In Reply to: Re: Dielectric first, then vibration... posted by Steve Eddy on August 7, 2003 at 21:32:27:
"In such a situation as this, the cable is in a pressure zone so the cable can be exposed to sound pressure levels as much as 6dB greater than if it were well away from the floor (or wall for that matter) due to the direct/reflected waves adding in phase (which is the principle of pressure zone microphones)."Precisely. This is why the air motion at the solid boundary is zero.
The question is whether speaker cables suffer from acoustic interference from motion or pressure. I suppose a jacketed, loosely-braided design could suffer more from pressure, while a compact design could suffer more from motion. I don't have enough experience to say whether the set of speaker cables contains both types.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Dielectric first, then vibration... - Leisure7 22:02:03 08/08/03 (12)
- Re: Dielectric first, then vibration... - Steve Eddy 22:55:12 08/08/03 (11)
- Re: Dielectric first, then vibration... - Ted Smith 23:38:19 08/08/03 (10)
- Re: Dielectric first, then vibration... - Steve Eddy 01:01:32 08/09/03 (9)
- Re: Dielectric first, then vibration... - Ted Smith 08:06:44 08/09/03 (8)
- Re: Dielectric first, then vibration... - Steve Eddy 09:56:07 08/09/03 (7)
- Reflecting boundary - Leisure7 11:29:31 08/10/03 (0)
- Steve, are you deliberately being obtuse... - Charles Hansen 10:52:41 08/09/03 (5)
- Re: Steve, are you deliberately being obtuse... - Steve Eddy 12:35:42 08/09/03 (4)
- Well, it's hard for me to believe... - Charles Hansen 13:03:28 08/09/03 (3)
- Re: Well, it's hard for me to believe... - Steve Eddy 16:43:18 08/09/03 (2)
- Re: Well, it's hard for me to believe... - Rod M 19:00:09 08/10/03 (0)
- I give up -- it's clear all you want to do is argue... - Charles Hansen 19:48:54 08/09/03 (0)