less(er) the reverb" is wrong?
"The higher the power response the greater the reverberation" is correct?
"the more delay there will be in the onset of the reverb field." I never knew that
Playing test tones through PPSL, caused a good amount of vibration in the midwoofer sitting on top of it. My thought was that, the only thing to dampen that effect would be Qes/Qms and the Box(air mass?).....and no electronic filter is going to improve or worsen this part of the game, in regards to our ability to adjust "Q" with a filter.
If that attitude is wrong, how so?
Something different happen if that woofer was connected to an amplifier?
what are the drawbacks of using the 2nd order at 21hz?
Not exactly correct.
The DI(theta) is the power response normalized by the "theta" response. In other words, the DI is dependent on what is chosen as the listening axis.
The listening axis response is what the direct field response will be, and the DI indicates what the relationship will be between the direct sound and the reverberant sound. If the DI is flat, then the reverberant field will have the same timbre as the direct sound. If it rises, then the direct sound will be "bright". This holds above say 300-400 Hz where the ears integration time is such that it cannot distinguish between the direct sound and the reverberant sound. But always remember that this is dependent on what one chooses as the listening axis. I choose and design my systems for a flat DI along about 20-25 degrees and toe-in the speakers. Thus, my direct field has the same timbre as the direct sound.
The software on my website shows many speakers listening axis response and the DI as the angle is changed. It also shows the power response. So there are many examples available.
Your "theory" is exactly the reverse - the higher the power response the greater the reverberation will be. The higher the DI, the lessor the reverb field will be and, which is very important, the more delay there will be in the onset of the reverb field.
You are funny! The exhaust vent of the amp!You are getting a 30 degree temp rise coming out of your vent?? Your cones are facing the slot?? This is sealed so no venting to cool the drivers?? Have to wonder what's going on inside the box. Sounds like you have built up so much heat that it's radiating through the cones and frame into the slot. Might want to shut down and carefully lay a finger close to on the frames.
If this is correct you could consider this as a drawback.
You kinda jumped into the middle of something Mark100... I'm talking, about a low pass...You're talking about a low pass, right? If so, it's nonsense to be blunt.
Maybe simulations make it look like something that helps, but if so, it just means bad design is being used to correct bad design.
The only low pass that should be in play, is the low pass used for x-over.
Whats the issue?You’re planning to put a second order low pass filter on the sub at 21 Hz?!
You kinda jumped into the middle of something Mark100... I'm talking, about a low pass...
Whats the issue?
Yeah, brings up memories of all the discussion about whether the 18H+ is a good low-sub driver, or mid-sub driver.Its a result of the rising frequency response of the 18H+ actually... oh yeah! and the slot on top of that compounds it
The best advice I've gotten about voicing is; you do what you have to do to get the frequency response linear.