Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 125

Thread: Klippel Test Links

  1. #21
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    249
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam_MSS View Post

    The anarchy surprises me a little bit with the apparent offset. The Bl curve isn't as flat as I'd expect but doesn't seem to disagree with the other data.
    Very typical of an XBL^2 driver. The Trio did the same thing, and a lot of subs do as well. We had a discussion a while back when I did the Trio about it. It's not due to the motor so much, but designed into the driver that I never got a straight answer on why.
    Just because you don't understand the data doesn't mean it's not relevant.

  2. #22
    Tester Extraordinaire ErinH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,247
    this might help...

    this guy is replying to the hump in Bl for the Scan 18wu; a similar trait found in the Anarchy:
    Quote Originally Posted by feyz View Post
    I am not sure we are talking about same thing because I can't interpret your 1/4 mm reference.

    I was pointing to the double hump (camel back) like shape that XBL motors and this driver shows in their BL vs X curve. Single gap conventional motors don't show this camel back BL curve (i.e. a depression towards zero and humps to both sides before the real decrease)

    The nonlinear sections with conventional single gap motors are towards the extremes of excursion, as you move away from zero displacement, it becomes more nonlinear. The dual gap ones as shown in these, has nonlinearity both at small excursion section and at big excursion section.

    In the conventional ones, the nonlienar regions are avoided when signal is low. With these, nonlinear region is hard to avoid because signal always goes thorough the zero region, whether it is small or large signal.

    It is kind of like the xover distortion of amplifiers, but not as bad because around zero region there is also a flat section, but followed by not flat up and downs to both side.

    So, as to why I said trade off comment, the BL curve is extended, but a penalty is paid by removing flatness in the middle of the BL curve. It is as if stuff is taken from middle added to the ends.

    And how much of this matters? I don't know, since nonlinear distortion is not audible it is not an issue anyways :p
    Your ears: The best tools you have... and they're free, too!

  3. #23
    Senior Member cvjoint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    801
    Real Name
    George
    He is probably talking about the XBL motor topology directly. The Scan is not dual gap. I don't see that much motor strength missing on the Exodus at 0mm. If you think that's offset look at the CSS Klippel, that thing is a tragedy.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    430
    I am dumbfounded with the SDX7 results...I mean these things sound GOOD.

  5. #25
    Senior Member cvjoint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    801
    Real Name
    George
    Well, they do have 4mm of xmax. That's more than the average 7" so it should sound pretty nice. I would think the Exodus would definitely sound nicer, at least for a pure midbass.

  6. #26
    Tester Extraordinaire ErinH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,247
    Last edited by ErinH; 10-29-2011 at 08:53 PM.
    Your ears: The best tools you have... and they're free, too!

  7. #27
    Devil's Advocate Adam_MSS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,578
    Real Name
    Adam
    Interesting results. Much smoother BL curve. Suspension seems off a bit. Does the cone sit forward at rest?

    Looking at the Scan results the WT2 and Klippel measured very similar levels of inductance. With the TD6H there is some spread.

    I've been looking at the Woofer Tester Pro to allow parameter measurement at higher power levels. Seems like it could be a good addition to my testing gear at a fraction of the klippel's cost.
    You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right. - R.Munroe

    The important thing in science is not so much to obtain new facts as to discover new ways of thinking about them. - W.L.Bragg



  8. #28
    Tester Extraordinaire ErinH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,247
    Scan Illuminator 12mu/4ohm results are up:
    DIYMA.com - Scientific Car Audio - Truth in Sound Quality
    Last edited by ErinH; 10-29-2011 at 08:53 PM.
    Your ears: The best tools you have... and they're free, too!

  9. #29
    Senior Member cvjoint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    801
    Real Name
    George
    Do you have more info on the large signal parameter of the WT?

  10. #30
    Tester Extraordinaire ErinH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,247
    woofertester.com

    Personally, I'm interested in a good perception based Rub & Buzz test. It's much more QC type testing, but if you can get it, I think it would be an extremely nice way to round out a test package. WT3 offers it as an add-on for $20, but it's not perception based.
    Perceptual Rub & Buzz Test Sequence for use with SoundCheck


    FWIW, this is what I'm planning on building in my next test room (look at the speaker testing setup in the wall):
    Last edited by ErinH; 10-08-2011 at 12:19 PM.
    Your ears: The best tools you have... and they're free, too!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •