Archive for the ‘Hyperspace’ Category

Wonder and Music

Thursday, December 18th, 2014

galaxySo many times I’ve felt like life was over.  That there was nothing to live for.

Don’t get me wrong — I’ve never seriously considered logging out of this cosmic videogame any earlier than I have to.  But often I’ve thought that the rest was going to be a slide into senility, nothing more than that.

Wonder always rescues me.

Life is infinitely precious, but it is Wonder that reminds me just how incredible it can be.

Have you stopped recently to consider what a miracle it is that atoms came together to make the living masterpiece of you? Have you paused to reflect on the incredible truth that something we call love exists? Maybe abstractions like truth, honor, justice, and love are human inventions. Maybe insects and worms know nothing of them. Perhaps ants and bees fight to protect their homes out of mere instinct. Maybe.

But unless you are truly soulless, truly dead inside, you have to be moved by the unbelievable beauty around you. Both the beauty that arises “naturally” in plants, animals, and geography…and the beauty that we as a species learn to create.

Do bird enjoy the sounds they make? Music has always been a powerful inspiration for me. I am mystified to find beauty in all kinds of music: so many infinite kinds of celebration - the “joyful noise” we humans make from sound and time, frequency and rhythm.

If you’ve read this far and you feel the need to escape from mere words back into the world of wonder, try this:

EPIC music with full cinematic eye candy.

I didn’t make it that beauty. But I enjoy it…and you might too.

—MRK

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

Why Hypercube Speakers Are Better Part 2

Friday, November 28th, 2014

hypercubeThe benefits of this design are not imaginary. They are backed up with objective test data. Tests confirm this enclosure can have an excellent impulse response and yet it can also serve as a passive radiator to enhance the acoustic ambiance.

Here are some measurements from a researcher posting at diyaudo.com who built some hypercubes and has been testing them:
.
.

(click graphs to enlarge)

The graph above is the on-axis impulse response. As you can see it is sharp and the aftermath is uncomplicated, which is excellent.

The graph above this line shows that the frequency response is nearly omnidirectional below 2Khz. The readings taken at various angles from the woofer’s axis are quite similar for low and midrange frequencies. What this means is that the emanation pattern is broad and not beaming.

And the graph above this line shows that there is significant radiation from the cabinet, not mere diffraction from the woofer. The cabinet radiation profile is similar to the woofer’s across a broad range of frequencies. In other words it puts the woofer’s backwave to use supplementing the woofer to assist the creation of omni ambiance.

hypercube

If you click this picture it will take you to the the post from the person who made them and took the data and generated the graphs above.

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

More Data

Wednesday, November 12th, 2014

 test both (click to enlarge)

A follow up on my last post.  More data just in from the bleeding-edge trenches of audio engineering! These from my fellow researcher G.M. showing the cumulative spectral decay (waterfall) plots of normal and hypercube-enclosed drivers.

.
.
.
.
sealed waterfallHere is the sealed box waterfall. Click to enlarge

You can see that in a sealed box there is a lot of ringing across the lower part of the spectrum muddying the sound and coloring the notes.
.
.
.
.
.

sealed waterfallAnd here is the Hypercube waterfall. Click to enlarge
.
As you can see, the box ringing is almost all gone.
.
Much purer sound.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
sealed waterfall

.

And here is the Sealed Box vs Hypercube distortion.

As you can see, the hypercube (green line) is always less than the ordinary sealed box (purple line) — usually by 3 to 6 dB.

— MRK

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

Independent Validation

Saturday, November 8th, 2014

enclosures.jpg (click to enlarge)

My new fellow researcher G.M. has recently been courageous enough to test for himself my claim that the Rhombic Docecahedron (parallel projected hypercube) is far superior as a speaker box than the standard designs. He is building his own set for listening tests as well as objective comparison measurements.

He built his first hypercube out of clear polycarbonate so that witnesses could see there was no acoustic padding inside it. For simplicity’s sake he energized it with a fullrange driver to avoid the complications of crossover effects on the sound.

Today I received his first impressions. G.M. writes:

“OH MY GOD THESE THINGS ARE INCREDIBLE. I have just one hypercube speaker completed so far. It’s SO much cleaner sounding than the sealed box…It’s not even close. The sealed boxes have twice the panel thickness and a fair amount of foam stuffing, yet resonate like crazy, muddying the sound to the extent that it’s instantly noticeable with bass and drums. To the contrary, it’s almost unbelievable how tight and dry sounding the hypercube speaker is. I feel very little vibration from the panels. Voices seem much less colored as well and I did notice a bit less directionality to the sound. It’s just as you said. I’m floored…..”

I envy him. It’s not every day you get to enlarge your own world-view. You never forget the first time you hear a speaker in a hypercube compared to the same speaker in an ordinary padded box.

Bravo, G.M.! I hope that when you have completed your testing you will permit me to use your real name for all the doubters who will think I made you up. I am certain you will find that objective measurements back up what your ears have already told you. Although any audiophile will drone that audio is a very subjective industry, once you have numbers and graphs you can challenge skeptics to perform the same experiment for themselves. Microphones and printers and FFT analyzers etc do not have subjective opinions.

— MRK

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

The State of Reality

Saturday, May 25th, 2013

meOnce in a while somebody should hold a State of the Reality address.

As far as I know, there are at least two new problems for modern physics now:

1. If the structure of spacetime is not as foamy as thought, as indicated by the two-photon observation, what is responsible for quantum jittering?

2. If neutrinos can actually travel faster than light as some experiments suggest, does this mean a total revision of General Relativity — or an exception for special-interest particles?

If we combine these, however: that space isn’t a bumpy ride even at trans-galactic distances and that some particles can go faster than light, then FTL drive or radio doesn’t look so far away.

—MRK

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon

A Tree Falls

Monday, May 20th, 2013

figure 1If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?

Well, yes Billy, it makes several ’sounds’. The realms of the wood are disturbed on several levels. There is the pressure disturbance wave caused by the falling of the tree, the acoustic spillover, and there is the change in the local electrostatic field, in the gravitational world, and so on. But if there is no one present to hear them, are they sounds?

Answer: whether or not there are sentient witnesses present, pressure-wave disturbances would radiate from the tree fall through the compliant forest.

You might think I am optimistic, that voices on the Internet will not be heard, that dystopia will follow. But I don’t see it. Some of you will hear me. When enough do, all will benefit.

The measurement concept in quantum mechanics, that something is not real unless it can be detected, comes up against the transfinities of the Many Worlds Theory and runs into difficulties. These apparently infinite quantities of alternate universes or altered histories were brushed away in QED (Quantum ElectroDynamics) by ‘renormalization’. If you put them back in, however, and add a few other effects to balance them, I believe that a full Feynman sum over histories formulation without renormalization will be productive for unified field theories.

– MRK

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon