I don't think Nania is way off track.
No doubts that a well engineered dynamic speaker does a pretty good job. No doubts also that it is a pretty klutzy device with a host of shortcomings, some of which cause an amp to partially lose its grip. The complex impedance of a speaker is nothing but bad news.
What Nania is partially describing is an ideal speaker that has no moving mass and/or a voice coil free of inductance. Electrostatics approach the ideal in some areas. I remember a speaker I once heard at a hi-fi show. It was esentially massless and required a tank of helium to operate - similar to the Ionovac in some respects. The bass sucked but the rest of the spectrum was fantastic - best I ever heard. The lows were reproduced by a well designed dynamic woofer system but you could actually hear a difference in quality between the bass portion of the spectrum and the remainder.
I've heard that putting a zobel across a tweeter much improves the sound quality. Never tried it myself but I think it's time I did so.
Nania is not the first to consider this problem and he won't be the last.
No doubts that a well engineered dynamic speaker does a pretty good job. No doubts also that it is a pretty klutzy device with a host of shortcomings, some of which cause an amp to partially lose its grip. The complex impedance of a speaker is nothing but bad news.
What Nania is partially describing is an ideal speaker that has no moving mass and/or a voice coil free of inductance. Electrostatics approach the ideal in some areas. I remember a speaker I once heard at a hi-fi show. It was esentially massless and required a tank of helium to operate - similar to the Ionovac in some respects. The bass sucked but the rest of the spectrum was fantastic - best I ever heard. The lows were reproduced by a well designed dynamic woofer system but you could actually hear a difference in quality between the bass portion of the spectrum and the remainder.
I've heard that putting a zobel across a tweeter much improves the sound quality. Never tried it myself but I think it's time I did so.
Nania is not the first to consider this problem and he won't be the last.
having read the first original post over and over again, i am trying to work out exactly what the theory states at all....
Nania, are you trying to state that current drive sounds nicer then voltage drive? or control both the voltage and the current being delivered to a speaker (i.e limiting the current in a voltage drive amp)? or that ohms law is wrong? or we should have constant impedence speakers (i wish) or what???????????
Nania, are you trying to state that current drive sounds nicer then voltage drive? or control both the voltage and the current being delivered to a speaker (i.e limiting the current in a voltage drive amp)? or that ohms law is wrong? or we should have constant impedence speakers (i wish) or what???????????
I think what may be helpful is to consider the premise of my theory which is: The music signal is not just voltage gain, it has frequency waveforms too so the signal is actually delivering power but because there is practically no resistance until the waveform hits the terminal, we simplify and say that the power is a passive derivative of the voltage creating current through the impedence. The traditional thinking shows the power is the work done through the resistance but because the speaker coil resistance is influenced by the signal sent we cannot rely upon it for calculations that will measure or predict its accuracy in duplicating the waveform. This is where my theory attempts to explain what is actually happening to the signal when the coils start interacting with it. This power delivered as a signal from the amp is in constant interaction with the changing impedence and can be mutated by it into its component voltage and current. That is what i mean when use the expression "power profile". What I attempting to show is how to reliably measure and therefore identify what makes an accurate stereo image. Ohms Law cannot do it because it doesn't take into account the frequency waveforms being delivered to the loudspeaker. I think you guys just have to sit with it a while and then I suspect it will start to make sense.
While it is true that many laws of physics start to go a little wonky in extreme cases, (lightspeed physics) I would have to say that neither the frequencies, impedances, voltages or currents involved in audio amps and loudspeakers are, by any stretch of the imagination, extreme.
A "music signal" is just a voltage signal. An amplifier or speaker doesn't know the voltage represents music. To think that anything bizarre happens just because the signal is music, is rediculous.
Not to mention the fact that it is a little pretentious to propose an audio theory named after yourself...
seangoesbonk
That is probably the only valid criticism I have heard so far🙂
As far as I know, my premises, definitions and scope are all original and that is why I put my name on it. If I am proven to be in error, I will defer to whoever has looked at the delivery of the stereo image through speakers and tried to explain it in the same way before my attempts to do so in this forum.
That is probably the only valid criticism I have heard so far🙂
As far as I know, my premises, definitions and scope are all original and that is why I put my name on it. If I am proven to be in error, I will defer to whoever has looked at the delivery of the stereo image through speakers and tried to explain it in the same way before my attempts to do so in this forum.
Ok, let's get this straight. You are correct in saying that a speaker changes impedance and demonstrating that this has an effect on the waveform coming out of the amplifier. But what you don't understand is that ohm's law does apply to this configuration very well. As seangoesbonk just stated, the amplifier doesn't know what's going through, it is simply voltage and current at changing frequencies. One example of your being wrong in the theory that I will state again is that you think an amp can either put a high voltage and low current or vice versa into the same speaker and get the same power. But it simply does not work this way. The only way to achieve high voltage and low current is to use a high impedance driver, and to achieve low voltage and high current is with a low impedance driver. The ratios are unlinear but they do have limits within 2 or 3 ohms for moderate drivers. BTW, do you actually know ohm's law? Do you know how much voltage it takes to cause a 4 ohm resistance to draw 2.5amps??? or how much current a 27K reisistor will draw when you put 15 volts accross it?
Duo
10V will cause 2.5A to flow though a 4 ohm load. 0.55mA will flow when 15V is dropped across 27 Kohms. I can see that you aren't done insulting me. A person who knows calculus will generally know how to add. Now that I have passed your 10 year old test, go and reread my threads and look for some higher learning. The same bulb may go on in your head like it did in mine🙂
Helix
What I am saying is that power is delivered to the amp and is broken down to its component values when it hits the moving coils of the loudspeaker and that to the extent it matches the delivered waveform, the image and accuracy is maintained. When it is not, the image is distorted and smeared. I believe that this is a new and unique view of looking at what happens to an audio signal and its interaction with a loudspeaker. I also believe that it may lead us to a way to evaluate amps by numbers and predict how well an amplifier will sound in recreating a stereo image. If I can get a working mathematical model, designing quality amps will have less trial and error and the whole audio business will lose its ability to ******** the public. This will make me immensely unpopular in the short term but will create honor to my family's name long after I die. Now if I can only recruit the brilliant minds of this forum to help me in this noble persuit instead of using their wit to flame me, I might get it done before I'm too old deaf for it to matter😉
edit:
What I am saying is that power is delivered by the amp and is broken down to its component values when it hits the moving coils of the loudspeaker and that to the extent it matches the delivered waveform, the image and accuracy is maintained. When it is not, the image is distorted and smeared.
What I am saying is that power is delivered by the amp and is broken down to its component values when it hits the moving coils of the loudspeaker and that to the extent it matches the delivered waveform, the image and accuracy is maintained. When it is not, the image is distorted and smeared.
Your burning yourself stating that you need to know how to add to do ohm's law, which mainly involves algebraic calculations in the form of division and multiplication. Also, you aren't going to put me off with your cheap comebacks. Also, 0.55Ma only flows through a 27k resistor at 14.85 volts, but close enough.
EDIT: Seeing how you go about your theory and the small degradations in the usual amplifier/driver system, I doubt you'd want to make calculations with numbers rounded so far. This could mean the whole difference in the bias of an emitter follower circuit, that may cause relentless dirstortion! Why bother with .1% resistors when you can't even manage perfection in the calculation?
EDIT: Seeing how you go about your theory and the small degradations in the usual amplifier/driver system, I doubt you'd want to make calculations with numbers rounded so far. This could mean the whole difference in the bias of an emitter follower circuit, that may cause relentless dirstortion! Why bother with .1% resistors when you can't even manage perfection in the calculation?
You've also got your power transfer theory backwards. An amplifier causes a voltage drop across the driver, thus causing current flow through the whole circuit. These two conditions are combined in the driver and turn into power.
Nania, i don't think i understand your summary of your theory, to quote :
Your saying that when power is delivered by the amp, and the 'speaker recreates the waveform exactly as it was intended by the source (for example the CD recording), that the sound is accurate. However if the waveform coming out of the 'speaker is not the same as the CD recording then the sound is distorted
Is this correct? whats the diffrence between this and the kind of distortion that everyone else on this forum speaks of (i.e THD)?
Your saying that when power is delivered by the amp, and the 'speaker recreates the waveform exactly as it was intended by the source (for example the CD recording), that the sound is accurate. However if the waveform coming out of the 'speaker is not the same as the CD recording then the sound is distorted
Is this correct? whats the diffrence between this and the kind of distortion that everyone else on this forum speaks of (i.e THD)?
Reminds me of my old school days, with RF tuitions about Kurokawa's power waves theory, which I almost forget 🙁 Considering a quadripole (the amp here) driving a load (the speaker here), Kurokawa no longer used E and H (or V and I) but the power, and splitted it in forward (incident) and backward (reflected) powers. He achieved the same results than the classical theory, but in a more "intellectually elegant" way. But I think the comparison stops here, mainly because in the RF theory, elements are no longer localized, and propagative phenomena occur. It's propagation that allows to split EM fields, voltages, power or whatever you may call it, into incident and reflected ones. At audio frequencies, AFAIK, propagation is not an issue, and nothing is localized. The speaker is a part of the circuit, and the words "What I am saying is that power is delivered to the amp and is broken down to its component values when it hits the moving coils of the loudspeaker" don't make sense here. You can try to look at Kurokawa's work, adapt his "power impedance" concept to your needs, reduce the propagative term to zero, but be prepared to rediscover George Ohm's law...
Just my $.02
Just my $.02
ftorres: it seems your $.02 is worth more than you think. I am a qualified amateur radio operator and those theories I learned in my training. They do apply to audio in the ways you have depicted. I use those theories in my design of RF amplifiers where you need to have as low a S.W.R. as possible which means that the load must be of the same impedance of the amplifier output.
EDIT: From what I've learned, I believe that SWR in a radio amplifier is similar to the common damping factor in audio amps where the impedance ratio determines the factor. Only in audio, one would usually like an amplifier with a lower impedance than the speaker, thus proving that a high positive ratio is good in audio, however 1:1 is simply the best for radio.
EDIT: From what I've learned, I believe that SWR in a radio amplifier is similar to the common damping factor in audio amps where the impedance ratio determines the factor. Only in audio, one would usually like an amplifier with a lower impedance than the speaker, thus proving that a high positive ratio is good in audio, however 1:1 is simply the best for radio.
I think that what nania says it's kind of nonsense, but ...
...that reminds me that I don't understand all the electronic theories as well, so if the guy likes his sound better that way, so be it!
...that reminds me that I don't understand all the electronic theories as well, so if the guy likes his sound better that way, so be it!
another thing...
wait a minute...
If they sell felt pens to paint cd edges to improve sound( in varios colors and some colors are better than others!!!!) then nania's theory can get somewere 😀
wait a minute...
If they sell felt pens to paint cd edges to improve sound( in varios colors and some colors are better than others!!!!) then nania's theory can get somewere 😀
Hi Guys,
I'm new to the audio forums after causing disturbances in the video forums...
But, what it sounds like Nania is describing is the problem that comes from conventional commercial power amplifiers having finite current delivery capability when dealing with the complex of resistive and reactionary loads produced by moving loudspeakers.
Couple that with the back-emf generated by the voice coils when the speaker moves, and ALL commercial amps have problems damping the movement of the voice coil.
Nania, Ohm's law DOES actually cover all the phenomena you describe! Unfortunately, it is usually described/applied naiively in a way that doesn't attempt to describe the complex dynamic loads that a loudspeaker coil represents when driven by a dynamic multi-spectral waveform.
The majority of what you were describing could be addressed by an infinitely low impedance voltage-driven amp, possessing infinite transient current delivery capability. Such an amp have a grip of iron on the speaker coil by its short-and-curleys, and would damp its movements quite nicely, thankyou.
Everybody would like to have one of these amps, but nobody would like to pay for one. Thus, audio designers search for ways to get the most out of real-world components at reasonable prices that don't come anywhere close to what "theory" says...
Bill.
I'm new to the audio forums after causing disturbances in the video forums...
But, what it sounds like Nania is describing is the problem that comes from conventional commercial power amplifiers having finite current delivery capability when dealing with the complex of resistive and reactionary loads produced by moving loudspeakers.
Couple that with the back-emf generated by the voice coils when the speaker moves, and ALL commercial amps have problems damping the movement of the voice coil.
Nania, Ohm's law DOES actually cover all the phenomena you describe! Unfortunately, it is usually described/applied naiively in a way that doesn't attempt to describe the complex dynamic loads that a loudspeaker coil represents when driven by a dynamic multi-spectral waveform.
The majority of what you were describing could be addressed by an infinitely low impedance voltage-driven amp, possessing infinite transient current delivery capability. Such an amp have a grip of iron on the speaker coil by its short-and-curleys, and would damp its movements quite nicely, thankyou.
Everybody would like to have one of these amps, but nobody would like to pay for one. Thus, audio designers search for ways to get the most out of real-world components at reasonable prices that don't come anywhere close to what "theory" says...
Bill.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.