"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message
...
Mr. Singh:

What software if any do you own and did you use to help you design the
xovers in your speakers?

What topology ar the xovers?

Where might one get a glimpse of their frequency response, phase, polar
response, etc.?

Give him a few minutes on this.
He's got to copy the Madisound graphs, paste them together, cover the seam
with White-Out, and join the lines with India ink.

Engineering documentation is such a chore.

Michael Mckelvy wrote:
Mr. Singh:

What software if any do you own and did you use to help you design the
xovers in your speakers?

What topology ar the xovers?

Where might one get a glimpse of their frequency response, phase, polar
response, etc.?


Mr. Mickey: are you a potential customer? Do you know anybody that is
likely to be a potential customer? Do you think there is anything more
to be said after listening to the speakers for the 45 day evaluation period?

Bob Morein wrote:
"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message
...

Mr. Singh:

What software if any do you own and did you use to help you design the
xovers in your speakers?

What topology ar the xovers?

Where might one get a glimpse of their frequency response, phase, polar
response, etc.?


Give him a few minutes on this.
He's got to copy the Madisound graphs, paste them together, cover the seam
with White-Out, and join the lines with India ink.

Engineering documentation is such a chore.



Bob, are you still here? I would've thought that with the Tarantino
analogy you would've recognized yourself as toast, but I guess the
lawsuit gives us precedent to think otherwise. Still, I find it telling
that those with the most obvious lack of success in their professional
endeavors are the most vocal.

"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Michael Mckelvy wrote:
Mr. Singh:

What software if any do you own and did you use to help you design the
xovers in your speakers?

What topology ar the xovers?

Where might one get a glimpse of their frequency response, phase, polar
response, etc.?


Mr. Mickey: are you a potential customer? Do you know anybody that is
likely to be a potential customer? Do you think there is anything more
to be said after listening to the speakers for the 45 day evaluation
period?

"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Michael Mckelvy wrote:
Mr. Singh:

What software if any do you own and did you use to help you design the
xovers in your speakers?

What topology ar the xovers?

Where might one get a glimpse of their frequency response, phase, polar
response, etc.?


Mr. Mickey: are you a potential customer?

Unlikely.

Do you know anybody that is
likely to be a potential customer?

I know lots of people, many of them audiophiles. I would certainly mention
your website and let them decide for themselves.

Do you think there is anything more
to be said after listening to the speakers for the 45 day evaluation
period?

I think that the questions I asked are reasonable and that you should have
no problem answering them.

I'm not trying to trick you, I am curious.

In the case of my own speakers I used LEAP and LMS. The xovers were 3rd
order on the tweeter and 2nd order on the woofer.

I provided graphs upon request, can you?

What aspects of crossover design do you find most important?

What is your approach to good stereo imaging?

Do you favor even order or odd order crosovers?

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 14 Sep 2003 14:24:45 -0400, "Bob Morein"
wrote:


"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message
...
Mr. Singh:

What software if any do you own and did you use to help you design the
xovers in your speakers?

What topology ar the xovers?

Where might one get a glimpse of their frequency response, phase, polar
response, etc.?

Give him a few minutes on this.
He's got to copy the Madisound graphs, paste them together, cover the
seam
with White-Out, and join the lines with India ink.

Engineering documentation is such a chore.

Of course, I don't remember any such disclosures on Mr. McKelvy's
defuct AOL web site.

Memory's the 2nd thing to go.

Bob Morein wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Michael Mckelvy wrote:

Mr. Singh:

What software if any do you own and did you use to help you design the
xovers in your speakers?

What topology ar the xovers?

Where might one get a glimpse of their frequency response, phase, polar
response, etc.?


Mr. Mickey: are you a potential customer? Do you know anybody that is
likely to be a potential customer? Do you think there is anything more
to be said after listening to the speakers for the 45 day evaluation

period?

Yes. "What did you do with my money?"

What's the matter, Roadkill? Out of the necessary development tools:
White-Out, paste, and india ink?


I don't know what you want from me Bob--I don't have a cure for
pancreatic cancer, for example. You really should air your dirty
laundry somewhere else.

Michael Mckelvy wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Michael Mckelvy wrote:

Mr. Singh:

What software if any do you own and did you use to help you design the
xovers in your speakers?

What topology ar the xovers?

Where might one get a glimpse of their frequency response, phase, polar
response, etc.?


Mr. Mickey: are you a potential customer? Do you know anybody that is
likely to be a potential customer? Do you think there is anything more
to be said after listening to the speakers for the 45 day evaluation

period?






I think I broke Mickey again.

Michael Mckelvy wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Michael Mckelvy wrote:

Mr. Singh:

What software if any do you own and did you use to help you design the
xovers in your speakers?

What topology ar the xovers?

Where might one get a glimpse of their frequency response, phase, polar
response, etc.?


Mr. Mickey: are you a potential customer?


Unlikely.

Do you know anybody that is

likely to be a potential customer?


I know lots of people, many of them audiophiles. I would certainly mention
your website and let them decide for themselves.


You would mention them under what conditions--that I use the necessary
meters and measurements? That's a flat out lie.



Do you think there is anything more

to be said after listening to the speakers for the 45 day evaluation

period?

I think that the questions I asked are reasonable and that you should have
no problem answering them.


I think the questions you asked aren't reasonable. I don't do
measurements. I even (gasp!) guessed at the efficiency. I think its a
pretty educated guess, though. If things go as planned, dave weil
should have my spare pair to evaluate next week. I'm more interested in
people's opinions of the sound than I am in hearing about how many
graphs I'm supposed to have at my disposal.


I'm not trying to trick you, I am curious.

In the case of my own speakers I used LEAP and LMS. The xovers were 3rd
order on the tweeter and 2nd order on the woofer.


My crossovers are second order, designed by LEAP.


I provided graphs upon request, can you?


I could, but I won't because I don't think they tell you a thing about
the sound. Lots of speakers have a flat frequency response and still do
many things wrong.


What aspects of crossover design do you find most important?


What are the choices?


What is your approach to good stereo imaging?


Position the speakers correctly in the room. Very few manufacturers
cover this well. I don't know why.


Do you favor even order or odd order crosovers?


What ever yields the best sounding response is what I favor.

"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message
...
Mr. Singh:

What software if any do you own and did you use to help you design the
xovers in your speakers?

**You can't beat LEAP, IMO. However, Speakeasy is bloody good value for
money and very powerful.

www.linearx,com

http://www.interdomain.net.au/~bodzio/

Actually, Speakeasy is amazing value for money. Highly recommended.


What topology ar the xovers?

**It depends what is required to get the best from the drivers. Some drivers
work fine with 6dB/oct filters. Some require more heroic measures.


--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au

"Socket" wrote in message
...
"Michael Mckelvy" wrote:

What software if any do you own and did you use to help you design
the
xovers in your speakers?

What topology ar the xovers?

Where might one get a glimpse of their frequency response, phase,
polar
response, etc.?

Give him a few minutes on this.
He's got to copy the Madisound graphs, paste them together, cover the
seam
with White-Out, and join the lines with India ink.

Engineering documentation is such a chore.

Of course, I don't remember any such disclosures on Mr. McKelvy's
defuct AOL web site.

Memory's the 2nd thing to go.

Pardon?

I forget the first.
--
S i g n a l @ l i n e o n e . n e t

"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Michael Mckelvy wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Michael Mckelvy wrote:

Mr. Singh:

What software if any do you own and did you use to help you design the
xovers in your speakers?

What topology ar the xovers?

Where might one get a glimpse of their frequency response, phase, polar
response, etc.?


Mr. Mickey: are you a potential customer?


Unlikely.

Do you know anybody that is

likely to be a potential customer?


I know lots of people, many of them audiophiles. I would certainly
mention
your website and let them decide for themselves.


You would mention them under what conditions--that I use the necessary
meters and measurements? That's a flat out lie.

I would mention that I know of a vendor doing business on-line using drivers
new to the market. He offers a money back guarantee so they would have
nothing to lose but a shipping fee for return. They appear to have nicely
made cabinets and how they would sound in somebody's room is a matter of
taste.

Do you think there is anything more

to be said after listening to the speakers for the 45 day evaluation

period?

I think that the questions I asked are reasonable and that you should
have
no problem answering them.


I think the questions you asked aren't reasonable. I don't do
measurements. I even (gasp!) guessed at the efficiency. I think its a
pretty educated guess, though. If things go as planned, dave weil
should have my spare pair to evaluate next week. I'm more interested in
people's opinions of the sound than I am in hearing about how many
graphs I'm supposed to have at my disposal.


I'm not trying to trick you, I am curious.

In the case of my own speakers I used LEAP and LMS. The xovers were 3rd
order on the tweeter and 2nd order on the woofer.


My crossovers are second order, designed by LEAP.


I provided graphs upon request, can you?


I could, but I won't because I don't think they tell you a thing about
the sound. Lots of speakers have a flat frequency response and still do
many things wrong.

What sort of things?

What aspects of crossover design do you find most important?


What are the choices?

Whatever YOU chose, on-axis response, horizontal polar response, flat phase,
the xover frequency and how it relates to the size of the driver(s) being
used, etc..

What is your approach to good stereo imaging?


Position the speakers correctly in the room. Very few manufacturers
cover this well. I don't know why.

I was referring to how you achieve good imaging through xover design.

Do you favor even order or odd order crosovers?


What ever yields the best sounding response is what I favor.

You are free to choose whatever you wish of course, I would suggest that you
take a look at Zalytron's site and another ribbon tweeter also made in China
by Fountek. The model JP-3.0 sells for $81.00 so it would be something for
an upgrade in your line. It looks to be a a great choice IMO for it's
smooth response and could be crossed over at a lower freuency. I think you
would find this would provide better imaging and dispersion. YMMV.

"trotsky" wrote in message
...

[snip]

I think that the questions I asked are reasonable and that you should
have
no problem answering them.


I think the questions you asked aren't reasonable. I don't do
measurements.
Why not? Debby does Dallas.

I even (gasp! LIED LIED LIED LIED LIED ) guessed at the efficiency. I
think its a
pretty educated guess LIE LIE LIE, though LIE. If things go as planned,
dave weil
should have my spare pair to evaluate next week. I'm more interested in
people's opinions of the sound than I am in hearing about how many
graphs I'm supposed to have at my disposal.

Trotsky, you can have as many graphs as you desire.
All that's required is graph paper, india ink, and the power of the
imagination.


From the Jupiter Audio website:

Frequency range: 50-20,000 Hz
Amplifier power: 20-100 watts
Impedance: 8 ohms
Efficiency (approx.-in room) 88 dB, 1 watt at 1 meter
Curb weight: 23 lbs

Liar, liar, pants on fire!

One useful bit of info, however, is the curb weight, determined on Trotsky's
meticulously maintained Spring-O-Matic bathroom scale.

Curb weight is a useful indication for trash disposal.
According to Trotsky's figures, a single run can collect about fifty pairs
of these abortions per run.

"Bob Morein" wrote in message
...

"trotsky" wrote in message
...

[snip]

I think that the questions I asked are reasonable and that you should
have
no problem answering them.


I think the questions you asked aren't reasonable. I don't do
measurements.
Why not? Debby does Dallas.

I even (gasp! LIED LIED LIED LIED LIED ) guessed at the efficiency. I
think its a
pretty educated guess LIE LIE LIE, though LIE. If things go as planned,
dave weil
should have my spare pair to evaluate next week. I'm more interested in
people's opinions of the sound than I am in hearing about how many
graphs I'm supposed to have at my disposal.

Trotsky, you can have as many graphs as you desire.
All that's required is graph paper, india ink, and the power of the
imagination.


From the Jupiter Audio website:

Frequency range: 50-20,000 Hz
Amplifier power: 20-100 watts
Impedance: 8 ohms
Efficiency (approx.-in room) 88 dB, 1 watt at 1 meter
Curb weight: 23 lbs

Liar, liar, pants on fire!

One useful bit of info, however, is the curb weight, determined on
Trotsky's
meticulously maintained Spring-O-Matic bathroom scale.

Curb weight is a useful indication for trash disposal.
According to Trotsky's figures, a single run can collect about fifty pairs
of these abortions per run.


Bob, this thread is technical in nature, if you can't discuss things at that
level please butt out.

There's plenty of room elsewhere for nonsense.

"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message
...

[snip]

Bob, this thread is technical in nature, if you can't discuss things at
that
level please butt out.

There's plenty of room elsewhere for nonsense.

Mike, I'm sure your questions are sincere, but Trotsky can't answer them,
because he did not follow any semblance of a design process.

It is very reasonable to highlight the fact that Trotsky advertises
objective specifications on his website which were presumably measured, but
were not. This is lying.

Your query has obtained all the information Trotsky has to offer. The result
supports my belief that Trotsky is engaging in something very close to
fraud.

The only mitigating factor, as it were, is Trotsky's moral blindness.
Hence, I have suggested that he may have an insanity defense against
business fraud, a first, or some other defense based upon impaired
judgement.

"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message
...

"Bob Morein" wrote in message
...

[snip]

Bob, this thread is technical in nature, if you can't discuss things at
that
level please butt out.

There's plenty of room elsewhere for nonsense.

I would like to add that if Trotsky had, in fact, performed accurate
measurements which confirmed that his speakers perform within the ample
boundaries of loudspeaker design, I would find no reason to quarrel. In
other words, even if Trotsky, with no exercise of skill, "lucked out", the
result could be worthy.

But you, as an engineer, know that the dimensionality of the design space is
too large to make that a realistic possibility. His forging of the specs is
merely icing on the cake.

Michael Mckelvy wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Michael Mckelvy wrote:


I know lots of people, many of them audiophiles. I would certainly

mention

your website and let them decide for themselves.


You would mention them under what conditions--that I use the necessary
meters and measurements? That's a flat out lie.


I would mention that I know of a vendor doing business on-line using drivers
new to the market.


Why would you do that? You've been saying they're crap for days. Are
you a sockpuppet.


He offers a money back guarantee so they would have
nothing to lose but a shipping fee for return. They appear to have nicely
made cabinets and how they would sound in somebody's room is a matter of
taste.


Please explain why you've changed your tune, assuming you're not a
sockpuppet.


Do you think there is anything more


to be said after listening to the speakers for the 45 day evaluation

period?

I think that the questions I asked are reasonable and that you should

have

no problem answering them.


I think the questions you asked aren't reasonable. I don't do
measurements. I even (gasp!) guessed at the efficiency. I think its a
pretty educated guess, though. If things go as planned, dave weil
should have my spare pair to evaluate next week. I'm more interested in
people's opinions of the sound than I am in hearing about how many
graphs I'm supposed to have at my disposal.



I'm not trying to trick you, I am curious.

In the case of my own speakers I used LEAP and LMS. The xovers were 3rd
order on the tweeter and 2nd order on the woofer.


My crossovers are second order, designed by LEAP.



I provided graphs upon request, can you?


I could, but I won't because I don't think they tell you a thing about
the sound. Lots of speakers have a flat frequency response and still do
many things wrong.


What sort of things?


What? Read my website: poor choices in cabinet design, drivers that
aren't rigidy mounted to the cabinet, etc.


What aspects of crossover design do you find most important?


What are the choices?


Whatever YOU chose, on-axis response, horizontal polar response, flat phase,
the xover frequency and how it relates to the size of the driver(s) being
used, etc..


Whatever gets the speaker to sound the most natural.


What is your approach to good stereo imaging?


Position the speakers correctly in the room. Very few manufacturers
cover this well. I don't know why.


I was referring to how you achieve good imaging through xover design.


Imaging is over rated. There are many aspects of reproduced sound that
suggest the sound of live music, and imaging is pretty near the bottom.
My speakers produce an excellent stereo image, but that wasn't one of
the things I focused on. This is on the website too.


Do you favor even order or odd order crosovers?


What ever yields the best sounding response is what I favor.


You are free to choose whatever you wish of course, I would suggest that you
take a look at Zalytron's site and another ribbon tweeter also made in China
by Fountek. The model JP-3.0 sells for $81.00 so it would be something for
an upgrade in your line. It looks to be a a great choice IMO for it's
smooth response and could be crossed over at a lower freuency. I think you
would find this would provide better imaging and dispersion. YMMV.


Which meters and measurements did you use to determing that, a Ouija board?

Bob Morein wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message
...

[snip]


Mr. Mickey: are you a potential customer? Do you know anybody that is
likely to be a potential customer? Do you think there is anything more
to be said after listening to the speakers for the 45 day evaluation

period?

Yes. "What did you do with my money?"

What's the matter, Roadkill? Out of the necessary development tools:
White-Out, paste, and india ink?


I don't know what you want from me Bob--

I want you to go out of business as quickly as possible.

I don't have a cure for

pancreatic cancer, for example. You really should air your dirty
laundry somewhere else.


My washer is groaning away on "heavy soil" with yours.


Lack of self awareness duly noted. It looks like McCarty has your
number anyway.

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Bobo's anti-irony shielding is holding firm.

Mike, I'm sure your questions are sincere, but Trotsky can't answer
them,
because he did not follow any semblance of a design process.

Fact: The Bug Eater went through various M&M rituals when he
designed his speakers. Of course, an objective observer presumes
Mikey is as inept at those rituals as he is in self-expression,
rhetoric, logic, listening to music, and everything else.

Fact: The Bug Eater's speakers are crap. He can barely give them
away to victims of relation or acquaintance.

Inference: Simply arguing in favor of the plugged-ear approach to
"design" is as pointless as showing Kroo**** what a hypocrite he is.


And yet, Bobo, here you are, accepting duh-Mikey's ill-formed blobs
of rhetoric on the subject, as if the design-by-wire system were an
abecedarian exercise in musical fulfillment. Very foolish.

I didn't say that. And if I made a statement which is subject to that
interpretation, let me amend it now.
Ever since Thiele and Small's landmark work, every speaker worthy of the
name has been designed in three steps:
1. Do the math, to get it close.
2. Saw up a storm of sawdust, to get closer.
3. "Voice" the speakers, the final, subjective step.

Variations of this process exist. For example, the designer may
intentionally add the "presence notch", or hollow out the midrange; or he
may modify the on-axis treble response to get the room response he desires.
He may choose the characteristic of the bass by manipulating the "Q" of the
system. He uses the math to achieve these variations with ease.

All of these subjective steps are aided, not impeded, by the control which
the mathematical models give the designer.

George, that's the way they do it. You're acting too much like an Eloi, who
prefers ignorance to a comprehension of the dark, smoking bowels of our
industrial civilization. By the time you see the product, all the math,
sawdust, and sweat has been wiped away. Be be not under the illusion that
there are audio "geniuses" who design like Jackson Pollack painted --
throwing paint at the canvas in "free expression."

Science serves the audio art, and it does so with distinction. Science
doesn't prescribe what a speaker should sound like, but it is the sharpest
tool we have.

Confuse not this statement with utterances from primitives like Krueger.
Krueger is a bad scientist, a pseudo-scientist. Science is morally neutral.
As a design tool, it is not anti-subjective.

"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Michael Mckelvy wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Michael Mckelvy wrote:


[snip]

You are free to choose whatever you wish of course, I would suggest that
you
take a look at Zalytron's site and another ribbon tweeter also made in
China
by Fountek. The model JP-3.0 sells for $81.00 so it would be something
for
an upgrade in your line. It looks to be a a great choice IMO for it's
smooth response and could be crossed over at a lower freuency. I think
you
would find this would provide better imaging and dispersion. YMMV.


Which meters and measurements did you use to determing that, a Ouija
board?

Mike,
Had your fill of unmitigated gall yet?

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Bobo misses the point again.

Bobo's anti-irony shielding is holding firm.

Mike, I'm sure your questions are sincere, but Trotsky can't answer
them,

Is there a reason you are so incompetent at using your newsreader,
Arnii?


Inference: Simply arguing in favor of the plugged-ear approach to
"design" is as pointless as showing Kroo**** what a hypocrite he is.


And yet, Bobo, here you are, accepting duh-Mikey's ill-formed blobs
of rhetoric on the subject, as if the design-by-wire system were an
abecedarian exercise in musical fulfillment. Very foolish.

I didn't say that. And if I made a statement which is subject to that
interpretation, let me amend it now.
[snip long-winded exultation of pseudo-engineering procedures]


I'm not a speaker designer, so I don't care about the details.

The point is that you're taking the Bug Eater seriously. However,
now that I've pointed that out, it's up to you to amend your ways.
If you don't care, I don't care.

George,
I'm just a minor planet, with a highly eliptical orbit which
occasionally takes into this galactic plane. I have far less familiarity
with the players than you do. I don't know how you can stand it, since the
number of participants, and variety of the discussions continually
decreases. It's like an inbred Appalachia where the IQ scores of the
denizens is proportional to the number of names in the county.

If there's something I need to learn about Mike, amuse yourself as I do
so. He does seem related to Krueger. Perhaps their cousins have been
marrying for generations.

Bobo peeks over the fence at the Dark Side.

If there's something I need to learn about Mike, amuse yourself as I do
so. He does seem related to Krueger. Perhaps their cousins have been
marrying for generations.

Now you're getting warm!

S888Wheel wrote:

It is very reasonable to highlight the fact that Trotsky advertises
objective specifications on his website which were presumably
measured, but
were not. This is lying.

Your query has obtained all the information Trotsky has to offer. The
result
supports my belief that Trotsky is engaging in something very close to
fraud.


What exactly is fraudulant or "very close to" fraudulant about what
Trotsky is
doing or saying regarding his new business?



Nothing. Bob has a secret desire to be Brian McCarty because he is
insane. It's one of those 'consider the source' kind of things.

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Bobo's anti-irony shielding is holding firm.

Mike, I'm sure your questions are sincere, but Trotsky can't answer
them,
because he did not follow any semblance of a design process.

Fact: The Bug Eater went through various M&M rituals when he
designed his speakers. Of course, an objective observer presumes
Mikey is as inept at those rituals as he is in self-expression,
rhetoric, logic, listening to music, and everything else.

You shouldn't presume without listening, unless you you have enough
expertise to know good drivers from bad drivers.

Fact: The Bug Eater's speakers are crap.

OSAF.

He can barely give them
away to victims of relation or acquaintance.

OSAF

Inference: Simply arguing in favor of the plugged-ear approach to
"design" is as pointless as showing Kroo**** what a hypocrite he is.


We've been pointing out what a pig you are for years to no avail.

Michael Mckelvy wrote:

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Bobo's anti-irony shielding is holding firm.


Mike, I'm sure your questions are sincere, but Trotsky can't answer

them,

because he did not follow any semblance of a design process.

Fact: The Bug Eater went through various M&M rituals when he
designed his speakers. Of course, an objective observer presumes
Mikey is as inept at those rituals as he is in self-expression,
rhetoric, logic, listening to music, and everything else.


You shouldn't presume without listening, unless you you have enough
expertise to know good drivers from bad drivers.


Fact: The Bug Eater's speakers are crap.


OSAF.

He can barely give them

away to victims of relation or acquaintance.


OSAF


Inference: Simply arguing in favor of the plugged-ear approach to
"design" is as pointless as showing Kroo**** what a hypocrite he is.



We've been pointing out what a pig you are for years to no avail.



Now Mikey, be nice to George--his "borg" approach got Arny to go on
vacation again.

"trotsky" wrote in message
ink.net...
Michael Mckelvy wrote:

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...


Bobo's anti-irony shielding is holding firm.


Mike, I'm sure your questions are sincere, but Trotsky can't answer

them,

because he did not follow any semblance of a design process.

Fact: The Bug Eater went through various M&M rituals when he
designed his speakers. Of course, an objective observer presumes
Mikey is as inept at those rituals as he is in self-expression,
rhetoric, logic, listening to music, and everything else.


You shouldn't presume without listening, unless you you have enough
expertise to know good drivers from bad drivers.


Fact: The Bug Eater's speakers are crap.


OSAF.

He can barely give them

away to victims of relation or acquaintance.


OSAF


Inference: Simply arguing in favor of the plugged-ear approach to
"design" is as pointless as showing Kroo**** what a hypocrite he is.



We've been pointing out what a pig you are for years to no avail.



Now Mikey, be nice to George--his "borg" approach got Arny to go on
vacation again.

OSAF

"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message
...

"Bob Morein" wrote in message
...

"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message
...

"Bob Morein" wrote in message
...

[snip]
I'm not an engineer and don't claim to be one. I do know that you can't
design a crossover using LEAP without doing measurements.

Yep.

"trotsky" wrote in message
nk.net...
Michael Mckelvy wrote:

"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Michael Mckelvy wrote:

"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Michael Mckelvy wrote:


I know lots of people, many of them audiophiles. I would certainly

mention


your website and let them decide for themselves.


You would mention them under what conditions--that I use the
necessary
meters and measurements? That's a flat out lie.


I would mention that I know of a vendor doing business on-line using

drivers

new to the market.


Why would you do that? You've been saying they're crap for days. Are
you a sockpuppet.


It would give me a chance to hear them. It's the only way I would.

He offers a money back guarantee so they would have

nothing to lose but a shipping fee for return. They appear to have

nicely

made cabinets and how they would sound in somebody's room is a matter
of
taste.


Please explain why you've changed your tune, assuming you're not a
sockpuppet.



I haven't. I let people make up their own minds.



You're not being forthcoming, Mickey. Before you claimed my speakers to
be crap because the drivers were "cheap." What changed? Did you see a
few posts on DIY forums that described the Silver Flutes as having
exceptionally flat frequency responses for the money? Just explain what
you're trying to do here.

snip


I'm not trying to trick you, I am curious.

In the case of my own speakers I used LEAP and LMS. The xovers were

3rd

order on the tweeter and 2nd order on the woofer.


My crossovers are second order, designed by LEAP.


If they were designed by LEAP some measurements had to have been done.



Perhaps. I don't believe it's necessary for me to go into the design
steps. To hear Bob Morion tell it, I don't have any anyway.



I provided graphs upon request, can you?


I could, but I won't because I don't think they tell you a thing
about
the sound. Lots of speakers have a flat frequency response and
still do
many things wrong.


What sort of things?


What? Read my website: poor choices in cabinet design, drivers that
aren't rigidy mounted to the cabinet, etc.


Having a cabinet not contribute sound of its own is not a poor choice.
IMO
speakers that show flat measurements and sound bad usually do so because
tehy aer measured at 1 watt and won't perform at real world spl's. Your
thoughts?


I've already covered this before, on rao. The problem with the
so-called "inert" cabinets is that they disperse too much energy to in
any way help give the illusion of live sound. In my opinion you *have*
to have cabinets and driver mounting schemes that don't absorb too much
energy, because reproduced music is *always* lacking in dynamic
qualities and liveliness compared to the live reference. Almost every
designer on the market gets this wrong, in my opinion, except for Naim,
Audio Note, and a few other British guys.

Now, conventional wisdom says that if a cabinet is contributing sound of
it's own, the sound is "colored". I simply don't find this to be true,
and my speakers are without question one of the most neutral speakers
I've ever heard. That doesn't mean they're without flaws, but they are
really neutral and really lively. *Some* more expensive drivers are
better at information retrieval than the Silver Flutes, but for the
money they are still astonishingly good.



What aspects of crossover design do you find most important?


What are the choices?


Whatever YOU chose, on-axis response, horizontal polar response, flat

phase,

the xover frequency and how it relates to the size of the driver(s)

being

used, etc..


Whatever gets the speaker to sound the most natural.


You don't think any of these things are more important than others or
someting not mentioned might be more important?


I would say on-axis response is the most important. Listening in the
sweet spot is the most important factor. Having a sweet spot the size
of your living room is a nice concept, but hardly acheivable. (With two
speakers, anyway.)



What is your approach to good stereo imaging?


Position the speakers correctly in the room. Very few manufacturers
cover this well. I don't know why.


I was referring to how you achieve good imaging through xover design.


Imaging is over rated. There are many aspects of reproduced sound that
suggest the sound of live music, and imaging is pretty near the bottom.
My speakers produce an excellent stereo image, but that wasn't one of
the things I focused on. This is on the website too.



Do you favor even order or odd order crosovers?


What ever yields the best sounding response is what I favor.


You are free to choose whatever you wish of course, I would suggest
that

you

take a look at Zalytron's site and another ribbon tweeter also made in

China

by Fountek. The model JP-3.0 sells for $81.00 so it would be
something

for

an upgrade in your line. It looks to be a a great choice IMO for it's
smooth response and could be crossed over at a lower freuency. I
think

you

would find this would provide better imaging and dispersion. YMMV.


Which meters and measurements did you use to determing that, a Ouija

board?


I looked at the graph, naturally I would expect you to audition them
your
self.

How did you decide on the the Silver Flutes?



I go into this on my website. I did a lot of window shopping on various
sites that sell raw drivers. I wanted something that was affordable,
uncommon in both name and design principle, and well made. When I got
it in my brain that I wanted a ribbon tweeter, I looked at all brands I
could find: Silver Flute, Hi-Vi, Fostex, Visaton, and
Bohlender-Graebner. The Silver Flutes seemed to have all the qualities
I wanted, and nobody else that I could find was using them. I got a guy
to build the cabinets for me, he did great work, and then I assembled
them. I actually wired the tweeters out of phase at first and thought
I'd shot myself in the wiener, because they just sounded off. I finally
figured out my mistake, and they sounded really good. Then they broke
in fully and sounded even better. The woofers were stiff as boards at
first, and the tweeter sounded edgy. After playing them for a long time
they finally came around, and although they weren't perfect they did
enough things really, really well that I knew I had something that
people would want to pay money for if they got a chance to hear them.
That last part is the hard part, though, because I'm simply not prepared
at this point to build a large inventory of them and try to build up a
traditional network. The factory direct approach seemed the best way to
go for a number of reasons. Now I face the arduous task of getting
testimonials and reviews to develop word of mouth advertising. I also
started advertising on Audiogon, but I think without other factors
developing a buzz about the speakers I can't expect them to sell based
on a picture on a website. Of course, I've only been up and running a
few weeks, so I can't expect miracles.

"trotsky" wrote in message
nk.net...
Michael Mckelvy wrote:

"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Michael Mckelvy wrote:

"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Michael Mckelvy wrote:


I know lots of people, many of them audiophiles. I would certainly

mention


your website and let them decide for themselves.


You would mention them under what conditions--that I use the
necessary
meters and measurements? That's a flat out lie.


I would mention that I know of a vendor doing business on-line using

drivers

new to the market.


Why would you do that? You've been saying they're crap for days. Are
you a sockpuppet.


It would give me a chance to hear them. It's the only way I would.

He offers a money back guarantee so they would have

nothing to lose but a shipping fee for return. They appear to have

nicely

made cabinets and how they would sound in somebody's room is a matter
of
taste.


Please explain why you've changed your tune, assuming you're not a
sockpuppet.



I haven't. I let people make up their own minds.



You're not being forthcoming, Mickey. Before you claimed my speakers to
be crap because the drivers were "cheap." What changed?

Nothing

Did you see a
few posts on DIY forums that described the Silver Flutes as having
exceptionally flat frequency responses for the money? Just explain what
you're trying to do here.



No. I looke briefly but all I found was one DIY gorup where somebody asked
about using them and the reply was "chortle."
Not a complete search so I will look more.

snip


I'm not trying to trick you, I am curious.

In the case of my own speakers I used LEAP and LMS. The xovers were

3rd

order on the tweeter and 2nd order on the woofer.


My crossovers are second order, designed by LEAP.


If they were designed by LEAP some measurements had to have been done.



Perhaps. I don't believe it's necessary for me to go into the design
steps. To hear Bob Morion tell it, I don't have any anyway.

Surpising, most designers love to brag.

I provided graphs upon request, can you?


I could, but I won't because I don't think they tell you a thing
about
the sound. Lots of speakers have a flat frequency response and
still do
many things wrong.


What sort of things?


What? Read my website: poor choices in cabinet design, drivers that
aren't rigidy mounted to the cabinet, etc.


Having a cabinet not contribute sound of its own is not a poor choice.
IMO
speakers that show flat measurements and sound bad usually do so because
tehy aer measured at 1 watt and won't perform at real world spl's. Your
thoughts?


I've already covered this before, on rao. The problem with the
so-called "inert" cabinets is that they disperse too much energy to in
any way help give the illusion of live sound. In my opinion you *have*
to have cabinets and driver mounting schemes that don't absorb too much
energy, because reproduced music is *always* lacking in dynamic
qualities and liveliness compared to the live reference.

How would one determine in any objective way what the limit is on
absorbsortion of energy?

Almost every
designer on the market gets this wrong, in my opinion, except for Naim,
Audio Note, and a few other British guys.

Now, conventional wisdom says that if a cabinet is contributing sound of
it's own, the sound is "colored". I simply don't find this to be true,
and my speakers are without question one of the most neutral speakers
I've ever heard.

It would be interesting to see ( at least it would be for me) comparisons of
the distortion produced by whatever is a known low distortion speaker,
compared to some of those you like and your Silver Flute designs.

That doesn't mean they're without flaws, but they are
really neutral and really lively. *Some* more expensive drivers are
better at information retrieval than the Silver Flutes, but for the
money they are still astonishingly good.

How would you rate Proa Ac or the VSM's?

What aspects of crossover design do you find most important?


What are the choices?


Whatever YOU chose, on-axis response, horizontal polar response, flat

phase,

the xover frequency and how it relates to the size of the driver(s)

being

used, etc..


Whatever gets the speaker to sound the most natural.


You don't think any of these things are more important than others or
someting not mentioned might be more important?


I would say on-axis response is the most important. Listening in the
sweet spot is the most important factor. Having a sweet spot the size
of your living room is a nice concept, but hardly acheivable. (With two
speakers, anyway.)



What is your approach to good stereo imaging?


Position the speakers correctly in the room. Very few manufacturers
cover this well. I don't know why.


I was referring to how you achieve good imaging through xover design.


Imaging is over rated.

If your playing a recording of a live event, the speakers should produce an
image that matches, no?

There are many aspects of reproduced sound that
suggest the sound of live music, and imaging is pretty near the bottom.

In your opinion.

My speakers produce an excellent stereo image, but that wasn't one of
the things I focused on. This is on the website too.



Do you favor even order or odd order crosovers?


What ever yields the best sounding response is what I favor.


You are free to choose whatever you wish of course, I would suggest
that

you

take a look at Zalytron's site and another ribbon tweeter also made in

China

by Fountek. The model JP-3.0 sells for $81.00 so it would be
something

for

an upgrade in your line. It looks to be a a great choice IMO for it's
smooth response and could be crossed over at a lower freuency. I
think

you

would find this would provide better imaging and dispersion. YMMV.


Which meters and measurements did you use to determing that, a Ouija

board?


I looked at the graph, naturally I would expect you to audition them
your
self.

How did you decide on the the Silver Flutes?



I go into this on my website. I did a lot of window shopping on various
sites that sell raw drivers. I wanted something that was affordable,
uncommon in both name and design principle, and well made. When I got
it in my brain that I wanted a ribbon tweeter, I looked at all brands I
could find: Silver Flute, Hi-Vi, Fostex, Visaton, and
Bohlender-Graebner. The Silver Flutes seemed to have all the qualities
I wanted, and nobody else that I could find was using them. I got a guy
to build the cabinets for me, he did great work, and then I assembled
them. I actually wired the tweeters out of phase at first and thought
I'd shot myself in the wiener, because they just sounded off. I finally
figured out my mistake, and they sounded really good. Then they broke
in fully and sounded even better.

The break in thing has been discussed to death.............

The woofers were stiff as boards at
first, and the tweeter sounded edgy. After playing them for a long time
they finally came around, and although they weren't perfect they did
enough things really, really well that I knew I had something that
people would want to pay money for if they got a chance to hear them.

Sounds very similar to the process I went through.


That last part is the hard part, though, because I'm simply not prepared
at this point to build a large inventory of them and try to build up a
traditional network. The factory direct approach seemed the best way to
go for a number of reasons. Now I face the arduous task of getting
testimonials and reviews to develop word of mouth advertising.

Wait til you check the ad rates for any of the mags.

I also
started advertising on Audiogon, but I think without other factors
developing a buzz about the speakers I can't expect them to sell based
on a picture on a website. Of course, I've only been up and running a
few weeks, so I can't expect miracles.

I can almost guarantee there won't be any of those.

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 15:30:11 -0700, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:

You shouldn't presume without listening, unless you you have enough
expertise to know good drivers from bad drivers.

Physician, heal thyself!

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 16:57:15 -0700, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:

I'm not an engineer and don't claim to be one.

What were you doing trying to market speakers then?

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 16:57:15 -0700, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:

I'm not an engineer and don't claim to be one.

What were you doing trying to market speakers then?

"dave weil" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 15:30:11 -0700, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:

You shouldn't presume without listening, unless you you have enough
expertise to know good drivers from bad drivers.

Physician, heal thyself!

Be my guest. You seem to have a case of something.

"Bob Morein" wrote in message
...

"Michael Mckelvy" wrote in message
...

[snip]

Bob, this thread is technical in nature, if you can't discuss things at
that
level please butt out.

There's plenty of room elsewhere for nonsense.

Mike, I'm sure your questions are sincere, but Trotsky can't answer them,
because he did not follow any semblance of a design process.

In one respect he did, he got decent xovers designed.

It is very reasonable to highlight the fact that Trotsky advertises
objective specifications on his website which were presumably measured,
but
were not. This is lying.

If as I assume, his xovers were designed by Madisound using their LEAP
software, they have an anechoic room to do the measurements that would go
along with the process.

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 15:40:51 -0700, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 16:57:15 -0700, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:

I'm not an engineer and don't claim to be one.

What were you doing trying to market speakers then?

Do you think one needs to be an engineer to build a good speaker. If so
please forward your opinion to Dick Olsher and of his satisfied customers.

That seems to be your objection on Trotsky - that he isn't doing all
of the "engineer-type things" that you seem to require.

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 15:41:30 -0700, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 15:30:11 -0700, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:

You shouldn't presume without listening, unless you you have enough
expertise to know good drivers from bad drivers.

Physician, heal thyself!

Be my guest. You seem to have a case of something.

What, common sense and logic?

Thank you for acknowledging that you have listened to Greg's speakers.
We're still waiting on a full report of how they actually sound.

Socket wrote:

trotsky wrote:


I go into this on my website. I did a lot of window shopping on various
sites that sell raw drivers. I wanted something that was affordable,
uncommon in both name and design principle, and well made. When I got
it in my brain that I wanted a ribbon tweeter, I looked at all brands I
could find: Silver Flute, Hi-Vi, Fostex, Visaton, and
Bohlender-Graebner. The Silver Flutes seemed to have all the qualities
I wanted, and nobody else that I could find was using them. I got a guy
to build the cabinets for me, he did great work, and then I assembled
them. I actually wired the tweeters out of phase at first and thought
I'd shot myself in the wiener, because they just sounded off. I finally
figured out my mistake, and they sounded really good. Then they broke
in fully and sounded even better. The woofers were stiff as boards at
first, and the tweeter sounded edgy. After playing them for a long time
they finally came around, and although they weren't perfect they did
enough things really, really well that I knew I had something that
people would want to pay money for if they got a chance to hear them.


It sounds to me like the first prototype you produced is effectively
the final design. Is that correct?


Yes. The only thing I played with was the amount of insulation in the
cabinet. And wiring the tweeters in correct phase, of course.



How much tweaking was involved?



None, really. I know I'm supposed to play with crossover values and
port lengths and such, but the biggest flaws I found in the sonic
presentation were what I deemed to be limitations in the drivers
themselves. I think I got lucky, because as you know, I'm pretty
particular about sound. I'm kind of looking forward to dave's reaction.
Obviously he doesn't have any reasons to do me any favors, so I doubt
he'll fudge the truth.

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 23:47:08 GMT, trotsky wrote:

Socket wrote:

trotsky wrote:


I go into this on my website. I did a lot of window shopping on various
sites that sell raw drivers. I wanted something that was affordable,
uncommon in both name and design principle, and well made. When I got
it in my brain that I wanted a ribbon tweeter, I looked at all brands I
could find: Silver Flute, Hi-Vi, Fostex, Visaton, and
Bohlender-Graebner. The Silver Flutes seemed to have all the qualities
I wanted, and nobody else that I could find was using them. I got a guy
to build the cabinets for me, he did great work, and then I assembled
them. I actually wired the tweeters out of phase at first and thought
I'd shot myself in the wiener, because they just sounded off. I finally
figured out my mistake, and they sounded really good. Then they broke
in fully and sounded even better. The woofers were stiff as boards at
first, and the tweeter sounded edgy. After playing them for a long time
they finally came around, and although they weren't perfect they did
enough things really, really well that I knew I had something that
people would want to pay money for if they got a chance to hear them.


It sounds to me like the first prototype you produced is effectively
the final design. Is that correct?


Yes. The only thing I played with was the amount of insulation in the
cabinet. And wiring the tweeters in correct phase, of course.



How much tweaking was involved?



None, really. I know I'm supposed to play with crossover values and
port lengths and such, but the biggest flaws I found in the sonic
presentation were what I deemed to be limitations in the drivers
themselves. I think I got lucky, because as you know, I'm pretty
particular about sound. I'm kind of looking forward to dave's reaction.
Obviously he doesn't have any reasons to do me any favors, so I doubt
he'll fudge the truth.

You are correct.

Socket wrote:

Actually, maybe this would be better in email. It's up to you -you
know the address.


No, I think this is great for the group--it must drive Bob Morion even
more insane. I'm sure he has all the marketing savvy of a doorknob.

trotsky said:

I would've hoped my vision would've come across somewhat from the site:

Nope. At least not completely. The estrangement from reality is well
disguised, so an unsuspecting sucker would hardly anticipate he's
reading the spew of Krooger's kissing kousin. OTOH, the preposterous
egotism and irrational response syndrome can be detected fairly
easily. The bit about your Eureka! "design" experience should be
stuck on there somewhere, lest an unsuspecting sucker assume you
know what you're doing.

Keep on truckin', though. You never know when reality will go
through a cosmic blender and render the Trotskyverse dimension
inhabitable to humans.