Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="95stroked1500" data-source="post: 2750516" data-attributes="member: 569805">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&#039;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&#039;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&#039;t need to justify myself or prove to anyone what i know. i could vary well state a # of very familliar companies who&#039;ve used him. but that wouldn&#039;t be too professional.talking down to knowledgable people? no. there are a lot of good speaker builders and designers. the best rely on&nbsp; more than just computer simulations and absolutes of a few known formula&#039;s. and that is my point. not what warbleed can or can&#039;t produce. it&#039;s easy to see he is very well versed in the science and physic&#039;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&#039;s and modeling programs.at one time, according to peoples mathmatics and physics knowledge, a bumble bee shouldn&#039;t have been able to fly on their engineering software. but yet since we grew up knowing that bee&#039;s fly, we accepted that there&#039;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&#039;s impossible. his programs show it can&#039;t.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="95stroked1500, post: 2750516, member: 569805"] 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. [/QUOTE]

Verification