In Reply to: RE: Really?!!!!!!!!! posted by villastrangiato on April 18, 2012 at 06:30:23:
To state as you did in earlier posts that it is 'WRONG' that a sphere gives the best FR is plainly and utterly incorrect.
You were wrong and I am asking, given that you were also quite rude to another poster in that part of this thread, that you acknowledge that at the top of this thread. I also think you should do so to the relevant poster.
Next? With a single driver on a sphere 'offseting' the driver is clearly unnecessary because the FR is as smooth as it gets on axis.
You still have not got that as one of the central facts the paper established, for all time.
I can not believe that you ever read the paper or absorbed it, your speed and narrowness of response here and now simply serves to confirm that view.
Gallo showed that spheres are practical enclosures and that they do sound very quiet. My spheres are heavy, but far lighter than many current 'high-end' wide range arrays, and single piece enclosures. But, they are easier to aim / adjust to very fine tolerances in azimuth, elevation and rotation, by eye. That's a pretty practical idea I think. And, I started treating our difficult room DIY and learning about speaker positioning in the 1980s. Also very practical, and cheap to boot.
That both sides of the high end market haven't taken them on, simply confirms for me that one of the central propositions of market theory - that consumers and suppliers are rational often fails to be true in reality. Mostly untrue is more accurate IME. Further I am no longer persuaded that the short term interests of consumers and investors should be the ONLY compass and rudder for humanity.
I pay attention to the hobby to learn, and find ways of DIYing those ideas that stand up to examination. I didn't get in to the hobby to spend lots of money but to do the very best possible job of reproducing real stereo recordings of acoustic music, within a budget. Especially of choral and orchestral music in large spaces. I hang out here to convey what I've learnt and am learning.
So I'm not very interested in the $$$$ and conspicuous consumption aspects of home audio. The high end and HT are to me good examples of a hobby that has lost its point. The high end is focussed on selling expensive low ROI upgrade components, and even lower ROI cables, as often as possible, to a market who want to reproduce recordings that I couldn't / wouldn't use to make sensible judgements, about where I'm going in the hobby. Don't wave the 'high-end' at me, it isn't convincing, put it away.
As your typical response to being corrected is to duck it and then use ad hominem both here and elsewhere within the same thread, you may not last around here. I have, you may not.
I can see why you 'left' DIYAudio. Perhaps you can't help it.
Or maybe it's just a matter of believing that you know more about wave launch than THE wave guide man, John Dunlavy. Wave-launch is what home audio boils down to. And that's a systems judgement.
Mind how you go.
Warmest
Tim Bailey
Skeptical Measurer & Audio Scrounger
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Comprehension poor today? - Timbo in Oz 08:05:17 04/18/12 (2)
- RE: Comprehension poor today? - villastrangiato 08:24:59 04/18/12 (1)
- I did NOT suggest that subs suffer from diffarction effects, I was commenting that it is often stated that - Timbo in Oz 16:05:43 04/18/12 (0)