Hi I'm trying to play with the FaitalPro 4FE32 in winlsd. The problem I have is that winlsf is insisting the spl is 86.59 instead of \faital's claim of 91. Am I missing something?
Thanks
Thanks
Hi, the WINisd programme will auto calculate some values according to the equations used and other parameters entered. These might vary from manufacturers figures. As long as the programme allows you to 'save' to memory everything should be fine. If not, it alerts you to a conflict between the parameters which are not correct.
A possible : Yeah, there are 3 difference impedance versions of the 3" and 4" FaitalPRO drivers (4,8,16ohm). Sometimes the T&S get mixed up on sites.
Use winISD pro.
They stopped supporting winISD some years ago. It had a mistake in the program that gave out an incorrect result. They never corrected that error.
They stopped supporting winISD some years ago. It had a mistake in the program that gave out an incorrect result. They never corrected that error.
Greets!
Yes, on this subject in general, quite a lot actually, though in the ensuing links you can become as knowledgeable as you choose, so I'll just address a few of the basics to explain the seeming discrepancy. 😉
Note that when the published sensitivity is done correctly it's calculated or measured at ~1 kHz, though too often can be at some high peak in the driver's breakup modes bandwidth [BW] above its usable passband, so completely bogus.
Notice though that Faital lists its efficiency [eta zero] as 0.02%, which = ~85 dB, so from a math derived POV Faital apparently rounded it down: Efficiency and sensitivity conversion - loudspeaker percent and dB per watt and meter loudspeaker efficiency versus sensitivity vs speaker sensitivity 1 watt = 2,83 volt box chart - sengpielaudio Sengpiel Berlin
Note too that T/S derived box programs are designed for box loading to only be in its acceleration [rising response] BW, so fades out/blends to the driver's response at the point where it becomes mass controlled [Fhm], ergo where its 'in box' efficiency will be calculated and what the rest of its response will be referenced from, so based on its published response it will be a bit shy of 90 dB/W/m at best:
Fhm = 2*Fs/Qts'
where Qts' = driver Qts + any added series resistance due to wiring, passive XO components, amp output impedance, etc.: mh-audio.nl - Home
New, more accurate and much enhanced WinISD V0.7: https://www.facebook.com/WinISD/posts/126113234166443
GM
Last edited:
Thanks for the replies. I am using Winlsd pro 0.7.0.900. Thanks GM, I am now even more confused as the graph/table in your link both indicate from an efficiency of around 2.5% they should have a sensitivity around 96dB, where does your 85dB come from? I realise that the box reduces output but no other driver I have tried has shown much difference.
PS I've just put in the Faital pro 4FE35, and that comes out with an even lower spl. Are the people at Faitalpro being heavily optimistic? Do I trust Winlsd to be accurate when trying to marry the faital to a bass driver as a 2 way FAST?
PS I've just put in the Faital pro 4FE35, and that comes out with an even lower spl. Are the people at Faitalpro being heavily optimistic? Do I trust Winlsd to be accurate when trying to marry the faital to a bass driver as a 2 way FAST?
You're welcome!
Cool! Most just start with the original freeware.
Hmm, the specs say 0.2% = 0.002 = 85 dB per the chart or input it in the calculator to get a more accurate number out to [9] decimal places 😉: Percent to Decimal Calculator
Hmm, when I load the T/S specs in Hornresp [only program I currently use] I get 85 dB on average in its passband in a ~IB [16 L] and using its design? specs [Mmd, Cms, Rms, BL] it's a bit higher, peaking at ~86.9 dB, so they're apparently being quite honest, which isn't surprising since prosound is so competitive today that they can't afford to BS much without risking being excluded in the big contract's preferred vendor listings.
Without loading up 0.7, no clue why its not returning the same data; from dim memory I don't recall any discrepancies of note compared to my own very accurate Excel programs, calculators I use[d] to vet freeware, online ones.
GM
Cool! Most just start with the original freeware.
Hmm, the specs say 0.2% = 0.002 = 85 dB per the chart or input it in the calculator to get a more accurate number out to [9] decimal places 😉: Percent to Decimal Calculator
Hmm, when I load the T/S specs in Hornresp [only program I currently use] I get 85 dB on average in its passband in a ~IB [16 L] and using its design? specs [Mmd, Cms, Rms, BL] it's a bit higher, peaking at ~86.9 dB, so they're apparently being quite honest, which isn't surprising since prosound is so competitive today that they can't afford to BS much without risking being excluded in the big contract's preferred vendor listings.
Without loading up 0.7, no clue why its not returning the same data; from dim memory I don't recall any discrepancies of note compared to my own very accurate Excel programs, calculators I use[d] to vet freeware, online ones.
GM
Attachments
Forget what I suggested above. FS graphs for all three impedance versions are similar, showing around 86-87dB @ 1KHz.
With most drivers I have seen on e.g. Parts Express, the 4ohm versions usually have a healthy sensitivity advantage over their 8ohm siblings.
With most drivers I have seen on e.g. Parts Express, the 4ohm versions usually have a healthy sensitivity advantage over their 8ohm siblings.
I think I owe apologies as I have probably got the decimal point in the wrong place.
Gotta say I'm getting really tired of living in a world where everyone seems to by trying to con via obfuscation.
Gotta say I'm getting really tired of living in a world where everyone seems to by trying to con via obfuscation.
Spiff happens! 😀
Yeah, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you!
GM
- Status
- Not open for further replies.