From: John Woodgate
Subject: Re: Cancel speaker resistance?
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 03:48:16 +0100
Organization: JMWA Electronics Consultancy
Reply-To: John Woodgate
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 06:54:54 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: Turnpike (32) Version 4.01 <5Z8C9wtxbnpWyFnyfFzqmVF739>
I read in sci.electronics.design that Richard D Pierce
wrote (in ) about
'Cancel speaker resistance?', on Mon, 16 Sep 2002:
>In article ,
>John Woodgate wrote:
>>I read in sci.electronics.design that Richard D Pierce
>> wrote (in ) about
>>'Cancel speaker resistance?', on Mon, 16 Sep 2002:
>>>Which KEF model are you reffering to?
>>It's a long time ago now. I looked for a reference in JAES, but I could
>>not find it.
>I assume you're NOT talking about things like the
>conjugate-matched products like the 104/2 and such? There are
>those that would argue that they are "constant current" in sort
>of perverted sort of way, in the same way a resistor is.
No, certainly not. The constant-current thing came up around the same
time as the first concentric tweeter. I asked at the time where the
amplifiers were coming from, but that was 'confidential'. I assumed that
the intention was to make active boxes, with built-in amplifiers.
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!