XXX vs. MX

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

doesn't the saying go though shalt not argue with ignorance, because they'll drag you down to their level and beat with experience?
i never claimed to be an engineer. but i have been shown things by some of the best in the industry, you guys will never grasp.

yes, FEA, LEAP, dumax, etc, etc. are valuable tools and will get you close. then comes that last 10% that is the most critical and the most time consuming to perfect. which doesn't come by use of any modeling program. and that is where most eveyone falls short.

you guys can stupify and fool those who don't know any better with all your pure science and physics approaches. it only works that way on paper. keep inflating your own sails, you will never have me fooled.

Then school us oh knowledgeable one, how does one go about 'tweaking' a spider by 'hand'? Think we can't 'grasp' it? Try us. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif
And who is this person you speak of?

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

doesn't the saying go though shalt not argue with ignorance, because they'll drag you down to their level and beat with experience?
i never claimed to be an engineer. but i have been shown things by some of the best in the industry, you guys will never grasp.

yes, FEA, LEAP, dumax, etc, etc. are valuable tools and will get you close. then comes that last 10% that is the most critical and the most time consuming to perfect. which doesn't come by use of any modeling program. and that is where most eveyone falls short.

you guys can stupify and fool those who don't know any better with all your pure science and physics approaches. it only works that way on paper. keep inflating your own sails, you will never have me fooled.

You're being just as blind but from a different angle!

The engineers for companies you mentioned previously do not just tap their wand over a speaker and work their magic, or grab a paint brush and work the "art" of speaker design. Believe it or not, they utilize things like FEA and Klippel with THD and IMD measurements. There is no magic at work; this is why they hire engineers to design speakers and not someone with a creative mind who couldn't run a FEA program like ABAQUS for the life of them.

At the same time, people like Dr. Earl Geddes and Dr. Lidia Lee are doing incredible work in understanding the psycho-acoustics of sound interpretation. While an engineer can easily design a speaker that is better in every way shape or form, this thread is perfect proof that the human element is very difficult to account for.

There are two arguments being created in this thread, both of which are 100% correct.

1. Speaker A sounds better than Speaker B

2. Speaker B is better than Speaker A and measures as such.

Speaker B is better because it can be proven as such through quantifiable measurements. Speaker A may be preferred, but this is opinion based with highly dynamic possibilities.

And Kurt, the 06 XXX is split coil only; there is no XBL^2 utilization at play.

 

[95stroked1500 10+ year member]

exactly. it is a 2 part design and build process. i am not blind to that. where i disagree is that a single process is going to produce perfection.

do the build parts to a high end speaker set really cost so much that it should retail for a thousand dollars vs a sony explode for fifty? or are you paying for someone's time, knowledge and expertise in producing a fine product?

with how the audio industry is such a wh0re fest, if just anyone could spend a couple weeks behind the computer on a design program and make a work of art speaker, all your purist sq oriented brands would be belly up. there'd be no need for $1500 component set when there would be equal in sound and durability for $100.

you want me to school you? let me ask you this. IF you made your living off of making "studio monitors" that were sought after and sold for $20G a set, would you tell potential competition your hard learned trade secrets? IF any of this info was to be shared with you, would you pass it on to anyone else?

and the person i speak of only spent a few years in this country before going back to europe. he was hired on as a private contractor by a few stateside companies to assist their "golden engineers" to further develope their product more than they were able to get it.

his frustrations of this countries audio industry turned him away. all these engineers of the mind set of not venturing away from what the "books said and what they were taught". if you couldn't show them on paper how and why it was better, they didn't want to accept using their ears hearing it was better. that would mean for them to re-learn everything they thought they new and admit they didn't know it all.

but their bringing in an outside person to achieve a sound they couldn't, already shows that. second part is their lack of patience to finish a design job to perfection. why should they produce the best? 99.8% of the customers won't know any better. it's an arguement of marketing. why double the cost of R&D to dial the speaker from 90% to 100%, when you won't make any more $ off the end result.

why change their train of thought, when what they've done all these years has worked just fine.

your single track mind set is not new to me. i was there myself until about 10 years ago. it is prevailent in this industry. i don't post this to argue with you, as i know i might as well be trying to huff and puff, and blow down a brick wall. not going to happen. i post so those with an open mind might explore all the sides with a free mind. get anyone i can to look for their answers in an open field, not just what there is to find on a single narrow path of limited idea's.

 

[I want SExxx 10+ year member]

OMFG this thread is ****ed up.

06xxx is split coil NO XBL^2 /discussion on that

split coil = better then XBL^2 for More power and getting louder.

XBL^2 is not the end all to SQ nor is it needed for a driver to sound good. IN FACT that can be said about all "linear" motor designs. There are drivers out there that have standard motors that sound just as good and BETTER then linear motor designs.

SQ IS SUBJECTIVE!!!!!!!!! To person A the MX sounds better and to person B the xxx sounds better. There are too many variables to say which of two good drivers sounds better. One may sound better doing one thing while the other sounds better doing something else.

Oh and Spiders do not break in to the point of being rendered useless, nor does it take 20-30 hours to break them in.

 

[Detox420 10+ year member]

Please...do tell. This is knowledge.

 

[SQBubble 10+ year member]

OMFG this thread is ****ed up.
06xxx is split coil NO XBL^2 /discussion on that

split coil = better then XBL^2 for More power and getting louder.

XBL^2 is not the end all to SQ nor is it needed for a driver to sound good. IN FACT that can be said about all "linear" motor designs. There are drivers out there that have standard motors that sound just as good and BETTER then linear motor designs.

SQ IS SUBJECTIVE!!!!!!!!! To person A the MX sounds better and to person B the xxx sounds better. There are too many variables to say which of two good drivers sounds better. One may sound better doing one thing while the other sounds better doing something else.

Oh and Spiders do not break in to the point of being rendered useless, nor does it take 20-30 hours to break them in.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/word.gif.64b12e39f936af3b4fff38a1c0bd0244.gif

you guys are taking it way too seriously... it's only subwoofers guys, besides... enclosure determines around 70% in SQ and transient response and all that PLUS each one has his own type of listening pleasure...! lol

 

[Chevyaudio 5,000+ posts]

Why can't we have more arguments like this...Its nice to see ca.com have an actual "audio" debate once an a while.

Yay...for debate.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

OMFG this thread is ****ed up.
06xxx is split coil NO XBL^2 /discussion on that

split coil = better then XBL^2 for More power and getting louder.

XBL^2 is not the end all to SQ nor is it needed for a driver to sound good. IN FACT that can be said about all "linear" motor designs. There are drivers out there that have standard motors that sound just as good and BETTER then linear motor designs.

SQ IS SUBJECTIVE!!!!!!!!! To person A the MX sounds better and to person B the xxx sounds better. There are too many variables to say which of two good drivers sounds better. One may sound better doing one thing while the other sounds better doing something else.

Oh and Spiders do not break in to the point of being rendered useless, nor does it take 20-30 hours to break them in.

1. For someone who behaves as if you have a great grasp on motor topologies, why would you make such a bad blanket statement? "split coil = better then XBL^2 for More power and getting louder." Sure, that's true if there's more coil than on the XBL^2 motor that's being compared. It certainly doesn't make for a great blanket statement. Look at the other positives that make XBL^2 a much better topology than split coil.

2. SQ is not subjective; sonic preference is. A speaker that accurately reproduces the input signal is an "SQ" speaker (god I hate that term) and no audible interpretation can change that. A speaker that sounds good but fails to produce the input signal accurately is NOT an "SQ" speaker.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

you want me to school you? let me ask you this. IF you made your living off of making "studio monitors" that were sought after and sold for $20G a set, would you tell potential competition your hard learned trade secrets? IF any of this info was to be shared with you, would you pass it on to anyone else?

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif
Im not asking for trade secrets, Im asking you to even begin to explain how you would go about tweaking a spider in such a manner to account for the various sonic aspects you allude to. If this is such a basic part of speaker design, telling us what's being done without giving away any 'secrets' should be easy.

So far all Ive seen from you is alot of talking down to knowledgeable people (like Warbleed) when you yourself cant, or simply haven't, explained your point beyond 'yeah this guy I know from Europe, that nobody else knows aparently, says nobody in the U.S. knows how to make a competent SQ woofer'.

Whatever. If you have any real info to add, Im all ears. Im never against learning something new, but to this point all you seem to be doing is blowing smoke.

 

[Hundreth 10+ year member]

1.) The 05 XXX is the more accurate driver.

2.) Most prefer the High Q sound of the MX and deem it as more accurate (Ryan), a few prefer the 05 XXX's sound. (Tuan) Its subjective.

/thread

 

[Savstyle 10+ year member]

Why can't we have more arguments like this...Its nice to see ca.com have an actual "audio" debate once an a while.

Yay...for debate.

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/word.gif.64b12e39f936af3b4fff38a1c0bd0244.gif

thinkin the same thing when i got to page 3

This should happen more often

 

[95stroked1500 10+ year member]

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif
Im not asking for trade secrets, Im asking you to even begin to explain how you would go about tweaking a spider in such a manner to account for the various sonic aspects you allude to. If this is such a basic part of speaker design, telling us what's being done without giving away any 'secrets' should be easy.

So far all Ive seen from you is alot of talking down to knowledgeable people (like Warbleed) when you yourself cant, or simply haven't, explained your point beyond 'yeah this guy I know from Europe, that nobody else knows aparently, says nobody in the U.S. knows how to make a competent SQ woofer'.

Whatever. If you have any real info to add, Im all ears. Im never against learning something new, but to this point all you seem to be doing is blowing smoke.

you are asking for more than i am going to share with you. learn it yourself. if you knew much about spiders yourself, you would have the basic idea of what to do.

have i mastered it? hell no. once i got to that point and had learned about all that i am referring to (and not just the # crunching part), i have no desire to venture down that road any more. i'm not going to spend 16 hours a day, every day, for years to learn it to that level. it took him a year to perfect the line i got to hear. and he had been doing speakers for 20 years or so.

if spider tuning means nothing, but you want to start learning that it does, you want to see it in writing, you can start by reading some of the works by vance dickason. even then his works only state how important it is for the drivers sound charictaristic. there's plenty more works here and there shared by audiophiles who build in their garages for their own use only that will give you a good start.

i don't need to justify myself or prove to anyone what i know. i could vary well state a # of very familliar companies who've used him. but that wouldn't be too professional.

talking down to knowledgable people? no. there are a lot of good speaker builders and designers. the best rely on more than just computer simulations and absolutes of a few known formula's. and that is my point. not what warbleed can or can't produce. it's easy to see he is very well versed in the science and physic's areas involving speakers.

so what i am against and always will be against, is anyone who tries to cram down peoples throat, that speaker A is better than speaker B, or absolutes of how they will perform, only judging by paper spec's and modeling programs.

at one time, according to peoples mathmatics and physics knowledge, a bumble bee shouldn't have been able to fly on their engineering software. but yet since we grew up knowing that bee's fly, we accepted that there's more to it than we once understood or could plot out. so how do you think, if one of those engineers had never experienced a bee in real life, would react when someone told him there was a bee and it flew.

he would insist bull poop, it's impossible. his programs show it can't.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

you are asking for more than i am going to share with you. learn it yourself.

I see. So you come here and spout this stuff about the nuances of spider design, this 'art' as you call it, but can't/wont even begin to say what/where/how this takes place? When I ask you to simply explain what you are talking about, your reply is to learn it myself. lol
Oh sure, all the top speaker makers know about it, but to even allude to it being about material properties, weave types, spring rates or anything else would just be giving away waaaay too much info to be professional. Have I got your story right? //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif Forgive me if I dont bow down and kiss your feet for sharing ... absolutely nothing ... with us.

All Ive asked you to do is back up your words with any sort of facts, explainations... or anything. Nope, all you give is vague and repetitive answers with an attitude.

if spider tuning means nothing, but you want to start learning that it does, you want to see it in writing, you can start by reading some of the works by vance dickason. even then his works only state how important it is for the drivers sound charictaristic.

I never said the spider wasn't important, I stated it needs to be seen in its proper perspective. You seem to think its the end-all answer to the 'sound characteristics' of a speaker, its not.

i don't need to justify myself or prove to anyone what i know. i could vary well state a # of very familliar companies who've used him. but that wouldn't be too professional.

You dont seem to think you need to justify anything, even your own claims. Nobody asked you to prove what you knew until you came here making this claim. You dont need to explain your position beyond some guy from Europe told you, you dont even feel the need to explain your experience... just come here and state whatever you wish, and god forbid anyone question you or your words.
How would mentioning this person's name, simply a guy who taught you some things about speaker design, be unprofessional? Are you suggesting he told you things he shouldn't have? Is there something to hide, or is it just a smoke screen to brush off backing up your words?

so what i am against and always will be against, is anyone who tries to cram down peoples throat, that speaker A is better than speaker B, or absolutes of how they will perform, only judging by paper spec's and modeling programs.

Please point out to me where I stated one sub was 'better' than another based on specs alone. If you are referring to the flat BL and distortion comments, those are facts, irrefutable. Or do you say otherwise? I have NEVER lead from that to the conclusion sub A was "better" than sub B. As a matter of fact, I made a post citing the difference between sound accuracy/SQ and sound preference. Ive also mentioned that I personally prefer the sound of non BL optimized drivers, even with their added distortion. So please, spare me. You are trying to argue a point I (and Warbleed) never made, and have repeated pointed out we were NOT making. reading > you
Im not trying to be hostile, but seriously, you are not being very reasonable. If you expect people to take you serious, you should be able to post some information about your position.

Lastly, do you also feel American speaker manufacturers cant get it right? Or just your buddy? Im curious.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

Tell you what, lets make this easy for you 95stroked1500. Im not even saying you are wrong (hell Ive never designed a sub before), but Id still like an explanation. That's not asking for too much.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

For what it's worth, I personally do not feel that there is any magic to be had in a spider. The suspension system and obtaining a usable Cms/Kms curve has long been achieved; this is why most companies are looking at ways to make BL more linear. The last great achievement was the use of progressive spiders (or perhaps using multiple, well-spaced spiders for high excursion designs). There simply is not any magic to be had in a spider: it's a piece of treated fabric.

Adire's Arachnid system was a pretty cool development, but relatively unnecessary unless we are looking at extreme excursion designs.