GFuNK

I do not in any way mean to diminish the great research that is done though! Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Engineers are applied scientists. I'm actually a research engineer if you feel this is such a crucial point. I don't see a huge amount of ground breaking research coming out of the hifi industry being adopted elsewhere. We certainly don't use hifi cables for our precision laboratory equipment. I feel a more crucial point is that you deal in cables. This my friend is a clear conflict of interest. Does it make your opinion less valid? Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Whilst his language is perhaps a little too strong in places, the underlying message is just a reiteration of the original video. Bob perhaps there are better ways to get your message across, you will not get a good response with this approach. I've encountered fraudulent claims in the hifi industry which have made me quite mad. As an engineer i understand the science and I can point out why their claims are flawed but when people fall back on the "you can't measure everything" and "your system is not revealing enough" then there is no point. It really is like debating the existence of god. I will continue to point out ideas that I think are flawed in the hope that people will question them and not reward bad engineering. I'm happy to be proven wrong, I don't know everything and i will continue to work on my manners . Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Is that entirely legal? One way to look at it is that you are potentially denying the artist royalties if the person who gets your mp3 would/may have purchased the album. Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Yeah, that might reduce diffraction ripples on axis. Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Having said that, it's a work of art, and you might absolutely love the sound! Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

My gut feeling is that you will get a pretty nasty dispersion pattern and potentially some nasty diffraction ripples in the frequency response. I think it's unavoidable with such a design. Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Apologies I haven't read the 60 or so previous pages in their entirety, there seems to be allot of chat about resonance, but is there any concern to the diffraction and scattering off the protruding horns? Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

I'm interested in the boom if willing to post to Melbourne. Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

So we can agree that the source is modified by the horn loading . Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

My understanding is that a horn would reduce the mechanical load on the driver thereby modifying the source characteristics. Wouldn't the change in directivity be related the dispersion of the waveguide? These are different things which are of course related to the specifics of a horn geometry.Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

Acoustic impedance that is. Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

My understanding is that horns are an efficiency increasing device that also modify the radiation pattern. Don't they increase efficiency through impedance matching? Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

I think you need to listen to some and compare . Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

The mechanism of dipolar radiation was known well before linkwitz was around. There is certainly less sound power going into the room. At low frequency it would excite the room differently. I've heard electrostatics before (dipolar) and off axis the change can be quite pronounced, strong sweet spot. Completely different philosophy in reproduction between the two I guess.

You mean they radiate in a dipole pattern don't you? That is, there is very little sound radiation out the sides. Very inefficient. Linkwitzs swears by them though. Is it for their symmetrical directivity? I forget. Regardless I think you need plenty of space for them. Why would they have a better FR though?

Well I must say I love the screen on my two touches. Displaying the track with progress and virtual vu's is great. Also I actually prefer to use the remote rather than my phone or tablet sometimes. Lastly, in all seriousness, having it display the date and time when in standby is awesome! I would not downgrade to a screenless steamer... The airplay and some of the other features are certainly of interest though... Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

I grew up in Townsville, when I was last there I saw that the only decent hifi store in town had closed down! Where do you get/listen to new gear?

Generalizations like this are misleading and plain silly. You do NOT need to spend 150% speaker rrp on amps to get the "best" out of speakers.I felt I needed to respond to provide a balanced view.

With 3kW peak power people are gonna have to install 15A lines for each of these speakers . I would love to see the distortion levels on the drivers! I agree with others that the marketing department have made some very tall claims.

I've used tontine, just keep jamming it in there to increase the density and flow resistivity . Or go to bunnings buy a big tube to use as an impedance tube and measure the absorption properties of different samples. Completely agree that anything with acoustic in the name is hugely inflated in price!

Wow, that stereophile link is hilarious. I do share the disappointment that engineering innovation and excellence is rewarded far less often than excellent marketing. Must be using some very purty lipstick on that pig... Sorry I couldn't help myself .

Came late to this one too. Kind of surprised there isn't a sticky on this topic since it had been done to death and just keeps popping up.

Oops I meant to quote rawls post #41. Tricky doing this on my phone... You are right, baffles are usually pretty plain looking! There are also practical impediments to running gear and speakers in seperate rooms. I use predominantly solid state. In my experience, there are bigger gains to be made elsewhere rather than obsessing over microphonics. Also, let's get into some good habits here. We don't normally refer to noise as "airborne vibrations". It gets confusing otherwise. As a noise and vibration engineer we deal with both seperately. Also, lets speak more plainly instead of throwing around buzzwords like Q, it just confuses people. Q is a measure of damping associated with a particular resonance, a CLD platform will have infinite resonance frequencies and they are certainly not "tuned" devices. There is, however, an optimal way of applying a CL. This is a function of the properties of the CL and host materials. Not every CLD platform is born equal . You are, however, certainly right about CLD being one of the best ways to reduce structural vibration!

Interesting thoughts, can't say I agree with them all... Also, a constrained layer damped platform will not absorb air-borne noise. It will only dissipate the vibration induced in the platform. The equipment will still be subject to the same levels of insonification. If you believe these effects are so pronounced, you need to treat both structural and air-borne paths. Either cover the equipment with some form of acoustic baffle or put it in another room away from those pesky speakers.