Home High Efficiency Speaker Asylum

Need speakers that can rock with just one watt? You found da place.

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ High Efficiency Speaker Asylum ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

Re: From Wayne Parham - Re: Patentable claim

Hi Tom!

You wrote:

> > Not having heard one, that would seem to be a remarkable call to make.

So, are you moving the discussion into the realm of the subjective, where we discuss what we think we hear with our ears? Or are we talking about the math involved to describe phase relationships and performance in the time domain. Because the former isn't something you could have used to impress the patent examiner.

> > A license is needed however as if a company knowingly allowed an
> > infringement and did nothing, that "looks bad" legally.

You're right. It dilutes your claim to intellectual rights.

> > So far as "work", so far as I know everyone was happy with the
> > sound, don't forget they have several different strengths.

I expect performance is acceptable. As I mentioned in other posts, it's one the few other implementations of large format conical horns besides my ten π 's. Mine is a single-fold equiangular spiral and yours is straight, but they are both conical horns used for wide-bandwidth applications. But the claims of time alignment and of wide bandwidth loading are what I object to.

> > The name "unity horn" is the horn design which has multiple ranges
> > in one horn, Lambda sold kits to build one version of it which was
> > a 16 1/2 inch square mouth horn with a 300 Hz low cutoff.

So you licensed the "Unity" trademark to Lambda and not the design? Having dissimilar branding may dilute your trademark. It would be like allowing someone else to call their adhesive bandage "Band-Aid." If it's the same, then you can license them the rights to manufacture without dilution. If not, you may have already diluted your rights to the name "Unity."

> > We sell several versions of the Unity including a 3 way horn.

But only the three-way implementation is covered by the patent, yes?

> > Two models can be mounted on a physical or acoustic boundary with
> > essentially no interference as well.

I see. Smaller units to be used as an HF subsystem, I assume.

> > one can move the hf source even more foreword and find a spot
> > where the two outputs are temporarily in phase but the "Time" is
> > skewed and an impulse would still show the hf leading.

That's the key here. "Temporarily" That's the point of all this. Moving the offset forward or back, either one is still a compromise. Your defense of the time alignment technique you've used only makes my case even more clear. There is no way to truly time align two different point sources at every frequency and at different positions with techniques as simple as position offset or the use of single-node filters. You can make them aligned at one frequency, and at one position and that is all.

I think Davies says it well, "It is one of the fundamental laws of linear systems that if their output depends only on previous input - that is, if they cannot see into the future - then the phase response is completely determined by the amplitude response."

> > Have to run, my kids and I are off to catch some pretty lights and
> > Transient response.

Super! Enjoy the holiday!

Wayne Parham

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Sonic Craft  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
You can not post to an archived thread.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]