Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="newusername" data-source="post: 5419427" data-attributes="member: 562064">So are you sure that you hated the linearity of the BL, or did you dislike the driver in that alignment?&nbsp; The LMS-Ultra, for example, was a low Q driver (~0.35 but I can&#039;t remember for sure) with low inductance as well.&nbsp; It was also very expensive, but as I acknowledged earlier, there is always a trade-off between price and performance.&nbsp; You are still suggesting that there is no use in any approach that focuses on linear BL, and that simply isn&#039;t true.&nbsp; There is no overhung driver that can do what the LMS-Ultra did in terms of performance; if there is, please point it out.You should come over to my house and you can point out which drivers of mine are XBL^2 and which aren&#039;t, just by listening to them.My point about listening was that in the circumstances, you (or the listener) have incorrectly blamed their displeasure in the sound on the fact that the axial response was flat.&nbsp; Where are the polar response plots?&nbsp; Can we have some THD, IMD, and CSD plots please?Well yes, it is very few and far between.&nbsp; For starters, drivers with XBL^2, LMS, Split Coil, etc. are all vastly outnumbered by overhung drivers.&nbsp; Most XBL^2 drivers are built for finished systems in pro or OEM applications; those available to consumers are largely budget-targeted DIY products.&nbsp; The number of LMS drivers out there are limited, for reasons we all know.&nbsp; Lastly, sq competitions do not judge how accurate to the source a vehicle is: they find the vehicle the judge likes most.All of these are great reasons why the top SQ cars don&#039;t have drivers in them.&nbsp; That has nothing to do with whether the technologies are useful or not.&nbsp; The technologies are useful because they make designing accurate systems more plausible.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="newusername, post: 5419427, member: 562064"] So are you sure that you hated the linearity of the BL, or did you dislike the driver in that alignment? The LMS-Ultra, for example, was a low Q driver (~0.35 but I can't remember for sure) with low inductance as well. It was also very expensive, but as I acknowledged earlier, there is always a trade-off between price and performance. You are still suggesting that there is no use in any approach that focuses on linear BL, and that simply isn't true. There is no overhung driver that can do what the LMS-Ultra did in terms of performance; if there is, please point it out. You should come over to my house and you can point out which drivers of mine are XBL^2 and which aren't, just by listening to them. My point about listening was that in the circumstances, you (or the listener) have incorrectly blamed their displeasure in the sound on the fact that the axial response was flat. Where are the polar response plots? Can we have some THD, IMD, and CSD plots please? Well yes, it is very few and far between. For starters, drivers with XBL^2, LMS, Split Coil, etc. are all vastly outnumbered by overhung drivers. Most XBL^2 drivers are built for finished systems in pro or OEM applications; those available to consumers are largely budget-targeted DIY products. The number of LMS drivers out there are limited, for reasons we all know. Lastly, sq competitions do not judge how accurate to the source a vehicle is: they find the vehicle the judge likes most. All of these are great reasons why the top SQ cars don't have drivers in them. That has nothing to do with whether the technologies are useful or not. The technologies are useful because they make designing accurate systems more plausible. [/QUOTE]

Verification