New FAQ - How to design without measurement gear

[diy speaker guy]

Re: New FAQ - How to design without measurement gear

And Hornresp or MJK's sheets are easier for the new guy NOT building horns or QWTL? Really?

Yes, I use all 3 for different things and Hornresp and MJK's MLTL worksheet are both easier to use than WinISD alpha. The first big thing you will notice is the ease of entry of t/s parameters in both programs I mentioned. In WinISD it's a somewhat tedious and lengthy process in which you have to open the database editor, enter parameters in a specific order, and hope the t/s parameters are correct, or WinISD might not accept them at all. Both of the other programs make t/s entries extremely quick and easy.

Moving on, Hornresp's relatively new slider controlled Loudspeaker Wizard makes the actual design process incredibly - almost ridiculously - fast and easy. OTOH, MJK's MLTL worksheet does not necessarily make the design process faster than WinISD but it's certainly no harder to use than WinISD.

And both programs are far more accurate than WinISD - and that's really the only thing that really matters, isn't it?

As for choosing between Hornresp and MJK's MLTL worksheet, Hornresp is much faster and easier to use but it cannot simulate the effects of stuffing (or lining) and can't calculate port velocity, while MJK's software (Mathcad) interface is a bit more cumbersome but it can simulate stuffing and port velocity. Hornresp is free and MJK's software is not.

If you have never tried Hornresp - and particularly the new(ish) Loudspeaker Wizard, I would strongly recommend it. It truly is faster, easier, and far more accurate than WinISD. And it's free too, so it won't cost anything but a bit of your time. Hornresp can now be found at http://www.hornresp.net.ms/, try it, you might like it.

[Jeff B.]

Re: New FAQ - How to design without measurement gear

Yes, I use all 3 for different things and Hornresp and MJK's MLTL worksheet are both easier to use than WinISD alpha. The first big thing you will notice is the ease of entry of t/s parameters in both programs I mentioned. In WinISD it's a somewhat tedious and lengthy process in which you have to open the database editor, enter parameters in a specific order, and hope the t/s parameters are correct, or WinISD might not accept them at all. Both of the other programs make t/s entries extremely quick and easy.

Moving on, Hornresp's relatively new slider controlled Loudspeaker Wizard makes the actual design process incredibly - almost ridiculously - fast and easy. OTOH, MJK's MLTL worksheet does not necessarily make the design process faster than WinISD but it's certainly no harder to use than WinISD.

And both programs are far more accurate than WinISD - and that's really the only thing that really matters, isn't it?

As for choosing between Hornresp and MJK's MLTL worksheet, Hornresp is much faster and easier to use but it cannot simulate the effects of stuffing (or lining) and can't calculate port velocity, while MJK's software (Mathcad) interface is a bit more cumbersome but it can simulate stuffing and port velocity. Hornresp is free and MJK's software is not.

If you have never tried Hornresp - and particularly the new(ish) Loudspeaker Wizard, I would strongly recommend it. It truly is faster, easier, and far more accurate than WinISD. And it's free too, so it won't cost anything but a bit of your time. Hornresp can now be found at http://www.hornresp.net.ms/, try it, you might like it.

Have your tried my Woofer, Box, and Circuit Designer?

[diy speaker guy]

Re: New FAQ - How to design without measurement gear

Have your tried my Woofer, Box, and Circuit Designer?

Yes, I've tried it before, and opened it up again just now to refresh my memory. We had this conversation last year already, when I first downloaded PCD and your other available software.

IIRC, I mentioned that your software was incredibly impressive but there were a couple of things I would like to see added. The first thing was that the Woofer, Box, and Circuit Designer did not seem to be able to simulate resonances in the enclosure or ports, and when I just checked now, it still does not seem to have that capability. That puts your box modeller on par with WinISD in that respect. It's certainly fast and easy to use, but without calculating internal resonances, a small percentage of cases will not be accurately modelled.

The 2nd thing I mentioned (when we discussed this last year) was that I would like to see a floor boundary condition added in one of the sheets, preferably PCD. Shortly thereafter, you did me one better and created the Diffraction and Boundary Simulator. I'm not implying that you created that spreadsheet because I asked for a floor boundary condition, I just mention it so you might be able to remember our previous conversation and when it occurred.

[Jeff B.]

Re: New FAQ - How to design without measurement gear

Yes, I've tried it before, and opened it up again just now to refresh my memory. We had this conversation last year already, when I first downloaded PCD and your other available software.

IIRC, I mentioned that your software was incredibly impressive but there were a couple of things I would like to see added. The first thing was that the Woofer, Box, and Circuit Designer did not seem to be able to simulate resonances in the enclosure or ports, and when I just checked now, it still does not seem to have that capability. That puts your box modeller on par with WinISD in that respect. It's certainly fast and easy to use, but without calculating internal resonances, a small percentage of cases will not be accurately modelled.

The 2nd thing I mentioned (when we discussed this last year) was that I would like to see a floor boundary condition added in one of the sheets, preferably PCD. Shortly thereafter, you did me one better and created the Diffraction and Boundary Simulator. I'm not implying that you created that spreadsheet because I asked for a floor boundary condition, I just mention it so you might be able to remember our previous conversation and when it occurred.

I do recall, now that your bring it up. Actually, I looked into implementing the port resonance simulation, but was unable to work out the math at the time, and set it aside. I may pick it up again sometime, but it was proving to be fairly complicated. If you want to work out the math for me, I would be glad to implement it. ;)

[diy speaker guy]

Re: New FAQ - How to design without measurement gear

I do recall, now that your bring it up. Actually, I looked into implementing the port resonance simulation, but was unable to work out the math at the time, and set it aside. I may pick it up again sometime, but it was proving to be fairly complicated. If you want to work out the math for me, I would be glad to implement it. ;)

Unfortunately math is my worst subject. I rely on you guys - MJK, McBean (Hornresp) and yourself - to work out all the math issues.

Technically though, the fact that your software does not include internal resonance simulation capability is not really a big deal at all - provided that the end users know about this issue and are aware of alternate software to fill in the gaps in the small percentage of cases where the enclosure and/or port get tall/long enough to cause problems, since the output from other programs can be made into .frd and .zma and imported into yours.

Just to be painfully clear, I think your software suite is great, and it has some features that are not included anywhere else (to my knowledge).

[dlr]

Re: New FAQ - How to design without measurement gear

I am looking for more. For example, what are design considerations when using these files in the PCD. So it's more of a design tutorial rather than using PCD tutorial. I think that's one thing that falls short both in Ray and Vance's books.

The writeup of my Chameleon hosted at Zaph Audio was written partly to describe my design process, rather than just a regurgitation of the design itself. That may add to what you are looking for. It includes downloadable files that can be used in Jeff's or other software, though these are the in-box files, not quasi-anechoic.

The Chameleon 2-Way

dlr

[fastbike1]

Re: New FAQ - How to design without measurement gear

Well, I'll give HornResp a look. FWIW, I use Woofer, Box, and Circuit Designer as my primary box modeler. I will cross check w/ Unibox if I think port resonance could be an issue.

I have paid for Martin's worksheets, but haven't quite got myself to wade through them.

If you have never tried Hornresp - and particularly the new(ish) Loudspeaker Wizard, I would strongly recommend it. It truly is faster, easier, and far more accurate than WinISD. And it's free too, so it won't cost anything but a bit of your time. Hornresp can now be found at http://www.hornresp.net.ms/, try it, you might like it.

[diy speaker guy]

Re: New FAQ - How to design without measurement gear

Well, I'll give HornResp a look. FWIW, I use Woofer, Box, and Circuit Designer as my primary box modeler. I will cross check w/ Unibox if I think port resonance could be an issue.

I have paid for Martin's worksheets, but haven't quite got myself to wade through them.

If you already have them, I'd suggest making sure you have the most recent versions, then try them right away, starting with the MLTL (ported box) worksheet. They all look very complicated but there's only a few things you have to enter. First, the t/s specs, then the box dimensions, driver position, port position, amount of stuffing, power applied, port radius and length and that's about it. Takes a couple of minutes and that's it.

If you need help with getting Hornresp going, let me know, I might even write up a simple closed and open box tutorial. You will be amazed how easy it is once you try.

[Paul Carmody]

Re: New FAQ - How to design without measurement gear

The writeup of my Chameleon hosted at Zaph Audio was written partly to describe my design process, rather than just a regurgitation of the design itself. That may add to what you are looking for. It includes downloadable files that can be used in Jeff's or other software, though these are the in-box files, not quasi-anechoic.

The Chameleon 2-Way

dlr

Yeah, the Chameleon writeup is excellent, and really does walk a person through the paces of speaker design. I put a link to it on my website not long after you did it.

[absolootbs]

Re: New FAQ - How to design without measurement gear

great tutorial, Paul! i've always wanted to know a little more about those programs, and the order in which to do things, but hadn't yet been able to bring myself to searching and reading help files, etc. now i might not have to.

one question: in step 2 you splTrace the acquired impedance graph but then, unless i missed something, it never gets used. in step 5 you model the impedance using t/s and box parameters, then you use that simulated file to extract minimum phase in step 8. so is it even necessary to do the splTrace of the impedance graph you get from the manufacturer or 3rd party?

[dian1511]

Re: New FAQ - How to design without measurement gear

Many, many thanks Paul! This site remains great because of generous people like you and many others who allow us novices to hang out and learn. It is truly appreciated.

On a different note, are you or were you a musician having studied all that theory? If so, do you play an instrument?

Darren

[Jeff B.]

Re: New FAQ - How to design without measurement gear

great tutorial, Paul! i've always wanted to know a little more about those programs, and the order in which to do things, but hadn't yet been able to bring myself to searching and reading help files, etc. now i might not have to.

one question: in step 2 you splTrace the acquired impedance graph but then, unless i missed something, it never gets used. in step 5 you model the impedance using t/s and box parameters, then you use that simulated file to extract minimum phase in step 8. so is it even necessary to do the splTrace of the impedance graph you get from the manufacturer or 3rd party?

Let me jump in there on this one. The modeled impedance is much more useful, especially for a woofer, since it will include the box and tuning in the impedance plot, and this can impact the crossover transfer function. The only use for using the traced impedance is so you can model the upper frequency rise in the Response Modeler to overlay the traced impedance at higher frequencies, since the affects of inductance vary with different drivers. If you have an impedance plot to reference, then you may not need to trace it at all and can just model to match and be done with it. The modeled impedance doesn't necessarily need to have the phase extracted either, as the modeled phase will be very, very close to the extracted phase anyway.

Jeff B.

[Paul Carmody]

Re: New FAQ - How to design without measurement gear

^^^
What Jeff said. Perfect answer.

[Pete00t]

Re: New FAQ - How to design without measurement gear

http://techtalk.parts-express.com/blog.php?b=74
I guess I need to do a writeup for setup using Series Xovers. It seems not a lot of people know how to use PCD for that. I suppose I could further augment the PCD setup for Parallels too. Maybe that's my next blog....
..

Later,
Wolf

Series cross overs: Yes, you definitely should do a write up on them.

[Paul Carmody]

Re: New FAQ - How to design without measurement gear

On a different note, are you or were you a musician having studied all that theory? If so, do you play an instrument?

I have a Bachelor's of Music in Music Business. My major was percussion, but I also play bass, guitar, and piano. I wrote video game soundtracks for a while, however like most music majors, my career now has nothing to do with music :o. I still play in orchestra pits around the city, which is fun and a bit of extra money. I also play in the local concert band.