Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Warbleed" data-source="post: 5212939" data-attributes="member: 549898">Uhm...this supports Nick&#039;s point?One of Nick&#039;s main points was that flat BL does not equate to flat response. The flattest BL curve in the world won&#039;t make a bit of difference if the entire moving assembly doesn&#039;t move in a linear fashion. It doesn&#039;t guarantee a flat Le curve (or a low initial Le), it doesn&#039;t guarantee a flat Cms curve either.Flat BL curves don&#039;t make up for response peaks, which are often due to a sky high Qtc (because of a sky high Qes). You cannot simply make up for a lack of motorforce with more power, either.A high Qts coupled with an extremely high Mms is never a good thing in terms of the frequency response you get from a speaker. You cannot sacrifice motor strength and moving mass to a large degree without consequences on sound and performance. The motor is certainly linear, but at what cost?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Warbleed, post: 5212939, member: 549898"] Uhm...this supports Nick's point?One of Nick's main points was that flat BL does not equate to flat response. The flattest BL curve in the world won't make a bit of difference if the entire moving assembly doesn't move in a linear fashion. It doesn't guarantee a flat Le curve (or a low initial Le), it doesn't guarantee a flat Cms curve either. Flat BL curves don't make up for response peaks, which are often due to a sky high Qtc (because of a sky high Qes). You cannot simply make up for a lack of motorforce with more power, either. A high Qts coupled with an extremely high Mms is never a good thing in terms of the frequency response you get from a speaker. You cannot sacrifice motor strength and moving mass to a large degree without consequences on sound and performance. The motor is certainly linear, but at what cost? [/QUOTE]

Verification