transparence dipole loudspeaker

Hi,

NO!

You extensively existed elsewhere that the room introduces huge amounts of distortion (SO BIG DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CABLES, AMPLIFIERS ETC ARE SWAMPED OUT). If I correct this distortion using inverse pre-distortion I have reduced the overall distortion, not made it larger.

By extension of your own argument, reducing the rooms errors shurely is introducing a REDUCTION IN DISTORTION, not "introducing distortion". Of course, you might not like the reduced distortion and prefer the originally higher level, which is fine.

But in this case you have gotten things back to front, namely it is not '' digital room eq introduces phase distortion'' but '' digital room eq reduces phase distortion''.

I appreciate that the difference between "introduces" and "reduces" may seem like splitting Hairs to you, to most people the difference between "introduce" and "reduce" is quite substantial though despite sharing most of the letters and wordstructure.

Ciao T

 

thorsten, I made a statement. The validity of which now appears to depend on the definition of phase distortion.

But since you didn't ask me for my definition in the begining, let me now ask YOU, what your definition is ?

 

Hi,

Not at all. Phase distortion is phase distortion.

The validity of your statement depends entierly on the simple fact that digital room EQ reduces phase distortion and does not INTRODUCE phase distortion in addition to that of the sytem, but reduces it.

You statement is counterfactual. That is all.

The standard definition is:

"phase distortion: Distortion that occurs when (a) the phase-frequency characteristic is not linear over the frequency range of interest, i.e., the phase shift introduced by a circuit or device is not directly proportional to frequency, or (b) the zero-frequency intercept of the phase-frequency characteristic is not 0 or an integral multiple of 2 radians. Synonym phase-frequency distortion."

L8er T

 

By the way, that is copyrighted so you shouldnt have really copied and pasted.

I asked for your definition.

Not the standard definition, because it is clear that we both have a different understanding of the term.

I was using the term exactly as has been defined in your pasted paragraph above.

 

I mean without giving credit to the author.

 

Hi,

Fair use quotation?

It is the same as quoted.

I think we understand the term exactly the same.

What YOU do not understand is how digital room equalisation operates. So you make claims that thare the exact and polar opposite of reality, in other words counterfactuals.

If you do than you are de-facto admitting that Digital Room Equalisation reduces phase distortion and thus does not introduce it. Hence you effectivly admit your original thesis was false.

So I suggest you simply retract your counterfactual thesis and admit that your claims where in direct opposition to reality as you failed to understand or examine reality (or that you outright lied - your choice which).

L8er T

 

I would like to take this opportunity to apologize to Thorsten and the others if any offense has been caused, by being too forthright.

 

Hi Johnny,

Thank you. I would also like to apologise, some of my remarks where rather confrontational. It is to get carried away and what simply passes in verbal conversation and is lauged off may take excessive weight when "in print".

It is important to realise that audio is a very personal thing and the people percieve things differently. That suggests that in areas where technical features and quantification fail to provide reliable correlation with people experience a degree of uncertainty remains and no-one is all right or all wrong.

Here's to many constructive discussions.

Ciao T

 

No offence taken..... by me

I was just annoyed by your lack of curtesy in answering a few obvious questions, which strangley would have provided some insight as to where you were coming from.

Being to forthright on a forum comes across as just being rather obnoxious, especially to some of the more long in tooth amongst the forum.

Apology accepted in the spirit it was intended.

I offer a virtual hand shake in return.

 

group delay g(w) =dp/d(w) where w=2pi*f is defined for sin(x+2pi*n) wheren is an integer.

Phase distotion of what ? State what you are referring to or retract your statement.