From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Don Klipstein)
Subject: Re: Bullshit wins v. science
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 04:36:38 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: MGT Consulting
References: <email@example.com> <3DC634B7.C303BC8E@scazon.com>
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 04:36:38 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.6.2 (SunOS)
In article , Kevin
Aylward wrote in part:
>An asymmetrical speaker as you note here, might well sound different on
>inversion, but then, technically, it is not that inversion that the ear
>is detecting, in the sense that there is some mechanism in the ear for
>distinguishing between positive and negative pressure. The sound being
>generated is actually different. An asymmetrical signal might be clipped
>in one inversion, but not the other. Usually, when one is disusing
>whether or not certain effects are detectable by the ear, the use of a
>baseline of neutrality is used. That is, amplifiers, and such like are
>being operated in their linear region and power ratings etc.
One problem here - a lot of loudspeakers have significant nonlinearity
when power and cone motion are within the ratings. The "limit of
linearity" for a loudspeaker may merely be some point at which distortion,
with increasing power, rapidly changes from significant to intolerable.
And for woofers, this maximum power for "reasonable" linearity varies
a lot both with frequency and with enclosure design. Midranges and
tweeters can also have nonlinear effects varying with frequency.
>So it would seem that in a real speaker, it may be possible to notice
>effects due to phase reversal, but that the ear itself is not responding
>to the phase reversal itself, but to the different spectrum of harmonic
>distortions that are generated. If the speaker was symmetric, phase
>invasion would have no effect.
- Don Klipstein (firstname.lastname@example.org)