"Arny Krueger" wrote in message ...
"Wessel Dirksen" wrote in message
om



Hi Ron, I need to proof read my replies more because I failed to
emphasize that I agree with what you are generally stating here. Basic
ideal formulas don't cut it as the bottom line in audio reproduction
and there is alot going on that is not in our control. Distortion and
other factors play also play a role to where, as you correctly state,
there is way more to this than a basic analysis of the frequency
response, time domain, and IM and THD distortion alone. If one
considers that no speaker cone is completely rigid, and many
mid-woofers are specifically designed to ripple to "enhance" high
frequency response, there is certainly artifact mini transient
behavior going on with every cone ripple and thus has it's own
transfer function albeit at a small fraction of total output.

Hence my earlier post:

"One problem is that a fairly complex model is required to predict the high
frequency performance of a speaker."

Right.


This is
only the beginning, there are almost uncountable areas that can
produce a small inaudible artifact, but with all artifact behavior
added up, it gets downright mysterious and no longer negligable
despite not being dominantly.

That is a matter of quantification.

Absolutely in theory, except I'm wondering if it is practically
quantifiable.


Awhile back, I posted an opinion in a
thread that even the most sophisticated 24/192 kHz measurement system
does not represent what a loudspeaker truly does when it reproduces a
cello.

True for many reasons. One is that the most sophisticated high-res
measurement systems don't as a rule provide an accurate representation of
the speakers response in all 4 pi steradians. The data involved is nearly
impossible to take, difficult to store and analyze, even by modern
standards and with modern tools.

I didn't get the idea that that idea was widely accepted.

The counterpoint is that 24/192 is way overkill - all we have to capture is
the audible performance.

Right, we're not even getting everything out of 16/44.1. I would say
24/196 is theoretically enough precision to capture all audible
Fourier components out of a complex signal, so measurement precision
is not the roadblock. But then what to do if you could get more out of
a test suite. For a speaker designer, it would currently be a mute
issue as you are really only connecting the dots with an existing
system with LCR filter techniques. I think advancements in the
theoretical simulation of driver behavior and measurement techniques
to capture them could be of practical benefit in technology
development, driver design, and potentially manufacturing processes.