Differences between compression drivers

[Robh3606]

If you want that as a reference for comparison then it needs to be validated. Otherwise it’s misleading.

On the basis of you’ve posted if it was true then why bother with beryllium??

I think there needs standard for the rise time and the other settings

The rise time is on every measurement, the smoothing and gate time. I don't change the rise time so same conditions. So what's the beef?

That is the default in Clio 7.11 and Clio Pocket 3.0 . So even between the 2 platforms same conditions. Both of which are calibrated for accuracy.

I don't see a reference on the plot for rise time on the 66000? So it's not valid.

I posted those in response to some of the drivers in the presentation. It's obvious to me that JBL did a good job with the diamond surround.

Let's see what you get. You still have your 2344/2425-26 combo? Set your conditions and we can compare. A 2370 or a 2307?

Did this with Zilch years ago and they were damn near identical.

Rob

https://www.audioheritage.org/vbulle...highlight=clio

[Robh3606]

Hello Ian

435Al/2431 measurement standard .580 and .15 rise time un-smoothed same gating .

Still "clean" either way. Little more detail faster rise time. Sticking with default standard.

Rob

[Robh3606]

"Your waterfalls have a different windows.

That completely changes the perspective of a waterfall plot. They all have to be like for like or its a waste of time comparing them because it's a visual representation. In REW I can make any driver look good, bad or indifferent by changing the perspective.

The real point is that the diaphragm output decays smoothly for a good 2ms then here are resonances ringing for 2.5ms or so out 5.1 ms. The thing is this diaphragm isn't well damped and that is why it sound's live."



Hello Ian


Changing the window length does not change the result.

You have choices for the number of slices I use 60 typically and if you increase the window the time between each slice increases.

This slightly changes the CSD appearance but but does not change the results

Do you or do you not have substantial ringing? That doesn't change.

Also looking down 40db you are in the mud. Go back and look at the CSD range used in the Beryllium presentation you posted it's 25db.

Also if you go back to the video 1st post you will see they are comparing CSD plots with different time windows and Db scales yet they seem to have no issue with it?

So I guess their presentation is wrong?

Change your view to 25db it will be closer to what I typically post. Also try a .58 msec rise time vs the 2.9 msec you have now.

Using the same conditions they should be much closer than your current settings.

Posted are window length changed CSD plots first and second posted at 25db.

No significant change.

Changes from 25db range to 40db last 2

Lots of garbage down there.

Now last one I adjusted to your parameters 40db scale 2.9m sec rise time. We are trying to see what's happening say 2 msec later to see the decay. With a rise time that wide you are actually obscuring what you are trying to see.

The actual decay is faster than you think and your rise time is effecting what you are seeing.

Probably that is why Clio default is .58 Msec risetime.

If your are going to post the 3 stooges please use the real ones and not the remake guys!


Rob

[Mr. Widget]

That makes you hypocrite then does it given your previous statements. You are an XXX. Your wife said XXX. l guess we just need to understand your limitations in the broader sense.

Ian,

Barry was being diplomatic, you are being a real jerk and your behavior is totally unacceptable. You have been attacking anyone you think disagrees with you. Disagreement is fine, but personal attacks are absolutely not.

Put a full stop to this personal attack BS or you will be blocked from posting.


Widget

[hjames]

Enough of this angry BS, Ian - no one wants to read it and it gains no one any ground.
I've just deleted a ton of Ian's posts and other posts that quoted and replied to it.
I sit quiet most of the time, but I have no problem swinging a permanent BAN on such abusive attacks.
I've been here for near 20 years and its always been a friendly place to learn and grow,
but this "any disagreement is an attack on me" crap has got to stop.

I'll ban you myself if you keep up with this!
And "blaming americans" for your disagrements is too ridiculous to even address in any detail.

Just chill - and if you can't chill - LEAVE (or be cast out).

[DerekTheGreat]

Enough of this angry BS, Ian - no one wants to read it and it gains no one any ground.
I've just deleted a ton of Ian's posts and other posts that quoted and replied to it...

Hey! I was in the middle of reading those angry, drunken posts!

[hjames]

Its an Attitude thing. If you can discuss technical issues without insulting folks that differ from you, feel free to stay.
The site has existed for a long time while people treated each other as peers.
I am not telling you to fuck off, I am telling you to be FRIENDLY and respectful to each other.
If you gotta push people down to get your opinion across, head somewhere else.
Accept it or not, that's just how it is.

I do not accept that critique. I think it's very one sided and I don't think you have any idea what the real issue is.

You are the USA brand here and you wear what I think you deserve to know. You have have to put on better face here. Offload your shit elsewhere. I have a lot of dealings with people regularly without issue and we have long relationships across different cultures. I've been doing it a long time.

It's up to Robert to come to terms with the fact that he has to become open to change, to be flexible and listen and understand some else's point of view. Not become rigid, a dictator, impatient and aggressive. People are allowed to raise legitimate questions when something doesn't look right. Don't play that alternative politics. It's getting a bit tired. I can see daylight right through you.

The response was what's your beef?? Robert needs to inclusive and step back and be patient and open up to different perspectives. That way this place will grow. At this point it's shrinking. He did the same thing to Rob S recently and he knows it. Robert H is being the dick here.

I didn't ask to be told how think, to be interrogated. Why this why that, you should do this and do that? Really??
His job is to listen and learn. Above all listen and learn from others. Earl recently insulted me without thinking. It was a fuck off statement. Re educate yourself. FFS. That's unacceptable. If they can get way with that they will keep doing it because they have no cause. I will drop them point blank hard. No excuses. No prisoners.

I asked Greg recently if he wanted to post here and he said he was not the least bit interested. He's over it. Go figure.

I am one of a few active technically orientated contributors here and you are telling me to fuck off.
If you feel the LHS is now waiting room go ahead. Your problem is you are perishing and the clocks ticking. The reality is your very vulnerability and your nervous about what's next.

The reality is I have the technical data to prove my point comparing a standard 2425 titanium diaphragm with a dusted one. It didn't get that far and it won't. It's more important that it be communicated the right environment.

Other people are very interested in this information. I am not in business of being dictated to.

Over and out

[Robh3606]

Hello Ian

Let's set the record straight.

Go look at post 31 you had concerns about the CSD's and thought they should be validated.

So in the same post I referenced the Clio Clinic we set up years ago. I corroborated with Zilch by verifying and changing test conditions.

I asked you to post what you have, all of my relevant test conditions were on the graphs.

Post 33

You opened with my windows were different and that made comparisons between them invalid for comparison purposes.

I changed the windows and verified the window differences were not significant.

You also said that the diaphragm decays smoothly for 2 msecs

I asked you to make changes so we could compare what I had posted

My last CSD was posted using your conditions and it looked similar to REV's

If you would have posted your CSD's with my settings we would have been able to confirm the CSD in both REV and Clio Pocket 3.0 were essentially interchangeable.

You chose not to and instead you got down right nasty.:

"I didn't ask to be told how think, to be interrogated. Why this why that, you should do this and do that? Really??
His job is to listen and learn. Above all listen and learn from others. Earl recently insulted me without thinking. It was a fuck off statement. Re educate yourself. FFS. That's unacceptable. If they can get way with that they will keep doing it because they have no cause. I will drop them point blank hard. No excuses. No prisoners."

That say's it all.

You missed an opportunity and the point.

Rob

[1audiohack]

Hello Rob and All;

I for one am keenly interested in this topic. I have for the last decade generally used my plane wave tube for my compression driver testing. I use the phase response to see where the driver becomes non linear. The visual plots you are showing are very easy to see where the ringing occurs and the extent of it.

My go to platform is TEF. That is what JBL used in the day for drivers like the 435’s. What is nice is that I can see exactly how they set up the test parameters and duplicate them for some continuity. TEF has the world’s worst waterfall graphics, it works well though.


I have just scratched the surface of REW and am quite surprised at how much functionality is buried in there.

I am also interested in applying the GedLee metric to my measurement routines. I don’t really want to buy and learn another platform and I think that Virtins virtual is the only platform that offers a somewhat turn key software pack to use GedLee? If anyone knows otherwise please share.

Responding to an Ian critique, it is true that I rarely have much to offer here. I am too busy to pursue this hobby anywhere near as much as I would like to and then to spend the time to document it and post it and defend it, just doesn’t fit into my life currently.

I don’t know if there is anything that I can do to advance this but I am in for what ever I can do.

Thanks Rob.
Barry.

[Ian Mackenzie]

Well Good luck with whatever it’s your about.

The problem is you’re now resentful and recalcitrant to anything you don’t already know. Giskard had the same problems although you tolerated it because there was something in it for you. He literally ripped a new hole every day of the week. You now gather in numbers to form a consensus as a decision making body. It’s like a Mr Wick movie. Oh John you’re out of favour with the society old buddy. The Adjudicator wants to see you. Mustn’t stir the pot…Lol. It’s amusing that you haven’t been able to sort out how to ban me……..muhhhhhhhh. OMG 😨.

Just look at yourselves suddenly waking up after you’ve been told. Bit late. The train has left the station. It’s a joke. I am not here for your entertainment. I’ve never been vilified ever and it’s not starting now.

The reality is these issues only exist statistically in this environment here. Robert has been trawling behind me for a number of years making really stupid assertions. In his own mind he needs control. He hides in the shadows. In 2003 he asserted that l shouldn’t start a 4343-4344 upgrade thread because how do l know it will make a difference? He was very defensive about. He’s been resentful ever since. I do nt want that so you can’t have it mentality. It’s called controlling behaviour and it’s been outlawed on social media and public forums. People with these personalities cling to the nearest risk because they fear the unknown. They don’t like change or unexpected events.

The world embraced the 4343-4344 thread that Ed and l wrote and thousands came to become involved. I find it very disturbing that someone in a position of authority holds that kind of dark attitude and behaviour. It’s actually scary.

I’ve compared posts and interactions from 10-15 years ago and there is a world of difference in the attitudes of the players involved. The LHS has become a very niche non technical jabber fest. In comparison to other environments this here is a totally un moderated church (sect) type gathering that now caters for a locked in residence. It’s like a small group who doesn’t like being interrupted.

“Oh what’s he talking about??? No the world is flat. Can’t you see.” There are no rules except the rules that suit on the day. A nursing home for some frail old folks.

Others are well aware and that is why they now post elsewhere. Unfortunately is too late to re build. They have moved on and they repeatedly have commented on behaviours here. The words strange come up.

You can’t go singling someone out and passing the blame. It’s doesn’t work. It’s what you’ve become. Obviously l no longer fit and l accept that. A whole new world awaits.

I wish you all fun with your JBL systems.

[pos]

I am also interested in applying the GedLee metric to my measurement routines.

Hi Barry

What metric are you referring too? Is it related to his polar map tool?
IIRC I once read Earl Geddes state that he preferred to rely on magnitude/phase measurements rather than waterfalls and such, as he found they provided just as much info when properly analyzed.

[DerekTheGreat]

...I’ve compared posts and interactions from 10-15 years ago and there is a world of difference in the attitudes of the players involved. The LHS has become a very niche non technical jabber fest. In comparison to other environments this here is a totally un moderated church (sect) type gathering that now caters for a locked in residence. It’s like a small group who doesn’t like being interrupted...

...I wish you all fun with your JBL systems.

How can you go about practically insulting people and then wishing them well? Why bother? The posts are gone now, but from what I remember reading, I recall being downright flabbergasted at your responses to Rob, you insulted the fella. Comments like: "..I don't need a reeducation.." are about as condescending as it gets. And they say Millennials, gen x and gen z's have a problem with constructive criticism... Everybody here has helped me in some way, including yourself. In the words of Rodney King (Wasn't it him?), "Can't we all just get along?" You know, I don't make sense of ~90% of what I come across here. For example: Ringing? Where/how do you see that on those graphs? And all those stats and parameters that are posted? WHOOSH! Right over my ignorant head. Even so, I still bothered to join this forum, well aware that I'd add no value. Glad I did, for if I hadn't, I wouldn't have the connections I have now, nor would I be having "fun with my JBL systems" as I am now. But I feel this forum still thrives on the technical side of things. Most of the non-technical conversations don't seem to inspire half as many responses as those which are asking for advice or guidance.

[Robh3606]

Hi Barry

What metric are you referring too? Is it related to his polar map tool?
IIRC I once read Earl Geddes state that he preferred to rely on magnitude/phase measurements rather than waterfalls and such, as he found they provided just as much info when properly analyzed.

Hello pos

Do you know what software or tools he was talking about? I have always been curious why HOM's are not lets say obvious in Group Delay and CSD plots.

Unless of course they are there but are difficult to see. Like the Step vs Impulse where the Step is easier to see actual delay between the drivers.

If I remember he uses Mathlab? And he has several applications he developed like his polar maps as an example.


Hello Barry

Let's see where the thread leads. I have been looking at CSD vs Wavelet. Admittedly I find the CSD's easier to understand vs Wavelets especially the Time Preferred Plot.

Rob

[1audiohack]

Hello Rob and Thomas;

My limited understanding of the GedLee metric is that it measures for many? types of distortions and applies a metric to the level of each of what Dr. Geddes believes are objectionable. Some or all of these distortion objections vary with level.

I have had a couple of disagreements with Dr Geddes on the audibility and objectionability of some types of audio chain distortions. For instance, I still don't believe that his choice to use the Talking Heads song Burning Down the House was the best audio track one could use to test people's ability to discern different levels of harmonic distortion in a sound system. Be that as it may, I do believe that he is correct on many fronts and his work to create a metric to actually show, through measurement, possibly the why this one, sounds better than that one, despite what some of the measurements that we are used to using might show us, but don't or can't answer this question. I believe this has real value and I would like to explore it much further.

The only software that I am aware of that measures for GedLee Metric distortions is available from Virtins Multi Instrument. See Virtins.com. Apparently you need the Pro version that currently costs $229.95 USD and the Device Test Plan that costs an additional $100. USD.

Thet price of the Virtins software is a total non issue, it is just one more thing I will have to learn. I wish GedLee metric was available in REW. Maybe it soon will be.. I should probably just ask.

All the best.
Barry.

[1audiohack]

Hi Barry

What metric are you referring too? Is it related to his polar map tool?
IIRC I once read Earl Geddes state that he preferred to rely on magnitude/phase measurements rather than waterfalls and such, as he found they provided just as much info when properly analyzed.

Hello Thomas;

If recall correctly Dr Geddes has interest in the phase relationship of the higher harmonics with the fundamentals? I do. This is where for instance if a diaphragm is ringing, the sound is no longer correlated with the fundamental and is just noise. This is what we see with the diamond surround drivers. The extra HF is not signal correlated, its energy seen in many frequency domain measurements is energy dispersed in the time domain.

Richard Heyser spoke about this and gave is the tools to measure this in the late sixties I think or early seventies.

I hope we get somewhere on this.

All my best.
Barry.