Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="T3mpest" data-source="post: 2126749" data-attributes="member: 560148">Just a question, I like phsyics but have never really researched speaker design, so if I&#039;m missing a fundamental concept correct me, please.&nbsp; I have a problem relating effeciency and excursion.&nbsp; I have a theoretical scenario.Ok, I am assume that if we had 2 speakers that were equal in all ways but senativity and Xmax. (IB install for simplicity)&nbsp; If driver A is 3db&#039;s more sensative than driver B, that means it is moving 2x as far with 1 watt of power.&nbsp; Since cone area&#039;s the same, the only other factor in moving air is excursion, we now have a direct correlation between effeciency, excursion, and SPL between the 2 drivers.&nbsp; As we continue to add power to each&nbsp; we&#039;d get an increase in excursion between the 2 drivers.&nbsp; In this case, driver A would always be louder than driver B.&nbsp; Both subs would hit the RMS limit, but no matter how far driver B was moving, it coudlnt&#039; be moving further than driver A due to effeciency being lower.&nbsp; Now if driver B had a higher power handling it could be louder, correct?&nbsp; If it had 2x the power handling it could actually hit X-max and tie with driver A, assuming it&#039;s final Xmax was indeed 2x that of A, if not it would be wasted as heat....Seems kinda weird, I&#039;d like to see a real world comparison between a Avalanche and a Aresenal for just this reason...&nbsp; Similar in power handling, but differnent effeciency&#039;s and&nbsp; excursion limits.&nbsp; However since the power handling is the same and effeciency is higher on the arsenal, it would appear the avalanche could never be louder.&nbsp; Assuming that RMS on the aresenal is needed to reach the&nbsp; 20.5mm xmax.&nbsp; The avalanche could never move that far being less effecient on the same power much more and you&#039;d fry a coil...&nbsp; Looking at a problem in that light it seems to really show just why people say to not judge a sub by it&#039;s RMS, since that&#039;s just the thermal power handling of the VC.&nbsp; This simplistic view of a loudspeaker has too many flaws to be useful.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="T3mpest, post: 2126749, member: 560148"] Just a question, I like phsyics but have never really researched speaker design, so if I'm missing a fundamental concept correct me, please. I have a problem relating effeciency and excursion. I have a theoretical scenario. Ok, I am assume that if we had 2 speakers that were equal in all ways but senativity and Xmax. (IB install for simplicity) If driver A is 3db's more sensative than driver B, that means it is moving 2x as far with 1 watt of power. Since cone area's the same, the only other factor in moving air is excursion, we now have a direct correlation between effeciency, excursion, and SPL between the 2 drivers. As we continue to add power to each we'd get an increase in excursion between the 2 drivers. In this case, driver A would always be louder than driver B. Both subs would hit the RMS limit, but no matter how far driver B was moving, it coudlnt' be moving further than driver A due to effeciency being lower. Now if driver B had a higher power handling it could be louder, correct? If it had 2x the power handling it could actually hit X-max and tie with driver A, assuming it's final Xmax was indeed 2x that of A, if not it would be wasted as heat.... Seems kinda weird, I'd like to see a real world comparison between a Avalanche and a Aresenal for just this reason... Similar in power handling, but differnent effeciency's and excursion limits. However since the power handling is the same and effeciency is higher on the arsenal, it would appear the avalanche could never be louder. Assuming that RMS on the aresenal is needed to reach the 20.5mm xmax. The avalanche could never move that far being less effecient on the same power much more and you'd fry a coil... Looking at a problem in that light it seems to really show just why people say to not judge a sub by it's RMS, since that's just the thermal power handling of the VC. This simplistic view of a loudspeaker has too many flaws to be useful. [/QUOTE]

Verification