In Reply to: RE: Series vs Parallel XO & Maggie Physics. posted by josh358 on July 17, 2010 at 11:04:18:
"You have to accept some slop in the time and frequency analysis because of the uncertainty principle"No I don't ............. (joke)
josh358, I very much appreciate your participation with Planar Asylum. I've learned a thing or two from you already and it's the intellegent discourse that keeps me checking back in.
I believe what you have commented on is likely to be right. I seriously doubt that one could detect the difference between the impulse response that I referred to and one that was ideal. I am stuck on the idea that a speaker should be viewed as a acoustic transducer. Any deviation from that is a flawed compromize. If we could but have our 20 to 20K monodriver then it would all be so much easier. AFAIK, it doesn't exist.
I don't want to step on Dr. Chaos's thread too heavily but couldn't pass on the joke.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Series vs Parallel XO & Maggie Physics. - emsquare 07/17/1013:38:24 07/17/10 (5)
- RE: Series vs Parallel XO & Maggie Physics. - josh358 14:08:54 07/17/10 (4)
- RE: Series vs Parallel XO & Maggie Physics. - emsquare 14:29:58 07/22/10 (3)
- RE: Series vs Parallel XO & Maggie Physics. - josh358 15:46:30 07/22/10 (2)
- RE: Series vs Parallel XO & Maggie Physics. - emsquare 16:06:28 07/23/10 (1)
- RE: Series vs Parallel XO & Maggie Physics. - josh358 16:23:14 07/23/10 (0)