WinISD or Madisound problem

[icor1031]

WinISD Beta and Alpha do the same thing.
What's the deal, why is my F3 @ 70Hz, when the site says a 1.5 ft3 box will get me 47Hz F3?

Thanks.

[Whitneyville1]

I think Madisound transposed 47 Hz for 74 Hz. That's the only thing that makes sense and what I got with WinISD (the newest version). I ran it three times, Beta, Alpha, and ISD to be certain. In 1.75 cu.ft ported I got a flat response (+.3dB). It would take a much larger sealed enclosure to be "ideal" by WinAlpha or ISD.

[icor1031]

In that case, the Nomex does 19Hz better.

Thanks.

[peepaj]

icor fs looks to be 42Hz, it's right under Le on the spec page.

[MSaturn]

use something other than winISD and see what happens.

[AR3A]

Is there a solid version of WinISD ? I get a littler unsettled when I hear the words alpha and beta. I use the beta all the time, I have never used the alpha.

[HareBrained]

As peepaj stated, the modeled FS is wrong. Change your 64 to 42.

I use Unibox myself, and love it.

[Chris Roemer]

Is there a solid version of WinISD ? I get a littler unsettled when I hear the words alpha and beta. I use the beta all the time, I have never used the alpha.

"beta" gives results VERY SIMILAR to "Alpha" (a.k.a. "Pro") and to every other reputable box modeler out there.

Beta has a couple features Pro doesn't have. And Pro can be a bit finicky with data entry until you get the hang of it. But Pro takes you ten times deeper into your explorations than beta can.

You'll finally understand what's meant by "excursion limited".
You can model passive radiators.
You can dial in different amounts of "leakage" for your box.
You can simulate a plate amp's low pass filter on a sub.
And much, much more.

Chris

[fastbike1]

Do you have Excel?

http://audio.claub.net/software/jbabgy/WBCD.html

or

http://audio.claub.net/software/kougaard/ubmodel.html

Is there a solid version of WinISD ? I get a littler unsettled when I hear the words alpha and beta. I use the beta all the time, I have never used the alpha.

[mdocod]

Things to consider:

WinISD Alpha Pro works fine, and is a reasonably accurate simulator provided you know it's qwerks and how to work around them. The most important thing is getting the driver data correctly entered. I like to let WinISD calculate most of the T/S specs from mechanical specs when entering driver information. There is an order that works well and prevents "problems." If you let WinISD do the calculations for you, and you see a discrepancy in it's results that are greater than say +/-10% from published specs, then you know there may be a misprint. At that point, it's a matter of experience deciding where the error most likely is, and either trusting your gut, or moving on to a different driver that doesn't have discrepancies.

I don't recommend the beta version because without the ability to simulate Xmax vs Pe, amateur builders are apt to be lead astray simply looking for the most extreme "flat extension" without being shown the sacrifices in dynamic range that are given to achieve those response curves. Flat to 20hz doesn't do you any good if the system is Xmax limited to 90dB and you wanted a 110dB capable pair of speakers. Simulation looking for "deep flat extension" only will often lead to the use of high distortion drivers.

If you want more accurate simulations, use Hornresp. Hornresp uses much more "industrial strength" math far beyond my comprehension, to produce a simulation result.

Regards,
Eric

[icor1031]

Oh, I used F instead of Fs.

Thanks.

[Whitneyville1]

Duh'o! I just plugged your numbers in 3 times and ran them...a Homer Simpson moment!

[AR3A]

WinISD pro keeps telling me that there is a consistency check fail on Qts, Qms, Qes.

For this driver

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/psho...4-1078&scqty=2

[AR3A]

I got it, don't enter Qts the program uses the other two to calculate Qts.

[peepaj]

Check out this thread, post 13 has zaph's measurements. You could try using them.
http://techtalk.parts-express.com/sh...d.php?t=230802

[AR3A]

Thank you surprisingly WinISD calculated very close to his measurements

[mdocod]

WinISD pro keeps telling me that there is a consistency check fail on Qts, Qms, Qes.

For this driver

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/psho...4-1078&scqty=2

I recommend a specific order of entering specs to prevent this problem with WinISD..

Qms, Mms, Cms, Re, BL, Sd, Xmax, Pe

If you follow that order, all other specifications will be calculated for you without any consistency problems. If one of these specs is not published/available, then come as close as possible to this order, then add 1 additional T/S spec at a time until the remaining important fields have been calculated.

Regards,
Eric

[Chris Roemer]

I recommend a specific order of entering specs to prevent this problem with WinISD..

Qms, Mms, Cms, Re, BL, Sd, Xmax, Pe

If you follow that order, all other specifications will be calculated for you without any consistency problems. If one of these specs is not published/available, then come as close as possible to this order, then add 1 additional T/S spec at a time until the remaining important fields have been calculated.

Regards,
Eric

It's not really all that complicated. (With "auto-calculate" - or whatever it's called turned on) just enter the parms in the order that they "tab", L>R, top to bottom, but don't enter too many.

I probably just enter Qes, Qms, (SKIP Qts - but watch it calculate it) Fs, Vas, Re, D (cone diameter - or alternately Sd, cone area), Le, Pe, and Xmax.

Away you go.

[mdocod]

Hi Chris,

How can you say "it's not really all that complicated" and then proceed to give a list of inputs that is equal in length to those I have provided? The complication is equal.

The mechanical characteristics are less apt to have been "fudged" in the spec sheet. Following the suggested input order I have presented will result in greater precision in most cases. Also, you should skip entering Le, WinISD doesn't calculate for that correctly anyways.

Regards,
Eric

[johnnyrichards]

My tutorial. Sometime this century I will upload the other parts...