"Joseph Oberlander" wrote in message
ink.net

Arny Krueger wrote:

Right, when floppy drives wholesaled for $300 you had one *world*
and when they wholesale for $6 you have another.

But knowing how and why they work is good knowledge. When I was
starting in the field a decade or more ago, techs could tell what was
wrong with a hard drive or power supply by the sound it was making.

Now, nobody cares or knows. - replace and forget.

Still, if I was making speakers, knowing how they work would be vital
knowledge, at least IMO.

What changed is the level of underlying complexity.

True. Still, you adjust. Surface mount technology isn't THAT hard to
analyze and repair.

My point is that mentally, people optimally analyze and manipulate on a
field with a certain of number of tokens. In order to be effective with a
complex system, the number of tokens has to remain about the same, so each
token has to represent a greater level of complexity. At some point you
forget about individual resistors and capacitors and start working in terms
of circuit boards. For more complex systems you forget about circuit boards
and each token is a box with a level of complexity like a PC.

Unfortunately, acoustics requires either:

1: technical knowledge that nobody on this group possesses.
Engineering and physics degrees and such.

In its former incarnation the group had people who were clearly
well-qualified speaker designers, people like Kantor, Dunlavy etc.

Nice links

I was there, those were far better days for RAO. Trolls like Middius and
Weil intentionally ran these people off. Notice Weil's comment about
"submissives"? Very revealing! I'm not surprised about the content, I'm
surprised he actually said it.

They can make a deign from scratch and it works perfectly the first
time,

every time.

Nope. There's still a lot of tweaking by instrument and ear of
initial loudspeaker designs, and perfection in speakers is still
elusive.

Well, you know what I mean - it's damn good and only needs refinement.
Definitely a league unto themselves. Trotsky thinking he's in the same
class is actually amusing.

Yeah, compare and contrast Greg Singh to Ken Kantor.

LOL!

2:Testing and trail and error based upon rough estimates. That's
the rest of us.

Speak for yourself!

Build acoustic chambers, test designs, tweak with the
cabinets, and so on.

That still happens, regardless of the skill that goes into the
initial design.

Sure. My point is that even the pros do it and double-check their
work with real tools. Real infrastructure.

Agreed. They do more than check, it's still an iterative process.

Greg's approach is a joke. Has he even DONE any analysis of a
finished product?

Well he says he listened to it in at least one room with at least one
recording and I believe that.

Here - check out this link:
http://www.tomshardware.com/howto/20031006/index.html

Check out a car plant - we have a few of them around here!

*300* steps to make a OEM quality case.

Since sheet metal/plastic products are a big business where I live, there is
nothing in that article that surprises me in the least. Not one tool I
haven't touched, not one machine I haven't seen, heard, touched, and
smelled, not one operation I haven't done myself from grinding dies to
putting product in cardboard boxes.

People don't even realize
how much time and effort goes into things like speakers and computer
cases. Sure, you get the soft-tooled POS junk that's done in 20
steps at the other end, but most of the industry works like this.

There's a lot more than 300 steps in a car door, not counting the work in
the individual components like the switches and motors.

A whole other realm than Trotsky works at.

Right.

But thanks for trying to straighten sockpuppet Yustabe out. Mission
Impossible.

I wonder what Greg's customer referral rate will be? Lol.

When I made my "stick a fork in it" comment early last month I was
totally serious. Everything that's happened since then was just the
denouement.

http://www.google.com/groups?selm=JT...%40comcast.com