Varying vs constant phase?

[MZKM]

Saw this guy post on Reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/audiophile/comments/l99jvc

This was for an exam and he said that the constant phase turned out to be the correct option. Any guesses why?

I would have said Option 2, as the phase is lower in the bass, thus the EPDR would be closer to the raw impedance of the speaker, whereas a high phase would bring it down a lot, taxing the amplifier more (low EPDR for the tweeter isn’t as much of an issue).

Or, is this the phase for say a DSP, and thus constant phase means constant time shift?

 

[ebslo]

Saw this guy post on Reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/audiophile/comments/l99jvc

Or, is this the phase for say a DSP, and thus constant phase means constant time shift?

I would guess it does not mean acoustic phase as constant non-zero acoustic phase is nonsensical (would imply delay approaches infinity as frequency approaches 0Hz).

So assuming it means electrical phase, consider the ramifications when phase gets to -90 degrees. On the chart given, phase even seems to approach -180 degrees!

 

[Pio2001]

I would guess it does not mean acoustic phase as constant non-zero acoustic phase is nonsensical (would imply delay approaches infinity as frequency approaches 0Hz).

It means the same for electric phase.

We can't see where the zero stands on the horizontal axis, and it is not said if the scale is linear or logarithmic.

If we suppose that 0 Hz is where phi2 is zero and if we suppose that the scale is linear, then phi2 represents a perfect response, delayed 25 µs.

 

[andreasmaaan]

Apart from anything else, I think they need to define "better".