Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="John Roberts" data-source="post: 84887" data-attributes="member: 126">Re: Looking for the chart that converts XILICA or others to othersThat sounds like a &quot;you can&#039;t get there from here&quot;.&nbsp; If the old school time-constant pole and zero approach does not cover higher order transfer functions, this begs the question what kind of speaker errors do we need to correct with EQ? My guess would be low order, but I am not the speaker expert here. (I&#039;m just asking about simple boost/cut EQ, where this BW discrepancy exists, not the other sundry DSP tricks). Perhaps a variant on the old school approach could be used that supports more complex curves. Of course this isn&#039;t an easy short term fix, but a more literal description of the transfer function could be more complete and less subject to interpretation. The shorthand descriptions only work when the parameters mean the same thing every time used. I am not smart enough to know if this different BW definition is a useful tool other DSP should support, or just different. JRPS: I really like to see engineered presets from the speaker professionals used whenever possible. Speakers should be a black box to end users, even if using multiple boxes to accomplish that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="John Roberts, post: 84887, member: 126"] Re: Looking for the chart that converts XILICA or others to others That sounds like a "you can't get there from here". If the old school time-constant pole and zero approach does not cover higher order transfer functions, this begs the question what kind of speaker errors do we need to correct with EQ? My guess would be low order, but I am not the speaker expert here. (I'm just asking about simple boost/cut EQ, where this BW discrepancy exists, not the other sundry DSP tricks). Perhaps a variant on the old school approach could be used that supports more complex curves. Of course this isn't an easy short term fix, but a more literal description of the transfer function could be more complete and less subject to interpretation. The shorthand descriptions only work when the parameters mean the same thing every time used. I am not smart enough to know if this different BW definition is a useful tool other DSP should support, or just different. JR PS: I really like to see engineered presets from the speaker professionals used whenever possible. Speakers should be a black box to end users, even if using multiple boxes to accomplish that. [/QUOTE]

Verification