q factor?
11-22-2004, 01:29 PM
#22
Guest
Posts: n/a
Derek is so right.. It's really a matter of perception with respect to damping or what is deemed as 'more accurate'.
The Total Q of a system only describes the predicted small-signal response, low frequency cutoff and gain of a woofer, based on a set of thiel small parameters.
What the bass sounds like is another topic.
The Total Q of a system only describes the predicted small-signal response, low frequency cutoff and gain of a woofer, based on a set of thiel small parameters.
What the bass sounds like is another topic.
11-22-2004, 05:54 PM
#26
Thanks for that insight DW and dave... [img]graemlins/2xblown.gif[/img]
yea, things are a little diff when you deal with large signal... but don't tell me you guys use something other then small signal parameters when you design a box... ?
Even with large signal, as long as the sub is linear, params aren't going to change that much anyway..
EDIT: your car sure does effect how your box will sound.. so these guys do have a point there... its all relative...
Edit2- here is a site that explains Q a little better then I could about 2/3 down http://www.ht-audio.com/basics.htm according to it i've been correct about Q and transient response...
[ November 22, 2004, 07:34 PM: Message edited by: Haunz ]
yea, things are a little diff when you deal with large signal... but don't tell me you guys use something other then small signal parameters when you design a box... ?
Even with large signal, as long as the sub is linear, params aren't going to change that much anyway..
EDIT: your car sure does effect how your box will sound.. so these guys do have a point there... its all relative...
Edit2- here is a site that explains Q a little better then I could about 2/3 down http://www.ht-audio.com/basics.htm according to it i've been correct about Q and transient response...
[ November 22, 2004, 07:34 PM: Message edited by: Haunz ]
11-22-2004, 06:54 PM
#27
Guest
Posts: n/a
You're welcome Haunz [img]graemlins/blah.gif[/img]
Anyways a lower Q, less than .7 is considered underdamped, and a higher Q such as 1.0 is considerecd overdamped. Whether one is "toiter" than the other is a matter of opinion about what the definition of "tighter" is. In any case the same sub in the same car, a larger box would have a lower Q and would have more extension than a smaller box that would have a higher Q and would sacrifice extension for power handling.
Anyways a lower Q, less than .7 is considered underdamped, and a higher Q such as 1.0 is considerecd overdamped. Whether one is "toiter" than the other is a matter of opinion about what the definition of "tighter" is. In any case the same sub in the same car, a larger box would have a lower Q and would have more extension than a smaller box that would have a higher Q and would sacrifice extension for power handling.
11-22-2004, 09:17 PM
#29
Guest
Posts: n/a
Now I know why I took a vacation from this place...
Very few people have access to large signal test equipment. In fact, I don't know for sure, but I think only LEAP 5 has the ability to handle driver non-linearities in determining output at high levels. Thanks to Klippel and LMS though, things are becoming better in that regard.
Very few people have access to large signal test equipment. In fact, I don't know for sure, but I think only LEAP 5 has the ability to handle driver non-linearities in determining output at high levels. Thanks to Klippel and LMS though, things are becoming better in that regard.
11-22-2004, 09:29 PM
#30
1000 Watt CAFz'r
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,783
LEAP 5 and LMS work really well together Dave. With a couple of simple parameter tests using the impedence function of LMS, you can get LEAP 5 to just about dial in the next winning lottery ticket #s.
[img]smile.gif[/img]
[img]smile.gif[/img]
