Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Phil Graham" data-source="post: 125343" data-attributes="member: 430">Re: Line array calculators indoors - some observations and questionsPrediction tools are tough, it is hard to disentangle when they are inaccurate for technical reasons from when they are inaccurate due to the data display choices that the manufacturers have made to &quot;pretty up&quot; the results.Of the prediction tools that I&#039;ve used, and admittedly I&#039;ve not used all of them, the only three that I&#039;ve seen perform in a realistic fashion are Martin Display 2 (MLA), Meyer MAPP, and F-Chart (EAW internal tool). I strongly suspect that EASE Focus 2 could perform similarly if the manufacturers put in &quot;real&quot; enough data. It is not merely enough to sum data accounting for complex plane (frequency and phase) polar response, one also has to simulate and/or measure that data correctly, and account for radiation impedance effects within the array.Assuming that you undertake all of the above technical bits correctly, then companies have to make the decision to display the results warts and all. Not everyone is comfortable doing this, obviously, especially at the lower end of the industry where users aren&#039;t advanced enough technically to tease out the key metrics from the ugliness typical of real data.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Phil Graham, post: 125343, member: 430"] Re: Line array calculators indoors - some observations and questions Prediction tools are tough, it is hard to disentangle when they are inaccurate for technical reasons from when they are inaccurate due to the data display choices that the manufacturers have made to "pretty up" the results. Of the prediction tools that I've used, and admittedly I've not used all of them, the only three that I've seen perform in a realistic fashion are Martin Display 2 (MLA), Meyer MAPP, and F-Chart (EAW internal tool). I strongly suspect that EASE Focus 2 could perform similarly if the manufacturers put in "real" enough data. It is not merely enough to sum data accounting for complex plane (frequency and phase) polar response, one also has to simulate and/or measure that data correctly, and account for radiation impedance effects within the array. Assuming that you undertake all of the above technical bits correctly, then companies have to make the decision to display the results warts and all. Not everyone is comfortable doing this, obviously, especially at the lower end of the industry where users aren't advanced enough technically to tease out the key metrics from the ugliness typical of real data. [/QUOTE]

Verification