Woofer / alignment comparison... [message #41317] |
Tue, 13 May 2003 04:28 |
jeff mai
Messages: 6 Registered: May 2009
|
Esquire |
|
|
Thanks for the response below, Wayne. I've attached a graph comparing an intriguing looking Beyma 12K200 woofer to a JBL 2206H woofer in a Pi-Aligned cabinet. The T/S parms for the Beyma unit are: Fs = 35Hz Re = 6.2 ohms Qms = 11.17 Qes = 0.229 Qts = 0.225 Vas = 160 liters Cms = 383 um / N Rms = 1 kg / s n0 = 2.9% Sd = 0.053 m^2 Xmax = 4.5 mm Le = 0.8 mH I also compared the Beyma unit in a "shelved" type alignment you mentioned in the previous thread. I think the Beyma compares well to the JBL, though it's distortion figures and build quality are certainly not going to match the JBL. Comments? I guess my main questions are: How realistically will these graphs represent the true frequency response? And, which sort of alignment is likely to give best in room response? And if the answer to the previous question is "it depends on the room" is it worthwhile trying to tailor the alignment to the room? Anyone feel free to chime in. Thanks, Jeff Mai
|
|
|
|
OK, so I've since learned... [message #41354 is a reply to message #41330] |
Wed, 14 May 2003 03:34 |
jeff mai
Messages: 6 Registered: May 2009
|
Esquire |
|
|
...that the response I mentioned and showed in the graph is a type of EBS alignment. Reading through previous posts to this forum, I noticed you warn against the dangers of increased distortion of such an alignment because it works below resonance. Is that the resonance of the system or of the drive unit? If I tune the system above the resonance of the drive unit, am I in the clear? Thanks again!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frequencies of interest [message #41372 is a reply to message #41370] |
Wed, 14 May 2003 12:53 |
|
Wayne Parham
Messages: 18791 Registered: January 2001
|
Illuminati (33rd Degree) |
|
|
Yes, tuning the Helmholtz frequency to match that of the motor will reduce its excursion. This in turn will reduce distortion. But it is also important to note that system tuning affects a region and not a specific frequency. The mechanical resonance of the woofer is shifted upwards by putting it in a box, and this new resonant frequency is denoted as Fo.In a bass-reflex system, you have five frequencies of interest - Fs, Fo, Fb, Fh and Fl. Fs is the woofer's free air resonance, Fo is the mechanical resonance that's been shifted by putting the woofer in the box and Fb is the resonant frequency of the box, it's Helmholtz frequency. Fh is the upper frequency of highest impedance, sometimes called the upper resonant frequency, and Fl is the lower frequency of highest impedance, the lower resonant frequency. The upper resonant frequency (Fh) is usually nearly coincident with the enclosed woofer's resonant frequency (Fo). They actually aren't the same, but they are near enough that the port damps the woofer's resonant frequency by a great deal. So for the octave above woofer resonance (approximately Fh) down to resonance (Fo), the port is tightly coupled with the woofer, damping its motion and making the system more rigid. Distortion is reduced because excursion is limited. Then, as frequency drops near Fl, the port begins to augment system output. In this mode, the port isn't limiting motion but it is increasing output so that the woofer doesn't have to move as much. You can find the formulas that define the relationships in the post called "Measure impedance."
|
|
|
Excursion damping bandwidth? [message #41377 is a reply to message #41372] |
Wed, 14 May 2003 13:43 |
mollecon
Messages: 203 Registered: May 2009
|
Master |
|
|
Wayne, are there any general rules as to how big an area the damped excursion works - in other words, over how big a bandwidth does the port reduce excursion &/or assist the woofer? & where is the Helmholz resonance/tuning frequency in relation to that bandwith? I probably shoulda figured it out from your post, but I'm not sure I 'get it'... :-(
|
|
|
|
|