|
Isolation Ward From ebony pucks to magic foil, mystical and controversial tweaks. |
For Sale Ads |
Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.
Original Message
RE: I now understand the emphasis on amplitude measurements over time measurements
Posted by rick_m on July 31, 2007 at 22:29:17:
Great Stu,
I thought that's what you meant, but wanted to be sure. I completely agree with you. I use two-way speakers (Celestion 3's) in the study and early on flipped the tweeter wiring so it would be in phase with the woofer. Sure it caused an on-axis notch at crossover but the result was well worth it. And I don't listen on-axis anyway.
My theory is that we are used to tuning out FR variations because they also occur in nature from things like foliage absorption. Timing problems on the other hand are less common, and much of the information we rely upon to survive in the wild, or on the street is encoded temporally. Yes, a flat FR looks good. And it IS good all else being equal, but it's only one view.
Something of interest to me currently is learning the frequency range where we are the most sensitive to timing (and hence harmonic alignment errors). I'm pretty sure that it doesn't extend all that high but may go lower than one would think. I've been toying with how to measure it but haven't hit upon an appealing scheme yet. Thoughts welcome. Heck, SWAG's at the result are welcome. For instance, I'm guessing that the upper critical frequency is ~8KHz.
Regards, Rick