8 Optimum Designs
Unconstrained by cost or availability, these represent the pinnacle of performance for nearfield
and midfield use.
8.1 Optimum Two-Way
Woofer: Seas L26ROY ...
Now tell me how can a 173g (cone+ VC assembly+ some suspension) membrane be crossed at 2kHz to a tweeter...(Yes, the L26ROY is classified as a sub)
Edit: more acceptable is a FASt with crossover at 0.2 kHz
Unconstrained by cost or availability, these represent the pinnacle of performance for nearfield
and midfield use.
8.1 Optimum Two-Way
Woofer: Seas L26ROY ...
Now tell me how can a 173g (cone+ VC assembly+ some suspension) membrane be crossed at 2kHz to a tweeter...(Yes, the L26ROY is classified as a sub)
Edit: more acceptable is a FASt with crossover at 0.2 kHz
Last edited:
By
But with a Yamaha JA-0801, a dome mid...clever but the question remains.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...a-0801-seas-l26roy.402637/page-4#post-7965132
Well, it just popped out !
But with a Yamaha JA-0801, a dome mid...clever but the question remains.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...a-0801-seas-l26roy.402637/page-4#post-7965132
These read uncannily like slightly modified / adapted responses from ChatGPT or similar [we've had several remarkably similar examples here of late] to a few select, not very clearly-defined questions.
There is no 'design draft'. There is no design. It's bollocks. Like all of the others. A dribbling waste of time. Riddled with inaccurate statements and a distinct lack of any useful information, with much of what actually is there apparently culled from data sheets. Drooling twaddle of the first order. Sucks like an asthmatic echnida after 2-decades of puffing on 60 Woodbines a day which has then been plonked on the top of Everest and informed his daughter has a starring role in a new film with a plumber. The mearest sneaking scrub ever whelped in the gutter would... [etc.]
1 Who is the author/authorship of this document? It's not signed.
2. What might have been the reason for the author/authorship not to sign this document?
3. Who is meant by we?
4. What makes this document a good document?
5. Why would a good document be subject for serious critiques?
6. If we need more serious critiques, then this document has been critisized before?
7. What's the criteria for a serious critique (and what's a non-serious critique)?
Last edited:
We should be making a "What the ultimate listener wants to hear from its system" thread
I imagine the responses: Loud and clear, etc etc...
I imagine the responses: Loud and clear, etc etc...
It's drivel apparently culled from ChatGPT or similar -the format, phrasing and structure is almost identical to other examples they churn out. What is 'good' about it? The onus is on the person posting it to explain what's going on, the origins, objectives etc. not other people to do so, or guess. But if you think we're all going to go through that electronically generated drivel line by line & point by point [which could take several hours] -I suspect you're sorely mistaken. Speaking purely for myself, I have limited leisure time. I don't mind helping out when I may be able to, or offering opinions for whatever they may or may not be worth, but that's a bit excessive.
As for 'more serious' -you mean like this:
...where you appear to have posted a graph of the Seas L26ROY. So what?
Here's a picture of a purple-***** baboon. It has roughly the same relevance until you can start explaining a bit. 😉
Attachments
Last edited by a moderator:
Contemplating a system requiring a small bass driver which will be using all of its 15mm Xmax to (barely) reproduce 20Hz at 105dB is, sadly, about as far from 'Ultimate' as I can envision.
The best bit for me was 'even decay...' suggesting a great long resonant transmission line, ported mid, and a 1" dome match well in this respect. Hilarious - can't wait to see the waterfall plot...
The best bit for me was 'even decay...' suggesting a great long resonant transmission line, ported mid, and a 1" dome match well in this respect. Hilarious - can't wait to see the waterfall plot...
Last edited:
Why don't we wait and see what OnAudio has to say. I would also be interested in knowing the author, and whether AI was involved plus its intended purpose.
I might consider questions after I learn these things.
I might consider questions after I learn these things.
Like e.g. today's simulations, AI/ChatGPT might become a valuable tool (read: a tool, but nothing more) for audio developments once matured. Maturing means training the algorithms. And there is a lot of discusssion and knowledge to train algorithms for specific audio tasks here in this forum. So why not train an AI system for audio development based on what has been elaborated here in this forum over all the years?
So, then ...
... in this logic, the posted draft already might be an AI/ChatGPT product resembling something like an audio project description. First hand, bravo for that. And if so, then it's a good begin, but nothing more. "We" then really badly need more "serious" critiques == input to improve/train the algorithm.
One of the very basic questions that remains for me: What might be the copyright aspekt of all this? Would it be e.g. ok for an open and community audio-AI-project to train the algorithms here in this forum, resorting to the already published knowledge base and to the ongoing discussion? If so, then it might be interesting in eventually joining into such a project. If there is any.
Last not least: Any AI related data and/or intends would have to be transparently declared. Clandestinely tapping knowledge and resources for non-diy-purposes is a no-go IMHO.
It might -albeit it will need to have access to the full data and ability to use other software to achieve a set of defined goals provided to it. No doubt will happen sooner or later.
I can't speak for anybody else: in my case I simply don't wish to participate in doing so -especially (speaking generally) if it's done covertly, without asking consent. Granted, plenty trawl forums for information already, but that doesn't mean we have to like or want even more of it. In more limited [typically private, with select objects & data from sources that agree to it] scenarios -potentially a different story.
I imagine each of us has an ultimate design or is working towards one, and that they are all different. Given the personal preference involved, any attempt to gain agreement that a particular design is indeed the ultimate is misguided. Had the OP simply presented his simulations or measurements, he may well have received plaudits. His original post though is fatally flawed.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.