Cabs and Dispersion

I assume it's cus the speakers were exorbitantly expensive... "hi-fi" and all.

Ahhh...it was talking about how expensive the speakers were, not now much extra liability they would incur from measuring them.

Okay.....I'm clear on what happened now. Disregard my unbelievable statement...just a misunderstanding.
 
Yes.

This has literally zero perceptible effect. At any practical distance from a guitar cab, the angular differences among different speakers to a given listening point are small enough so as not to cause detectible response differences.

The audible effect of an array of cone transducers on off-axis response is entirely due to differences in arrival times of the sound from different speakers. This causes phase differences that vary with frequency and cause some frequencies to be reinforced and others to be cancelled.


No.

Awesome, didn't know that. Thanks!
 
It was the line about liability insurance. I can't figure out why that's relevant.
That has since been answered, but my statement was perfectly clear. Here's what I typed: "The lab's owner had to increase his liability insurance coverage in order to be comfortable having the speaker on his premises."
So, your contention is that it's just the theory predicting comb filtering as you move along the same axis as the speaker placement, and that any further visualizations are pointless because "it just sounds like comb filtering as you move", yes?
No. Once again, my point was clear on this count. Here's my statement again: "Collecting raw data is one thing, albeit a highly nontrivial one. Processing it for graphic display requires decisions about what kind of display to create and requires substantial time, effort, and skill."

If anyone wants to play games taking and crunching directivity data on guitar cabs - I've done so a number of times, but never a full data set of the kind that is required to generate directivity balloons - I say, "knock yourself out." It will necessitate a lot of labor, will never generate a nickel of revenue to compensate, and it will be poorly understood - if at all - by guitar players.
 
That has since been answered, but my statement was perfectly clear. Here's what I typed: "The lab's owner had to increase his liability insurance coverage in order to be comfortable having the speaker on his premises."

Fair enough. It was my fault. IDK....I guess my mind jumped to wondering why even crazy expensive speakers required a business to take on additional liability insurance and incorrectly assumed it had something to do with professional liability. I've also seen (and heard) 6-figure speakers but not 7-figure speakers. So...IDK...maybe there's something absolutely insane out there, or maybe the lab's insurance covered their property/staff and didn't have enough left over for stuff they had in to test.
 
The details don’t really matter… People fudge shit all the time.

I did work for utility company and presented to the C level suite… at the end, Chief counsel insists that everybody stand up and walk away from the report print out … “Plausible deniability”

Even though I just spent 90 minutes walking them through it; thoroughly defensible from my side as well. 👍
 
Well, such things exist for hifi and monitor speakers. I think it would be nice to be able to visualize it, partially to figure out why so many people seem to prefer horizontal 2x12s and 4x12s even when it seems like vertical 2x12s should do more of what a lot of people claim to want.
I expect it is nothing more than "a full size head fits and looks better on top of a horizontal cab or 4x12." We are heavily indoctrinated that a guitar rig looks a particular way.
 
Back
Top