In Reply to: Set of agreements and disagreements posted by Jacques on August 19, 2006 at 04:25:49:
Your bench test does not include:
AND
the sound wave vibrations from both speakers!The vibration of the power amp is NOT trivial.
If we look at the signal from the loudspeaker very simplistically, then you might think that feeding a signal in from another power amp would suffice to duplicate what goes on with back-EMF, but unfortunately, the timing and phase relationships are not going to be equivalent, the back EMF WILL stress the amp in a manner that a separate indepedant tone (or multiple tones) will not do, because of the current and voltage relatonships of the back-EMF to the orignal signal coming out of the amp.
I understand what you (and many) would like to do: create a more completely cntrolled and replicable test situation. Unfortunately, if we are to arrive at the real truth of what is going on in the real world, we can not ignore certain as[pects because they are inconvenient or untidy.
Yes, use of any particular loadspeaker would technically be valid only for that loudspeaker. On the other hand, a very typical 2-way system could be used as a baseline, and additional test could be conducted on a "typical" electrostatic loudspeaker.
Something approaching the whole truth of the matter, even if it involves a specific loudspeaker system, would be better than ignoring or sweeping under the rug a portion of the truth. Some reaction to a specific loudspeaker would provide more information than not using a loudspeaker.
Jon Risch
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- At least two more things - Jon Risch 16:27:57 08/20/06 (20)
- and again - Jacques 09:22:08 08/21/06 (19)
- Re: and again - Jon Risch 20:58:31 08/22/06 (18)
- Re: and again - jneutron 06:34:38 08/23/06 (17)
- Nope. - Jon Risch 21:13:52 08/23/06 (7)
- silly response. but, consistent.. - jneutron 07:46:49 08/24/06 (6)
- Sad - Jon Risch 21:26:52 08/24/06 (2)
- Again, you with your "look it's halleys comet" routine. - jneutron 08:35:12 09/05/06 (0)
- Re: Sad - jneutron 06:19:38 09/05/06 (0)
- Re: silly response. but, consistent.. - john curl 13:16:17 08/24/06 (2)
- Re: silly response. but, consistent.. - jneutron 13:37:01 08/24/06 (1)
- Re: silly response. but, consistent.. - john curl 14:50:32 08/24/06 (0)
- Re: and again - john curl 10:13:49 08/23/06 (8)
- Hey JC..what is " vector stimulus on the VI space."..do you know? - jneutron 10:45:28 08/23/06 (6)
- Re: Hey JC..what is " vector stimulus on the VI space."..do you know? - john curl 12:06:45 08/23/06 (5)
- Re: Hey JC..what is " vector stimulus on the VI space."..do you know? - jneutron 12:57:11 08/23/06 (4)
- Re: Hey JC..what is " vector stimulus on the VI space."..do you know? - john curl 16:35:29 08/23/06 (3)
- Re: Hey JC..what is " vector stimulus on the VI space."..do you know? - jneutron 05:46:25 08/24/06 (2)
- Re: Hey JC..what is " vector stimulus on the VI space."..do you know? - john curl 15:33:15 08/24/06 (1)
- another jc post..fluff and nuttin else. - jneutron 07:06:55 09/05/06 (0)
- Re: and again - jneutron 10:42:17 08/23/06 (0)