Dungeon Keeper
#256 Re: Dungeon Keeper
So are you now wanting the goalposts moved when a suggestion is made to trial a high order/complex crossover? Have we now moved onto requiring a hearing test because people don't hear music properly before we can partake in any such crossover trial? Yes, I know you don't read my posts(unless you cheat) but others do.
#257 Re: Dungeon Keeper
And yet you state this as if to present it as a fact about Scottmoose when, in fact, it is just your opinion, formed from a very limited set of experience. In fact, you know almost nothing about Scottmoose. Nor do I for that matter, though I have heard, and formed a positive impression, of a couple of speakers he has designed (or been involved in the design of).Daniel Quinn wrote: ↑Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:11 pmAdditionally , you will appreciate the scottmoose makes no such limitations to his experience , he seeks to rarefy his personal experience to the status of fact.
I also know almost nothing about Dr. Bunsen but have obviously formed an opinion of the man based on my limited experience of him. I think I see parallels between my own approach and his philosophy; I seek simplicity (I use OTL valve amps and no crossovers, for example, and have been experimenting with no-DAC DSD replay).
Now, as nobody is actually on trial here can we not just accept a live and let live approach where Dr Bunsen can have his own threads about Doc Mods and Scottmoose can have the same for his topics; we can make our own decisions about which have merit? Of course there can be discourse/debate within the treads but throwing personal antagonism and confrontation into the mix achieves nothing (unless you're a lawyer of course ).
BTW, you should try and get along to Owston...
PS. Having read your last post we could probably spend a significant part of the day just talking/listening to Genesis (up to W&W!).
Sorry, I couldn't resist!
-
- Old Hand
- Posts: 860
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:19 am
#258 Re: Dungeon Keeper
Ray P wrote: ↑Tue Apr 18, 2017 1:08 pmAnd yet you state this as if to present it as a fact about Scottmoose when, in fact, it is just your opinion, formed from a very limited set of experience. In fact, you know almost nothing about Scottmoose. Nor do I for that matter, though I have heard, and formed a positive impression, of a couple of speakers he has designed (or been involved in the design of).Daniel Quinn wrote: ↑Tue Apr 18, 2017 12:11 pmAdditionally , you will appreciate the scottmoose makes no such limitations to his experience , he seeks to rarefy his personal experience to the status of fact.
Sorry , that is not correct by the ordinary meaning of what he says. I do not need to know scottmoose , I am happy to accept he is nice guy I am commenting only on his posts . And in his posts he repeatedly states his opinion as fact , that is not my opinion but a reasonable and proportionate assessment of the words he employs in many of his posts . Nether is it to say his opinion is not correct , it is simply to state a truth not an opinion .
Scottmoose often asserts an opinion as a fact , is a factual statement , it is not my opinion , it is factually true by virtue of the ordinary meaning of the words he uses, it does not require my opinion for its validity .
-
- Old Hand
- Posts: 860
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:19 am
#260 Re: Dungeon Keeper
Then please read again
"Everything I am writing here is fact; the only opinions I'm giving are where I state reasons for using a particular feature." Scottmoose .
o dear
"Everything I am writing here is fact; the only opinions I'm giving are where I state reasons for using a particular feature." Scottmoose .
o dear
#261 Re: Dungeon Keeper
Well, I have no real side in this but
I think that is closer to a statement of fact than an opinion.The downsides of high order filters are potentially higher insertion losses than physically simpler designs, but these are typically less than you would get in terms of the production tolerances of most drive units. They're rarely minimum or linear phase either, but that also applies to low order types. On the other hand, a high order crossover at a low frequency can provide an extremely consistent response on & off axis since you avoid the inherent beaming of a large cone bass / midbass driver toward the top of its range. Tone / timbre can become much more natural as a result, especially in the diffuse / reverberant field. By suppressing unwanted resonances of the bass drivers you also end up with a cleaner midband and presence region due to the lowered distortion levels. A panacea? Obviously not. But they can work extremely well when used appropriately.
Whenever an honest man discovers that he's mistaken, he will either cease to be mistaken or he will cease to be honest.
-
- Old Hand
- Posts: 860
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:19 am
#262 Re: Dungeon Keeper
As I said , I am not saying he is wrong , I am simply making an observation . It is my opinion that hifi is so full of shite { though this forum is refreshing free of it } that it is important to distinguish between fact and opinion and comment when opinion is masquerading as fact and establish what are the factual credentials , I am not personally getting at scottmoose ,I am observing .
it is what I do best
it is what I do best
#263 Re: Dungeon Keeper
It is not my intention to take sides
You're simply expressing an opinion Nick, one that I don't share, however for the purpose of this discourse, I'll go with your observation, in which case...
...we should be even-handed as one might reflect that content from both Dr. Bunsen and Scottmoose could be interpreted as presenting opinion as fact.Daniel Quinn wrote: ↑Tue Apr 18, 2017 1:41 pm ...it is important to distinguish between fact and opinion and comment when opinion is masquerading as fact and establish what are the factual credentials...
Sorry, I couldn't resist!
-
- Old Hand
- Posts: 860
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:19 am
#264 Re: Dungeon Keeper
I agree , on occasion Dr Bunsen as a propensity to present his opinions as fact .
But he explains without relying on theory or indeed rhetoric why he elevates his opinion to the status of fact . His explanations are verifiable empirically , just do it and listen which means I can understand what doc Bunsen is saying without having to accept a load of theory , I can neither reject or refute without expending considerable time
I have tried what the doc advocates, it is quick and easy and it works for me .
compare "The downsides of high order filters are potentially higher insertion losses than physically simpler designs, but these are typically less than you would get in terms of the production tolerances of most drive units. To : " complex crossovers are musically harmful, instead steel line the cabinent , direct couple and dope the bass driver"
But he explains without relying on theory or indeed rhetoric why he elevates his opinion to the status of fact . His explanations are verifiable empirically , just do it and listen which means I can understand what doc Bunsen is saying without having to accept a load of theory , I can neither reject or refute without expending considerable time
I have tried what the doc advocates, it is quick and easy and it works for me .
compare "The downsides of high order filters are potentially higher insertion losses than physically simpler designs, but these are typically less than you would get in terms of the production tolerances of most drive units. To : " complex crossovers are musically harmful, instead steel line the cabinent , direct couple and dope the bass driver"
- Scottmoose
- Needs to get out more
- Posts: 1802
- Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 11:03 am
- Contact:
#265 Re: Dungeon Keeper
I appreciate that Richard's modifications that you mention are relatively quick & easy, especially for people not particularly up on, or even interested in, speaker design. All of which is fair enough. However, you may recall that it was never at any time claimed that anything I put on this thread was supposed to be quick or easy. It's not necessarily meant for the same people. And if somebody has a question, they can ask.
I invite you to indicate where I am stating opinion as fact:
I invite you to indicate where I am stating opinion as fact:
Those are not opinions, they are facts. Rather basic ones.The downsides of high order filters are potentially higher insertion losses than physically simpler designs, but these are typically less than you would get in terms of the production tolerances of most drive units.
That's not an opinion either. You will, of course, have noted that I have taken the trouble to point out several downsides to high order filters.They're rarely minimum or linear phase either, but that also applies to low order types.
That's another fact, noting a potential [you will, naturally, have seen the caveat; universal applicability is not implied] advantage of a high order filters at a low crossover frequency.On the other hand, a high order crossover at a low frequency can provide an extremely consistent response on & off axis since you avoid the inherent beaming of a large cone bass / midbass driver toward the top of its range.
Another fact, noting a potential advantage that has been underlined for years by a great deal of acoustic research; a more uniform / consistent behaviour over a wide listening angle improves both for those not directly on axis relative to speakers where there is greater variability in behaviour. This is frequently pointed out by those advocating omnidirectional designs and their variations.Tone / timbre can become much more natural as a result, especially in the diffuse / reverberant field.
That's also a fact. Reducing distortion anywhere makes for a cleaner presentation, a.k.a. one that is more accurate. Since the resonances in question typically occur in the presence region, and the HD products resulting from these lower down in the midrange, they are noted in particular.By suppressing unwanted resonances of the bass drivers you also end up with a cleaner midband and presence region due to the lowered distortion levels
Natch.A panacea? Obviously not. But they can work extremely well when used appropriately.
Last edited by Scottmoose on Tue Apr 18, 2017 3:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
'"That'll do," comes the cry of the perfectionist down the ages.' (James May The Reassembler)
Website www.wodendesign.com
Community sites www.frugal-horn.com & www.frugal-phile.com
Website www.wodendesign.com
Community sites www.frugal-horn.com & www.frugal-phile.com
-
- Old Hand
- Posts: 860
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:19 am
#266 Re: Dungeon Keeper
Scott , you just do not get it do you .
I have no desire to show how the epistemological and ontological foundations of an awful lot of what you say is not factually based but theory based . You have chosen to give audio theory the status of fact . That is were we are at .
I have no desire to show how the epistemological and ontological foundations of an awful lot of what you say is not factually based but theory based . You have chosen to give audio theory the status of fact . That is were we are at .
- Scottmoose
- Needs to get out more
- Posts: 1802
- Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 11:03 am
- Contact:
#267 Re: Dungeon Keeper
So you're not going to indicate where you claim I have stated opinion as fact then. You're just going to insinuate. I see.
'"That'll do," comes the cry of the perfectionist down the ages.' (James May The Reassembler)
Website www.wodendesign.com
Community sites www.frugal-horn.com & www.frugal-phile.com
Website www.wodendesign.com
Community sites www.frugal-horn.com & www.frugal-phile.com
#268 Re: Dungeon Keeper
"Downside" is a opinion, not a fact.The downsides of high order filters are potentially higher insertion losses than physically simpler designs, but these are typically less than you would get in terms of the production tolerances of most drive units.
And I dont TBH understand the second part as it looks to me like a conflict of units. "insertion losses" on one side, "production tolerances" on the other side.
Whenever an honest man discovers that he's mistaken, he will either cease to be mistaken or he will cease to be honest.
-
- Old Hand
- Posts: 860
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:19 am
#269 Re: Dungeon Keeper
What Nick says and
You are missing the point -
the facts you state and claim as facts , I consider to be dependant on theory and are thus not facts , such as
"The downsides of high order filters are potentially higher insertion losses than physically simpler designs, but these are typically less than you would get in terms of the production tolerances of most drive units." "Tone / timbre can become much more natural as a result, especially in the diffuse / reverberant field."
They are thus in my opinion - Not facts . They are also opague and in many respect meaningless .
for instance lets take the first one "The downsides of high order filters are potentially higher insertion losses than physically simpler designs, but these are typically less than you would get in terms of the production tolerances of most drive units"
by insertion losses , I assume you mean loss of sensitivity , why not say it , you also state this loss of sensitivity is meaningless because it will not be as large of differences between drive units - there is no evidence for this .
So essentially what you are saying is downside of high order filters is they will make the speaker less sensitive . Why did you not say this , why is it a downside and is it the only downside ?
ps - I looked up insertion loss and it seems to be a telecomunuications terms ?
You are missing the point -
the facts you state and claim as facts , I consider to be dependant on theory and are thus not facts , such as
"The downsides of high order filters are potentially higher insertion losses than physically simpler designs, but these are typically less than you would get in terms of the production tolerances of most drive units." "Tone / timbre can become much more natural as a result, especially in the diffuse / reverberant field."
They are thus in my opinion - Not facts . They are also opague and in many respect meaningless .
for instance lets take the first one "The downsides of high order filters are potentially higher insertion losses than physically simpler designs, but these are typically less than you would get in terms of the production tolerances of most drive units"
by insertion losses , I assume you mean loss of sensitivity , why not say it , you also state this loss of sensitivity is meaningless because it will not be as large of differences between drive units - there is no evidence for this .
So essentially what you are saying is downside of high order filters is they will make the speaker less sensitive . Why did you not say this , why is it a downside and is it the only downside ?
ps - I looked up insertion loss and it seems to be a telecomunuications terms ?
- andrew Ivimey
- Social Sevices have been notified
- Posts: 8318
- Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 8:33 am
- Location: Bedford
#270 Re: Dungeon Keeper
It does me good to see words like epistemological and ontological....cor, never thought in an audio forum - a first perhaps.
Necessary? Germaine? Contingent? Lorra larffs- Yes I'll shut up but it does bring a smile to my face, a spring to my stride.
Dialectical materialism nah, surely but how about a bit of Husserl or a bit of deconstruction. I think semiology crept in a while back.
Larks!
Ducks...
Necessary? Germaine? Contingent? Lorra larffs- Yes I'll shut up but it does bring a smile to my face, a spring to my stride.
Dialectical materialism nah, surely but how about a bit of Husserl or a bit of deconstruction. I think semiology crept in a while back.
Larks!
Ducks...
Philosophers have only interpreted the world - the point, however, is to change it. No it isn't ... maybe we should leave it alone for a while.