In Reply to: Re: Wave shape posted by tomservo on September 9, 2003 at 06:13:09:
Tom -As is typical of you, you misrepresent the facts.
So let's see if we can't bring some honesty into the discussion, shall we?
I said that if a loudspeaker were to act as as a filter that presented a pure -90 o phase shift, then a corresponding filter of +90 o would act as a correction mechanism. The speaker would be an integrator, so a differentiator would fix its response, both phase and amplitude.
That would also mean that the loudspeaker alone would have amplitude response curve with a negative slope, and the correction circuit would have positive slope. The speaker would rolloff at a constant 6dB/octave, and the correction circuit would rise correspondingly at 6dB/octave.
The reason this doesn't work is that there are other electro-mechanico-acoustic filters in the system. It is not a pure filter, and so it cannot be corrected with a pure filter. There are several system solutions that address specific problems and optimize certain performance parameters. But there is no "magic bullet" solution that addresses them all.
Regarding your comment about phase, it isn't all that difficult to measure or to model. About my use of the term "we," it is a collective noun that referred to the people discussing this matter on this thread. And about agreement, well, the thing I suggested we probably agreed upon was that if am integrator/differentiator pair were combined, the result would be neutral amplitude and phase response. So if this doesn't occur when the differentiator (compensation circuit filter) is a pure minimum-phase filter, then the integrator (loudspeaker filter function) must be a complex filter that doesn't match the differentiator. Perhaps I was wrong to include you in my assumption of collective agreement.
Wayne
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Wave shape - Wayne Parham 09/9/0314:46:42 09/9/03 (23)
- Re: Wave shape - tomservo 21:00:24 09/9/03 (22)
- Re: Wave shape - Wayne Parham 04:34:06 09/10/03 (21)
- Re: Wave shape - tomservo 07:09:16 09/10/03 (20)
- Re: Wave shape - Wayne Parham 22:43:06 09/10/03 (19)
- Re: Wave shape - tomservo 07:32:53 09/11/03 (18)
- Re: Wave shape - Wayne Parham 08:50:42 09/11/03 (17)
- Re: Wave shape - tomservo 10:27:33 09/11/03 (16)
- Re: Wave shape - Wayne Parham 03:52:06 09/12/03 (15)
- Driver operation & E-mails - tomservo 09:52:06 09/12/03 (14)
- Re: Driver operation & E-mails - Wayne Parham 15:31:09 09/12/03 (13)
- Re: Driver operation & E-mails - tomservo 07:08:28 09/13/03 (12)
- Re: Driver operation & E-mails - Wayne Parham 07:48:02 09/13/03 (11)
- Re: Driver operation & E-mails - tomservo 09:10:28 09/13/03 (10)
- Re: Driver operation & E-mails - Wayne Parham 18:43:14 09/13/03 (9)
- Re: Driver operation & E-mails - tomservo 19:47:35 09/13/03 (8)
- Tom Danley - P.T. Barnum of the industry - Wayne Parham 04:25:20 09/14/03 (7)
- Re: Tom Danley - vs- Bozo The Clown - tomservo 16:05:40 09/14/03 (6)
- Re: Tom Danley - P.T. Barnum of the industry - Wayne Parham 16:32:30 09/14/03 (5)
- P.T. Barnum & Bozo the happy little speaker clown - tomservo 18:46:43 09/14/03 (4)
- Re: Tom Danley - P.T. Barnum of the industry - Wayne Parham 01:43:50 09/17/03 (0)
- Horn phase - Wayne Parham 22:29:09 09/14/03 (2)
- Re: Horn phase - tomservo 18:12:07 09/16/03 (1)
- Re: Horn phase - Wayne Parham 01:12:04 09/17/03 (0)