Jump to content
Electrodynamic

SI 4" coil DS4-18 info and discussion

Recommended Posts

Just to be obvious my comment was meant in jest (and I'm hoping its been taken that way).  :blink:

I think we're both making fun of some of the posts in the past on boards far far away. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we're both making fun of some of the posts in the past on boards far far away. :)

 

Yup, but just want to clarify because on the web sometimes its hard to read intent/sarcasm and I dont want to come off wrong lol...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True.  Speaking of Clipple and the real Klippel, I took a look at the pricelist.  First, there were so many options and packages and this, that, and the other that I have no clue how much a speaker testing system would actually cost.  But, based on what I saw, I could choose to get a full Klippel system or buy a nice used car or a not as nice new car.  Wow that system is expensive.  Guess I'll continue to use the DATS system and send off my woofers if I really need something tested to the nth degree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today is the day I get banned from AVS lol...

 

For typing this as a response lol...

 

---------------------------------

 

Screw Kipple! They aren't qualified to test a sub.

 

I want to see a BEAST GTG test. THATS WHERE REAL SUBS PROVE THEIR WORTH..... I want to see magic smoke and maybe even an egg cooked on a hot voicecoil...

 

Can we STFU about Kipple....

 

Let's talk about other stuff...

 

Like how slab house construction should be outlawed to ensure we all get the UKF we want, or how the driver should be made out of unicorn dust and shoot rainbows of love out in a omnidirectional field....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I would have assumed you would have had a message warning and edited post but not banned. But then again I have seen many banned for weird things other than profanity.

 

But the one irritating thing that has been going around is Klippel testing. I am sick of hearing about it. I am also sick of the three people(I think) that continuously bash every post that Nick from SI ever posts about a product. If you dont like the company fine but just keep quiet and move on.

 

SO sorry for your loss Ender but I dont go to AVS much anymore unless to check on Beast's, Not's, Scott's, P.I.'s, Dgage, Gorilla or Luke's threads.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not here to cause trouble, and this will be my one and only post on this forum.  I'm going to quickly explain things and leave.

 

 

About that whole "K" verified thing. When a manufacturer displays the "K" logo on their advertising and say that the product is "verified" it doesn't mean that the specs reported are what were measured on that German transducer interrogation thingy. That is what most would assume but what it means is that the engineers or technicians at said manufacturer are in possession of a system and are trained and certified on all 4 major test modules. Of course if you spend the big dollars to have one and get the training it likely means that you are using it during development and design to help make improvements. Who buys a super cool tech toy and doesn't have fun with it?

 

Point is it does not mean that the xmax spec is what was measured on the machine.

 

If a manufacturer is advertising "klippel verified" it has a very specific meaning as indicated in this paper.

 

https://www.klippel.de/fileadmin/klippel/Files/Know_How/Application_Notes/AN_05_Displacement_Limits.pdf

 

If a manufacturer is claiming "klippel verifed" and it can't pass the tests indicated in the paper at the published xmax, the manufacturer is abusing the klippel intent.  Using the klippel during design is very different than being klippel verified.  

 

Whether or not this whole issue matters is clearly subjective.  Clearly no one here thinks it does.

 

So much posting over so much nonsense. That extra 1.3 mm of "verified" x-max makes all the difference in the world with those high-power simulations (that rely on the linear extrapolation of non-linear small-signal parameters...). 

 

 

The difference is actually pretty substantial, it's not 1.3 mm.  In the SI 24 prototype the klippel limit measurement showed by Jacob of Sundown showed 20 mm xmax defined by Le limit and something like 30 mm for the Bl limit.  Then SI added IIRC 6 mm to the klippel Bl based on what he thought the production driver might measure and published 36 mm as xmax.  That's a difference of 16 mm, almost half between klippel verified and published spec.

 

And since Dayton uses a completely different method to spec xmax you can't even directly compare drivers from the two companies.  THIS is what I care about and why I feel it's important to know how xmax is specified.  What good are sims if the large signal parameters you use are not defined and therefore meaningless?

 

Data-bass testing levels the playing field but not all drivers are tested by data-bass.

 

Again, this whole issue is due to the fact that SI has claimed on several occasions that their various drivers are klippel verified.  They are not verified by klippel's definition of the testing.  A LOT of people think they are because they have been told they are.

 

 

 

But the one irritating thing that has been going around is Klippel testing. I am sick of hearing about it. I am also sick of the three people(I think) that continuously bash every post that Nick from SI ever posts about a product. If you dont like the company fine but just keep quiet and move on.

 

I'm not sure where this idea that I have an agenda to sink SI comes from.  I don't ever start these discussions, I only post to correct misinformation or when provoked.  And I continue to post to rebuttals and attacks on my posts but I'm supposed to shut up and the people arguing with me are in the right even if they have no technical response at all?  I almost never get a technical rebuttal on this subject matter, it's mostly all emotional attacks, very similar to this thread and the SI 24 thread on this forum.

 

Half the posts in this thread are making fun of me while there's very little discussion about the thread topic, this new driver.  And you want to criticize me for bashing every post that Nick ever posts?  This is pretty hypocritical as I was never even a member of this forum until right now and there's more posts about me on this forum than I ever posted about Nick or SI (not counting posts to defend myself).  I comment on VERY few posts from Nick or about SI drivers, and most of my posts are in defense of the information I provide, which is almost never argued in a technical manner.

 

Not to mention that most of the posts in this thread are in direct violation of the forum policy.  But I don't care, the fact that you've collectively decided to devote this thread to a discussion of me and how much AVS sucks doesn't bother me.  But consider what you are doing.

 

Data-bass is one of the most technically informative websites available.  It's information is extremely valuable and the test procedures and methods are beyond reproach.  And you guys have turned the forum into a high school level social media bullying tool.  You might want to consider that and maybe have some discussion of this new driver in technical terms.

 

And that's it for me.  I'm clearly not welcome here and I won't bother you guys again.  I don't have any ill will toward any of you and still have a great deal of respect for some of you.  No disrespect even for Ender, even though he posted an inflammatory post specifically for the reason of inciting trouble in full expectation of being banned.  This doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but whatever.  if this isn't about the information then what are we doing?  Just a social media boy's club?

 

I realize some of the earlier discussions were quite heated, especially between Nick, Beast and myself.  It was very confrontational.  In the recent past I have been much less confrontational mainly because I haven't had those two arguing with me on a regular basis and providing little or no technical argument to the information I present.  Still, when I go out of my way to be non confrontational and politically correct and post no comments about SI at all that could be construed as a slight to the product, I'm still perceived as having an agenda.  I even went out of my way to praise the low normalized Le of the new driver, said the xmax rating was the same method used by others in the same market niche and said the power rating was fair.  And still I get attacked so fiercely that the attacker expects to be banned, when he clearly demonstrates that he doesn't even understand the subject matter or the test equipment.

 

Peace and respect to everyone, especially those I've had personal conversations with in the past.  I'll now leave you guys to continue in any way you like.  Bash me all you want if if makes you feel better, I don't mind.  But maybe try to throw a bit of technical discussion in every once in awhile.  These issues are important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is being bashed. And forums are always about information/experiences, opinions and sometimes facts. Is all in good fun. It gets irritating seeing the same post every time after Nick's or others posts. DIY you have had plenty of great posts but at times it seems like your posts are to discredit Nick. And its not just you but others. Very small percentage have not been happy with their SI subwoofer and they are the most vocal in forums. They always want to make sure every single person who ever wants to buy a SI sub have been told about their experience. Annoying at times.

 

Forum policy, LOL, This is Ricci's forum and he always steps in when it gets too roudy. And dont feel bad because when other knowledgeable people are passionate about subwoofers they tend to rub others the wrong way at times also. Just saying, that your not the only one. Look at the old Seaton Bosso wars. LOL

 

 

Did Nick ever post an excursion video of the DS4?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not here to cause trouble, and this will be my one and only post on this forum.  I'm going to quickly explain things and leave.

 

 

 

If a manufacturer is advertising "klippel verified" it has a very specific meaning as indicated in this paper.

 

https://www.klippel.de/fileadmin/klippel/Files/Know_How/Application_Notes/AN_05_Displacement_Limits.pdf

 

If a manufacturer is claiming "klippel verifed" and it can't pass the tests indicated in the paper at the published xmax, the manufacturer is abusing the klippel intent.  Using the klippel during design is very different than being klippel verified.  

 

Whether or not this whole issue matters is clearly subjective.  Clearly no one here thinks it does.

 

 

The difference is actually pretty substantial, it's not 1.3 mm.  In the SI 24 prototype the klippel limit measurement showed by Jacob of Sundown showed 20 mm xmax defined by Le limit and something like 30 mm for the Bl limit.  Then SI added IIRC 6 mm to the klippel Bl based on what he thought the production driver might measure and published 36 mm as xmax.  That's a difference of 16 mm, almost half between klippel verified and published spec.

 

And since Dayton uses a completely different method to spec xmax you can't even directly compare drivers from the two companies.  THIS is what I care about and why I feel it's important to know how xmax is specified.  What good are sims if the large signal parameters you use are not defined and therefore meaningless?

 

Data-bass testing levels the playing field but not all drivers are tested by data-bass.

 

Again, this whole issue is due to the fact that SI has claimed on several occasions that their various drivers are klippel verified.  They are not verified by klippel's definition of the testing.  A LOT of people think they are because they have been told they are.

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure where this idea that I have an agenda to sink SI comes from.  I don't ever start these discussions, I only post to correct misinformation or when provoked.  And I continue to post to rebuttals and attacks on my posts but I'm supposed to shut up and the people arguing with me are in the right even if they have no technical response at all?  I almost never get a technical rebuttal on this subject matter, it's mostly all emotional attacks, very similar to this thread and the SI 24 thread on this forum.

 

Half the posts in this thread are making fun of me while there's very little discussion about the thread topic, this new driver.  And you want to criticize me for bashing every post that Nick ever posts?  This is pretty hypocritical as I was never even a member of this forum until right now and there's more posts about me on this forum than I ever posted about Nick or SI (not counting posts to defend myself).  I comment on VERY few posts from Nick or about SI drivers, and most of my posts are in defense of the information I provide, which is almost never argued in a technical manner.

 

Not to mention that most of the posts in this thread are in direct violation of the forum policy.  But I don't care, the fact that you've collectively decided to devote this thread to a discussion of me and how much AVS sucks doesn't bother me.  But consider what you are doing.

 

Data-bass is one of the most technically informative websites available.  It's information is extremely valuable and the test procedures and methods are beyond reproach.  And you guys have turned the forum into a high school level social media bullying tool.  You might want to consider that and maybe have some discussion of this new driver in technical terms.

 

And that's it for me.  I'm clearly not welcome here and I won't bother you guys again.  I don't have any ill will toward any of you and still have a great deal of respect for some of you.  No disrespect even for Ender, even though he posted an inflammatory post specifically for the reason of inciting trouble in full expectation of being banned.  This doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but whatever.  if this isn't about the information then what are we doing?  Just a social media boy's club?

 

I realize some of the earlier discussions were quite heated, especially between Nick, Beast and myself.  It was very confrontational.  In the recent past I have been much less confrontational mainly because I haven't had those two arguing with me on a regular basis and providing little or no technical argument to the information I present.  Still, when I go out of my way to be non confrontational and politically correct and post no comments about SI at all that could be construed as a slight to the product, I'm still perceived as having an agenda.  I even went out of my way to praise the low normalized Le of the new driver, said the xmax rating was the same method used by others in the same market niche and said the power rating was fair.  And still I get attacked so fiercely that the attacker expects to be banned, when he clearly demonstrates that he doesn't even understand the subject matter or the test equipment.

 

Peace and respect to everyone, especially those I've had personal conversations with in the past.  I'll now leave you guys to continue in any way you like.  Bash me all you want if if makes you feel better, I don't mind.  But maybe try to throw a bit of technical discussion in every once in awhile.  These issues are important.

 

You just couldn't stay away could you?  :rolleyes:

 

Please hold all other companies to the same standards that you hold my company to. Also devote the same time and dedication to making certain that they absolutely conform to 100% Klippel standards across the board. If you let other company's pass, why is that? Is it because they do not post any Klippel data at all? If the latter is the case maybe I should not post any Klippel data but use completely ficticious numbers in hopes that no one actually measures my speakers and/or can use the data properly.  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You just couldn't stay away could you?  :rolleyes:

 

Please hold all other companies to the same standards that you hold my company to. Also devote the same time and dedication to making certain that they absolutely conform to 100% Klippel standards across the board. If you let other company's pass, why is that? Is it because they do not post any Klippel data at all? If the latter is the case maybe I should not post any Klippel data but use completely ficticious numbers in hopes that no one actually measures my speakers and/or can use the data properly.  :ph34r:

 

Ok, if you are going to question my motivations by implying I'm not being fair  I'll do more than one post here.

 

Why should I stay away?  This thread is all about me, not your driver.  Do a post count and see.  In the SI 24 thread someone flat out called me an asshole and a large portion of that thread was about me too.  You guys want to make it seem like I derail your product threads at avs but you derail your own product threads here to talk about me.  Do you not see the irony?

 

I do hold other companies to the same standards.  NO OTHER COMPANY THAT I KNOW OF IS USING THE FORUMS FOR MARKETING AND TELLING FORUMS THAT THEIR DRIVERS ARE KLIPPEL VERIFIED WHEN THEY ARE NOT.  This is really simple and I've explained that numerous times.  If other companies never claim to be klippel verified there's no reason to hold them to klippel standards because there is no claim that they live up to those standards.

 

When Dan Wiggins was proven to be cheating on xmax by ignoring the offset and inflating the xmax spec by about 2x on a CSS driver due to the ignored offset I assure you this situation was not taken lightly.  It happened on the parts express forum.  He explained it away by saying if it didn't have the offset that's what the xmax would be.  But it did have an offset.  And I've caught him cheating in the same way with another driver he measured.  I can provide links if you want.  The CSS product manager at the time this driver was released demonstrated pretty clearly that he didn't know how to read a klippel graph at all.  This was also not treated lightly.

 

Bill Fitzmaurice was banned from diyaudio for sockpuppeting, and is very likely still doing sockpuppeting to this day on other forums.  He is also very active in trying to persuade diy'ers horns are too hard to design and they shouldn't even try.  He claims there's no advantage to horns unless they provide 6 db or more sensitivity gain over ported boxes with the same driver and tuning when his own designs don't even come close to that standard.  A large percentage of his posts are either misleading or simply wrong.  You better believe I've had words more than a few times with Bill about these issues.

 

That's 4 high profile individuals I've held to the same standard of presenting accurate information.

 

And you better believe if I find out another company is actively posting on a forum for marketing purposes where i am a member and claiming their xmax is klippel verified when I have proof it's not is going to hear about it.

 

The reason I sometimes post about your products is because there's an alarming amount of misinformation floating around about them.  Just a few weeks ago you were still promoting the myth that one SI 24 = 3 HST when this was debunked the minute the data-bass measurements for the 24 came out.  Debunked in detail.  IIRC even the Deep Sea guy said he believed the SI 24 was equal to a pair of LMS, not 4 LMS as the rumors stated.

 

It took you 2 full years to remove the "highest displacement driver on the planet" claim from you website when you knew full well the entire time it was not.

 

And a large population of your enormous following picks up on these rumors and misinformation and spread them like wildfire.

 

THAT is why it might seem to you like I'm picking on you specifically.  But I'm not.  I'm just correcting bad information when necessary.  It's not my fault that these same issues come up over and over.

 

The amount of fanboy SI posts compared to my SI posts is probably somewhere around a ratio of 10000 to 1 and yet you think I post too much.

 

A lot of these issues could have been solved two years ago if you had listened to a little common sense instead of instantly taking a confrontational stand about information that was proven to not be true.

 

I really don't enjoy rehashing all this history but that's the point - it's not history.  This bad information keeps bubbling up over and over.

 

At this point I don't believe you are posting that your drivers are klippel verified anymore, so as soon as others stop posting that they are (or provoking me by mocking me about past discussions), this issue will never be mentioned by me again.  Remember, I never start these things, I only respond to misinformation and provocation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, if you are going to question my motivations by implying I'm not being fair  I'll do more than one post here.

 

Why should I stay away?  This thread is all about me, not your driver.  Do a post count and see.  In the SI 24 thread someone flat out called me an asshole and a large portion of that thread was about me too.  You guys want to make it seem like I derail your product threads at avs but you derail your own product threads here to talk about me.  Do you not see the irony?

 

I do hold other companies to the same standards.  NO OTHER COMPANY THAT I KNOW OF IS USING THE FORUMS FOR MARKETING AND TELLING FORUMS THAT THEIR DRIVERS ARE KLIPPEL VERIFIED WHEN THEY ARE NOT.  This is really simple and I've explained that numerous times.  If other companies never claim to be klippel verified there's no reason to hold them to klippel standards because there is no claim that they live up to those standards.

 

When Dan Wiggins was proven to be cheating on xmax by ignoring the offset and inflating the xmax spec by about 2x on a CSS driver due to the ignored offset I assure you this situation was not taken lightly.  It happened on the parts express forum.  He explained it away by saying if it didn't have the offset that's what the xmax would be.  But it did have an offset.  And I've caught him cheating in the same way with another driver he measured.  I can provide links if you want.  The CSS product manager at the time this driver was released demonstrated pretty clearly that he didn't know how to read a klippel graph at all.  This was also not treated lightly.

 

Bill Fitzmaurice was banned from diyaudio for sockpuppeting, and is very likely still doing sockpuppeting to this day on other forums.  He is also very active in trying to persuade diy'ers horns are too hard to design and they shouldn't even try.  He claims there's no advantage to horns unless they provide 6 db or more sensitivity gain over ported boxes with the same driver and tuning when his own designs don't even come close to that standard.  A large percentage of his posts are either misleading or simply wrong.  You better believe I've had words more than a few times with Bill about these issues.

 

That's 4 high profile individuals I've held to the same standard of presenting accurate information.

 

And you better believe if I find out another company is actively posting on a forum for marketing purposes where i am a member and claiming their xmax is klippel verified when I have proof it's not is going to hear about it.

 

The reason I sometimes post about your products is because there's an alarming amount of misinformation floating around about them.  Just a few weeks ago you were still promoting the myth that one SI 24 = 3 HST when this was debunked the minute the data-bass measurements for the 24 came out.  Debunked in detail.  IIRC even the Deep Sea guy said he believed the SI 24 was equal to a pair of LMS, not 4 LMS as the rumors stated.

 

It took you 2 full years to remove the "highest displacement driver on the planet" claim from you website when you knew full well the entire time it was not.

 

And a large population of your enormous following picks up on these rumors and misinformation and spread them like wildfire.

 

THAT is why it might seem to you like I'm picking on you specifically.  But I'm not.  I'm just correcting bad information when necessary.  It's not my fault that these same issues come up over and over.

 

The amount of fanboy SI posts compared to my SI posts is probably somewhere around a ratio of 10000 to 1 and yet you think I post too much.

 

A lot of these issues could have been solved two years ago if you had listened to a little common sense instead of instantly taking a confrontational stand about information that was proven to not be true.

 

I really don't enjoy rehashing all this history but that's the point - it's not history.  This bad information keeps bubbling up over and over.

 

At this point I don't believe you are posting that your drivers are klippel verified anymore, so as soon as others stop posting that they are (or provoking me by mocking me about past discussions), this issue will never be mentioned by me again.  Remember, I never start these things, I only respond to misinformation and provocation.

 

Aside from your normal tirade of passive-agressively "calling people out" [largely industry leaders who individually net more in one year than you do in five, ten, twenty, years]. Knowing the latter paints a perfect picture of your need to "prove" something to the DIY community by selectively targeting a company that provides data. Case in point is that you are "calling out" industry leaders as if you know more than they know. They make a living at it,  you do not. They know more than you know. You use the forums as your private soap box hoping that someone will join in and call industry leaders "morons" meaning you know more than they do. I don't even know why I'm entertaining your response with this text because it is simply not worth my time. 

 

While you are a bother to every forum you are a member of, you actually increase my sales by keeping the topics at the top. :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, your assessment of my motivations is completely wrong and now you are guessing my salary too.  It's nothing but personal with you, which is why we have issues so frequently and confrontationally.

 

These industry leaders do know a lot, that doesn't mean I don't know what I'm talking about.  And being an industry leader doesn't give anyone free reign to post misinformation on public forums for marketing purposes.

 

Instead of trying to guess what I know and what I don't why not request links so you can see that I know what I'm talking about.  When I say Dan was cheating on xmax I wasn't the first to point it out, a reputable 3rd party measurement showed it very clearly.  Dan even admitted it - if it wasn't for the offset the xmax would have been the published xmax.  But there was a very large offset so xmax was not nearly as much as claimed.

 

The only reason I'm "calling out" anyone here is because you seem to want me to prove my sole mission in life is not posting about you. I take great offense to people that use forums as a marketing tool and then post incorrect information.  Since people like you are apparently making more in one year than I make in 20 by your estimation, there's no need to make crazy claims in search of sales, you can afford to calm it down and be conservative in your claims and you wouldn't have these problems.  You are certainly not the only one I've had an issue with.  Make whatever claims wherever you like, but if you do it in forums I'm a member of you will hear about it.  I have more interactions than I can count on the forums, I only mention the higher profile ones to show that it isn't all about you.  Most of my posts are about enclosure design and accuracy in simulation.

 

I don't think I've ever received a technical response from you over the years except for the first couple at diyaudio.  So don't assume to know what I know and what I don't when you aren't able to even have a technical discussion about these issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a manufacturer is advertising "klippel verified" it has a very specific meaning as indicated in this paper.

 

https://www.klippel.de/fileadmin/klippel/Files/Know_How/Application_Notes/AN_05_Displacement_Limits.pdf

 

If a manufacturer is claiming "klippel verifed" and it can't pass the tests indicated in the paper at the published xmax, the manufacturer is abusing the klippel intent.  Using the klippel during design is very different than being klippel verified.  

 

Whether or not this whole issue matters is clearly subjective.  Clearly no one here thinks it does.

 

 

As far as my post you quoted. To my knowledge that is the way things typically work.

 

Yes, technically the Klippel xmax rating for a sub driver would be based on the lowest of the 4 parameters listed in the link.

 

However, off-hand I can't think of any company that is confirmed as actually using that very stringent standard as their published rating. Many of the larger more technically advanced mfg's are developing with Klippel systems and using them to help design and modify their drivers to perform better. They advertise that the drivers are engineered or evaluated during development with Klippel but their literature does not seem to imply that the xmax rating itself comes from the Klippel results as outlined in the documentation. For example: Alpine, B&C, 18Sound, Faital, Rockford Fosgate, Dayton and others, all use Klippel for driver development, but none of them actually say that the spec is derived from Klippel tests do they? Some of them state that it is mathematical. B&C specs an xmax and an Xvar figure which does appear to be from Klippel analysis though this is not said directly anywhere I can find. The notes I've found on it mention the BL curve and the suspension compliance only. Additionally they mention a 50% point in a way that seems to imply that this Xvar number allows BL to drop that far as well which would be below normal.

 

Is anyone aware of a company that does spec xmax in the manner outlined in the Klippel literature or claim to? I've asked this before and I don't think anyone had a sure answer.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not here to cause trouble, and this will be my one and only post on this forum.  I'm going to quickly explain things and leave.

 

 

 

If a manufacturer is advertising "klippel verified" it has a very specific meaning as indicated in this paper.

 

https://www.klippel.de/fileadmin/klippel/Files/Know_How/Application_Notes/AN_05_Displacement_Limits.pdf

 

If a manufacturer is claiming "klippel verifed" and it can't pass the tests indicated in the paper at the published xmax, the manufacturer is abusing the klippel intent.  Using the klippel during design is very different than being klippel verified.  

 

Whether or not this whole issue matters is clearly subjective.  Clearly no one here thinks it does.

 

 

The difference is actually pretty substantial, it's not 1.3 mm.  In the SI 24 prototype the klippel limit measurement showed by Jacob of Sundown showed 20 mm xmax defined by Le limit and something like 30 mm for the Bl limit.  Then SI added IIRC 6 mm to the klippel Bl based on what he thought the production driver might measure and published 36 mm as xmax.  That's a difference of 16 mm, almost half between klippel verified and published spec.

 

And since Dayton uses a completely different method to spec xmax you can't even directly compare drivers from the two companies.  THIS is what I care about and why I feel it's important to know how xmax is specified.  What good are sims if the large signal parameters you use are not defined and therefore meaningless?

 

Data-bass testing levels the playing field but not all drivers are tested by data-bass.

 

Again, this whole issue is due to the fact that SI has claimed on several occasions that their various drivers are klippel verified.  They are not verified by klippel's definition of the testing.  A LOT of people think they are because they have been told they are.

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure where this idea that I have an agenda to sink SI comes from.  I don't ever start these discussions, I only post to correct misinformation or when provoked.  And I continue to post to rebuttals and attacks on my posts but I'm supposed to shut up and the people arguing with me are in the right even if they have no technical response at all?  I almost never get a technical rebuttal on this subject matter, it's mostly all emotional attacks, very similar to this thread and the SI 24 thread on this forum.

 

Half the posts in this thread are making fun of me while there's very little discussion about the thread topic, this new driver.  And you want to criticize me for bashing every post that Nick ever posts?  This is pretty hypocritical as I was never even a member of this forum until right now and there's more posts about me on this forum than I ever posted about Nick or SI (not counting posts to defend myself).  I comment on VERY few posts from Nick or about SI drivers, and most of my posts are in defense of the information I provide, which is almost never argued in a technical manner.

 

Not to mention that most of the posts in this thread are in direct violation of the forum policy.  But I don't care, the fact that you've collectively decided to devote this thread to a discussion of me and how much AVS sucks doesn't bother me.  But consider what you are doing.

 

Data-bass is one of the most technically informative websites available.  It's information is extremely valuable and the test procedures and methods are beyond reproach.  And you guys have turned the forum into a high school level social media bullying tool.  You might want to consider that and maybe have some discussion of this new driver in technical terms.

 

And that's it for me.  I'm clearly not welcome here and I won't bother you guys again.  I don't have any ill will toward any of you and still have a great deal of respect for some of you.  No disrespect even for Ender, even though he posted an inflammatory post specifically for the reason of inciting trouble in full expectation of being banned.  This doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but whatever.  if this isn't about the information then what are we doing?  Just a social media boy's club?

 

I realize some of the earlier discussions were quite heated, especially between Nick, Beast and myself.  It was very confrontational.  In the recent past I have been much less confrontational mainly because I haven't had those two arguing with me on a regular basis and providing little or no technical argument to the information I present.  Still, when I go out of my way to be non confrontational and politically correct and post no comments about SI at all that could be construed as a slight to the product, I'm still perceived as having an agenda.  I even went out of my way to praise the low normalized Le of the new driver, said the xmax rating was the same method used by others in the same market niche and said the power rating was fair.  And still I get attacked so fiercely that the attacker expects to be banned, when he clearly demonstrates that he doesn't even understand the subject matter or the test equipment.

 

Peace and respect to everyone, especially those I've had personal conversations with in the past.  I'll now leave you guys to continue in any way you like.  Bash me all you want if if makes you feel better, I don't mind.  But maybe try to throw a bit of technical discussion in every once in awhile.  These issues are important.

 

So, just for reference, here is the rest of what I posted:

 

"What? Lies on the Internet? Embellished "specs" in promotional materials?

 

That's nonsense. All manufacturers post all of their Klippel data, good bad, or otherwise, because the Internet demands it...

 

Next, you'll tell me that my iNuke 3000 doesn't really deliver 3000 watts. Everyone knows they do.

 

So much posting over so much nonsense. That extra 1.3 mm of "verified" x-max makes all the difference in the world with those high-power simulations (that rely on the linear extrapolation of non-linear small-signal parameters...). 

 

Sure, I'm concerned about throw and linearity, but they're not my main focus, provided they're adequate for the goals of the design at hand. If not, I chose the wrong driver. I'm far, far more worried about the moving parts hitting the stationary ones, and I can find that limit myself, no Klippel needed.

 

"Not enough... Not enough... Too much!!!!"

 

Back to your regularly-scheduled programming.

 

That's a solid looking driver. All these driver options are making it hard not to punch the easy button and run a bunch of sealed subs..."

 

I did not intend to fan flames then, and do not intend to fan them any further now.

 

I do take offense when my posts are "cherry picked" to make it seem like I said something I didn't. DO NOT drag me in to to your crusade here. All I intended with the "1.3 mm" comment (which is a number I pulled out of my ass) is that specsmanship on the Internet is nonsense, just like the ceaseless Internet bench racing debates that rage on and on based on it.

 

Zilch (R.I.P.) said it best: "More data, less wank."

 

Anyhow, enough of this crap, I'll quit pounding on the keyboard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as my post you quoted. To my knowledge that is the way things typically work.

 

Yes, technically the Klippel xmax rating for a sub driver would be based on the lowest of the 4 parameters listed in the link.

 

However, off-hand I can't think of any company that is confirmed as actually using that very stringent standard as their published rating. Many of the larger more technically advanced mfg's are developing with Klippel systems and using them to help design and modify their drivers to perform better. They advertise that the drivers are engineered or evaluated during development with Klippel but their literature does not seem to imply that the xmax rating itself comes from the Klippel results as outlined in the documentation. For example: Alpine, B&C, 18Sound, Faital, Rockford Fosgate, Dayton and others, all use Klippel for driver development, but none of them actually say that the spec is derived from Klippel tests do they? Some of them state that it is mathematical. B&C specs an xmax and an Xvar figure which does appear to be from Klippel analysis though this is not said directly anywhere I can find. The notes I've found on it mention the BL curve and the suspension compliance only. Additionally they mention a 50% point in a way that seems to imply that this Xvar number allows BL to drop that far as well which would be below normal.

 

Is anyone aware of a company that does spec xmax in the manner outlined in the Klippel literature or claim to? I've asked this before and I don't think anyone had a sure answer.  

 

I know how Dayton specifies xmax and I know how SI (and Sundown) do it.  I'm not so sure of some of the others you mentioned, but in most cases they are not specifically saying the drivers are klippel verified, and certainly not repeating the claim several times on open forums for marketing purposes.  If I had direct proof that ANY company was abusing the klippel intent by saying the drivers were verified when they are not I would be equally vocal about them.  This isn't about a crusade against SI, I've said some very nice things about their products lately and even recommend them to people when I think it's a product they should buy.  I've been directly responsible for at least a few SI sales.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, just for reference, here is the rest of what I posted:

 

"What? Lies on the Internet? Embellished "specs" in promotional materials?

 

That's nonsense. All manufacturers post all of their Klippel data, good bad, or otherwise, because the Internet demands it...

 

Next, you'll tell me that my iNuke 3000 doesn't really deliver 3000 watts. Everyone knows they do.

 

So much posting over so much nonsense. That extra 1.3 mm of "verified" x-max makes all the difference in the world with those high-power simulations (that rely on the linear extrapolation of non-linear small-signal parameters...). 

 

Sure, I'm concerned about throw and linearity, but they're not my main focus, provided they're adequate for the goals of the design at hand. If not, I chose the wrong driver. I'm far, far more worried about the moving parts hitting the stationary ones, and I can find that limit myself, no Klippel needed.

 

"Not enough... Not enough... Too much!!!!"

 

Back to your regularly-scheduled programming.

 

That's a solid looking driver. All these driver options are making it hard not to punch the easy button and run a bunch of sealed subs..."

 

I did not intend to fan flames then, and do not intend to fan them any further now.

 

I do take offense when my posts are "cherry picked" to make it seem like I said something I didn't. DO NOT drag me in to to your crusade here. All I intended with the "1.3 mm" comment (which is a number I pulled out of my ass) is that specsmanship on the Internet is nonsense, just like the ceaseless Internet bench racing debates that rage on and on based on it.

 

Zilch (R.I.P.) said it best: "More data, less wank."

 

Anyhow, enough of this crap, I'll quit pounding on the keyboard.

 

I'm sorry you thought I cherry picked text from your quote.  I could have quoted the whole thing but I usually narrow the quote text down to make it clear exactly what I'm responding to.  You've made it clear in at least a couple of posts in this thread and the SI 24 thread that you think I'm on a crusade that is nonsense, which is why it's a bit surprising that you think I'm dragging you into this, as I'm just responding to something you said.  I replied to that specific text to explain that it's not nonsense.  

 

I'm not really sure why you are upset, as you seem to agree with the premise that "specsmanship on the internet is nonsense", and I view that as a big problem, your comments clearly indicate that you don't think it's a problem (or at least it's a problem that you have no problem working around).  If there was a standard, or if we at least knew how the specs were derived the specs would be useful, not nonsense.  Mark Seaton effectively said the same thing, he agreed in the premise that the "klippel verified" thing was not true but didn't see the problem because specs are not that useful.  They WOULD be a lot more useful if there was a standard or we at least knew how they were derived.

 

Anyway, I have a lot of respect for you, I reference your designs quite often as recommendations.  But the reality is, if you make posts online they will sometimes get quoted.  I didn't do it in a malicious fashion  I seriously didn't mean any disrespect to you, just tried to explain why I feel this issue is important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know how Dayton specifies xmax and I know how SI (and Sundown) do it.  I'm not so sure of some of the others you mentioned, but in most cases they are not specifically saying the drivers are klippel verified, and certainly not repeating the claim several times on open forums for marketing purposes.  If I had direct proof that ANY company was abusing the klippel intent by saying the drivers were verified when they are not I would be equally vocal about them.  This isn't about a crusade against SI, I've said some very nice things about their products lately and even recommend them to people when I think it's a product they should buy.  I've been directly responsible for at least a few SI sales.

 

I get it. You called out SI because of the Klippel verified bit. I understand your technical points made there. My comment really has nothing to do with SI or Nick at all but is a slight change of subject to a general observation on what this term "Klippel verified", in general, means. I hadn't thought about this that much at all until recently.

 

What I'm saying in a nutshell is... Are there ANY commercially available drivers that have "Klippel verified" xmax specification, as defined in the documentation, other than those tested on the bench by VC mag by Patrick T. or the handful on the one that was over at DIYMA for awhile? I don't know of any. I'm not even sure what my point is with that either, other than it surprises me on one hand and also does not on the other, since it would likely greatly deflate your xmax compared to competitors not following the same rigid system.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not even sure what my point is with that either, other than it surprises me on one hand and also does not on the other, since it would likely greatly deflate your xmax compared to competitors not following the same rigid system.

that just about sums it about. In the end, it's called being human :)

 

today it is a dude angry about spec sheet inflation in audio equipment

2000 yrs ago it was a dude angry about the debasement of his coins

 

time to move on with life!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get it. You called out SI because of the Klippel verified bit. I understand your technical points made there. My comment really has nothing to do with SI or Nick at all but is a slight change of subject to a general observation on what this term "Klippel verified", in general, means. I hadn't thought about this that much at all until recently.

 

What I'm saying in a nutshell is... Are there ANY commercially available drivers that have "Klippel verified" xmax specification, as defined in the documentation, other than those tested on the bench by VC mag by Patrick T. or the handful on the one that was over at DIYMA for awhile? I don't know of any. I'm not even sure what my point is with that either, other than it surprises me on one hand and also does not on the other, since it would likely greatly deflate your xmax compared to competitors not following the same rigid system.

 

Most of the time data sheets don't say how xmax is derived.  The B&C faq says how they got theirs, it would appear that xmax is geometric measured (coil and gap).  And their xvar is the 50 percent point of Bl or suspension but they don't specifically say klippel was used and don't claim klippel verified, they made their own new term.  I found out how SI specs xmax by accident at diyaudio when Nick posted the info.  I found out how Dayton specs xmax by accident when reading posts from the former product manager.  I found out how CSS specs xmax by accident by reading a thread about a 3rd party klippel measurement of the driver in question showing it had much less than advertised xmax and the subsequent discussion involving the CSS product manager and Dan Wiggins.  And the CSS former product manager stated more recently that the CSS Trio 12 xmax was vastly overstated, in fact I think he said the usable excursion was about 15 mm despite the (IIRC) published spec of  27 or so mm xmax.  He wasn't even confronted or even asked about it, he just came right out and said the published Trio 12 xmax was vastly overrated.  Not sure if he was still employed by CSS at that time.

 

Most of this info I find completely by accident, I don't go seeking out scandals.  Although I would prefer the ultra high excursion manufacturers to specify "usable excursion" instead of xmax this isn't going to happen and I can't blame them.  It would be pretty hard to get a high klippel verified xmax out of ANY of those niche of drivers and everybody wants to publish the highest number.  So it isn't a problem for me (even though this high excursion niche has come up with a completely new way to define xmax)  UNLESS they specifically say the driver is klippel verified when it's not.  I don't know how Mach 5 or Alpine or others derive xmax.  I would like to know.  But at the same time I also know they are not on open forums claiming their drivers are klippel verified.

 

I do know Alpine, B&C, Dayton, and several others make very extensive use of the klippel machine when designing drivers but I don't think many (if any) are claiming the drivers are klippel verified.  Dayton does give a klippel rating sometimes, but only in passing, not in the specs section.  It does say klippel verified on some product pages in the text at the top but I've never seen a klippel of any of those Daytons.  If I found out they were abusing the klippel verified status I would be equally vocal about that.  But it seems unlikely, the Dayton 465 claims 11 mm klippel verified xmax (which seems reasonable), and only in the text at the top of the product page.  The word klippel doesn't appear on the UM 18 product page at all, not the Dayton product page or the parts express page.

 

http://www.daytonaudio.com/index.php/pa465s-8-18-pro-subwoofer-4-vc-8-ohm.html

 

As I think you know I like to sim stuff and I strive for extreme accuracy.  I would like to know what the specs I am using actually mean.  I think Alpine has published klippel data but I haven't been too interested in their drivers so I didn't look to see if it was the full suite of info or specifically selected data, and didn't check to verify that their claimed xmax was truthful and correct (assuming they are claiming klippel verfied status).  I would very much like to see full data on all drivers, until that happens I'm happy to try to find out how manufacturers of drivers I'm interested in derive xmax so the spec has some kind of meaning.

 

I'm NOT suggesting SI publish xmax numbers based on klippel verified testing.  All I'm suggesting is that they quit saying the drivers are klippel verified, and in fact I don't think they are doing that anymore anyway.  

 

The fact that some of the pro drivers (like B&C 18TBW100) pass the 3rd party independent klippel rating tests at their published spec means that at least some companies are using some form of klippel verification process even if it's not specifically stated in their ad copy or spec sheet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice discussion.  I totally get the sort of game-theory dilemma about publishing Xmax based on actual measurements (via Klippel).  That doesn't mean this information wouldn't be useful to the designer.  Actually, I don't especially want to see the minimum Klippel Xmax figure on its own.  I think it'd be far more useful to have each of the numbers for Xmax of BL, Kms, and Le.  While BL Xmax is probably universally important, I might not care as much about Le XMax if I'm using the driver exclusively for deep bass, and I might not care about the Kms number if I'm exclusively using the driver at frequencies above its resonance.  But of course, until the industry is willing to standardize on publishing these figures (and to be fair, requiring Klippel is probably too much to demand of small manufacturers who can't afford the system), it's unlikely any one company will take the lead on this issue and publish "true" Xmax figures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well that's it really isn't it, the information is obviously useful to the end user but it's not in the interests of the manufacturer to publish it so the info isn't published and hence why this site is so useful. Unfortunately the probability of the info being published doesn't vary with the no of posts on the subject but there we are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry you thought I cherry picked text from your quote.  I could have quoted the whole thing but I usually narrow the quote text down to make it clear exactly what I'm responding to.  You've made it clear in at least a couple of posts in this thread and the SI 24 thread that you think I'm on a crusade that is nonsense, which is why it's a bit surprising that you think I'm dragging you into this, as I'm just responding to something you said.  I replied to that specific text to explain that it's not nonsense.  

 

I'm not really sure why you are upset, as you seem to agree with the premise that "specsmanship on the internet is nonsense", and I view that as a big problem, your comments clearly indicate that you don't think it's a problem (or at least it's a problem that you have no problem working around).  If there was a standard, or if we at least knew how the specs were derived the specs would be useful, not nonsense.  Mark Seaton effectively said the same thing, he agreed in the premise that the "klippel verified" thing was not true but didn't see the problem because specs are not that useful.  They WOULD be a lot more useful if there was a standard or we at least knew how they were derived.

 

Anyway, I have a lot of respect for you, I reference your designs quite often as recommendations.  But the reality is, if you make posts online they will sometimes get quoted.  I didn't do it in a malicious fashion  I seriously didn't mean any disrespect to you, just tried to explain why I feel this issue is important.

 

I have no beef with anyone here, and no skin in this game. Just don't want a tongue in cheek post cherry-picked to make it seem like I was claiming something I'm not.

 

Don't own any of the drivers in the discussion, and at the moment, I don't intend to. To each their own.

 

Point I was trying to make with my post is that using small signal parameters as the basis for a large signal simulation isn't exactly a valid approach. Maybe it wasn't stated as eloquently or clearly as I could have. My measurements have borne this out over and over, sometimes with very interesting consequences.

 

The other point I was trying to make is that linear xmax is just not something I lose sleep over, it is a soft limit. The hard limits, when moving parts slam into stationary ones, or when the smoke comes out, are the ones I worry about. 

 

Exceeding xmax sounds bad. Exceeding xmech gets expensive. 

 

Seriously though, flirting with either is reason to buy more drivers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...