In Reply to: Re: can the relative drop in level posted by hancock on November 4, 2002 at 14:53:34:
John -I was curious what your comment might be about the crossover flaw in the Lambda Unity's. It isn't as if I was the only person to notice it - It was a known issue. I wondered how you might comment about that problem, and why it was produced this way only to be redesigned later. It's a beautiful horn, by the way. Very aesthetically pleasing. And probably sounds pretty good too, but it had some huge peaks and dips, and one tell-tale spiked dip that indicated the system was suffering from severe cancelation from adjacent drivers.
You've been pretty vocal with your opinions about crossover design, and it seems that the "basic design tools" might have been overlooked on the Lambda Unity. I wondered what you did to solve this problem, or if you just left 'em alone. Seems to me that a huge anomaly that was later fixed by a crossover might have been easily seen by the most rudimetary modeling tools. So I just thought you might comment on that, but if you don't want to, that's OK too.
On another note, you boasted recently on another thread that you have flat phase and amplitude response from 40Hz to 22kHz. How exactly do you keep the system from becoming reactive in the lower octaves? If not a huge horn, the system cannot possibly be purely resistive that low, and even with good horn loading, today's technology proves to have some phase "jitter." You suggested that you are using DSP, but what equipment do you use that corrects the frequency domain and the time domain simultaneously? Particularly in the lower octaves where it is moving the most, that would seem an incredible feat.
Wayne
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: can the relative drop in level - Wayne Parham 16:14:30 11/04/02 (19)
- Re: can the relative drop in level - hancock 14:37:05 11/06/02 (8)
- Re: can the relative drop in level - hancock 00:38:26 11/07/02 (0)
- Re: can the relative drop in level - hancock 00:20:10 11/07/02 (0)
- Re: can the relative drop in level - Wayne Parham 00:51:32 11/07/02 (0)
- Re: can the relative drop in level - Wayne Parham 16:55:31 11/06/02 (4)
- Re: can the relative drop in level - hancock 00:34:34 11/07/02 (3)
- You asked for it - Wayne Parham 02:07:08 11/07/02 (2)
- Re: You asked for it - hancock 07:16:30 11/07/02 (1)
- Re: You asked for it - Wayne Parham 18:16:48 11/07/02 (0)
- Re: try 4 or more high efficiency subs - Mark Seaton 22:01:03 11/04/02 (9)
- "No spin zone" - Wayne Parham 23:09:37 11/04/02 (8)
- 2nd try... - Mark Seaton 00:04:04 11/05/02 (7)
- Re: 2nd try (at spin) - Wayne Parham 00:47:25 11/05/02 (6)
- Re: 2nd try (at spin) - tomservo 09:03:31 11/05/02 (5)
- Re: 2nd try (at spin) - Wayne Parham 10:14:55 11/05/02 (4)
- Re: 2nd try (at spin) - William Cowan 13:54:44 11/05/02 (1)
- Re: 2nd try (at spin) - Wayne Parham 16:30:14 11/05/02 (0)
- Re: 2nd try (un-wind) - tomservo 13:30:37 11/05/02 (1)
- Re: 2nd try (un-wind) - Wayne Parham 16:31:26 11/05/02 (0)