Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share your ideas and experiences.
Return to Planar Speaker Asylum
136.37.87.70
In Reply to: RE: The Quad 63* "Delay Line" posted by PaulF70 on July 01, 2025 at 19:41:22
Imagine dropping a rock in a body of water. You see the waves emanating from the point of entry slowly loosing energy as the waves move away.
If the body of water is small enough and the rock large enough there would not be enough loss of energy and when the waves hit the perimeter of the body of water it would crash in on itself.
Same for the 63. If the amplitude of the signal was the same around the perimeter as in the center the carefully crafted wave front would be degraded. There must be loss in amplitude as the signal moves away from the center.
Follow Ups:
But, Kent, we're talking about *speakers*, not water.
Just kidding. Again, that makes perfect sense.
Yes the water analogy is a bit crude but it gives a visual example of what Walker was trying to achieve with the speaker.
But let's step back for a moment and try to understand what Walker was trying to achieve. The wave front of a perfect point source an infinitely small point producing all frequencies in all directions about 12" behind the plane of the speaker.
Even if one could create the perfect point source, an impossible task given our current technological capabilities, would it not be reasonable to assume the perfect point source wave front would reduce in amplitude as it moves away from the point?
Peter Walker was one of the most brilliant minds audio has ever seen. While at times his approach may seem complex in reality his solutions were elegant and simple.
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: