I believe the 200's already have most of the measurements Dave listed.Originally Posted by Gov
|
I believe the 200's already have most of the measurements Dave listed.Originally Posted by Gov
-curtis
I like how the FR is displayed in the ever-popular 6dB/division scale!Originally Posted by curtis
I have been bothered by that FR measurement, BTW. It does not seem to match up at all to the stated range of the loudspeaker. The graph looks like the HTM-200 does ~ 110Hz-20 KHz +- 3 dB. (Also there's that wierd flat portion at the upper frequencies that looks like something was saturated or something...)
Dave - I would suggest not doing any splicing. I think many folks become suspicious of the accuracy of a curve when it is pieced together, as who is going to piece together any 'bad' parts? However, if I could see a close mic curve AND a spliced anechoic, together with an explanation of each, that would work.Originally Posted by davef
Just my 2 cents....
FWIW, I think that's more in depth than 98% of consumers know or care about. I think it's great to have as much information available as possible (and I'd love to see it all broken down and explained, of course), but you can make it overly complicated to the point where the consumer either feels dumb, or feels that it's complicated in order to actually hide something or mislead. I would be careful of that.Originally Posted by MikeAndAnnie
Also - until this thread I wasn't even aware that splicing happened on some FR response plots. And, frankly, I have no idea what other companies may have done so. That's my own ignorance though
Jon O.
This sounds great! I can't wait to see the graphs!
Awesome work Dave!
If you're not aware, I think 98% is WAY too low an estimate.Originally Posted by Jonnyozero3
David
Well, I'm aware that those such as us (who desire such information) account for approximately 0.14 percent of the cosumer population...but I'm also aware that we are much more important (of course we are!), so I calculated a fudge factor of 14.285714285714285714285714285714 to get to a weighted result which amplified our importance in the estimate. So, instead of 0.14%, I bumped us up to 2%, leaving the rest of the "normies" at a compressed 98%. Selfish thing for me to do...I know. But I was hoping my skewed numbers would, in a backhanded way, convince Dave to not only provide all the above information, but photos of the warehouse, testing chamber(s), diagrams, schematics, personal notes (handwritten included, legible or not), in order to better inform us about his product.Originally Posted by bikeman
Jon O.
Jon ---
Your post is cracking me up! My baby has been driving us nuts -- this is the first good laugh I have had in a few days.. Thank You!!! Very Much Needed!!!
Anytime Dave Glad to hear the baby has healthy lungs
Last edited by Jonnyozero3; 10-13-2006 at 01:11 PM.
Jon O.
Ummm....I just noticed, because someone posted a graph in the AVS forum, the new measurements are up:
http://www.ascendacoustics.com/pages...t340mmeas.html
http://www.ascendacoustics.com/pages...bm170meas.html
-curtis