Indeed!
The golden ratio, other than its interest to theoretical mathematicians, really only applies to aesthetics. Rectangles closer to square than the golden ratio are uninteresting, Those less square than the golden ratio are pleasing. I find the golden ration makes box proportioning rather difficult because the resulting cabinet is too fat. As far as internal modes are concerned, if the cabinet is reasonable well damped, any not rational ratio works just fine. In reality, I have used perfectly square cross-sections with no apparent problems.
The golden ratio, other than its interest to theoretical mathematicians, really only applies to aesthetics. Rectangles closer to square than the golden ratio are uninteresting, Those less square than the golden ratio are pleasing. I find the golden ration makes box proportioning rather difficult because the resulting cabinet is too fat. As far as internal modes are concerned, if the cabinet is reasonable well damped, any not rational ratio works just fine. In reality, I have used perfectly square cross-sections with no apparent problems.
or even a .8 to 1 to 1.2 ratio works.
I had a 2' wide by 3' tall by 15" deep box (.618 x 1 x 1.618), those golden ratios make for big awkward looking boxes.
I had a 2' wide by 3' tall by 15" deep box (.618 x 1 x 1.618), those golden ratios make for big awkward looking boxes.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.