Re: electron pool
I don't know. No matter how many they are, they are still finite. And i don't really care how it works, just that it does.
dave
auplater said:
I don't know. No matter how many they are, they are still finite. And i don't really care how it works, just that it does.
dave
auplater,
What makes the situation even worse is that this is a shorted turn of wire. No current density, so no flux. It is possible that it is below local ground level, and, the pieces of heat shrink tubing, that are crucial, are forming some sort of storage mechanism.
If you read the above noted thread you will find a number of experiments by people all over the place, using a wide variety of cables and nothing better than their ears to judge by. You will also find a barter offer from me for a few someones who are competent and have relevant test equipment, to investigate this.
This just follows along from developments in audio transformer coil dielectric circuits and speaker and interconnect cables with distributed, low dielectric constant, casings. For the cables, if you change the amount of dielectric distributed down the cable length, in discreet pieces, you alter the amount of low level wide band dynamic information retained within the information packet, that is exciting the speaker or following piece of electronic gear.
I would like someone much more competent than I to figure out what is really going on, because there is an implication here that we can have a ground plane "circuit" that we can manipulate.
None of these items are covered in any first order approximations I know of. All of them work and do so at a level that is frankly astonishing. Just about as crazy as the EnABL patterns.
Bud
What makes the situation even worse is that this is a shorted turn of wire. No current density, so no flux. It is possible that it is below local ground level, and, the pieces of heat shrink tubing, that are crucial, are forming some sort of storage mechanism.
If you read the above noted thread you will find a number of experiments by people all over the place, using a wide variety of cables and nothing better than their ears to judge by. You will also find a barter offer from me for a few someones who are competent and have relevant test equipment, to investigate this.
This just follows along from developments in audio transformer coil dielectric circuits and speaker and interconnect cables with distributed, low dielectric constant, casings. For the cables, if you change the amount of dielectric distributed down the cable length, in discreet pieces, you alter the amount of low level wide band dynamic information retained within the information packet, that is exciting the speaker or following piece of electronic gear.
I would like someone much more competent than I to figure out what is really going on, because there is an implication here that we can have a ground plane "circuit" that we can manipulate.
None of these items are covered in any first order approximations I know of. All of them work and do so at a level that is frankly astonishing. Just about as crazy as the EnABL patterns.
Bud
electron pool
Hi Bud
Don't get me wrong... I'm not disparaging the effect... just trying to get a handle on it... For instance, an amp-second ~6.2 x 10^18 electrons... sounds like a bunch. But, a mole of copper (64 gms +/-) contains at least 6 x 10^24 conduction electrons, maybe twice that many if both valence electrons contribute to conduction)
So, say we have 6.4 grams of copper on a board (not alot)... that's roughly 1.2 x 10^24 electrons in the conduction band available to carry a load (this assumes only valence electrons, no lower orbit sharing, etc., a gross oversimplification no doubt)
So we have 12 x 10^23 electrons available easily to conduct divided by 6 x 10^18 electrons/amp ... uhhh... that would be >10^5 amps to deplete the pool... not likely.
Now if you speak of dielectric participation and use terms like potential modulation and/or dipole effects, maybe you'd be closer to a plausible explanation...
I'm intriqued by the EnaBL thing... as I've dealt with boundary layers in liquids for decades (in electrochemistry, it's where all the action is). Might try fiddling with a speaker cone or two.
John L.
Hi Bud
Don't get me wrong... I'm not disparaging the effect... just trying to get a handle on it... For instance, an amp-second ~6.2 x 10^18 electrons... sounds like a bunch. But, a mole of copper (64 gms +/-) contains at least 6 x 10^24 conduction electrons, maybe twice that many if both valence electrons contribute to conduction)
So, say we have 6.4 grams of copper on a board (not alot)... that's roughly 1.2 x 10^24 electrons in the conduction band available to carry a load (this assumes only valence electrons, no lower orbit sharing, etc., a gross oversimplification no doubt)
So we have 12 x 10^23 electrons available easily to conduct divided by 6 x 10^18 electrons/amp ... uhhh... that would be >10^5 amps to deplete the pool... not likely.
Now if you speak of dielectric participation and use terms like potential modulation and/or dipole effects, maybe you'd be closer to a plausible explanation...
I'm intriqued by the EnaBL thing... as I've dealt with boundary layers in liquids for decades (in electrochemistry, it's where all the action is). Might try fiddling with a speaker cone or two.
John L.
auplater
Don't get me wrong John, I am actually hollering for help. And, just reporting what I have witnessed.
Certainly dielectric dipoles are implicated. I manipulate them to produce "voiced" output transformers, increasingly sought after for the guitar amplifiers used by musicians. That, along with a core event that mimics, or is a lack of B loop storage, with the ensuing lack of zero crossing distortion, are just other examples of me having run much farther and faster than my theoretical underpinnings will support. I am quite sure this Electron Pool foolishness is directly related. The more avenues that are closed off by real time physics, the better, in my book.
Thankfully my son is a biochemist/physicist, so when I get to see him, he listens and shares what seems relevant. He has said that he is no less perplexed than I am, and accuses me of using my loss of mathematics as an excuse for unrestrained empirical magic.
Please do explore EnABL. It will drive you to elevate the performance of every piece of gear in your music reproduction system.
Bud
Don't get me wrong John, I am actually hollering for help. And, just reporting what I have witnessed.
Certainly dielectric dipoles are implicated. I manipulate them to produce "voiced" output transformers, increasingly sought after for the guitar amplifiers used by musicians. That, along with a core event that mimics, or is a lack of B loop storage, with the ensuing lack of zero crossing distortion, are just other examples of me having run much farther and faster than my theoretical underpinnings will support. I am quite sure this Electron Pool foolishness is directly related. The more avenues that are closed off by real time physics, the better, in my book.
Thankfully my son is a biochemist/physicist, so when I get to see him, he listens and shares what seems relevant. He has said that he is no less perplexed than I am, and accuses me of using my loss of mathematics as an excuse for unrestrained empirical magic.
Please do explore EnABL. It will drive you to elevate the performance of every piece of gear in your music reproduction system.
Bud
scott_m said:
i looked in my old Fostex data sheets and plugged the appropriate T/S parameters into the modified OB worksheet I used for the FE-103E design. The driver will work if you pad it down 2 dB. If you calculate the resistors required to form an L-Pad between the driver and the crossover it should work well.
Thanks. I'm currently in the middle of building a house and I don't have it in me to tackle anything more complicated than a plank of wood with drivers and some quick soldering. This project should satisfy the itch nicely!
Scott.
Scott.
No, it's tinny pretty much most of the time if there is music in a certain frequency range. They get "shouty" when pushed really hard. Acoustic music is better, but it's almost always easier on the ears. The sound is a characteristic of the driver, not the source or the music. If I thought so, I would tell you. I'm telling everything, warts and all so that people know what they're getting into but I want to emphasize that the potential that these speakers have is very obvious and I consider them a work in progress. I think that they'll reward the effort, and if not I'll have learned a great deal.
I'm considering alternate drivers, but one of the purposes of building these speakers was to try mods to the stock drivers to see what the differences would be and get some hands on experience before trying the mods on my more expensive full range units. I'm particularly interested in the FE108E Sigma and FX120, but in the mean time I'm going to see what I can make of the current drivers.
Not in my wildest dreams did I think that I'd come anywhere near 20Hz. No, I made this point and I want it to be perfectly clear - The bass that is there is very good, and I firmly believe that the bass is being compromized by factors that have nothing to do with the speakers themselves, such as speaker positioning and proximity of furniture, etc.
Got it. I'll probably do the woofers first, they should be somewhat easier to start with.
Now that I believe. I got the Scott 299B for free from someone that hadn't used it since '72, and later I in turn gave it to an audio buddy who was a bit down on his luck at the time and needed some happiness in his life. He absolutely loves it and I'd bet he keeps it 'till he can't hear anymore.
🙂
I got a chance to play around a bit more with the pair that my buddy and I built. They are currently on "test baffles" made from 1 inch MDF, with the rear of the driver cutouts rounded. A Bryston B60 integrated amp was used with three different sources: his super cheapo cd player, an ipod, and his laptop. The laptop played .wav files through my Scott Nixon USB DAC.
These speakers are unforgiving of poor sources, especially the cheap cd player. The laptop setup was MUCH better.
There is something going on with the higher frequencies, but changing to a better source helped tame it immensely. I am still not ready to indict the drivers or design yet either, as the drivers are still basically brand new.
We may be taking them with us to the Burning Amp festival, but there is already quite a bit of gear on the schedule for the event. If the chance arises we will certainly hook them up to get the thoughts of people with better ears.
I will post impressions as they break in further and I get more seat time with them. I would also like to hear the 4 inch Tang Band Bamboo drivers in them, just for fun.
best regards,
psz.
These speakers are unforgiving of poor sources, especially the cheap cd player. The laptop setup was MUCH better.
There is something going on with the higher frequencies, but changing to a better source helped tame it immensely. I am still not ready to indict the drivers or design yet either, as the drivers are still basically brand new.
We may be taking them with us to the Burning Amp festival, but there is already quite a bit of gear on the schedule for the event. If the chance arises we will certainly hook them up to get the thoughts of people with better ears.
I will post impressions as they break in further and I get more seat time with them. I would also like to hear the 4 inch Tang Band Bamboo drivers in them, just for fun.
best regards,
psz.
Yes, please try the bamboos. If your report is good, I would love to try it as well if I can find some decently priced Alphas down here. You might want to use the notch filter on the bamboos to tame that upper midrange peak, makes a wonderful difference.
Re: Re: electron pool
Hmmm..........
This is fair enough. You have to try it to find out.
Just please do not make up some pseudotechno babble to explain it.
I would suggest you do not know this for a fact - though as
described the process is unlikely to do much harm. It does
not address the fundamental engineering issues involved
and "black magic" is pretty pointless without this.
🙂/sreten.
planet10 said:
Hmmm..........
This is fair enough. You have to try it to find out.
Just please do not make up some pseudotechno babble to explain it.
I would suggest you do not know this for a fact - though as
described the process is unlikely to do much harm. It does
not address the fundamental engineering issues involved
and "black magic" is pretty pointless without this.
🙂/sreten.
Re: Re: Re: electron pool
Just throwing out a potential theory for people to chew on... and i said as much.
But EnABL does address a fundemental engineering issue with loudspeakers... one that any decent loudspeaker engineer is well familiar with. No black magic involved, this one is pretty cut & dried.
dave
sreten said:
Just throwing out a potential theory for people to chew on... and i said as much.
But EnABL does address a fundemental engineering issue with loudspeakers... one that any decent loudspeaker engineer is well familiar with. No black magic involved, this one is pretty cut & dried.
dave
Re: Re: Re: Re: electron pool
Hi,
Really ? care to elaborate or give a reference other than :
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue21/standingwaves.htm
Which is an excellent example of pseudotechobabble at its best.
(Most of it makes sense except for the bits that matter / are new).
😉/sreten.
planet10 said:
Hi,
Really ? care to elaborate or give a reference other than :
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue21/standingwaves.htm
Which is an excellent example of pseudotechobabble at its best.
(Most of it makes sense except for the bits that matter / are new).
😉/sreten.
Greets!
What's new? All I saw was a tedious way for a DIYer to fine tune what a manufacturer does by means of selective varying of diaphragm composition/thickness, doping, edge damping, dimpling, de-coupling rings, etc..
GM
What's new? All I saw was a tedious way for a DIYer to fine tune what a manufacturer does by means of selective varying of diaphragm composition/thickness, doping, edge damping, dimpling, de-coupling rings, etc..
GM
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: electron pool
GM's comment shows how much effort speaker designers spend on trying to get the cone to surround interface such that they can get a minimum reflection at the surround. Once you have heard an EnABLed speaker you will realize how much they have left on the table.
What it does is simple, effective, and it shows what is possible if a known problem is addressed more thoroughly than is usual.
Take a cheap speaker, listen to it, then EnABL it, listen to it againm then come talk...
dave
sreten said:
GM's comment shows how much effort speaker designers spend on trying to get the cone to surround interface such that they can get a minimum reflection at the surround. Once you have heard an EnABLed speaker you will realize how much they have left on the table.
What it does is simple, effective, and it shows what is possible if a known problem is addressed more thoroughly than is usual.
Take a cheap speaker, listen to it, then EnABL it, listen to it againm then come talk...
dave
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: electron pool
Not to mention controlling break-up modes to 'shape' an extended HF response beyond the driver's TL BW and the two combined is the main reason for the huge disparity in price between 'inexpensive' to 'ridiculous' of similar spec wide BW drivers for a given frame size.
planet10 said:
Not to mention controlling break-up modes to 'shape' an extended HF response beyond the driver's TL BW and the two combined is the main reason for the huge disparity in price between 'inexpensive' to 'ridiculous' of similar spec wide BW drivers for a given frame size.
TangBand 4" bamboo drivers
PSz:
It's a pleasure meeting you at the Burning Amp event. I have the 4" bamboo drivers, and you are welcome to come over (south San Jose) to listen to them or even try them in your system.
Best,
Kurt
PSz:
It's a pleasure meeting you at the Burning Amp event. I have the 4" bamboo drivers, and you are welcome to come over (south San Jose) to listen to them or even try them in your system.
Best,
Kurt
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: electron pool
Having a tech to mostly deal with the reflection issues gives the designer one more degree of freedom to get all those other things right. It will be interesting to see what comes out when talented designers start incorporating EnABL from the start.
dave
GM said:
Having a tech to mostly deal with the reflection issues gives the designer one more degree of freedom to get all those other things right. It will be interesting to see what comes out when talented designers start incorporating EnABL from the start.
dave
Yeah, I must admit I'm really surprised it works so well since my own adventures in cone doping, etc., convinced me that it takes a considerable amount of added material to get worthwhile results, but then other than spraying shellac/whatever either through an airbrush on select areas of small drivers or a touch-up gun for larger units, all I did was run a ring of gooey accordion surround doping compound around the diaphragm/foam or rubber surround junction to kill those 'snappy' high Q spikes so common with cheap drivers.
GM said:
Not any more than i was when i got to sit down and really listen... i don't think this is about the added material, but what the little bumps do to break up the boundry waves. Similar tech is used to great effect in breakwater engineering.
If i send you a couple pair of 1197s could you round up something to listen to them in?
dave
Understood, I'm just surprised it takes so little even though there's a bunch of them.
About the best I can do AFAIK till at least late next summer is make some adapters to load them into Buzz's 40-1354 towers I brought to the Atlanta DIY Meet several years ago, but even then it will have to wait until the weather either gets wet and/or cold enough to keep him off the driving range for a few days. I have some stock 1197s to compare them to as well as the CSS FR125S Bob so kindly sent me. The latter calc a drop-in alignment, so curious how it fares to the tweaked 1354s I did.
Speaking of which, those tweaked 1197s you sent that Woody wound up with sounded pretty darn good for the effort expended, so how do they fare against the much more time intensive EnABL'd units?
About the best I can do AFAIK till at least late next summer is make some adapters to load them into Buzz's 40-1354 towers I brought to the Atlanta DIY Meet several years ago, but even then it will have to wait until the weather either gets wet and/or cold enough to keep him off the driving range for a few days. I have some stock 1197s to compare them to as well as the CSS FR125S Bob so kindly sent me. The latter calc a drop-in alignment, so curious how it fares to the tweaked 1354s I did.
Speaking of which, those tweaked 1197s you sent that Woody wound up with sounded pretty darn good for the effort expended, so how do they fare against the much more time intensive EnABL'd units?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.