Is there a way (software?) b to determine the number, shape, width of the karlson slots in the vent?
- software ="perhaps" - for a given enclosure size /form factor it probably would be fairly easy to try a few shelves with different cuts then test response - input impedance, and listen (if applicable) for large signal chuffing effects.
Might NEXO's technique be more suitable for larger cabinets with little use of acoustic damping material on the walls than say a small reflex fullranger cabinet or Pensil type with sustantial fill?
There seems to be some relationships spoken of within the patent.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US9635454B2/en
FWIW I think that technique might be useful with some "XKi" where the vent is long enough to merit the cut. I would assume a cut vent would have to be longer than uncut for the same tuning frequency.
Might NEXO's technique be more suitable for larger cabinets with little use of acoustic damping material on the walls than say a small reflex fullranger cabinet or Pensil type with sustantial fill?
There seems to be some relationships spoken of within the patent.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US9635454B2/en
FWIW I think that technique might be useful with some "XKi" where the vent is long enough to merit the cut. I would assume a cut vent would have to be longer than uncut for the same tuning frequency.
What once was old is again new...
How this stuff gets patented beggars belief.
Granted -an item patented doesn't have to actually work, it just needs to be original. Which the above certainly is not. It's about as far from original as you can get.
How this stuff gets patented beggars belief.
Granted -an item patented doesn't have to actually work, it just needs to be original. Which the above certainly is not. It's about as far from original as you can get.
I have these references:
(1 page of 4)
and — you’ll recognize this, for A10p:
dave
(1 page of 4)
and — you’ll recognize this, for A10p:
dave
Yep, model looks familiar. 😉
pdf above looks like Karlson's? Norman Fulmer's attached (filed '52, granted '57):
pdf above looks like Karlson's? Norman Fulmer's attached (filed '52, granted '57):
Also used to control the market.
Cisco used to slightly modify logical interfaces and then get a patent. Given their size, they control the market so other vendors, in order to ensure interoperability, had to pay Cisco a fee and add that modification to their product.
It's a nasty world full of lawyers and MBAs.
On the positive side, it doesn't always happen. As the fallen Monster discovered when they tried it on with Blue Jeans a decade or so ago.
Granted, the chap in question was a lawyer in a former life -and a fairly formidable one specialising in commercial litigation at that. But his response was a fairly comprehensive demolition of the position Monster's legal team had attempted to take, setting out in detail prior art, dissimilarities, the total ambiguity of their claims, failure to provide comprehensive proof in support of their claim, its frivolous nature given those conditions, and expressing his perfect willingness not only to go to court, but to hold said court's attention on the lack of merit to their claims, which would hamper their ability to behave in that way in future. He also pointed out the almost total absence of any up-side for Monster, in the highly improbable event of their obtaining a judgement in their favour, since as a small business with limited sales any reasonable license fee they could obtain via their proceeding would hardly hit a total of four figures.
Granted, the chap in question was a lawyer in a former life -and a fairly formidable one specialising in commercial litigation at that. But his response was a fairly comprehensive demolition of the position Monster's legal team had attempted to take, setting out in detail prior art, dissimilarities, the total ambiguity of their claims, failure to provide comprehensive proof in support of their claim, its frivolous nature given those conditions, and expressing his perfect willingness not only to go to court, but to hold said court's attention on the lack of merit to their claims, which would hamper their ability to behave in that way in future. He also pointed out the almost total absence of any up-side for Monster, in the highly improbable event of their obtaining a judgement in their favour, since as a small business with limited sales any reasonable license fee they could obtain via their proceeding would hardly hit a total of four figures.