Recent content by Jason K

  1. J

    Incompetent Internet Reviewers - Responses

    And this is 96dB data. Also 2nd HD is not problem while Sample A has problem at 85dB at the same level of distortion 2nd, 3rd both. I think that sample's distortion is not from the magnet - frame resonance distortion.
  2. J

    Incompetent Internet Reviewers - Responses

    I said it WAS exist. Look that Sample A data. Almost 1% at 400% at 85dB. It isn't designed feature, is it? Measuring now is meaningless because he lowered the distortion. Can you guess why that sample only have higher distortion? You said it would be modified sample, But I know it is not...
  3. J

    Incompetent Internet Reviewers - Responses

    Yeah I can’t demonstrate that, but significant higher distortion at sample A was still exist..
  4. J

    Incompetent Internet Reviewers - Responses

    Other measurment datas uploaded from him are after modification. Before modi, I don’t have it.
  5. J

    Incompetent Internet Reviewers - Responses

    I can only find 1M measurement of Sample A before modification. Sorry. But 1m measurment and PR NF measurement of Sample A are similar enough. If the distortion occured from the back, it can ba leaked by tweeter unsealed gap, and PR diaphragm.
  6. J

    Incompetent Internet Reviewers - Responses

    But 97 to 85dB is more important. It is not 3~4dB diffrence. Sample A 85dB distortion level similar Selah’s 97dB. Is it randomable distortion that we just should accept?
  7. J

    Incompetent Internet Reviewers - Responses

    First picture is it. To compare I uploaded PR response too.
  8. J

    Incompetent Internet Reviewers - Responses

    This is it.
  9. J

    Incompetent Internet Reviewers - Responses

    I saw them. Impedance peaks are reduced and bass response is shelved. Not good sign as passive speaker.. but reduced the distortion. If the magnet - frame resonance is the main reason, how about adding damping sheet on the frame or adding pressure on the back(magnet). To be pressed by hard stuff...
  10. J

    Incompetent Internet Reviewers - Responses

    I said that it looks like 1M measurement.
  11. J

    Incompetent Internet Reviewers - Responses

    When I saw them, I thought the distortion is occured to back of the woofer. Not in front of it. If this assuming is right, speaker driver test can be explained(clean) and additional absorber in the Sointuva reducing distortion can be explained too.
  12. J

    Incompetent Internet Reviewers - Responses

    That was nearfield measurement of woofer. In front of the woofer 1cm. They looks clean enough. But when the reviewer measured in front of PR, the problem was showed like 1M measurement.
  13. J

    Incompetent Internet Reviewers - Responses

    Here is another Purifi speaker sample. Selah Audio Purezza. https://www.erinsaudiocorner.com/loudspeakers/selah_audio_purezza/ I can see the problematic distortion around 400Hz at 97dB. It reachs to -45dB like Sample A. But at 85dB, it is -55dB. Almost 0.1%. Another better one, Sample B was...
  14. J

    Incompetent Internet Reviewers - Responses

    I understand it is typo, 0.05% is about -65dB. They looks like -50~45dB around 400Hz.
  15. J

    Incompetent Internet Reviewers - Responses

    Thank you for detail answer. I have to let to you know what I know. I’ve been saw the process of measurements. The two sample data was measured before modification. This is the first measured data of sample A. And what I upload is measured to compare both of samples. If you take my word to...
Back
Top