Nice to read a view from the manufacturer.Seeing as my Sointuva's are currently in production and I was concerned, I asked March Audio about the problems suggested by this thread. I got this response. I just included the relevant information. (See BOTH quote boxes!)
Some information posted by Lars RisboI haven't read every post to see if this has been asked ... How is that the purifi driver can be hailed as the bestest lowest distortion driver in the universe if it has a fundamental issue like a nasty fundamental resonance that means it actually has a region of very high distortion?
(*it's quite possible my question is borne of ignorance, apologies if it is)
This. Exactly.Not to put words in his mouth, but the reason why should be very clear: as soon as a reviewer makes changes to a DUT, the manufacturer can blame the reviewer for issues.
Never buy DIY or artisan and you are safe. Only industrial design.
More Answers from Marchaudio
View attachment 215037
View attachment 215039
View attachment 215040
View attachment 215041
Or someone is going out of their way to ensure exchange of information on a contentious issue when one of the key parties is banned from the forum.This is just like the "Please Explain" thread when Alan created a sockpuppet account (Zaphod Beeblebrox) after being banned.
Groundhog day!
Or someone is going out of their way to ensure exchange of information on a contentious issue when one of the key parties is banned from the forum.
Thank you for clarifying, so it's a difficult solution then. I understood that the solution to this was adding damping material, but if the other sample did not have the issue. Doesn't it proves that the qty of Damping was not the source of this problem? I am a bit confused here, what am I missing? Did the sample B had sealed binding post?Again, I've never tampered with the speakers before taking measurements.
Including bolts.
Alan goes on to say.
"I changed the speaker arbitrarily and then proceeded with the measurement," he said.
But I swear I never touched anything.
Even when passing a bunch of data to Alan through a sample A/B test.
Hey, I did not do any of behaviours to be banned as I know. Of course I don't have any intent to make troubles too. Please chill. If the moderator's instructions are given, I will 100% follow them!This is just like the "Please Explain" thread when Alan created a sockpuppet account (Zaphod Beeblebrox) after being banned.
Groundhog day!
I'm no speaker setup expert.Thank you for clarifying, so it's a difficult solution then. I understood that the solution to this was adding damping material, but if the other sample did not have the issue. Doesn't it proves that the qty of Damping was not the source of this problem? I am a bit confused here, what am I missing?
I just get mesmerised with the surround flexing like that. It's suppose to maintain consistent Surface area as the driver push forward or backwards. to minimize doppler distortion. Simply magic.Hey, I did not do any of behaviours to be banned as I know. Of course I don't have any intent to make troubles too. Please chill. If the moderator's instructions are given, I will 100% follow them!
Add an image for more joyful ASR
View attachment 215056
Also why some designs choose to "link" the motor/magnet assemblies in a horizontally-opposed configuration for large-excursion drivers - either that or by providing substantial back bracing which contacts directly. Either of which are difficult designs to produce (and virtually impossible to produce affordably).It would be a lot better to mount the driver by its motor which is the source of the Newton forces but this is not standard. The best would be to bolt the motor onto a heavy solid chunk of metal serving as inertial reference to absorb the Newton forces.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...ifi-woofer-speaker-builds.352063/post-7058058
You're not the only one. Unfortunately there is no purely objective way to determine which is entirely true. March Audio has stated that both units left as tested and identical (or at least within normal tolerances). At the same time the binding post issue alone would seem to indicate variance outside of what I would think "normal QC" would allow. On the opposite side, without doing every single step on video (in one take) for scrutiny... there isn't a way to conclusively prove that issues weren't caused, or at least exacerbated, during modification.Thank you for clarifying, so it's a difficult solution then. I understood that the solution to this was adding damping material, but if the other sample did not have the issue. Doesn't it proves that the qty of Damping was not the source of this problem? I am a bit confused here, what am I missing?
And yet, every day will differ in meaningful ways from the day before. We should not be so quick to label people sock puppets.The best predictor of future behaviour, is, wait for it...past behaviour.
Thank you for clarifying, so it's a difficult solution then. I understood that the solution to this was adding damping material, but if the other sample did not have the issue. Doesn't it proves that the qty of Damping was not the source of this problem? I am a bit confused here, what am I missing? Did the sample B had sealed binding post?
Sample B also had the binding post exposed.Thank you for clarifying, so it's a difficult solution then. I understood that the solution to this was adding damping material, but if the other sample did not have the issue. Doesn't it proves that the qty of Damping was not the source of this problem? I am a bit confused here, what am I missing? Did the sample B had sealed binding post?
Alan keeps asserting that the problem is due to the OP tinkering with the speaker, but from the original post and all later posts it looks the OP only began disassembling the speaker after he found the distortion issue.More Answers from Marchaudio
that's what makes Purifi so SEXY xDI just get mesmerised with the surround flexing like that. It's suppose to maintain consistent Surface area as the driver push forward or backwards. to minimize doppler distortion. Simply magic.