Thank you for taking your time. I can't possibly know what causes the difference in the phase response but the delay still makes sense to me since the drivers still have some offset in spite of the waveguide.
I will try and figure out what is going on but my hopes aren't that high as a complete beginner, this is a little overwhelming for me to be honest. Looks like I am gonna stick to that delay and hope for the best.
Thanks again for your input witwald, I'll let you know when this project comes to an end.
I will try and figure out what is going on but my hopes aren't that high as a complete beginner, this is a little overwhelming for me to be honest. Looks like I am gonna stick to that delay and hope for the best.
Thanks again for your input witwald, I'll let you know when this project comes to an end.
I am actually using the factory data for the .zma files, and I am assuming you are not interested in them but I am uploading the files just in case...
You think the problem might be the fact that I don't take my own impedance measurements?
The factory files should be okay in the frequency range above 250 Hz. The tweeter is a sealed unit, and the woofer impedance shouldn't be affected by the enclosure loading until below 100 Hz or so. I just wanted to have all the available data at hand as part of the overall simulation strategy.
The offset distance needed to get the best simulated combined response is 0.295 inches (0.00749 meters). This corresponds to a time offset of only 0.00749/343*1000 = 0.0218 milliseconds. At 15 kHz, the distance corresponds to 32.8% of the wavelength of sound. That time offset looks to be close to the delta time between individual samples when a sampling rate of 48 kHz is used (1/48000*1000 = 0.0208 milliseconds). That's not a big offset at all.
The offset distance needed to get the best simulated combined response is 0.295 inches (0.00749 meters). This corresponds to a time offset of only 0.00749/343*1000 = 0.0218 milliseconds. At 15 kHz, the distance corresponds to 32.8% of the wavelength of sound. That time offset looks to be close to the delta time between individual samples when a sampling rate of 48 kHz is used (1/48000*1000 = 0.0208 milliseconds). That's not a big offset at all.
That's good to know...
I got the same result when I loaded .frd files as is (without the Hilbert Bode transform). I also realised when I am implementing the h.b. function, I have to apply a completely different value to match the inverted summation and the inverted measurement, which doesn't seem right.
So I guess I should just ditch using the H.B. transform function and load the .frd's as measured, and apply the 0.295 inches mod-delay.
