the power that is needed to move the cone is allmost nothing. any power level below that would result in a SPL level that is way too low for a human ear to pick up.
I listen to what you say expect though that the threshold will be different from speaker to speaker , will be crossover depending , size of cone depending , and expect the numbers to increase according to the size/use of the speaker.
Probably in every day listening this will be nothing to bother about, when very low power is the target both sensitivity of the speaker and threshold of cone movement might be an issue .
Kind regards
Sakis
The problem is with the speaker. We all are in this place in the digital world but scattered around the world in Real Life. Only one, maybe two of us can analyze the two different chains with the same input when the terminal element is something which don't log for ALL to see.
Of course my intention was to do the input-output-log with different configurations. That's the whole point of the discussion - to determine if they behave differently.
And to this part of your answer:
I didn't mean to analyze the input. The input is a generated signal, same for all systems to be tested, especially designed for various frequencies and rapidly changing loudness (=dynamic). Maybe a song or musicfile, I don't know.
What's important and has to be logged and saved and visualized is the OUTPUT. And by that I mean the exact signal that's leaving the system and normally would reach the loudspeaker. Minimum test candidates: one with the pot before the gain stage and one in between gain and main amp (your original two cases if I'm right). For most accurate results these two have to be constructed to be equal in every regard but the position of the potentiometer.
Two possibilities:
1) The output is identical. Everything you hear is plainly psychological and YOUR hearing. Physically and electronically both versions behave the same.
2) The output is NOT the same. To be exact: to strengthen your findings the difference in the amplitude peak to peak of the quietest input and the loudest is smaller in one case than in the other. Then you're right and it's proven. Then the happy part starts: determine WHY.
Of course my intention was to do the input-output-log with different configurations. That's the whole point of the discussion - to determine if they behave differently.
And to this part of your answer:
See: two people not communicating in their native language at the finest.
I didn't mean to analyze the input. The input is a generated signal, same for all systems to be tested, especially designed for various frequencies and rapidly changing loudness (=dynamic). Maybe a song or musicfile, I don't know.
What's important and has to be logged and saved and visualized is the OUTPUT. And by that I mean the exact signal that's leaving the system and normally would reach the loudspeaker. Minimum test candidates: one with the pot before the gain stage and one in between gain and main amp (your original two cases if I'm right). For most accurate results these two have to be constructed to be equal in every regard but the position of the potentiometer.
Two possibilities:
1) The output is identical. Everything you hear is plainly psychological and YOUR hearing. Physically and electronically both versions behave the same.
2) The output is NOT the same. To be exact: to strengthen your findings the difference in the amplitude peak to peak of the quietest input and the loudest is smaller in one case than in the other. Then you're right and it's proven. Then the happy part starts: determine WHY.
Last edited:
it do not matter. the SPL level is WAY to low no matter what speaker it is. or crossover or speaker cone size.
Yes we understand each other perfectly now
I agree ... I may perform both tests in the output with in next week and post my findings here ...
Been performing numerous tests in the parts that complete my system and use them as given facts and never thought to do that ...
A very nice idea will do so .
I agree ... I may perform both tests in the output with in next week and post my findings here ...
Been performing numerous tests in the parts that complete my system and use them as given facts and never thought to do that ...
A very nice idea will do so .
AudioSan, if the cone isn't moving there can be no sound. Even amp noise.
easte, your post #98 spoke of "...analyze the speaker..." to answer questions of components and their configurations. I think analyzing the dowstream signal would be more fruitful.
DF96, all loudspeakers are faulty. Some are more faulty than others. None are radioactive and must be kept at a distance.
easte, your post #98 spoke of "...analyze the speaker..." to answer questions of components and their configurations. I think analyzing the dowstream signal would be more fruitful.
DF96, all loudspeakers are faulty. Some are more faulty than others. None are radioactive and must be kept at a distance.
Last edited:
No - I'm sorry. And if I had one, the discussion would be over, wouldn't it 😉
My educated guess however (mechanical engineer here, no electrical) is the following: before the first gain the input signal has let's say 2V peak-to-peak. After the gain-stage it's 20V peak-to-peak (purely theoretically). With a potentiometer that's controlling the 2V p2p you can't achieve the same degree of "fineness" as with one controlling 20V p2p. Mechanical imperfections in the potentiometer may lead to "jumps" when trying to finetune the signal. This would be worse with the delicate signal before amplification.
I hope one can understand what I try to say.
That, of course, has nothing to do with dynamics and is just my guess as to why many or most manufactures put the potentiometer behind the gain.
Will do both no worries... That was a nice idea ...
would you like to share an opinion on post #94 ?
How can you say that ? 🙄🙄🙄
the perfect potentiometer is just a voltage divider will do the same job when the voltage applied is 1, 5, or 20 volts divide it ....
(Or we are having a language issue again ?)
the perfect potentiometer is just a voltage divider will do the same job when the voltage applied is 1, 5, or 20 volts divide it ....
(Or we are having a language issue again ?)
that is why they use, say 100K pot before gainstage and 10K after gainstage.
another ting is noise level. With the pot before the gainstage, the gainstage noise will be constant regardless of the volumpots position.
place your opinion on post 94
Its reasonable and correct written post without verbal amplification
Last edited:
Correct i rushed in a wrong conclusion .....
That can be a perfect excuse for having the pot behind the amp and after the buffer but then why repeat a buffer after the CD player's active stage ?
Then again in modern gain stages with all that technology isn't the noise floor too low to bother with ? ( existing though )
That was my point. Every loudspeaker has a powerlevel needed to start moving the cone in the first place. Then there is a powerlevel to move the cone in such a way, that one's ears can recognize the movement of air. And then there is a level at which the loudspeaker plays as intended and constructed. Those are different for every speaker. And now take a box with different loudspeakers. Tiny little ultra lightweight foil tweeters (bändchen hochtöner don't know the english term), 4' mids and for the fun let's say 10' woofers for bass.
Do you really believe that this loudspeaker sounds the same way with 3W input power as with 200?
That will also mean that analysis on the given speaker is needed since the threshold of the speaker might be critical in very low power ...
I expect that results will be far too different when power is A next to power B
as far as i remember, i have never seen a buffer with the pot behind it. only active gainstage.
explain why then a gain stage already exists on the output of your CD player why repeat it ?
Gain stage that is capable of driving any known amplifier as far as know ...
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.