Strange idea.... - Page 2

Dan Wesnor · 07-10-2003, 05:26 PM

Quote:

I only said that it looked like the responses provided were of the crossover circuit only,

First of all, that's NOT what you said, you said nothing about crossovers. Second, they are not crossover outputs, but acoustic responses of drivers with crossovers. They show the complex mathematical addition of various crossover topologies in order to show their effects on transient response. Yes, John is a theorist, but he's also one of the best designers working today. He would rather share his theories to educate other designers than to post his designs in order to compete with them.

Quote:

Was this some paltry attempt at an insult or something?

Sorry, whenever I see someone make sweeping statements that have no basis in theory or mathematics, and for which the person making the statement has not demonstrated adequate experience to make an objective evaluation, the first thing I think of is a Stereophile review.

How many "phase coherent" speakers have you actually heard, and how did you know they were phase coherent? I'll give you a hint - 90% of the time a commercial speaker claims to be phase coherent, it's not.

And just to clear things up, a two way speaker (properly designed for time alignment) will be time aligned across its bandpass on the plane defined as all point equidistant from the acoustic centers of both drivers. For a pair of two-way speakers, time alignment can only exist on the axis defined as all points equidistant from the acoustic centers of all four drivers.

Gianluca · 07-10-2003, 05:29 PM

Guys,

when I started this thread I didn't mean to post silly questions...

The problem is that I am not an expert, I've never built anything.

My thought was just that "more drivers = more accurate sound"... I was probably wrong...

The only thing I am interested in when listening to music is that I want to listen EXACTLY what the source is... I want to listen to accurate sound...

TimForman · 07-10-2003, 05:59 PM

Personally, I love the debate. I learn a great deal when these guys get all worked up.

RichardHOS · 07-11-2003, 01:04 AM

Dan, do you have an ego problem or something? Seriously, your tone seems completely innapropriate.

Quote:

First of all, that's NOT what you said, you said nothing about crossovers.

I referred specifically to the graphs presented, which were of different crossover topologies. I didn't think I needed to be so exacting in my posts. Geez.

Quote:

Second, they are not crossover outputs, but acoustic responses of drivers with crossovers.

Yeah, I had actually missed that previously. Thanks for pointing it out.

Quote:

Sorry, whenever I see someone make sweeping statements that have no basis in theory or mathematics, and for which the person making the statement has not demonstrated adequate experience to make an objective evaluation, the first thing I think of is a Stereophile review.

Oh boy, I guess it was an insult then. How sad. Perhaps you missed the IMO qualifier used numerous times in my post? Just when did I claim to be making an objective statement, and since when do people need "adequate experience" to express their personal opinions?

In case you missed it, I only stated that IMO Phase alignment was over-hyped and over-rated. That provoked a very condescending post from you, and I'm not quite sure why.

Quote:

90% of the time a commercial speaker claims to be phase coherent, it's not.

So you agree with half of my opinion then? Are you sure? I'm apparently not qualified to give one, so you should be forewarned.

Patrick Sun · 07-11-2003, 08:19 AM

Guys, please kindly address the driver integration issues, and leave the unwelcomed personal snide remarks off the forum.

Dan Wesnor · 07-11-2003, 08:25 AM

Richard, you have yet to say anything that shows that you understand what the words phase coherent meant. There are people reading your posts who might think you know what you are talking about and might even believe you. Part of educating people is stopping other people from miseducating them.

By the way, you can't get away with whatever you want by calling it an opinion. Contrary to what many people believe, not all opinions are correct. Opinions based on incomplete or incorrect information are incorrect and no better than intentional misinformation. The effects of phase on sound are mathematical certainties, not something that is subject to the whims of opinion. You did not say you preferred chocolate ice cream, you said 80 years of research proven by rigorous mathematics was bunk.

You had no basis for your statements when you made them and still have not presented anything to back them up. Stop backpedalling and tell us WHY phase is not important.

Quote:

Oh boy, I guess it was an insult then.

It only applies to you if 1) you made a sweeping statements that had no basis in theory or mathematics, and 2) had not demonstrated adequate experience to make an objective evaluation. I guess you feel that that is the case.

When you post something to the board for people trying to learn, please be extra careful that your "opinions" have some basis in the real world. People who know what they are doing were trying to educate the readers of this board about the importance of phase in loudspeaker design, and you come in and belittle the concept without providing anything at all to back up your point.

IMO, your past was demeaning to people who have bothered to learn something and destructive to those who are currently trying to learn something.

RichardHOS · 07-11-2003, 09:03 AM

Yep... serious ego trip.

Quote:

you said 80 years of research proven by rigorous mathematics was bunk.

I suggest you carefully reread what I actually said instead of fantasizing something and attributing it to me.

Quote:

Stop backpedalling and tell us WHY phase is not important.

I never said it wasn't important, just that it is over-hyped and over-rated. You agree with half of that, so I'll move on to the other part. 80 years of research still hasn't unambiguously demonstrated that absolute phase or relative phase between decorrelated signals is perceptible. Therefore, my original opinion still stands - phase coherence in the crossover region is important, but the over-marketed hype/promise of having a truly phase coherent speaker probably isn't. If you'd bother to read all of my posts in this thread, that would be clear as from the beginning I stated that phase in the crossover region is something that should be properly addressed, but instead you saw a single statement you didn't agree with (out of context, BTW), and decided to become the educating crusader. Really... I'm sure it is well intentioned, but unecessary and misguided.

Jack Gilvey · 07-11-2003, 09:14 AM

See what happens with multiple drivers? Rancor.

RichardHOS · 07-11-2003, 09:23 AM

lol.

I'm still searching for that perfect full-range driver. Let me know if you find it first!

TimForman · 07-11-2003, 09:26 AM

Wow, I guess so! I'm going to stick with two-way systems.

Jack Gilvey · 07-11-2003, 09:40 AM

Quote:

I'm still searching for that perfect full-range driver. Let me know if you find it first!

Heard much about these?

Quote:

I'm going to stick with two-way systems.

You'll be halfway there.

Despite what corporate-controlled media outlets like VH1 would have you believe about their beloved "crossover artists", they're nothing but technically-proficient hacks fighting a losing battle. I don't know why they get the attention they do while such champions of waveform intergrity like Greg M toil away in relative anonymity (that's right, anonymous even to his relatives) in a place like Georgia. Go figure.