DSE 10" Sub $148 on website
Me&Myself
If you were interested in getting one of the DSE subs:
Print this out and take to your local store to show them it is $148.
Craig
> If you were interested in getting one of the DSE subs:
>
> Print this out and take to your local store to show them it is $148.
Looks like they have updated their Web site.
The price can't be beaten.
Bob Bobslef
of the store, go back in and buy it again. Save you $30.
"What The!" <bl...@blah.comm> wrote in message
news:_ygPb.20680$Wa....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Now that just fucking shits the pants off me after buying one a couple of
> days ago and the guy saying he can't budge on the price.
>
> "Me&Myself" <mscarboro...@netspace.net.au> wrote in message
> news:buigu3$20e6$1...@otis.netspace.net.au...
> >
>
http://www.dse.com.au/cgi-bin/dse.storefront/400cc6af050f6fe8273fc0a87f9c071
Bob Saccamano
"What The!" <bl...@blah.comm> wrote in message
news:_ygPb.20680$Wa....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Now that just fucking shits the pants off me after buying one a couple of
> days ago and the guy saying he can't budge on the price.
>
> "Me&Myself" <mscarboro...@netspace.net.au> wrote in message
> news:buigu3$20e6$1...@otis.netspace.net.au...
> >
>
Unknown
>Went in, spoke to one of the "authorised to refund" people and got my $30
>back, it would have been bad if he refused i guess 'coz it was clearly
>stamped on the back of the reciept "14 days money back garentee no questions
>asked" .
>I'm slightly happier for that bit of 'good fortune' .
>
Thats excellent :)
I love it when someone gets a win in such circumstances as these :)
>
>"Bob Bobslef" <bh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:400d9f4a$0$26114$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
Fred
"What The!" <bl...@blah.comm> wrote in message
> After a few hours of running in, and doing a few small things like
replacing
> the internal acoustic foam and removing the grille from the port, it
doesn't
> sound too bad. Its certainly a good addition if you don't have a subwoofer
> at hte moment, and my room is reasonably big and it does a good job. I
found
> that i initially had to have it quite loud to get any sound out of it, but
> since it gotten a bit more use, i've been able to turn it down quite a bit
> as its really started to give a decent sound, for the money that is.
I doubt that the output of the sub has altered much. It's much more likely
that "you" have become accustomed to "it". Ive been running mine at about
1/3 volume for over a month, which seems quite adequate, without any
noticeable change in the quality of output. I even tried it in the lounge
room but it didn't seem to add much as the main speakers have two 8" woofers
each and they produce enough bass.
Denz
"What The!" <bl...@blah.comm> wrote in message
> After a few hours of running in, and doing a few small things like
replacing
> the internal acoustic foam and removing the grille from the port, it
doesn't
> sound too bad. Its certainly a good addition if you don't have a subwoofer
> at hte moment, and my room is reasonably big and it does a good job. I
found
> that i initially had to have it quite loud to get any sound out of it, but
> since it gotten a bit more use, i've been able to turn it down quite a bit
> as its really started to give a decent sound, for the money that is.
Im a little sceptical about this idea of 'running in' speakers- is it real,
or urban legend? What is supposed to be different about a speaker that is
'run in' ?
Fred
"Denz" <RUB...@RUBBISHhotmail.com> wrote in message
news:OlXQb.27810$Wa.1...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> Im a little sceptical about this idea of 'running in' speakers- is it
real,
> or urban legend? What is supposed to be different about a speaker that is
> 'run in' ?
I am more than just sceptical. I don't believe it at all. People just become
accustomed to the sound of the loudspeaker and then tell themselves that it
has changed. I find it laughable.
Dale
"What The!" <bl...@blah.comm> wrote in message
> fred, wouldn't it be the other way around. think about it for a second...
>
> its like getting in a new faster car, it feels fast at first, but once you
> get used to it, it feels slower.
> like a subwoofer if you previously didn't have one, hooking a new one up
> would have the sound of bass where there previously may not have been any,
> so you would notice it, but after a while get used to it. so using that
> theroy would be more inclined to say that over time you'd need to turn the
> sub up to hear its output.
> just another perspective to think about.
>
> "Fred" <noe...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> news:401459fa$0$28870$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
If you are really curious about this "phenomenom" of running in speakers why
don't you start a new post asking some of the more experienced folks in here
for their opinions on running in speakers?
For that matter go also to some other forums and collect data from a range
of much more experienced people than yourselves. No insult intended here at
all.
Dale
Dale
Bob Saccamano
be a load of bollocks, but it is mentioned. 10 hours they say.
"Fred" <noe...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:401459fa$0$28870$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
>
Dale
"What The!" <bl...@blah.comm> wrote in message
>
> "Dale" <dpoole@iinetdotnetdotau> wrote in message
> news:4015c34f$0$1746$5a62...@freenews.iinet.net.au...
> >
> > If you are really curious about this "phenomenom" of running in speakers
> why
> > don't you start a new post asking some of the more experienced folks in
> here
> > for their opinions on running in speakers?
> >
>
> bitching. ;-)
Yes, you are probably right. But i reckon among the bitching could be
something useful. As a point of reference I had a simple 2-way floorstander,
after about 2-4 weeks of use the bass became more pronounced and uch more
effortless. the differnces were minimal.
After that i had a set of 3-way floorstanders it took about 10 months and
then they sounded superb, the difference was quite obvious even though the
change happened over a longer period. Different materials in the surround
and spider I guess plus small differences in electronics.
In my experience different speakers take differenct times and the effect of
break in will vary.
I have heard that if you saturate your rubber roll surround on your drivers
with armourall until it no longer soaks it up you will notice a difference.
Perhaps try this simple experiment and see what you notice.
Remember the greater the resolution of your system the more you will notice.
Dale
roughplanet
news:buigu3$20e6$1...@otis.netspace.net.au...
Product/View/A2669
> If you were interested in getting one of the DSE subs:
> Print this out and take to your local store to show them it is $148.
Best $3000* worth of adverising DSE ever spent, eh?
ruff
* 100 units at $30 each
Patric Scully
wrote:
>
>"What The!" <bl...@blah.comm> wrote in message
>news:MTGRb.31409$Wa....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>> "Dale" <dpoole@iinetdotnetdotau> wrote in message
>> news:4015c34f$0$1746$5a62...@freenews.iinet.net.au...
>> >
>> > If you are really curious about this "phenomenom" of running in speakers
>> why
>> > don't you start a new post asking some of the more experienced folks in
>> here
>> > for their opinions on running in speakers?
>> >
>>
>> I'm not that silly .. hehe, that's just asking for a thread full of
>> bitching. ;-)
Not necessarily, Dale! The fact is, anyone that builds speakers can
easily find out whether the "run in" this is myth, magic or real.
Sorry to disillusion those of you that believe in it, but it doesn't
happen. Yes, the very first time a speaker is run - for a period of
seconds - up to its rated input power and full frequency range, it is
as "run in" as it is going to get. This is because the suspension is
flexed for the first time, any stiffness from the newness of the
suspension will loosen up immediately, and that is it.
I have tested this many times over the years, and have found that
nothing changes. The usual recommended way is to run a driver at its
resonant frequency for between 12 and 24 hours, at sufficient input
voltage to fully flex its suspension.
So to test, measure the T/S parameters, and record them. Then carry
out the "running in", wait until the voice coil cools down, and
measure the T/S parameters again.
Then calculate an alignment twice, one with each set of T/S
parameters. You will find that in each case one alignment is the same
as the other. Looking at the individual T/S parameters, you might see
that the values of some of these have changed after the "run in"
period. This is true, but until you do a design using the different
sets you won't realise that the changes in each set compensate each
other, such that an alignment design is identical for each set of
parameters. But it is important to realise that after the "run in"
period the driver must be allowed to cool down, as the running may
raise the temperature of the voice coil, which must be allowed to
return to normal.
This issue has been kicking around for years, just like the cable
arguments. But if you want to find out more on the topic, either carry
out the measurements described about above, or Google on the subject
of speaker run-in, referencing such people as Dick Pierce and Tom
Nousaine.
>Yes, you are probably right. But i reckon among the bitching could be
>something useful. As a point of reference I had a simple 2-way floorstander,
>after about 2-4 weeks of use the bass became more pronounced and uch more
>effortless. the differnces were minimal.
Sorry, but unfortunately your acoustic memory doesn't last long enough
for you to be able to make that judgement. Again, look this up!
>After that i had a set of 3-way floorstanders it took about 10 months and
>then they sounded superb, the difference was quite obvious even though the
>change happened over a longer period.
Sorry, but you are not really able to remember what something
"sounded" like, over even short periods of time. People are indeed
able to remember pitch, for time, and some people claim to be able to
remember how different musical intruments sound. But like the cable
argument, they are unable to achieve this under bias controlled
conditions. Try it"
>Different materials in the surround and spider I guess plus small differences in electronics.
>In my experience different speakers take differenct times and the effect of
>break in will vary.
It is your "opinion", not experience. Acoustic memory doesn't last
that long. But try it under bias conditions, it you like. But in my
experience, measuring and designing and evaluating over many years, no
speaker driver has ever changed in the manner claimed by the "run in"
protagonists. This is because the materials used in the suspension,
the only materials in a driver subject to movement in relation to
other materials, are controlled by something called the "modulus of
elasticity", something most engineers and technicians would have heard
about. And this has only two effects - when a material is stressed
without exceeding its elastic limit - its modulus - it always returns
to its initial state. But if the material is stressed such that it
exceeds its elastic limit, then it never returns to its original
state. In fact, the material is said to have "failed", something that
in the case of metals is known as "metal fatigue", and all materials
are subject to the physics of this.
>>I have heard that if you saturate your rubber roll surround on your drivers
>with armourall until it no longer soaks it up you will notice a difference.
This is an entirely different issue. If a flexible material absorbs
something like "Armourall", it physical properties will be changed, so
the driver is no longer the one for which the enclosure was designed.
>Perhaps try this simple experiment and see what you notice.
>Remember the greater the resolution of your system the more you will notice.
What do you mean by resolution? Do you mean frequency response? Please
realise that changing the physical characteristics of a driver means
that the Thiele/Small must be measured for the changed driver before
an enclosure may be designed for it. Did you know, for example, that
increasing the mass of the driver cone will lower the resonant
frequency of the driver? Unfortunately though, nothing is for nothing
because this will also lower the efficiency of the driver.
Anyway, the subject of loudspeaker design is complex, and people
should really study the available literature, do some measurement,
design, testing and evaluation, before making these extraordinary
statements about electromechanical systems such as loudspeakers.
regards
Patric Scully
The Soundman
(to email remove dontspammit)
Fred
"What The!" <bl...@blah.comm> wrote in message
> fred, wouldn't it be the other way around. think about it for a second...
>
> its like getting in a new faster car, it feels fast at first, but once you
> get used to it, it feels slower.
> like a subwoofer if you previously didn't have one, hooking a new one up
> would have the sound of bass where there previously may not have been any,
> so you would notice it, but after a while get used to it. so using that
> theroy would be more inclined to say that over time you'd need to turn the
> sub up to hear its output.
> just another perspective to think about.
LOL, that analogy supports what I said. See Patric Scully's post under this
thread.
Fred
"What The!" <bl...@blah.comm> wrote in message
> My mains have a pair of 12" woofers in them, and they produced nice clean
> natural bass (bass reflex enclosure) down to probably 50hz -3dB point
(only
> a guess).
A guess? Useless and extraneous information that I am forced to ignore. I
tried the sub with my main system (-3db at 34Hz) amd it made very little
difference unless I pushed the volume control so high as to make the overall
sound very boomy and totally unsatisfactory. But with my PC system (-3db @
58Hz) it sounds great.
> The sub HAS increased in output from when i first plugged it in,
> playing the same scenes from movies to test the rumble, the volume on the
> sub was maxed out, and the reciever channel gain was on +9dB for the sub
> channel. However, progressivly i was able to turn things down and Volume
is
> now on 3/4 on sub amp, channel gain on my reciver is +1dB.
Auditory memory is a completely unreliable method for testing. Had you
performed tests with a sound level meter etc, that would be a totally
different story. Face it, you have become accustomed to the sound.
> The only thing
> that has changed is the cable that i use to hook it up, but that was
> replaced quite early (after initial tests to make sure that it worked).
> Could be that your sub had undergone secondary QC checks when manufactured
> and was already "run in" when unboxed, who knows. ;-)
The sound of a loudspeaker does not alter over a few days or weeks. The unit
will sound different in a few years but in the short time you've had it
there is no discernable or measurable change. FFS stop kidding yourself.
Fred
"What The!" <bl...@blah.comm> wrote in message
> Sounds like Phill Allison has long lost brother.
>
Now you've gone too far :)
Dale
More in text below.
"Patric Scully" <soundswad...@starwon.com.au> wrote in message
news:conm10tudgptct4ht...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 09:20:24 +0800, "Dale" <dpoole@iinetdotnetdotau>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"What The!" <bl...@blah.comm> wrote in message
> >news:MTGRb.31409$Wa....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >>
> >> "Dale" <dpoole@iinetdotnetdotau> wrote in message
> >> news:4015c34f$0$1746$5a62...@freenews.iinet.net.au...
> >> >
> >> > If you are really curious about this "phenomenom" of running in
speakers
> >> why
> >> > don't you start a new post asking some of the more experienced folks
in
> >> here
> >> > for their opinions on running in speakers?
> >> >
> >>
> >> I'm not that silly .. hehe, that's just asking for a thread full of
> >> bitching. ;-)
>
> Not necessarily, Dale! The fact is, anyone that builds speakers can
> easily find out whether the "run in" this is myth, magic or real.
>
> Sorry to disillusion those of you that believe in it, but it doesn't
> happen. Yes, the very first time a speaker is run - for a period of
> seconds - up to its rated input power and full frequency range, it is
> as "run in" as it is going to get. This is because the suspension is
> flexed for the first time, any stiffness from the newness of the
> suspension will loosen up immediately, and that is it.
A couple of things come to mind here. There are many experienced and long
term speaker builders that I have met 2 of them even sell commercial high
end products that talk about "run-in". My comments in this thread reflect
their comments I have had in conversation with them and my own "percieved"
experiences.
The other is with regard to the mechanical materials in the spider and roll
surround. You say these items are as loose as they will be after a few
seconds of full power "run-in". I just simply don't yet have the experience
first hand to comment on this except that with a lot of materials of various
kinds the ability to flex seems to improve with use.
> I have tested this many times over the years, and have found that
> nothing changes. The usual recommended way is to run a driver at its
> resonant frequency for between 12 and 24 hours, at sufficient input
> voltage to fully flex its suspension.
Yes, I heard a couple of hours near rated power with white noise (from
memory) or a reasonable full range music cd.
> So to test, measure the T/S parameters, and record them. Then carry
> out the "running in", wait until the voice coil cools down, and
> measure the T/S parameters again.
Agreed, this seems like the logical means to ascertain what is happening. I
have yet however to set up my measuring equipment.
> Then calculate an alignment twice, one with each set of T/S
> parameters. You will find that in each case one alignment is the same
> as the other. Looking at the individual T/S parameters, you might see
> that the values of some of these have changed after the "run in"
> period. This is true, but until you do a design using the different
> sets you won't realise that the changes in each set compensate each
> other, such that an alignment design is identical for each set of
> parameters.
I am aware of this compensation. Dickason also talks about it in LSD 6th ed.
> But it is important to realise that after the "run in"
> period the driver must be allowed to cool down, as the running may
> raise the temperature of the voice coil, which must be allowed to
> return to normal.
Agreed. I would think this obvious but always good to mention.
> This issue has been kicking around for years, just like the cable
> arguments. But if you want to find out more on the topic, either carry
> out the measurements described about above, or Google on the subject
> of speaker run-in, referencing such people as Dick Pierce and Tom
> Nousaine.
Thank you for the suggestions.
> >Yes, you are probably right. But i reckon among the bitching could be
> >something useful. As a point of reference I had a simple 2-way
floorstander,
> >after about 2-4 weeks of use the bass became more pronounced and uch more
> >effortless. the differnces were minimal.
> Sorry, but unfortunately your acoustic memory doesn't last long enough
> for you to be able to make that judgement. Again, look this up!
> >After that i had a set of 3-way floorstanders it took about 10 months and
> >then they sounded superb, the difference was quite obvious even though
the
> >change happened over a longer period.
>
> Sorry, but you are not really able to remember what something
> "sounded" like, over even short periods of time. People are indeed
> able to remember pitch, for time, and some people claim to be able to
> remember how different musical intruments sound. But like the cable
> argument, they are unable to achieve this under bias controlled
> conditions. Try it"
I think I would need to. I don't always believe what we can "currently"
measure is always telling the full story. And at the same time I also agree
that perception is a tricky thing, to add, it can be very easy indeed to
confidently fool oneself
> >Different materials in the surround and spider I guess plus small
differences in electronics.
> >In my experience different speakers take differenct times and the effect
of
> >break in will vary.
>
> It is your "opinion", not experience.
This is semantics. If I percieve something it is my current experience. If I
mislead someone it is not intentional. I would think most people are the
same unless they intend to deliberately fool another for whatever reasons.
> Acoustic memory doesn't last
> that long. But try it under bias conditions, it you like. But in my
> experience, measuring and designing and evaluating over many years, no
> speaker driver has ever changed in the manner claimed by the "run in"
> protagonists. This is because the materials used in the suspension,
> the only materials in a driver subject to movement in relation to
> other materials, are controlled by something called the "modulus of
> elasticity", something most engineers and technicians would have heard
> about. And this has only two effects - when a material is stressed
> without exceeding its elastic limit - its modulus - it always returns
> to its initial state. But if the material is stressed such that it
> exceeds its elastic limit, then it never returns to its original
> state. In fact, the material is said to have "failed", something that
> in the case of metals is known as "metal fatigue", and all materials
> are subject to the physics of this.
This is informative, thanks.
> >>I have heard that if you saturate your rubber roll surround on your
drivers
> >with armourall until it no longer soaks it up you will notice a
difference.
>
> This is an entirely different issue. If a flexible material absorbs
> something like "Armourall", it physical properties will be changed, so
> the driver is no longer the one for which the enclosure was designed.
Yep, I follow that.
> >Perhaps try this simple experiment and see what you notice.
> >Remember the greater the resolution of your system the more you will
notice.
>
> What do you mean by resolution?
Accuracy. The ability to "resolve" more of the original data on the software
(CD).
> Do you mean frequency response? Please
> realise that changing the physical characteristics of a driver means
> that the Thiele/Small must be measured for the changed driver before
> an enclosure may be designed for it. Did you know, for example, that
> increasing the mass of the driver cone will lower the resonant
> frequency of the driver? Unfortunately though, nothing is for nothing
> because this will also lower the efficiency of the driver.
Yes, I am aware of these things.
> Anyway, the subject of loudspeaker design is complex, and people
> should really study the available literature, do some measurement,
> design, testing and evaluation,
Agreed, the more I learn the I realise how complex it all is. It is however
an enjoyable process.
> before making these extraordinary statements about electromechanical
systems such as
> loudspeakers. regards
That sounds unnecessarily harsh.
Dale
Patric
> snip
> > I have tested this many times over the years, and have found that
> > nothing changes. The usual recommended way is to run a driver at its
> > resonant frequency for between 12 and 24 hours, at sufficient input
> > voltage to fully flex its suspension.
>
> Yes, I heard a couple of hours near rated power with white noise (from
> memory) or a reasonable full range music cd.
Best is a warble tome (similar to pink noise) around the resonant
frequency of the driver, white noise doesn't really work the driver
and the same applies to a music cd. But only for test purposes, it
doesn't change anything.
> > Then calculate an alignment twice, one with each set of T/S
> > parameters. You will find that in each case one alignment is the same
> > as the other. Looking at the individual T/S parameters, you might see
> > that the values of some of these have changed after the "run in"
> > period. This is true, but until you do a design using the different
> > sets you won't realise that the changes in each set compensate each
> > other, such that an alignment design is identical for each set of
> > parameters.
>
> I am aware of this compensation. Dickason also talks about it in LSD 6th ed.
Bye and large an excellent source of information for designers.
>
> I think I would need to. I don't always believe what we can "currently"
> measure is always telling the full story. And at the same time I also agree
> that perception is a tricky thing, to add, it can be very easy indeed to
> confidently fool oneself
Popular myth, frequently used in the "objective v. subjective"
discussions. But the fact is that the science of acoustics doesn't
have any factors that are incapable of being measured. But we are not
talking about measuring, per se, except to have a basis for designing
an enclosure alignment for a driver. And the basis for this is well
known. (after Thiele/Small) What is being discussed is the duration of
sonic or acoustic memory, and this is confirmed as being of
microseconds duration - again Google on this to get the background.
> > It is your "opinion", not experience.
>
> This is semantics.
Yes, this is how we differentiate the meaning of language. "Opinions"
are formed within the mind, and are not based on any data in
particular, whereas "experience" is a record of something actually
experienced, i.e. some fact or other.
> If I percieve something it is my current experience.
If you insist, but the language I use disagrees with this statement.
>If I mislead someone it is not intentional.
The question of your misleading someone or not is not the point I am
making, nor am I implying that you are misleading anyone when you
quote an opinion.
> I would think most people are the same unless they intend to deliberately
> fool another for whatever reasons.
Again, I am not implying any intent to mislead. But IMO it is useful
when making a point to use the concepts of "opinion" and "experience"
in the strictly literal sense, so as to facilitate clarity. Your
opinion obviously differs from this. So be it!
> > Anyway, the subject of loudspeaker design is complex, and people
> > should really study the available literature, do some measurement,
> > design, testing and evaluation,
>
> Agreed, the more I learn the I realise how complex it all is. It is however
> an enjoyable process.
>
> > before making these extraordinary statements about electromechanical
> systems such as
> > loudspeakers. regards
>
> That sounds unnecessarily harsh.
Sorry you feel that way, it was not meant as any sort of put-down or
to be harsh. But we are talking about engineering and science, and in
this respect it really only is appropriate to follow a scientific
method when dealing with these matters. I am sure you are grateful
that the people that designed, e.g., one's motor vehicle, brakes,
lights, windows, cooker, electrical appliances, etc., stuck to
scientific or engineering rigour when designing these things, rather
than doing their work based on the sort of rhetoric that is frequently
offered when discussing such things as loudspeaker designs, cable
effects, and so on on the Usenet!
To be fair, what is being discussed about loudpeakers, above, surely
deserves the same level of scientific rigour as the engineering of
those artefacts upon whose rigourous design depends the safety of the
people that use them.
> Dale
>
> > Patric Scully
> >
> > The Soundman
> >
> > (to email remove dontspammit)
Cheers
Patric
Dale
"Patric" <soun...@starwon.com.au> wrote in message
news:7138535d.04020...@posting.google.com...
> "Dale" <dpoole@iinetdotnetdotau> wrote in message
news:<401ddcd3$0$1721$5a62...@freenews.iinet.net.au>...
snip
> Best is a warble tome (similar to pink noise) around the resonant
> frequency of the driver, white noise doesn't really work the driver
> and the same applies to a music cd. But only for test purposes, it
> doesn't change anything.
Thank you for the information.
> > > Then calculate an alignment twice, one with each set of T/S
> > > parameters. You will find that in each case one alignment is the same
> > > as the other. Looking at the individual T/S parameters, you might see
> > > that the values of some of these have changed after the "run in"
> > > period. This is true, but until you do a design using the different
> > > sets you won't realise that the changes in each set compensate each
> > > other, such that an alignment design is identical for each set of
> > > parameters.
> >
> > I am aware of this compensation. Dickason also talks about it in LSD 6th
ed.
>
> Bye and large an excellent source of information for designers.
Yes, thats what I heard, hence the purchase. Any other materials you have
found of similar quality?
> > I think I would need to. I don't always believe what we can "currently"
> > measure is always telling the full story. And at the same time I also
agree
> > that perception is a tricky thing, to add, it can be very easy indeed to
> > confidently fool oneself
>
> Popular myth, frequently used in the "objective v. subjective"
> discussions. But the fact is that the science of acoustics doesn't
> have any factors that are incapable of being measured.
A very absolute statement.
> But we are not
> talking about measuring, per se, except to have a basis for designing
> an enclosure alignment for a driver. And the basis for this is well
> known.
Agreed
> (after Thiele/Small) What is being discussed is the duration of
> sonic or acoustic memory, and this is confirmed as being of
> microseconds duration - again Google on this to get the background.
Yes. It seems I would need to google this at least to further the discussion
and gather some more information. This information is also not new news to
me. And I am not disagreeing, just not completely agreeing in an absolute
sense.
> > > It is your "opinion", not experience.
> >
> > This is semantics.
>
> Yes, this is how we differentiate the meaning of language. "Opinions"
> are formed within the mind, and are not based on any data in
> particular, whereas "experience" is a record of something actually
> experienced, i.e. some fact or other.
Again semantics and the reflection of our current backgrounds and education.
Whilst I am in no way countering your experince and would gladly humble
myself to learn from you (it is obvious to me you have much more experience
than I in designing, testing and building speakers) my background is/was
more involved in psychology, relationship and of the body and mind
interaction, principles of psychneuroimunology etc.. I used to present this
work in seminars in Germany and Oz.
> > If I percieve something it is my current experience.
>
> If you insist, but the language I use disagrees with this statement.
I am okay with whatever your most comfortable with. It is I who is
interested in learning from you. To me what is important is to know the base
understanding to allow easy and understandable communication.
> >If I mislead someone it is not intentional.
>
> The question of your misleading someone or not is not the point I am
> making, nor am I implying that you are misleading anyone when you
> quote an opinion.
>
> > I would think most people are the same unless they intend to
deliberately
> > fool another for whatever reasons.
>
> Again, I am not implying any intent to mislead. But IMO it is useful
> when making a point to use the concepts of "opinion" and "experience"
> in the strictly literal sense, so as to facilitate clarity. Your
> opinion obviously differs from this. So be it!
I do not wish to get caught in the english language. Thank you for the
clarification of your position.
> > > Anyway, the subject of loudspeaker design is complex, and people
> > > should really study the available literature, do some measurement,
> > > design, testing and evaluation,
> >
> > Agreed, the more I learn the I realise how complex it all is. It is
however
> > an enjoyable process.
> >
> > > before making these extraordinary statements about electromechanical
> > systems such as
> > > loudspeakers. regards
> >
> > That sounds unnecessarily harsh.
>
> Sorry you feel that way, it was not meant as any sort of put-down or
> to be harsh.
Thank you.
> But we are talking about engineering and science, and in
> this respect it really only is appropriate to follow a scientific
> method when dealing with these matters.
Yes, but lets not make it to dry, or harsh:-)
> To be fair, what is being discussed about loudpeakers, above, surely
> deserves the same level of scientific rigour as the engineering of
> those artefacts upon whose rigourous design depends the safety of the
> people that use them.
Agreed, especially when aiming for quality and satisfaction of the best
possible job you can do, which I assume we all are. However it is still a
hobby and a most enjoyable one. I also like to keep it light and easy whilst
maintaining accuracy and integrity of the product.
> > Dale
> >
> > > Patric Scully
> > >
> > > The Soundman
> > >
> > > (to email remove dontspammit)
>
> Cheers
>
> Patric
Thanks Patric
Dale