Eddie Runner wrote:

Nousaine wrote:

the little CARTOONS are so that ANYONE can understand it...

Except, apparently, you. The 'waves' you draw in the car are of such a
length
that they cannot be of low bass frequency unless that car were 20-30 ft
long.

1st off.... The if you read my article a little more closely the waves and
distances
I used to write MY article are at 60Hz.... Here is a link to my paper again
in
case you have forgotten and since you obviously need to read it again
http://www.installer.com/tech/aiming.html

Actually your cartoons have no scaling to them. The frequencies would have to
be referent to some room dimensions so you can't just 'claim' they are 60 Hz.
Without a distance scale it can't be determined.



2nd.... A self proclaimed AUDIO GURU such as yourself should know that
a 20 or 30 ft wave as you suggest above would be about 37Hz to 55Hz if
your here on planet earth with the rest of us, but you keep rfering to 60Hz
which is only about 18ft.....

60 Hz is where the the lowest axial mode occurs in many small cars.


3rd... And this is where I would guess your off track in your theories...For
a standing wave to occur the whole wave (18ft at 60Hz) doesnt need to be
stretched out to a full 18 ft like you seem to be saying... A reflection can
come back on itself and create a standing wave in as little as 1/4 wavelength
(4.7ft)....

OK, what's the frequency of the that standing wave? (Hint:, the 2nd of 60 hz is
120 Hz, the 4th is 240 Hz.)

So while your spouting the HUGE 20-30ft wavelengths (as you
did above) trying to justify your position, your ignoring (or just dont know)
about the facts that standing waves occur in as little as 1/4 wavelength (and
even shorter is possible in complex reflective situations like A CAR).....

As I said, the standing wave region in a small car is between roughly 60 and
600 Hz.


You might consider starting with some understanding about acoustics
yourself
before trying to teach others.

ha ha
Jeez Tom,
its so funny how most of these folks on here that have read my article
feel like they have gotten something from it.... Its funny how the results I
say that will get DOES HAPPEN and you still say IT CANT WORK...
ha ha
It cracks me up....
Who elected you GURU anyway???

you make this **** up so the magazines can PAY YOU!! ha ha ha

Eddie; that's why I publish things in the magazines and elesewhere.

For the PAY not for the ACCURACY!
Yes thats obvious......

Have you
given papers at AES Conventions?

Tom, I hate to dissapoint you but I was an AES member back in 1982...

So what happened?


I have. Do you own and operate a computer
based acoustical measurement system? I do.

Yes I have the LMS system, and I have been around audio test equipment
for well over 30years.....

OK then why not publish some response graphs at the listeners head position
with the enclosure in different directions or locations? That's what I did.