Everything here is wrong.
This is not an arbitrary game and the goal is not to win, you either didn't read my latest posts or didn't understand them. It's a very specific method to address a very specific issue. And it really has nothing to do with how the "black box" or app works, the app is only responsible for calculating user inputs, and it does this remarkably well.
Since you don't know how simulators work, and have clearly shown over and over that you don't understand what they are designed to do, and have never even attempted to use one, there is understandably nothing valuable to you here. But for those that value accurate sims, this is the only proposed method that will work for this type of driver.
Interesting that you haven't been able to point out a flaw in the results, only in what you consider is appropriate scientific rigor, which incidentally is also wrong. Lots of results are arrived at empirically, especially in the medical field where testing and documenting results is often the most time consuming and expensive part of the process.
EDIT - just a bit more info.
Ben would like to make it sound like I played around with different tweaks to different parameters until I found something that vaguely resembles a measurement.
This could not be further from the truth. I recognized the response curve shape in measurements of this type of driver and immediately knew which parameter would cause the curve shape to fit better.
I even knew the AMOUNT to adjust. Since I always add double Re to adjust for power compression just to see what will happen, I knew that this amount would be in the right ballpark to allow for the necessary curve shape change.
Literally the first thing I tried worked, and it worked very well. Doubling Re and adjusting power to compensate was the first thing I tried, and it's still the best generic simple tweak I've seen. You can get closer by playing with curve fit and more accurately adjust Re, but even as it is the simple generic tweak is very good. It took a long time to verify that it worked well with all drivers of this type in all enclosures, but my first attempt was literally all it took to nail the method.
None of this has any similarity at all to Super Mario, picking parameters out of a hat, iterative variations to find something that would work, or any of that. It was all very precise and thought out before I even tried it.
Last edited:
Back on track
So with real Thiele Small parameters the output in the 287 litre enclosure looks like this:
Old numbers are grey.
Vented enclosure.
So with real Thiele Small parameters the output in the 287 litre enclosure looks like this:
Old numbers are grey.
Vented enclosure.
Can you specify a post number that describes the enclosure dimensions or at least box dimensions so I can sim it too?
Just by looking at it I can tell you that result is not accurate. There's no "inductance hump" and no rolloff down at Fb, in fact this is showing the opposite. It's also definitely not even close to what OP described when he was standing next to it (like a close mic measurement would show) and listening, 16 hz was weaker than the higher frequencies.
Just by looking at it I can tell you that result is not accurate. There's no "inductance hump" and no rolloff down at Fb, in fact this is showing the opposite. It's also definitely not even close to what OP described when he was standing next to it (like a close mic measurement would show) and listening, 16 hz was weaker than the higher frequencies.
Last edited:
Hi there Bach One: Any news to report on the organ speaker project? When I returned to computer, found this interesting story had diverted into technical discussions. Hope you meet the required dateline. How does it sound with the speaker system active? ...regards, Michael
This is what a measurement of this type of driver in a ported box looks like. This is the big (35 cubic foot) ported RE XXX as measured at data-bass. It's tuned at 12 hz.
As you can see, there's a massive inductance hump above tuning (this is one of the drivers most affected by this issue) and a rolloff down at tuning, in fact there's not much 12 hz at all in the measurement.
Mark's sim is showing the exact opposite, a bump at tuning and no inductance hump. Mark's sim is not even close to accurate. The higher frequency rolloff is probably more accurate than a simple sim but the low frequencies are not even close to accurate. Looks like complex inductance sims are not adequate to accurately sim this type of driver.
As you can see, there's a massive inductance hump above tuning (this is one of the drivers most affected by this issue) and a rolloff down at tuning, in fact there's not much 12 hz at all in the measurement.
Mark's sim is showing the exact opposite, a bump at tuning and no inductance hump. Mark's sim is not even close to accurate. The higher frequency rolloff is probably more accurate than a simple sim but the low frequencies are not even close to accurate. Looks like complex inductance sims are not adequate to accurately sim this type of driver.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Last edited:
No, I don't know, sorry. I have never played Super Mario.
When the computer (console) games appeared, I was too grown up (mentally) for them already, so I pass them to the other children to play with.
You don't need a software to do an empirical research about the effect of increasing the Re in the vented alignment. Paper and pencil is all what you need for that.
Hi Michael,
Hope to get the last three speakers in place tonight. Then I'll need to let the PL Adhesive dry on the triangular corner cabinet. Have all the wires in place, so it's just a matter of attaching them to the boxes.
The system has sounded pretty nice in listening testing. I do hope to see some improvement in the bass when that second bass box is in the mix.
Mark Andersen is trying to get some information on what MIDI signals the Peterson system will send for the digital sounds on the Artisan Sound Engine. I've passed his message on to our organ tech. Hope we can obtain that so he can program it before coming. If not, we'll have to take time to do it when he arrives.
Current targets are still for the console to be returned and connected next Tuesday (Aug. 11th). Mark will come on Wed. or Thurs. I'm trying to have him come Wed, but the organ tech wants to be here too. He's yet to tell me what day he can come.
I need to run the RJ45 network cable through an existing conduit from the console to the amp closet. That's for the MIDI signals. Also need to run a two wire cable from the shades relay to the amp closet. That's for the auto switch that cuts on power to the amps when the organ is powered on. Finally, I need to put together the temperature sensor and run two conductor wire from it to the closet. And I still need to change out the capacitors in that ART pre amp for the low bass signals. I can use the equalizer temporarily if I don't get it done before showtime.
Still need to do some sound reduction treatment on the door. But that can be done later.
But things are starting to come together.
Thanks for asking.
I'm just posting progress reports from time-to-time. I just jump in and make them quickly so I don't get hit by the shrapnel going back-and-forth in the technical discussion. My project is too mundane to satisfy some of the technocrats. And I need to humor them because they've been helpful. 😉
BO
Post #199
Hi Mark,
Thanks for the data on the SI HT18. I assume, that is from the one you mentioned earlier? Was it still mounted in the car during measurement? I'm busy today, but I'll look into this more later.
Regards
Hi Mark,
Thanks for the data on the SI HT18. I assume, that is from the one you mentioned earlier? Was it still mounted in the car during measurement? I'm busy today, but I'll look into this more later.
Regards
Hi Bach On,
Post #208: "... I still need to change out the capacitors in that ART pre amp for the low bass signals. I can use the equalizer temporarily if I don't get it done before showtime."
I will only hurt your performance if you crank the gain pots most or all the way up. Yes, you need to get it done - no, it's not the most important thing.
Great to see your progress.
Regards,
Post #208: "... I still need to change out the capacitors in that ART pre amp for the low bass signals. I can use the equalizer temporarily if I don't get it done before showtime."
I will only hurt your performance if you crank the gain pots most or all the way up. Yes, you need to get it done - no, it's not the most important thing.
Great to see your progress.
Regards,
Dead air space in between is usually the kind of barrier used. I'm leaning towards a little of both. I'm really not sure how we'll be able to handle it.
BO
BO
For the door you want a couple layers of sheetrock and some weather stripping.
For the driver measurements.
Driver was vertical. All doors and trunk were open. Mass was magnets equally spaced on the cone from the front and back.
Essentially a free air driver measurement.
Larger BL.
Much heavier than specified.
And I'm staying out of the arguments as well.
The simulation I posted was the 287 litre box with 18 Hertz tuning.
Both sets of parameters used in the identical enclosure.
Simulation was done in Hornresp. Although I'm pretty sure most recognised that.
Good to hear about your progress Ron.
For the driver measurements.
Driver was vertical. All doors and trunk were open. Mass was magnets equally spaced on the cone from the front and back.
Essentially a free air driver measurement.
Larger BL.
Much heavier than specified.
And I'm staying out of the arguments as well.
The simulation I posted was the 287 litre box with 18 Hertz tuning.
Both sets of parameters used in the identical enclosure.
Simulation was done in Hornresp. Although I'm pretty sure most recognised that.
Good to hear about your progress Ron.
For sound isolation you have two choices.
Absorption or reflection.
Absorption works best with the absorbers being one quarter the wavelength of the frequency range you wish to absorb. For 32hertz that would be 16 feet thick.
An open pipe speaks at double it's length. So a 16 foot pipes acoustical wavelength is 32 feet.
Reflection is a game you can win.
Absorption or reflection.
Absorption works best with the absorbers being one quarter the wavelength of the frequency range you wish to absorb. For 32hertz that would be 16 feet thick.
An open pipe speaks at double it's length. So a 16 foot pipes acoustical wavelength is 32 feet.
Reflection is a game you can win.
16 feet thick, huh? You doing your stand-up comedy routine again? 😀
I currently have two 4x8 sheets of insulation. One is a fiberboard. The other is foam. The foam has an aluminum foil covering on one side. I also have foam type weather stripping on a roll.
I was thinking of putting the fiber sheet directly on the door. Then I'd screw a set of 2x2s (or 2x4s) around the perimeter like a frame. Then the 1/2 inch foam insulation would be attached to the frame boards with adhesive or spcrews. That would potentially create an air space between the insulation. I figured to seal all gaps in the boards with silicone caulking. Optimally, the air space should be a vacuum. Ours won't be.
My HOPE was that the aluminum foil surface MIGHT reflect some of the sounds. A more costly Plan B might be to attach some type of sheet metal over the aluminum foil side.
I'll have to make some sort of detour cutout for the doorknob.
I know that sounds primitive. But that's what I was thinking.
The fiberglass insulation between two sheets of sheetrock has helped muffle some on the higher sounds in the walls. I don't really think anything practical I can do will stop those lowest sounds. But I can at least say I tried. 🙄
BO
I currently have two 4x8 sheets of insulation. One is a fiberboard. The other is foam. The foam has an aluminum foil covering on one side. I also have foam type weather stripping on a roll.
I was thinking of putting the fiber sheet directly on the door. Then I'd screw a set of 2x2s (or 2x4s) around the perimeter like a frame. Then the 1/2 inch foam insulation would be attached to the frame boards with adhesive or spcrews. That would potentially create an air space between the insulation. I figured to seal all gaps in the boards with silicone caulking. Optimally, the air space should be a vacuum. Ours won't be.
My HOPE was that the aluminum foil surface MIGHT reflect some of the sounds. A more costly Plan B might be to attach some type of sheet metal over the aluminum foil side.
I'll have to make some sort of detour cutout for the doorknob.
I know that sounds primitive. But that's what I was thinking.
The fiberglass insulation between two sheets of sheetrock has helped muffle some on the higher sounds in the walls. I don't really think anything practical I can do will stop those lowest sounds. But I can at least say I tried. 🙄
BO
Last edited:
Well for for what it's worth. I've worked on sound isolated rooms. And I've worked on anechoic chambers.
I worked on both the design side and the construction side. The only thing that reflect sound is mass. You need something heavy enough but the sounds going to bounce off. That's why I give you a suggestion of a double layer of sheetrock. It's inexpensive and it does the job. If you are interested I can send you a pamphlet that has everything you need to know about sound isolation.
I worked on both the design side and the construction side. The only thing that reflect sound is mass. You need something heavy enough but the sounds going to bounce off. That's why I give you a suggestion of a double layer of sheetrock. It's inexpensive and it does the job. If you are interested I can send you a pamphlet that has everything you need to know about sound isolation.
Don't miss the simple distinction between barriers and absorbers. Mark's providing good advice, again.
For sure, you don't want any needless absorption inside the pipe/speaker room.
But seeming odd at first hearing, you can use absorption in the "target" room because the great majority of sound in a room has bounced around before getting to your ears. Absorbers almost anywhere (behind a couch, for example) will help. And the room will sound better (higher amenity) to those in it.
Decades ago I worked on highway noise and barrier design. In my research, I discovered one type of fence that never works and one that always cut highway noise annoyance.
Ben
For sure, you don't want any needless absorption inside the pipe/speaker room.
But seeming odd at first hearing, you can use absorption in the "target" room because the great majority of sound in a room has bounced around before getting to your ears. Absorbers almost anywhere (behind a couch, for example) will help. And the room will sound better (higher amenity) to those in it.
Decades ago I worked on highway noise and barrier design. In my research, I discovered one type of fence that never works and one that always cut highway noise annoyance.
Ben
I'd like to see the pamphlet, Mark.
Ben, I've seen some of those fences. But I don't really know what makes one better than another.
BO
View attachment 1995-06.pdf
20 years old. But nuttins changed much.
If you want the acoustics mother load I have but a few more.
You may not finish reading them before you grow old and can't remember what page you were on, or what page you left the book marker on.....
😉
20 years old. But nuttins changed much.
If you want the acoustics mother load I have but a few more.
You may not finish reading them before you grow old and can't remember what page you were on, or what page you left the book marker on.....
😉
I like it. Small, powerful button-sized magnets are cheap at the local crafts supply shop. Thanks.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.