CHANGSTAR: Audiophile Headphone Reviews and Early 90s Style BBS

  • December 31, 2015, 11:07:07 AM
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 11

Author Topic: The headphone technology thread...  (Read 5537 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Armaegis

  • Uphill, both ways
  • Able Bodied Sailor
  • Pirate
  • ***
  • Brownie Points: +76/-3
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 883
  • metallurgist, rocket scientist, swing dancer
Re: The headphone technology thread...
« Reply #20 on: April 15, 2015, 01:36:37 AM »

Something else for you guys to digest: the amplitude of the driver movement is not linearly related to voltage amplitude.

Electrical power given as V^2/R is the same regardless of the frequency... but when you transform that electrical power into acoustic/sound pressure power, that is a function of frequency^2 and displacement^2. So when your frequency goes down, your displacement goes up in order to maintain the same power output.

So big drivers have an easier job producing bass because they don't have to move as far. The lighter something is and the less it has to move, the less crap it has to deal with regarding inertia, air resistance, etc.
Logged
Do you think there may be an acoustic leak from the jack hole? ~Tyll Hertsens

Not sure if I like stuffing one hole or both holes. Tending toward one hole since both holes seems kinda ghey ~Purrin

Clemmaster

  • Able Bodied Sailor
  • Pirate
  • ***
  • Brownie Points: +10/-1
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 239
Re: The headphone technology thread...
« Reply #21 on: April 15, 2015, 01:40:11 AM »

If you send a sine wave signal to an amplifier with voltage gain and voltage output (so no funny Bakoon current-output business), the signal that the headphone should receive will be a sine wave at the same voltage amplitude but with different frequencies.

I assume you meant the opposite?
Logged

Marvey

  • The Man For His Time And Place
  • Master
  • Pirate
  • *****
  • Brownie Points: +555/-33
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6698
  • Captain Plankton and MOT: Eddie Current
Re: The headphone technology thread...
« Reply #22 on: April 15, 2015, 02:17:36 AM »

Couple of things to consider:

Drag (Air friction):

Fd = 1/2*p*u(x)^2*Cd*A
  • p = fluid density (air is a fluid).
  • u(x) = velocity. this will vary. for a sine wave, speed will be max at the x=0 position. also low frequency = less velocity.
  • Cd = drag coefficient
  • A = area of driver
Force/Tension of Diaphragm (Spring):

Fs = -kx
  • k = spring stiffness
  • x = position of the driver.
  • Note: this should be a linear eq. for an ortho
Acceleration = (Force from the interactions between driver magnet and amp - Fs - Fd) / mass of diaphragm

Conclusion: moar power is better. you can never not have enough power. sorry, i answered a different question.
Logged

Clemmaster

  • Able Bodied Sailor
  • Pirate
  • ***
  • Brownie Points: +10/-1
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 239
Re: The headphone technology thread...
« Reply #23 on: April 15, 2015, 02:21:16 AM »

Well you kinda confirmed that friction does not depend on mass.
Logged

Marvey

  • The Man For His Time And Place
  • Master
  • Pirate
  • *****
  • Brownie Points: +555/-33
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6698
  • Captain Plankton and MOT: Eddie Current
Re: The headphone technology thread...
« Reply #24 on: April 15, 2015, 02:25:48 AM »

Well you kinda confirmed that friction does not depend on mass.

If friction depended upon mass, Formula One cars would be going no more than 48mph, and 4000lbs Camaros would be going 483mph.


P.S. C'mon guys. This is high school physics.
Logged

Anaxilus

  • Phallus Belligerantus Analmorticus
  • Pirate
  • **
  • Brownie Points: +65535/-65535
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3493
  • TRS jacks must die
    • The Claw
Re: The headphone technology thread...
« Reply #25 on: April 15, 2015, 02:29:00 AM »

God, I thought we were over this air resistance thing after the second post. I think you guys are taking advantage of an entry-level "engineer's" use of language.

Marv makes a good point about the constant of air resistance/air pressure versus the resistance from a driver's drag. The only problem in carrying the point further would be calculating the Cd for any given driver. As someone who has done quite a bit of that in the automotive world at a rather rudimentary level, I can say doing it with all sorts of varying driver technologies will not be easy or cheap. Ultimately, it's likely the smallest concern in the grand scheme of things so I wouldn't sweat it too much until the rest of the data suggests looking there.

Anyway, wake me up when the discussion moves to sound pressure versus sound intensity. :D
Logged
"If you do not change direction, you may end up where you are heading." - Lao Tzu

"The Claw is our master. The Claw chooses who will go or who will stay." - The LGM Community

"You're like a dull knife, just ain't cuttin'. Talking loud, saying nothing." - James Brown

Marvey

  • The Man For His Time And Place
  • Master
  • Pirate
  • *****
  • Brownie Points: +555/-33
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6698
  • Captain Plankton and MOT: Eddie Current
Re: The headphone technology thread...
« Reply #26 on: April 15, 2015, 02:39:47 AM »

As to the question why a thinner diaphragm is better: less mass = better acceleration / responsiveness.
Why a thinner diaphragm is worse: deformation / lack of rigidity / lack of damping.

I'm not a big fan of planars for speakers. I feel that the inherent tension of planars relative to small displacement (large surface area) makes them less sensitive to low level signals compared to the best cone drivers. I also do not like cones with thick rubber surrounds or rigid spiders - they seem to absorb low level signals. (None of this matters if you are not a resolution / plankton freak.) I do not like speakers with heavy thick cones. They weigh a ton, and require huge magnets to have any kind of efficiency.
Logged

Armaegis

  • Uphill, both ways
  • Able Bodied Sailor
  • Pirate
  • ***
  • Brownie Points: +76/-3
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 883
  • metallurgist, rocket scientist, swing dancer
Re: The headphone technology thread...
« Reply #27 on: April 15, 2015, 02:48:38 AM »

Classical air resistance calculations also assume uniform/constant air flow etc. At the scale of the stuff we're talking about (both the physical size as well as the movement), it's less about the air resistance and more about the fluid boundary layers... and even then, it's not going to have the kind of macroscopic effect of dragging down the driver. You also really really do not want to do these sorts of calculations. Seriously, this coming from a guy who's undergrad degree ostentatiously has the word "aerospace" in it.
Logged
Do you think there may be an acoustic leak from the jack hole? ~Tyll Hertsens

Not sure if I like stuffing one hole or both holes. Tending toward one hole since both holes seems kinda ghey ~Purrin

dreamwhisper

  • Able Bodied Sailor
  • Powder Monkey
  • ***
  • Brownie Points: +8/-3
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 77
Re: The headphone technology thread...
« Reply #28 on: April 15, 2015, 02:52:41 AM »

So, should headphone manufacturers that are pioneering new light diaphragms be allowing people to audition them in helium immersion chambers? (with scuba gear of course)


 :P
Logged

Marvey

  • The Man For His Time And Place
  • Master
  • Pirate
  • *****
  • Brownie Points: +555/-33
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6698
  • Captain Plankton and MOT: Eddie Current
Re: The headphone technology thread...
« Reply #29 on: April 15, 2015, 02:54:05 AM »

fluid dynamics..... the stuff of nightmares. I quit that track well before then. More fun to brute force the calcs and have a computer do the simulations.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 11