OS waveguide profile

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#22
GM said:
What interested me most though was the wife preferred the 500 Hz, making me wonder if it's more gender related since the female's BW is shifted a bit higher.
Click to expand...

It is not true that women have any different hearing than men. But what may very well be true is that they like "smaller" and men like "bigger". It may very well have just been appearance and nothing to do with sound.

That is what my years of experience have taught me. With only subjective impression one never knows what they will get. Without measurements everything is a crap shoot. The better quality the measurements the better design you can do.

I completely agree that years ago taking measurements was impossible for the novice. But today that is not the case. I have written a whitepaper on how to do superior measurements for about $100. I will post this to my web site and then maybe we can all start to get some real data and then maybe we can get somewhere. (For some reason my web server is not letting me update my website. I am looking into that.)
 
Last edited:
#23
You're welcome! Yeah, it's ~ the same as one can't scream very loudly when one's mouth is covered with a resistive material, so it's all about 'robbing Peter to pay Paul' since the driver by itself only has so much usable BW, so you want its max highs, then the horn's LF corner must increase and vice versa, so historically, they split the difference as an acceptable high power trade-off.

GM
 
#24
gedlee said:
It is not true that women have any different hearing than men. But what may very well be true is that they like "smaller" and men like "bigger". It may very well have just been appearance and nothing to do with sound.

That is what my years of experience have taught me. With only subjective impression one never knows what they will get. Without measurements everything is a crap shoot. The better quality the measurements the better design you can do.

I completely agree that years ago taking measurements was impossible for the novice. But today that is not the case. I have written a whitepaper on how to do superior measurements for about $100. I will post this to my web site and then maybe we can all start to get some real data and then maybe we can get somewhere. (For some reason my web server is not letting me update my website. I am looking into that.)
Click to expand...

OK, then how should we interpret this human speech power response comparison? [attached]

Understood and fully agree.

Thanks! I look forward to it, though the way things are going I may continue to be just a DIY ‘talking head’ role I’ve been forced into since 2000. I could leave the forums to give me the time to ‘do my thing’, but at this point I get more satisfaction from helping folks attain the relatively high [and preferably higher] level of HIFI/HT performance that me and my family, close friends enjoyed for several decades.

GM
 

Attachments

  • Human Speech Power Response.gif
    Human Speech Power Response.gif
    17.7 KB · Views: 254
#27
454Casull said:
OK, got it. I used John K's Excel spreadsheet to get the values of the constants as follows:

Let:

tan(A)^2 = C
B = "B" from the spreadsheet

then use explicit equation:

y(x) = (B+(x*C)^2)^0.5

where

x1 = "X Throat"
x2 = your desired waveguide depth (this is a function of how low you want your pattern control and/or desired mouth size)

Fairly simply now that I think about it. The sketched profile is accurate to how many significant digits of the constants you input into the equation.
Click to expand...

In case anyone with Solidworks out there has been trying to draw an os curve with the equation, the above works quite well. Thanks 454!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom