|
Recent Additions
Budget Components Audacious Audio J. Gordon Holt
Loudspeakers
Amplification
Digital Sources
Analog Sources
Accessories Listening / Art Dudley The Fifth Element / John Marks Music in the Round / Kal Rubinson Fine Tunes / Jonathan Scull Special Features Reference Interviews Think Pieces Historical Recording of the Month Records 2 Die 4 Music/Recordings Stephen Mejias Robert Baird Fred Kaplan Wes Phillips Audio News Past eNewsletters RMAF 2009 SSI 2009 CES 2009 RMAF 2008 FSI 2008 CES 2008 RMAF 2007 CEDIA 2007 HE 2007 FSI 2007 CES 2007 China 2006 RMAF 2006 HFN 2006 CEDIA 2006 HE 2006 FSI 2006 CES 2006 Forums Galleries Vote Previous Votes AV Links Audiophile Societies Contact Us Customer Service New Subscription Digital Subscription Renew Give a Gift Sub Services Recordings Backissues More . . . Phono Preamp Hi-Fi Phono Cartridge Amplifiers Stereo Speakers |
Time Dilation, Part 2:
Fig.5 By way of contrast, this—on the same scales and with the same settings—is the equivalent to figs. 4 and 5 that would be obtained using the author's listening room for the measurement.
Responses
Fig.6 Comparison of frequency responses obtained from the B&W CDM1 NT loudspeaker using the nearfield method (blue trace) and windowed ground-plane method (purple), with B&W's simulated response included for comparison (red). Concentrating now on resonances, figs.7–9 show three further waterfalls obtained using the single-plane measurement method, which should be compared with that of fig.4a. Whereas for fig.4a the speaker was placed directly on the sports hall's hard rubberized floor (as pictured in fig.10), for fig.7 four soft rubber equipment feet were inserted between the speaker base and the floor, to provide a measure of decoupling between them. My original intention for this was to check whether vibrations reaching the measurement microphone via the floor were corrupting the results. There is no evidence of that here (although it's always advisable to check), but there is a very obvious change in the appearance of a pronounced resonance at around 500Hz. This same resonance can be seen—somewhat enhanced, which is intriguing—in figs. 8 and 9 as well, for which the speaker was mounted on a stand (as pictured in fig.11 for the two-plane case) with, respectively, three metal cones and four rubber feet between the speaker base and stand top plate.
Fig.7 Cumulative decay spectra obtained using the same measurement conditions as in fig.4a but with the speaker decoupled from the floor using soft rubber feet. Note how a 500Hz resonance is now evident.
Fig.8 Now the speaker is mounted on a stand, with three metal cones between the speaker base and stand top plate.
Fig.9 As in fig.8, but with soft rubber feet substituted for the cones.
Fig.10 Ground-plane measurement setup in the middle of the sports hall's floor.
Fig.11 Two-plane setup in the same hall, with the measurement microphone taped into the junction of floor and wall and the speaker angled at 45º. The obvious conclusion to draw is that this resonance is a cabinet mode that is suppressed when the speaker base is supported on (and damped by) a flat surface. So the use of speaker/floor decoupling in ground-plane testing actually commends itself for two reasons: to prevent transmission of vibrations to the microphone through the floor, and to ensure that the resonance behavior of the speaker cabinet is fully expressed.
Article Continues: Page 3 »
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||


