- Joined
- Apr 7, 2024
- Messages
- 675
- Likes
- 2,087
And there is the problem, right there.A lot of speaker design is based on guesswork and speculation anyway.
But there is no evidence that it does. None. Literally....None.if it does what they say, there has got to be a reason, an effect, for it.
See point 2What effect are you suggesting would do it?
Pure, 100% speculation. That's what gets engineering into these messes in the first place....because I'm not sure what your actual contention is. My contention is that the designer did the maths: 6>1, and correspondingly, you might find a greater surface area of coil windings. Plus it might cool better spread between 6 motors. So, I'm not sure how wrong I am when I am not advocating the technical argument myself, just explaining what might be the design intention.
I rest my case... yer onnerI'm not in the habit of reverse-engineering goofball designs inside my head, but I guess I am now.
...but I'm just speculating and playing Devil's Advocate for a rational based on some science-y thing that the designer-"engineer" might have had in mind. A lot of speaker design is based on guesswork and speculation anyway
A lot of speaker buying is based on guesswork and speculation… This I would agree!A lot of speaker design is based on guesswork and speculation anyway.
On the one hand this is an area of mature technology, where most ideas, good and bad, have been tested, and Darwin has done his thing. There's little to be had but slow and incremental improvements, mostly through application of work from other areas, materials, modeling software, what have you.I think it's about driver mass, in relation to magnet's surface area on the coil, if I had to guess. Let's say that total driver mass is identical, I'm pretty sure six magnets and coils can move it with more control than a single coil.
We all just need to accept that kit ends. Reproduction is engineering, not art. We all need to buyrecords, more records, bigger houses to accomodate our records.recordings. And we need to get off our asses to hear live music. Musicians are the artists, not some schmoe with a HiFi brand.
No need for reverse-engineering, if it delivers what is objectively good sound measurements, it is a succeessful design, we won't care if it's made of a dozen toilet paper. I believe a lot of ppl here would be convinced if it objectively performs ignoring the look or array, but if it don't perform, it doesn't matter if it is made out of unobtainium either...but I'm just speculating and playing Devil's Advocate for a rational based on some science-y thing that the designer-"engineer" might have had in mind. A lot of speaker design is based on guesswork and speculation anyway. I'm just trying to fix that concept to a plausible effect. Six coils verses one? if it does what they say, there has got to be a reason, an effect, for it.
What effect are you suggesting would do it? ...because I'm not sure what your actual contention is. My contention is that the designer did the maths: 6>1, and correspondingly, you might find a greater surface area of coil windings. Plus it might cool better spread between 6 motors. So, I'm not sure how wrong I am when I am not advocating the technical argument myself, just explaining what might be the design intention.
I'm not in the habit of reverse-engineering goofball designs inside my head, but I guess I am now.
Well for me - it would have to justify the arrays existence, not just by performing, but by performing better than a traditional design (otherwise the cost and other compromises are not justified).I believe a lot of ppl here would be convinced if it objectively performs ignoring the look or array,
No offense, I am personally more open, if gimmicks or a diffent approach did achieve what is desired, it's a good design, the extra cost is just kind of R&D cost in my book, there's no harm to pay extra for some gimmicks/look where one would get more satisifaction, but if one need to trade performance for the gimmick/look, then it is going into the wrong directionWell for me - it would have to justify the arrays existence, not just by performing, but by performing better than a traditional design (otherwise the cost and other compromises are not justified).
Problem is if they are selling the array based on "speed" it is nonsense. All designs that achieve flat FR also achieve "speed", and you don't need daft looking, expensive, beaming tweeter arrays for the mid range to get that.
That is fine - we are a broad churchNo offense, I am personally more open
That's a lot of money freed up right there.FIFY.
Jim
Problem is if they are selling the array based on "speed" it is nonsense. All designs that achieve flat FR also achieve "speed", and you don't need daft looking, expensive, beaming tweeter arrays for the mid range to get that.