|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
|
|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
In Reply to: RE: Subjectivist incoherence posted by morricab on March 17, 2008 at 09:32:27:
coherence comes from two main reasons: 1) The same material is used to reproduce the whole frequency range
Well the technical reason for 1 is totally obvious because the same panels reproduce the whole frequency range so by definition the same material is used.
Once again, we are at the same point, where you use "Audiophile" terms that are well understood by audiophiles, but disconnected from physical reality. I know of no scientific reason for a material to be "coherent" audibly. "Coherence" for me, would involve the interaction of waves dependent upon their relative phase. Perhaps you mean it in some type of Audiophile Chemist subjectivist expression, of unknown meaning to me?
This means that the coloration would be the same over all frequency ranges would it not?
Uh, no. If you are referring to transducers, resonances, motor non-linearity, distortion, etc are very much frequency dependent. The diaphragm material only plays a role in the distortion profile.
Point 2 is also obvious what is there to state? It is a full-range single driver speaker so there where a simple RC filter is used to narrow the radiating pattern with increasing frequency to thus retain a wide even dispersion but there are no abrupt transitions. Got it?
and 2) There are no abrupt transitions from steep filtered crossovers.
No, I haven't "got it". What does this have to do with "coherence"? Are you now referring to Phase Coherence? If so, then what you have stated above is complete nonsense.
To be honest, at this point, I'm just like you, in that I have no idea what you're talking about. The above makes no sense whatsoever.
It is sadly ironic that you have dipole speakers and yet can't understand the benefit of having the whole range covered by a single type of driver, especially when issues like beaming have been addressed.
Perhaps because my understanding of phase vs frequency is different from yours? Or that the physical attributes necessary for low and high frequency performance are diametrically opposed?
Coherence has more to do with impulse response
Ok. So what does 1) have to do with this?
than polar data and in that regard my speakers are far more coherent than your garbbled up mess for speakers
You are deeply confused about the meaning of terms here. Your speakers are more "coherent" than mine? Base on? Do you understand that you must define the design axis for the impulse to be of relevance?
Do you understand what this means for an acoustically large panel like yours vs a coincident piston source like mine?
I have in-room FR data and the speakers are +-2db from 200Hz to 12Khz or so with no correction. As this measurement is in-room then I consider this a reasonable proxy for a polar response as off-axis is included in such a measurement.
:-). Google polar response, then power response. I gather that this is not a gated measurement, but perhaps RTA at the mic tip? This means what in relation to that heard at each ear?
cheers,
AJ
This post will last approximately 2 minutes. 120,119,118,117...
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Subjectivist incoherence - AJinFLA 03/17/0817:32:24 03/17/08 (1)
- RE: Subjectivist incoherence - morricab 01:33:11 03/18/08 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
