q factor?

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

11-22-2004, 09:36 PM

#31

Dave MacKinnon

Guest

Posts: n/a

My LMS arrives shortly... [img]graemlins/jammin.gif[/img]

[img]smile.gif[/img]

I'm still old-school with Leap 4 though... No money left to bump to 5.. maybe with some more private and prototype reviews for different companies...

[ November 22, 2004, 10:38 PM: Message edited by: Dave_MacKinnon ]

11-23-2004, 02:23 AM

#32

Haunz

4000 Watt CAFz'r

iTrader: (3)

Join Date: Jun 2002

Posts: 4,218

^ so what do you expect people to design there boxes with ??

I guess if you only have a small parameter model you are totally wasting your time...

11-23-2004, 06:46 AM

#33

PEI330Ci

1000 Watt CAFz'r

Join Date: Oct 2003

Posts: 1,783

Dave, you are going to love LMS 4.X

11-23-2004, 12:08 PM

#34

Dave MacKinnon

Guest

Posts: n/a

This is truly sad to say, but I don't bother much with spending time designing boxes. I model them in a sheet I created and aim for a target Fs or Qts, the drop 'em in the trunk and see if I like it.

Small signal parameters are great and do a good enough job predicting the output. Just saying that it's not the end-all be-all of determining what is going to happen. Imagine if the SPL guys could predict power compression and cone pressures in their vehicles?

The LMS is for the speaker design and prototyping side of things. Determining what the specs are basically.

11-23-2004, 01:38 PM

#35

Paul Niwranski

Guest

Posts: n/a

^ Dave - you sound like me. I used to pour over box programs to no end, changing the smallest details until it was "perfect"

Now, I hit what I consider to be a good balance of volume, F3, vent length, and excursion and I'm done. Generally, it takes longer to enter in the T/S specs. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Results are the same - I jsut have more free time.