What about Doppler distortion? Must be present and must be in relation to the amplitudes? Might be related to the passband of the driver or at least the audibility of it?Earl was talking about modulating a 1kHz tone at 100 cycles per second. That's not the same as playing 100Hz + 1kHz.
Chris
Pfffssssst, pfffffssst… (Sorry could not resistEssentially, there is no way to produce clean sound by shaking heavy cardboard and copper coils at thin air. Just compare the distortion of electrostatic full-range and film tweeters to Rice-Kellogg cone drivers. And with power-madness gripping the audio world, moving masses are getting, well, massive, moving toward half-pound coils to handle (at least in marketing blurbs) big watts.
B.
since you mentioned "reduced" my suggestion is definitely valid as well. Horns with compression drivers do definitley have less FM distortion but they have increased 2nd order harmonic distortion due to the nonlinearity of the air in the compression chamber.Essentially, there is no way to produce clean sound by shaking heavy cardboard and copper coils at thin air.
The Purifi drivers have amazing specs. I have yet to buy a pair. I tested an assortment of 7" drivers a few years ago and the Seas driver had the lowest distortion. The Dayton Reference drivers did well. My documentation isn't perfect. Some of the tests were done with a current drive amplifier, some with voltage drive. For smaller dirvers Aurasound 2" driver used by Linkwitz in the Pluto has very low distortion as well. I was targeting 0.1% distortion and was able to get close to that at usable listening levels with those drivers.Purifi drivers ?
Driver | Diameter | Two Tone (dB) Closest, Highest Harmonic | T Decay -30dB, Current Drive | T Decay -30 dB Voltage Drive |
RadioShack | 6 | -38 | ||
Tang Band | 6.5 | -45 * | ||
ScanSpeak Illuminator | 7 | -42, -42 | 1.5 ms | 0.8 ms |
Seas W18EX001 | 7 | -50, | 1.2 ms | |
Dayton Ref | 7 | -48 | 0.8 ms | |
Seas W22EX | 8 | -50, -42 | 1.5 ms | |
Dayton Ref | 8 | -48 | 1.4 ms | |
HiVi M8N | 8 | -38, -38 | 1.1 ms |
Hi Charleshave less FM distortion but they have increased 2nd order harmonic distortion due to the nonlinearity of the air in the compression chamber.
Regards
Charles
Essentially, there is no way to produce clean sound by shaking heavy cardboard and copper coils at thin air. Just compare the distortion of electrostatic full-range and film tweeters to Rice-Kellogg cone drivers. And with power-madness gripping the audio world, moving masses are getting, well, massive, moving toward half-pound coils to handle (at least in marketing blurbs) big watts.
B.
Aside from your personal insult attack, can you actually name any way in which a 15-inch driver today has features which make it audibly better than a Stephens 150W (woofer) made in 1965 with a resonance of 20 Hz, a very light cone, substantial alnico magnet with hole in the middle, cast frame, edge-wound rectangular coil wire*, and accordion surround.If only you'd move beyond Brylcreem and a sundial on your wrist to tell time, there is a hell of a lot of advances in the last 50 years.
What you list is either audibly trivial and/or incremental or relates to manufacturing or durability*.Audibly better.....
Anytime you want to wax poetically about your Stephens, just pull out the Klippel results for it.
This is an unproductive question to say the least. Who is supposed to know what a Stephens whatever-the-hell is supposed to sound like, let alone what its measurements are?Aside from your personal insult attack, can you actually name any way in which a 15-inch driver today has features which make it audibly better than a Stephens 150W (woofer) made in 1965 with a resonance of 20 Hz, a very light cone, substantial alnico magnet with hole in the middle, cast frame, edge-wound rectangular coil wire*, and accordion surround.
B.
* like the famous Western Electric horn drivers of 1935
Objection, CONCLUSION.What you list is either audibly trivial and/or incremental or relates to manufacturing or durability*.
OK, I admit it: it was a trick question. I was wondering if the Stephens 150W is audibly and visually distinguishable from a couple of top of the line JBL drivers today (and for a real good reason, as some with a grasp of audio history may know)?
B.
* maybe not durability since folks are buying and selling old Stephens today, ahem, ahem.
Just compare the distortion of electrostatic full-range and film tweeters
Am I the only one here reading this like; the vast majority of the world audio transducer industry are meekly trying to catch up to the epic ‘Stephens’ driver from a bygone era?What you list is either audibly trivial and/or incremental or relates to manufacturing or durability*.
OK, I admit it: it was a trick question. I was wondering if the Stephens 150W is audibly and visually distinguishable from a couple of top of the line JBL drivers today (and for a real good reason, as some with a grasp of audio history may know)?
B.
* maybe not durability since folks are buying and selling old Stephens today, ahem, ahem
As an architect/ designer by trade I kinda have to agree on the looks thoughAm I the only one here reading this like; the vast majority of the world audio transducer industry are meekly trying to catch up to this epic ‘Stephens’ driver from a bygone era?