ErinH
04-21-2012, 12:37 AM
Bill,
I think everyone in audio agrees that while HD plots help you learn more about a driver, it doesn't do as good a job as really illuminating trouble areas regarding distortion as much as multitone or IMD testing does.
I realize that you almost have to have software to really pull a measurement like this off in order to set a fixed tone and a sweep range for IMD or set tones for multitone testing, but I was wondering if this is something you had considered doing. Given the way your software works, I was thinking that maybe there is a way to provide test tracks that have multiple tones in them, in spaces? Maybe something like a track with 74, 79, 83, 87, 91hz altogether. Further test tracks with higher frequency content could be used. The good thing is that if you have 5 or 6 tracks, the data always remains constant because those tracks and the tones within them are always constant. One could play the multitone track and use the standard FR window to collect the data and see just how the distortion components attribute the makeup of the driver's output.
I know you know exactly what I'm talking about and to a MUUUUUUUCH better degree since Praxis actually had the capability to do this (I used Praxis and loved the features, but OM is so much simpler which may be it's downfall in this kind of testing's regard) so forgive me if I'm overreaching but I thought it couldn't hurt to toss it out there.
Something like this (borrowed from Mark K's site):
http://www.audioheuristics.org/measurements/Testing/Midrange2/Graph/Accuton_C44_400Hz_NL_pt25m.GIF
Truth be told, if there were a way to be able to extract more non-linear distortion data from test drivers, I'd pretty much have no reason to keep using the Klippel for my purposes. I love OM for it's ease and if there were one thing I'd like to be able to do with it, this topic would be it for me.
Between OM and DATs, I'm pretty much set. I realize there are other packages but when it boils down to time, these 2 products take the cake for me. I've been through a LOT of test gear over the past couple years and can't beat the simplicity of OM, even with the tradeoffs given.
I actually hope to use these two products on my website (medleysmusings.com (http://www.medleysmusings.com); shameless plug) after I get it off the ground a bit. Maybe you guys wouldn't mind me using your logo on the site. ;)
Thanks,
Erin
I think everyone in audio agrees that while HD plots help you learn more about a driver, it doesn't do as good a job as really illuminating trouble areas regarding distortion as much as multitone or IMD testing does.
I realize that you almost have to have software to really pull a measurement like this off in order to set a fixed tone and a sweep range for IMD or set tones for multitone testing, but I was wondering if this is something you had considered doing. Given the way your software works, I was thinking that maybe there is a way to provide test tracks that have multiple tones in them, in spaces? Maybe something like a track with 74, 79, 83, 87, 91hz altogether. Further test tracks with higher frequency content could be used. The good thing is that if you have 5 or 6 tracks, the data always remains constant because those tracks and the tones within them are always constant. One could play the multitone track and use the standard FR window to collect the data and see just how the distortion components attribute the makeup of the driver's output.
I know you know exactly what I'm talking about and to a MUUUUUUUCH better degree since Praxis actually had the capability to do this (I used Praxis and loved the features, but OM is so much simpler which may be it's downfall in this kind of testing's regard) so forgive me if I'm overreaching but I thought it couldn't hurt to toss it out there.
Something like this (borrowed from Mark K's site):
http://www.audioheuristics.org/measurements/Testing/Midrange2/Graph/Accuton_C44_400Hz_NL_pt25m.GIF
Truth be told, if there were a way to be able to extract more non-linear distortion data from test drivers, I'd pretty much have no reason to keep using the Klippel for my purposes. I love OM for it's ease and if there were one thing I'd like to be able to do with it, this topic would be it for me.
Between OM and DATs, I'm pretty much set. I realize there are other packages but when it boils down to time, these 2 products take the cake for me. I've been through a LOT of test gear over the past couple years and can't beat the simplicity of OM, even with the tradeoffs given.
I actually hope to use these two products on my website (medleysmusings.com (http://www.medleysmusings.com); shameless plug) after I get it off the ground a bit. Maybe you guys wouldn't mind me using your logo on the site. ;)
Thanks,
Erin