Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

guy sergeant wrote:

You do make me laugh sometimes! You really do seem to have problems in seeing the merits in anything if it doesn't fully satisfy the very particular performance criteria you set. As a species such inflexibility wouldn't allow you to evolve very much and you'd soon become extinct.

Yes, you probably are correct but I do not fight for existence or propagation of my breed but rather I’m enjoying my existence.

guy sergeant wrote:

Shaping the magnetic circuit of a driver is possibly a good idea. I hope that someone else may see that idea and implement it more effectively resulting in a driver that is closer to my ideal. That, I would regard as progress. For making that aspect of design an issue in the first place I would commend Feastrex (although in this case it isn't an entirely new idea) It doesn't matter that their implementation doesn't work particularly well or that they stuck one of the dreaded yellow cones on the front. The fact is that they may prompt others to develop the idea further.  The same applies to all of the people working with field coils or some of the things you yourself have done with your playback. Others may be provoked into further advancing the science.

Well, this is one of the reasons why I have writhen this article:

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/TreeItem.aspx?PostID=930

No one questions that shaping the magnetic circuits “might” be a prospective direction but would it be possible to learn about it from an industry participants? Absolutely not! The reasons why not is because the definition of success for the industry players is not the achieved Sound but the amount of sales and the amplitude of marketing squeal was created around tha product that employs the given magnetic circuits.

Rgs,
The caT

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site