IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

early 1970's speaker design
Bartholomew MacG...
post Apr 5 2012, 06:18
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 24
Joined: 9-February 12
Member No.: 97028



Here's a quote from the engineer Siegried Linkwitz that was in an interview that was posted in Stereophile:

QUOTE
Dickson: You're most widely known as the developer of the Linkwitz-Riley crossover. Could you explain a few of the characteristics of this crossover?

Linkwitz: To answer your question, we need to go back to when I started out exploring the whole speaker issue in the early '70s. Then you could take the grille cloth off many of the available speakers and see a strange, almost haphazard arrangement of the drivers on the baffle. It really puzzled me and I wondered what was going on. So I asked some of the designers why they were doing this and they said; "Because we've found it sounds better."

As I looked further into this issue, I realized that two principal things were not well-understood. First, very little was known at that time about the effects of diffraction from the cabinet edges. Second, and more importantly, very little was understood about how phase-shift with respect to the current passing through the voice-coils of different drivers affected the polar radiation pattern of a speaker. In other words, the interaction between the electrical side of a driver and the acoustical response was not clear at the time. For example, the phase-shift between the current in the tweeter and midrange voice-coils, relative to the placement of these drivers on the baffle, affects the speaker's radiation pattern.


http://www.stereophile.com/content/siegfried-linkwitz-page-4



I was wondering if anyone knows if this is really true - that they just didn't know what they were doing and were in some way desinging the speakers by trial and error.


Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
julf
post Apr 5 2012, 09:40
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 359
Joined: 14-January 12
Member No.: 96426



QUOTE (Bartholomew MacGruber @ Apr 5 2012, 07:18) *
I was wondering if anyone knows if this is really true - that they just didn't know what they were doing and were in some way desinging the speakers by trial and error.


Well, loudspeaker "design" in the early 70's was mostly by copying and tweaking "well-known designs". There was some serious research at places like BBC, and KEF was pioneering use of computer analysis, but most "designers" rehashed some basic designs and design rules. My favourite example is the original Linn Isobarik (I still love my modded early examples). Linn bought the design from the original designer/developer, but didn't understand it - as a result, pretty much every "improvement" Linn introduced during the production lifetime of the speaker was a backwards step...
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bartholomew MacG...
post Apr 5 2012, 10:53
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 24
Joined: 9-February 12
Member No.: 97028



QUOTE (julf @ Apr 5 2012, 09:40) *
QUOTE (Bartholomew MacGruber @ Apr 5 2012, 07:18) *
I was wondering if anyone knows if this is really true - that they just didn't know what they were doing and were in some way desinging the speakers by trial and error.


Well, loudspeaker "design" in the early 70's was mostly by copying and tweaking "well-known designs". There was some serious research at places like BBC, and KEF was pioneering use of computer analysis, but most "designers" rehashed some basic designs and design rules. My favourite example is the original Linn Isobarik (I still love my modded early examples). Linn bought the design from the original designer/developer, but didn't understand it - as a result, pretty much every "improvement" Linn introduced during the production lifetime of the speaker was a backwards step...



That seems strange to me. You'd think they'd be engineers who knew something about acoustics and would try to use some of that. The other thing that's weird is the phrase "sounds better" which sort of seems to imply they listened to music on them and made their decisions based on that instead of using measurements.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
julf
post Apr 5 2012, 11:42
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 359
Joined: 14-January 12
Member No.: 96426



QUOTE (Bartholomew MacGruber @ Apr 5 2012, 11:53) *
That seems strange to me. You'd think they'd be engineers who knew something about acoustics and would try to use some of that.

There was a fair bit of academic work going on, but it only trickled into the industry during the 70's - remember that stuff like the Thiele & Small work was only published in the early 70's, and took a while to be accepted.. High-end hifi was also a very marginal business.
QUOTE
The other thing that's weird is the phrase "sounds better" which sort of seems to imply they listened to music on them and made their decisions based on that instead of using measurements.

Ah, but this was the 70's. Measurements were for men in white coats that smoked pipes. The cool crowd *experienced* things (and smoked other kinds of stuff...) smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic


Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th December 2014 - 14:26