Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#41
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
Don Pearce wrote:
A true RMS current meter doesn't help, unfortunately. A speaker's impedance is very reactive so multiplying RMS current and voltage doesn't give you power. ** Of course, but what you actually do is multiply the rms noise current SQUARED by the voice coil resistance to get the heat dissipation in the copper wire in watts. If you find the minimum impedance of the driver with a sine wave test in the mid band, then that number can be used instead of the copper resistance to give an accurate power dissipation figure, including suspension and eddy current losses. That would need some sort of measurement system that could provide vector products. As for doing that with a noise source, forget it. ** A wind band power meter will do the job, analogue multiplying or digital sampling. So no, you can't measure pink noise power into a speaker. ** Of course you can. ..... Phil |
#42
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
Scott Dorsey wrote:
** That is complete bull****. I have spent a great deal of time in my so far 46 year career testing and verifying makers specs for audio equipment ( including speakers ) and find very little to complain about. Then why do we keep seeing frequency ranges without tolerances? And why will you never see a distortion spec on a loudspeaker? ** Here is the context that Mr Dorsey mischievously snipped: " As I said, published specifications for loudspeakers, and in fact, for most audio products, aren't worth the paper they're printed on " My comment was clearly about *published specs* !! If specs are simply not supplied, that is another matter. FYI: The term "frequency range" means what is says, the range of frequencies a speaker is capable of producing. Frequency response is a different spec, requiring a graph. Distortion specs are non simple, as the amount varies widely with frequency and level. Reviews sometimes cover THD with a series of graphs. ..... Phil |
#43
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
Mat Nieuwenhoven wrote:
If the SPL is measured at 2.84 Volts, then the sensitivity will be less for the 16 Ohm version. ** The spec is for so many dBs *per applied watt* at 1 metre. For an 8ohm speaker this equates to 2.83V rms and for a 16 ohm model 4.0V rms. Sometimes the makers will use 100mW for their tests as SPLs of 98dB and over are *very* loud. Technically, you are correct. The 1998 book "Testing loudspeakers" from D'Appolito gives the formula in chapter 2.8.3. ** Ya don't say. However, amplifiers don't amplify watts. They amplify voltages, and have a limitation on the current they can supply: that determines their wattage. ** No fooling. For practical use with given amp, a speaker with a higher SPL at 2.83V will sound louder than one with a lower SPL, even though the latter one might be more efficient when looking at SPL/Watt. ** Sorry, that makes no sense at all. Statements of the bleeding obvious followed by a complete non-sequitur do you no credit at all. .... Phil |
#44
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
|
#45
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
|
#46
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
Mat Nieuwenhoven wrote:
Technically, you are correct. The 1998 book "Testing loudspeakers" from D'Appolito gives the formula in chapter 2.8.3. ** Ya don't say. I like to provide references if possible. ** A tedious pretension to non existent expertise - I'd say. For practical use with given amp, a speaker with a higher SPL at 2.83V will sound louder than one with a lower SPL, even though the latter one might be more efficient when looking at SPL/Watt. ** Sorry, that makes no sense at all. Say if I were to replace the small speakers of my home stereo by ones that can provide a decent SPL at much lower frequencies, and I have the choice of two, one with an SPL of 80 dB and the other with 85 dB (both measured with 2.83 V), then the one with 85 dB will be noticably louder with the same volume settings. That is obvious. Now if these speakers are 6 ohm, and there is a 12 ohm version also, then driven with the same amp the 12 ohm version will be less loud (its SPL at 2.83 V). Yet if one measures both speaker units with regards to efficiency (sound per watt), the 12 ohm one could be more efficient. ** Complete ********. Try actually reading my earlier post directed to YOU and see that the spec is for an *applied watt*" so the rms noise voltage used *DEPENDS* on the speaker's nominal impedance. 2.83V for 8 ohms, 4V for 16 ohms and 3.46 for 12 ohms. BTW Learn not to over snip. ...... Phil |
#47
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
|
#48
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
On 22/04/2019 10:31 pm, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Trevor wrote: Yep, and I said *I* DON'T consider the speaker part of the "guitar itself" or cables and pedals, that's all. Why not? The amplifier is clipping, the speaker is breaking up, the cabinet is deliberately designed to limit bandwidth. Not only that, the output of the amp at high levels is looping back into the guitar pickups, causing the system to ring. The amplifier/speaker is half the system and is likely more a source of "tone" than the instrument itself. You misunderstand, read my original post in full. The sound will definitely depend on the speaker and everything else as you say. BUT *I* wouldn't design a guitar amp around *ONE* guitar, and change the speaker for a different guitar. Would you? So the actual guitar and pedals etc is NOT something I'd take into account when designing a guitar amp/speaker combo. (well I would for a bass guitar Vs 6 string of course) But hey I'm sure there are some who might, can't think of any commercial manufacturers that do though. |
#49
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
On 22/04/2019 10:31 pm, Scott Dorsey wrote: The amplifier is clipping, the speaker is breaking up, the cabinet is deliberately designed to limit bandwidth.Â* Not only that, the output of the amp at high levels is looping back into the guitar pickups, causing the system to ring.Â* The amplifier/speaker is half the system and is likely more a source of "tone" than the instrument itself. On 4/23/2019 7:21 AM, Trevor wrote: You misunderstand, read my original post in full. The sound will definitely depend on the speaker and everything else as you say. BUT *I* wouldn't design a guitar amp around *ONE* guitar, and change the speaker for a different guitar. Would you? I think that what Scott was trying to get across is not that you would design the guitar, processors, amplifier, cabinet, and speaker as a unit, but rather, that a speaker intended for use with an electric guitar would have different design parameters than one that was intended to be used in a home bookshelf speaker, which would have different design parameters than one intended for use in a PA line-array system, etc. -- For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#50
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote: ** That is complete bull****. I have spent a great deal of time in my so far 46 year career testing and verifying makers specs for audio equipment ( including speakers ) and find very little to complain about. Then why do we keep seeing frequency ranges without tolerances? And why will you never see a distortion spec on a loudspeaker? ** Here is the context that Mr Dorsey mischievously snipped: " As I said, published specifications for loudspeakers, and in fact, for most audio products, aren't worth the paper they're printed on " My comment was clearly about *published specs* !! If specs are simply not supplied, that is another matter. I get the spec sheet. Important stuff is missing. Enough to frequently make the spec sheet worthless. It's getting worse too. I have three microphones from China with the same frequency response plots. The measured frequency response of all three bears no connection to the supplied plot. The manufacturer bought a capsule from someplace and put the capsule manufacturer's plot on the microphone datasheet, totally ignoring the contribution of the rest of the microphone. The term "frequency range" means what is says, the range of frequencies a speaker is capable of producing. Frequency response is a different spec, requiring a graph. You put enough power into anything and it'll move. Maybe not for very long before it fails, but it'll move. Distortion specs are non simple, as the amount varies widely with frequency and level. Reviews sometimes cover THD with a series of graphs. Yes. Be really nice to see distortion spectra too, but you won't see one on a datasheet. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#51
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
In article , Mike Rivers wrote:
On 22/04/2019 10:31 pm, Scott Dorsey wrote: The amplifier is clipping, the speaker is breaking up, the cabinet is deliberately designed to limit bandwidth.Â* Not only that, the output of the amp at high levels is looping back into the guitar pickups, causing the system to ring.Â* The amplifier/speaker is half the system and is likely more a source of "tone" than the instrument itself. On 4/23/2019 7:21 AM, Trevor wrote: You misunderstand, read my original post in full. The sound will definitely depend on the speaker and everything else as you say. BUT *I* wouldn't design a guitar amp around *ONE* guitar, and change the speaker for a different guitar. Would you? I think that what Scott was trying to get across is not that you would design the guitar, processors, amplifier, cabinet, and speaker as a unit, but rather, that a speaker intended for use with an electric guitar would have different design parameters than one that was intended to be used in a home bookshelf speaker, which would have different design parameters than one intended for use in a PA line-array system, etc. This is true. But... I know plenty of guitarists who have several different amps. They use this amp when they want this tone and that amp when they want that tone. Just like sax reeds. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#52
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
Distortion specs are non simple, as the amount varies widely with frequency and level. Reviews sometimes cover THD with a series of graphs. On 4/23/2019 9:16 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote: Yes. Be really nice to see distortion spectra too, but you won't see one on a datasheet. The specifications define the design The data sheet tells you how close you came to your design choices The numbers that you see in the ads and web sites is neither of the above. It's what the manufacturer wants you to compare with their competitors' publications. It's a very glossed-over view of reality. -- For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#53
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
Mat Nieuwenhoven wrote:
Technically, you are correct. The 1998 book "Testing loudspeakers" from D'Appolito gives the formula in chapter 2.8.3. ** Ya don't say. I like to provide references if possible. ** A tedious pretension to non existent expertise - I'd say. I do not doubt your decades of experience in this field, but I prefer verifiable references. ** What a pretentious prat you are. For practical use with given amp, a speaker with a higher SPL at 2.83V will sound louder than one with a lower SPL, even though the latter one might be more efficient when looking at SPL/Watt. ** Sorry, that makes no sense at all. Say if I were to replace the small speakers of my home stereo by ones that can provide a decent SPL at much lower frequencies, and I have the choice of two, one with an SPL of 80 dB and the other with 85 dB (both measured with 2.83 V), then the one with 85 dB will be noticably louder with the same volume settings. That is obvious. Now if these speakers are 6 ohm, and there is a 12 ohm version also, then driven with the same amp the 12 ohm version will be less loud (its SPL at 2.83 V). Yet if one measures both speaker units with regards to efficiency (sound per watt), the 12 ohm one could be more efficient. ** Complete ********. Try actually reading my earlier post directed to YOU and see that the spec is for an *applied watt*" so the rms noise voltage used *DEPENDS* on the speaker's nominal impedance. 2.83V for 8 ohms, 4V for 16 ohms and 3.46 for 12 ohms. I did read your posts, and it is exactly what I wanted to point out. ** Unfortunately you are totally WRONG. The _efficiency_ is defined per applied watt. A given amp gives out voltage. If the amp is capable of say 40 Vrms output, then a lower impedance speaker will get more watts than a higher impedance one, provided the amp can supply enough current. An 8 ohm speaker will then take 200W, a 16 ohm speaker 100W. The 16 ohm one would have to have twice the efficiency per watt as the 8 ohm one in order to produce the same SPL. ** You are merely repeating the same complete ********. Because the power level is 1 watt, the dB/watt/metre test uses different noise voltages for different impedance speakers. You have no point. ....... Phil |
#54
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
Scott Dorsey wrote:
** That is complete bull****. I have spent a great deal of time in my so far 46 year career testing and verifying makers specs for audio equipment ( including speakers ) and find very little to complain about. Then why do we keep seeing frequency ranges without tolerances? And why will you never see a distortion spec on a loudspeaker? ** Here is the context that Mr Dorsey mischievously snipped: " As I said, published specifications for loudspeakers, and in fact, for most audio products, aren't worth the paper they're printed on " My comment was clearly about *published specs* !! If specs are simply not supplied, that is another matter. I get the spec sheet. Important stuff is missing. Enough to frequently make the spec sheet worthless. ** Really ? You are bull****ting wildly. It's getting worse too. I have three microphones from China with the same frequency response plots. The measured frequency response of all three bears no connection to the supplied plot. The manufacturer bought a capsule from someplace and put the capsule manufacturer's plot on the microphone datasheet, totally ignoring the contribution of the rest of the microphone. ** Really - that is enough for you to condemn the entire audio industry for publishing false specs ? How absurd. The term "frequency range" means what is says, the range of frequencies a speaker is capable of producing. Frequency response is a different spec, requiring a graph. You put enough power into anything and it'll move. Maybe not for very long before it fails, but it'll move. ** Really - is that the best you can do? Distortion specs are non simple, as the amount varies widely with frequency and level. Reviews sometimes cover THD with a series of graphs. Yes. Be really nice to see distortion spectra too, but you won't see one on a datasheet. ** Still not an example of publishing false specs. Get real. ...... Phil |
#55
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
Mike Rivers wrote:
Distortion specs are non simple, as the amount varies widely with frequency and level. Reviews sometimes cover THD with a series of graphs. Yes. Be really nice to see distortion spectra too, but you won't see one on a datasheet. The specifications define the design ** No, they characterise the performance of a given design. The data sheet tells you how close you came to your design choices ** Huh ? Makes no sense at all. The numbers that you see in the ads and web sites is neither of the above. ** Of course, since they are not what you have claimed. It's what the manufacturer wants you to compare with their competitors' publications. ** Good specs help to sell products, nothing new there. It's a very glossed-over view of reality. ** That is your barking mad opinion. Slandering the entire audio industry because particular specs are simply not published is a gross absurdity. Mike Rivers reputation as a know nothing, bull**** artist is not in any danger. ..... Phil |
#56
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
On Tuesday, April 23, 2019 at 3:39:32 PM UTC-5, wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote: ** That is complete bull****. I have spent a great deal of time in my so far 46 year career testing and verifying makers specs for audio equipment ( including speakers ) and find very little to complain about. Then why do we keep seeing frequency ranges without tolerances? And why will you never see a distortion spec on a loudspeaker? ** Here is the context that Mr Dorsey mischievously snipped: " As I said, published specifications for loudspeakers, and in fact, for most audio products, aren't worth the paper they're printed on " My comment was clearly about *published specs* !! If specs are simply not supplied, that is another matter. I get the spec sheet. Important stuff is missing. Enough to frequently make the spec sheet worthless. ** Really ? You are bull****ting wildly. It's getting worse too. I have three microphones from China with the same frequency response plots. The measured frequency response of all three bears no connection to the supplied plot. The manufacturer bought a capsule from someplace and put the capsule manufacturer's plot on the microphone datasheet, totally ignoring the contribution of the rest of the microphone. ** Really - that is enough for you to condemn the entire audio industry for publishing false specs ? How absurd. The term "frequency range" means what is says, the range of frequencies a speaker is capable of producing. Frequency response is a different spec, requiring a graph. You put enough power into anything and it'll move. Maybe not for very long before it fails, but it'll move. ** Really - is that the best you can do? Distortion specs are non simple, as the amount varies widely with frequency and level. Reviews sometimes cover THD with a series of graphs. Yes. Be really nice to see distortion spectra too, but you won't see one on a datasheet. ** Still not an example of publishing false specs. Get real. ..... Phil I took you seriously until you started engaging in ad hominem attacks. |
#57
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
James Price wrote:
** Still not an example of publishing false specs. Get real. I took you seriously until you started engaging in ad hominem attacks. ** You must be delusional - there are simply no "ad hominem" attacks coming from me. FYI #1 All your posts here look like trolls, based on garbage posted on some unidentified forum. FYI #2 The internet exists so that fools can misinform each other. FYI You have no idea *at all* who is right and who is not - making it impossible to correctly judge the posted replies. So you get it wrong. ..... Phil |
#58
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
On 23/04/2019 11:03 pm, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 22/04/2019 10:31 pm, Scott Dorsey wrote: The amplifier is clipping, the speaker is breaking up, the cabinet is deliberately designed to limit bandwidth.Â* Not only that, the output of the amp at high levels is looping back into the guitar pickups, causing the system to ring.Â* The amplifier/speaker is half the system and is likely more a source of "tone" than the instrument itself. On 4/23/2019 7:21 AM, Trevor wrote: You misunderstand, read my original post in full. The sound will definitely depend on the speaker and everything else as you say. BUT *I* wouldn't design a guitar amp around *ONE* guitar, and change the speaker for a different guitar. Would you? I think that what Scott was trying to get across is not that you would design the guitar, processors, amplifier, cabinet, and speaker as a unit, but rather, that a speaker intended for use with an electric guitar would have different design parameters than one that was intended to be used in a home bookshelf speaker, which would have different design parameters than one intended for use in a PA line-array system, etc. Well duh! Did anybody say otherwise? |
#59
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
On 23/04/2019 11:18 pm, Scott Dorsey wrote:
This is true. But... I know plenty of guitarists who have several different amps. They use this amp when they want this tone and that amp when they want that tone. Just like sax reeds. Of course, just as they would change guitars for a different tone. And naturally they often use different combinations of guitar and amp for certain tones. Changing speakers in one amp is not something usually done a regular basis though! :-) |
#60
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
James Price wrote:
..... Phil I took you seriously until you started engaging in ad hominem attacks. He does that. For the most part he knows what he's talking about but sometimes he just goes off his nut like this. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#61
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
In article , Trevor wrote:
On 23/04/2019 11:18 pm, Scott Dorsey wrote: This is true. But... I know plenty of guitarists who have several different amps. They use this amp when they want this tone and that amp when they want that tone. Just like sax reeds. Of course, just as they would change guitars for a different tone. And naturally they often use different combinations of guitar and amp for certain tones. Changing speakers in one amp is not something usually done a regular basis though! :-) That's why you get separate head amp and cabinet, so you can swap different cabinets around with the same electronics! It's crazy the stuff musicians do. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#62
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
Scott Dorsey wrote:
** Some troll posted: I took you seriously until you started engaging in ad hominem attacks. He does that. For the most part he knows what he's talking about but sometimes he just goes off his nut like this. ** That would be an "ad hominem" attack on me - would it not? Abusive, non specific and complete bull****. ..... Phil |
#63
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
On Wednesday, April 24, 2019 at 8:36:37 AM UTC-5, Scott Dorsey wrote:
James Price wrote: I took you seriously until you started engaging in ad hominem attacks. He does that. For the most part he knows what he's talking about but sometimes he just goes off his nut like this. Noted. |
#64
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
** You must be delusional - there are simply no "ad hominem" attacks coming from me.
The irony is palpable. |
#65
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
Tobiah the Troll wrote:
** You must be delusional - there are simply no "ad hominem" attacks coming from me. The irony is palpable. ** **** off you bran dead troll ..... Phil |
#66
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
wrote:
Tobiah the Troll wrote: ** You must be delusional - there are simply no "ad hominem" attacks coming from me. The irony is palpable. ** **** off you bran dead troll .... Phil I'd have to say that while Phil is very often a source of very good information on this newsgroup, the above post very definitely looks like an "ad hominem" attack. |
#67
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
Ralph Barone wrote:
Tobiah the Troll wrote: ** You must be delusional - there are simply no "ad hominem" attacks coming from me. The irony is palpable. ** **** off you bran dead troll .... Phil I'd have to say that while Phil is very often a source of very good information on this newsgroup, the above post very definitely looks like an "ad hominem" attack. ** Well, you must have a strange idea of what constitutes "ad hominem". FYI #1 Fair comment is NOT an "ad hominem" attack. Advising a poster who uses an offensive, smart arse remark as his only post to go away quickly is not an "ad hominem attack". Using an offensive, smart are remark as one's only post is the act of a troll. To also call such a person "brain dead" is fair comment. What Tobiah posted WAS very clearly an "ad hominem " attack, on me. He got back what he deserved. FYI #2 An "ad hominem " attack is typically a mixture of verbal abuse and downright lies posted in place of a proper answer to fair criticism and/or factual information. Try reading more carefully and thinking a bit harder next time. If you can. ..... Phil |
#68
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
On Thursday, April 25, 2019 at 11:40:30 PM UTC-5, wrote:
An "ad hominem " attack is typically a mixture of verbal abuse and downright lies posted in place of a proper answer to fair criticism and/or factual information. Try reading more carefully and thinking a bit harder next time. If you can. Ad hominem: marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made. Exhibit A: "Mike Rivers reputation as a know nothing, bull**** artist is not in any danger." |
#69
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
James Price wrote:
An "ad hominem " attack is typically a mixture of verbal abuse and downright lies posted in place of a proper answer to fair criticism and/or factual information. Try reading more carefully and thinking a bit harder next time. If you can. Ad hominem: marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made. ** Straight from Google I bet. Question: Is that not EXACTY what you posted a day or so ago ?? No answer required. Exhibit A: "Mike Rivers reputation as a know nothing, bull**** artist is not in any danger." ** A simple statement of fact. Mike Rivers makes and has long made his living from folk who mindlessly believe his nonsense claim he made re published specs being worthless. There is no answer to his words, since he provided no proof and has never made any attempt to. That you have no clue as to the truth, or not, of any of this is your problem. See my other posts re YOUR character, which you have posted no answer to either. BTW: Did you notice that I was the ONLY person to ACTUALLY answer you question ? Do you have a clue what the word " ingrate " means ? No answer required. ...... Phil |
#70
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
Don Pearce wrote:
A true RMS current meter doesn't help, unfortunately. A speaker's impedance is very reactive so multiplying RMS current and voltage doesn't give you power. ** Of course, but what you actually do is multiply the rms noise current SQUARED by the voice coil resistance to get the heat dissipation in the copper wire in watts. If you find the minimum impedance of the driver with a sine wave test in the mid band, then that number can be used instead of the copper resistance to give an accurate power dissipation figure, including suspension and eddy current losses. That would need some sort of measurement system that could provide vector products. As for doing that with a noise source, forget it. ** A wind band power meter will do the job, analogue multiplying or digital sampling. So no, you can't measure pink noise power into a speaker. ** Of course you can. .... Phil Nope. Didn't understand a word of that. ** Really ?? So " I squared R " has no meaning in your world ? The resistive losses that increase a speaker's mid band, resistive impedance beyond the DC ohms value are also mysterious to you ? A multiplying power meter, using analogue multiplier ICs, is also a mystery ? Where have you been hiding Don. Under a rock? ..... Phil |
#71
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
|
#73
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
On 26/04/2019 11:21 PM, James Price wrote:
On Thursday, April 25, 2019 at 11:40:30 PM UTC-5, wrote: An "ad hominem " attack is typically a mixture of verbal abuse and downright lies posted in place of a proper answer to fair criticism and/or factual information. Try reading more carefully and thinking a bit harder next time. If you can. Ad hominem: marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made. Exhibit A: "Mike Rivers reputation as a know nothing, bull**** artist is not in any danger." Not a thread worth pursuing. Phil is more often than not spot on technically. It's just when he goes of his meds that things get a little out of proportion. geoff |
#74
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
On Friday, April 26, 2019 at 6:43:37 AM UTC-5, wrote:
James Price wrote: An "ad hominem " attack is typically a mixture of verbal abuse and downright lies posted in place of a proper answer to fair criticism and/or factual information. Try reading more carefully and thinking a bit harder next time. If you can. Ad hominem: marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made. ** Straight from Google I bet. Webster's dictionary. Exhibit A: "Mike Rivers reputation as a know nothing, bull**** artist is not in any danger." ** A simple statement of fact. Fine, you're an idiot. That's not an ad hominem. It's a simple statement of fact. |
#75
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
On Friday, April 26, 2019 at 7:43:19 AM UTC-5, geoff wrote:
On 26/04/2019 11:21 PM, James Price wrote: On Thursday, April 25, 2019 at 11:40:30 PM UTC-5, wrote: An "ad hominem " attack is typically a mixture of verbal abuse and downright lies posted in place of a proper answer to fair criticism and/or factual information. Try reading more carefully and thinking a bit harder next time. If you can. Ad hominem: marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made. Exhibit A: "Mike Rivers reputation as a know nothing, bull**** artist is not in any danger." Not a thread worth pursuing. Phil is more often than not spot on technically. It's just when he goes of his meds that things get a little out of proportion. geoff Kind of an idiot savant. |
#76
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
|
#77
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
|
#78
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
Don Pearce wrote:
Nope. Didn't understand a word of that. ** Really ?? So " I squared R " has no meaning in your world ? The resistive losses that increase a speaker's mid band, resistive impedance beyond the DC ohms value are also mysterious to you ? A multiplying power meter, using analogue multiplier ICs, is also a mystery ? Where have you been hiding Don. Under a rock? I squared R has plenty of meaning. Unfortunately a speaker is not an R. It's an X. ** However, the copper voice coil IS a simple resistance hence I squared R applies. You did not read my post. Your measurement method, applied to a pure capacitor, would apparently yield a power level. ** Not at all, an ideal capacitor has a resistance of zero. Try reading my post, it is very clear. ..... Phil |
#79
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
Don Pearce wrote:
Nope. Didn't understand a word of that. ** Really ?? So " I squared R " has no meaning in your world ? The resistive losses that increase a speaker's mid band, resistive impedance beyond the DC ohms value are also mysterious to you ? A multiplying power meter, using analogue multiplier ICs, is also a mystery ? Where have you been hiding Don. Under a rock? .... Phil I squared R has plenty of meaning. Unfortunately a speaker is not an R. It's an X. And I squared X gives you VA, not Watts. Your measurement method, applied to a pure capacitor, would apparently yield a power level. You can't put any power into a capacitor. d Oops - let me correct that. A speaker is a whole slew of different R + jX, with the values being different at every frequency over the measurement band. No scalar instrument can tell you about power transfer into that. You can do it with a vector instrument at a single frequency - and I regularly do that. But a noise signal with a scalar voltmeter and a scalar ammeter? Nope. Not on this earth. ** You are making a very basic mistake. Consider the following: If you apply a noise voltage to a resistor and measure the current flow with a wide band, true rms meter the formula "I squared R " applies exactly. If you add an ideal reactance in series with the resistor the formula "I squared R " still applies since the resistor is the only power dissipating item. A speaker can be accurately modelled as several resistances in series with a lossless reactive component, also in series. My earlier post outlines how to quantify the additional resistances due to suspension losses etc - works out to be about 20% more then the DCR value of the voice coil. So, power dissipation IS "I squared R " where I = the rms current flow and R = the resistive, mid band impedance minimum. BTW: You really need to check out how multiplying power meters work. ..... Phil |
#80
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Listed Specifications for Guitar Speaker Frequency Range
geoff wrote:
Not a thread worth pursuing. Phil is more often than not spot on technically. ** A lot more often than you think - cos you are not in a position to tell. It's just when he goes of his meds that things get a little out of proportion. ** That is a blatant and completely false "ad hominem" attack. ..... Phil |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Frequency range of the voice | Pro Audio | |||
select frequency range | Pro Audio | |||
select frequency range | General | |||
Monitor Frequency Range | Pro Audio | |||
Monitor Frequency Range | Pro Audio |