Fun with TPS reports - Speaker selection decision tree

[Wolf]

Re: Fun with TPS reports - Speaker selection decision tree

I think my tree covers all of the same features as the driver performance triangle. In fact, it adds the driver choices as well. Are there features missing that you are looking for? Perhaps one could explore efficiency -- damping vs resonant as the 4th dimension.

Does anyone have any creative data presentation techniques that would allow the 4th dimension to be displayed?

Yes- it does, and there is more there. But it did remind me of the triangle...

4th dimension- Isn't that before they got a fifth guy in the group? ;)
Wolf

[brianpowers27]

Re: Fun with TPS reports - Speaker selection decision tree

I think my tree covers all of the same features as the driver performance triangle. In fact, it adds the driver choices as well. Are there features missing that you are looking for? Perhaps one could explore efficiency -- damping vs resonant as the 4th dimension.

Does anyone have any creative data presentation techniques that would allow the 4th dimension to be displayed?

[[email protected]]

Re: Fun with TPS reports - Speaker selection decision tree

maybe you just need a bigger tree.

[romanbednarek]

Re: Fun with TPS reports - Speaker selection decision tree

It is a good visual aid, don't get me wrong.
Kinda reminds me of the '3-option triangle' for woofers.
-small box
-deep bass
-high sensitivity

Just you can only pick 2!
Later,
Wolf

PS- I also do this in my free time!:D

[Wolf]

Re: Fun with TPS reports - Speaker selection decision tree

It is a good visual aid, don't get me wrong.
Kinda reminds me of the '3-option triangle' for woofers.
-small box
-deep bass
-high sensitivity

Just you can only pick 2!
Later,
Wolf

PS- I also do this in my free time!:D

[brianpowers27]

Re: Fun with TPS reports - Speaker selection decision tree

Rory,

Thanks for the suggestions. I have a limited understanding in this area but enough to understand the gist of what you are getting at.

For instance, the bottom left with a lo-fi large no-bass system, it can be a hi-fi one, and just add a sub if required.

It's really kinda confusing, really.
Later,
Wolf

I am sure that you understand that it is impossible to group the speaker designs along multiple axis'. With that said I chose cabinet size, bass extension and efficiency. I am open to suggestions on how this can be best accomplished.

I had a hard time on some of the choices, since the items could fall into multiple categories. I also had to draw a line on what I considered to be small vs large cabinet size... I chose 1ft3 as the mark of delineation. I stuck open baffle into the large size... Bass extensions is another rather subjective terms since a 6th order at 50hz likely has less bass than a 2nd order at 70hz...

I went through and re-labeled some of the systems at the bottom.You may need to refresh your browser.

Take it easy on me since I am doing this in my free time. To my knowledge, no one has ever done this before, visually.

[Wolf]

Re: Fun with TPS reports - Speaker selection decision tree

While that does have some direction, it doesn't cover nearly all of the bases. There are many other options not inherent in that flowchart.

For instance, the bottom left with a lo-fi large no-bass system, it can be a hi-fi one, and just add a sub if required.

It's really kinda confusing, really.
Later,
Wolf

[Taterworks]

Re: Fun with TPS reports - Speaker selection decision tree

Your "???" would be a design with very limited maximum output, or an extremely resonant character, and would likely be energized by a small driver. Transient response would be close to nonexistent. I think bandpass enclosures in general and the Bose Acoustimass 8th-order bandpass bass module in particular fall into this category as well. Small size, high efficiency, and low extension are goals in the pro audio world, and since the Bose patent on the 6th-order bandpass enclosure has been allowed to expire, the uptake of the design in the pro audio world has been rapid (see Mackie, KV2 Audio, RCF, FBT, Funktion-One, Void, and Community's new VLF line).

I'm planning on working with Wolf to design a Mass-Loaded Tapped Horn subwoofer to go with his Mr. East project (which I originally misidentified on several occasions as the "Mr. E's" until Wolf set me straight, but it seemed appropriate -- what are they? It's a mystery.) Mass-loading of a tapped horn enables shaping of the low-end response, but the tradeoff is a more resonant character as a high acoustic impedance is introduced at the end of the horn line. Other tradeoffs include higher driver excursion requirements and lower sensitivity further up in the passband.

[brianpowers27]

Maybe this will be helpful for someone. Use this to help make decisions when building speakers. I plan to make a few other flowcharts in the coming days for other topics such as modeling/simming/measuring.