奇文共欣赏-ZAPH-短冲程的低音喇叭声音较好

hya1951

奇文共欣赏-ZAPH的文章:短冲程的低音喇叭声音较好
这个观点颠覆了我们的常识-低音喇叭冲程越大越好,但读过以后,觉得不无道理,所有的设计都是在各种参数之间的一种妥协,长冲程得到了大的低频输出,那必然也会失去什么,本人英语太菜,翻译可能词不达意,大家还是看原文吧
I prefer woofers with lower Xmax - Stop the presses!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Woofers with lower Xmax sound better


Warning: This article appears, at first glance, to contain broad sweeping generalizations. I wouldn't generalize if I didn't have enough experience to see the trends. A generalization is simply something that's more true than not. In this discussion, I'm not referring to minor millimeter differences in midwoofers, but large Xmax differences in larger woofers.

I never gave it much thought as to why, in my experience, lower Xmax woofers sound better. What I did notice though is that this statement stirs up a few folks who would like to think that their super-ultra-Xmax woofers are the best sounding woofers available. This is the 2"+ peak to peak crowd who determines a subwoofer value by a dollar to displacement ratio. Bragging rights are important to some people, and when you get the right to brag about having the highest output, you definitely cannot brag about having the highest quality sound.

Lower Xmax woofers, as a generalization, sound better. It's the result of a simple design philosophy. While increasing a woofer design's Xmax, at some point the woofer stops being a reproducer of music, and starts being a power tool of noise making. These "power tools" are more suitable for home theater where the typical sound being reproduced is noise anyway. But for music, forget it.

I can summarize what I speculate are most of the issues:


Long voice coils have associated response problems. Look at any monster woofer's response in the lower midrange and you will surely see a massive peak and dip. Many short voice coil woofers don't have this problem. With some woofers, the initial peak is still audible even with a low 4th order rolloff. In fact, peaks are still audible even if completely filtered out - They re-appear lower in frequency as 3rd order harmonic distortion. This is why some subs are easily localized even when crossed over at 80 hz.

Large excursion woofers are typically designed to work with high power in smallish enclosures, making the stroke very non-linear at the extremes of operation due to extreme pressures. That results in distortion. This is a good read on the subject.

Long voice coils generally have very high Le. Some begin rolling off at 80hz already.

Long voice coils generally have higher Le distortion - inductance changes greatly based on the coil's location in the gap.

Large excursion woofers often have more mechanical operating noise - slapping voice coil leads, and air noise from high pressure escaping from the pole piece vent.

Large excursion woofers are required to have huge surrounds to support their excursion. Often these are poorly designed and suck-back or deform under heavy load, causing distortion. Or on the other side of this argument, to avoid deformation, the surrounds are made so thick and stiff that the Fs of the driver goes way up.

Related to the issue above, large excursion woofers often have poor bass extension and require active EQ to get a reasonable bass response.

Larger surrounds mean less effective radiating area, and higher even order distortion lower in frequency. Look at the low end distortion of an XT25 tweeter for an example of the distortion created when a higher percentage of radiating area comes from the surround.

This is not related to sound quality, but is still very important: The large magnets required to move these large masses of voice coil and cone are occasionally so large that they can't be placed within 10 feet of a TV. Specifically, keep those damn magnets away from my expensive ISF'd RPTV.
A good woofer design can minimize many of the problems listed above, but there's a point of diminishing returns. And here's the core statement of this article: The more output a woofer has, the more tradeoffs have to be made in it's design. You can disagree with portions of this explaination, but you can't disagree with the core statement. There are a few workarounds that help the situation, such as underhung motors like the ones used in Aurasound's subs, or the dual gap/short coil design used in Adire's XBL^2 subs. These help greatly, but many core design tradeoffs remain.

I don't want to take this argument too far either - too little Xmax is just as bad as too much.

Difficult data comparisons

I'm not the type to make a point without data to support it, but this particular point is somewhat difficult to prove simply because every woofer is different. It's impossible to have one standard woofer, and then another one just like it but with double the Xmax. I can however compare woofers to subwoofers all day, and when I do that it's pretty clear which is performing better. I've got many examples, and here's one.

Dayton RSS315HF Subwoofer
Dayton RS270 Woofer
One might immediately say "you can't compare those, they are completely different woofers." Well, I just did compare them. Same SPL at 100 hz. The little 10" low Xmax RS270 was moving quite a bit more to reach that level, probably about 2/3 of it's Xmax. It still managed to outperform the subwoofer through most of the low end, even when factoring in the RS270's slightly earlier rolloff. Make no mistake, I love the Dayton 12" RS sub - but I only use it when I really need that much output.
I think most people would be surprised how, on average, a good large "woofer" compares to a similar sized high Xmax subwoofer. I've seen it, I've heard it and I have lots of hard, objective data to show it.

My advice to all in factoring Xmax of a woofer into a purchase decision is to first consider the woofers with the lowest distortion and then factor in your preferred music listening level and the amount of Xmax the driver has. If you can't reach that level with one woofer of reasonable Xmax, consider using two or more. If you have space limitations and listen only to home theater at outrageous levels, then by all means sort your possibilities by displacement per dollar and get the most Xmax you can.

One final note in this article: Those who read this and run off to a forum to announce "I heard that woofers with lower Xmax sound better" are clearly not getting the gist of this article. Additionally, those who immediately say "Zaph is out of his mind" are just not getting it either. It's not about broad, sweeping generalizations that are only sometimes right. It's about acknowledging the tradeoffs that go into higher Xmax driver design. There are a lot of tradeoffs. Of course more expensive drivers may have costly design features intended to minimize the tradeoffs. But also realize that there are some tradeoffs that are not easily resolved by throwing money at a driver design. At some point, more Xmax in a woofer just doesn't make sense. It's up to you to decide where that point is.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page done by John "Zaph" Krutke © 2005
Also visit -Zaph|Audio-

花花

  我是不是连接到了国外

hya1951

  我是不是连接到了国外
花花 发表于 2009-9-18 14:33

对不起,请L版或1999版等英语好的翻译一下吧,此文很有意思,如果我翻译,就要贻笑大方了

jzzch

  我是不是连接到了国外
花花 发表于 2009-9-18 14:33

你是到了国外！呵呵

lakerblue

对不起,请L版或1999版等英语好的翻译一下吧,此文很有意思,如果我翻译,就要贻笑大方了
hya1951 发表于 2009-9-18 15:31

还是你来吧，凡事尝试一下嘛

windowsdq

我喜欢较低的线性冲程低音

-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------

低线性冲程低音声好


警告：本文看来，乍看之下，包含广泛的一概而论。我不能一概而论，如果我没有足够的经验，看到的趋势。一概而论是某种仅仅这比不正确的。在这次讨论中，我不是指midwoofers毫米小的差异，但大型线性冲程低音差异较大。

我从来没有给它多以为什么觉得，在我的经验，较低的线性冲程低音声。我没有注意到的是，虽然这句话激起了有一些人谁愿意认为他们的超级超线性冲程低音扬声器是最好的探空低音可用。这是2“+峰值人群谁决定由流离失所比1美元的低音炮的价值。吹牛的权利是很重要的一些人，当你的权利，吹嘘具有最高输出，你绝对不能吹嘘有最高品质的声音。

下线性冲程低音扬声器作为一个概括，音质更好。这是一个简单的设计理念的结果。同时增加在某个时候低音设计的线性冲程的低音扬声器被停止的音乐重制，并启动身为噪声权的工具。这些“电动工具”的家庭影院更适合于典型的声音是噪声重现无论如何。但对于音乐，算了吧。

我可以总结一下我推测是大多数问题：


长音圈有关联的响应问题。看看任何怪兽低音在较低端的响应，你一定会看到一个大规模的高峰期和下降。许多短期音圈低音没有这个问题。对于某些低音，最初的高峰期仍然听见即使低四阶滚降。其实，高峰仍然听到，即使完全过滤掉了-他们重新出现在频率较低的三阶谐波失真。这就是为什么有些潜艇很容易越过本地化即使在80赫兹以上。

大型游览低音的典型设计工作，在小巧的机箱高功率，使中风非常不运作时，由于极端的压力极端线性。在失真的结果。这是关于这一问题的良好的阅读。

长音圈普遍具有很高的乐。一些在80hz开始滚动已经关闭。

长音圈普遍有较高的乐失真-电感的基础上大大改变线圈的位置的差距。

大型游览低音往往有更多的机械运转噪声-打耳光音圈线索，从高，空气从极片逃逸发泄压力的噪音。

大型游览低音都要求有巨大的包围，以支持他们的游览。通常这些设计不当，吸回或在负荷较重的变形，造成失真。或根据这个论点的另一边，避免变形，周围是了这么厚，僵直的驱动程序财政司司长一路去。

有关上述问题，大型游览低音往往较差低音扩展，并要求积极均衡得到合理的低音响应。

围绕意味着更大的有效散热面积少，甚至以更高的频率较低的失真。在一个XT25高音低端失真寻找一个创建的失真例如，当散热面积的比例来自环绕。

这是不相关的声音质量，但仍然很重要：大型磁铁须搬迁的音圈和锥这些大型群众有时非常大，他们不能在10英尺的电视机上。具体而言，让那些该死的磁铁远离我昂贵ISF'd背投电视。
一个好的低音扬声器的设计可以减少上面列出的许多问题，但有一个收益递减点。下面是本文的核心声明：以上输出低音，越要权衡在它的设计制造。你可以不同意这种释部分，但不能同意的核心声明。有一些变通办法，帮助诸如underhung像Aurasound的潜艇，还是双重差距中所使用的电动机的情况下，/短线圈设计Adire的XBL中使用^ 2潜艇。这些帮助很大，但许多核心设计权衡仍然存在。

我不想利用这个论点不是太远-太少线性冲程是一样太多坏。

数据比较困难

我不是不把这类数据点支持，但是这点有一定的困难证明只是因为每个低音是不同的。它不可能有一个标准的低音，然后再像之一，但它的线性冲程双。不过，我可以比较低音的低音炮一整天，当我做到这一点，很明显，这也表现更好。我有很多例子，这里的一个。

戴顿RSS315HF低音炮
戴顿RS270低音
人们可能会立即说：“你无法比拟的，它们是完全不同的低音。”嗯，我只是做比较。同样的声压级在100赫兹。小10“低线性冲程RS270在动相当多的达到这个水平，大概有2 / 3的它的线性冲程。它仍然设法胜过通过最低端的低音炮，即使保理在RS270的稍早滚降。请不要误会，我爱顿12日的“RS分-但我只用它当我真的需要这么高的产量。
我想大多数人会惊奇地发现，平均来说，一个好大的“低音”比较类似大小的高线性冲程低音炮。我已经看到了，我已经听到了，我的努力，客观数据来证明这一点很多。

我的建议在保成一个低音喇叭线性冲程购买决定对所有是首先考虑与最低失真的低音，然后因素聆听您喜爱的音乐水平和数额的线性冲程驱动程序。如果你不能达到的一个合理的水平线性冲程低音单元，可以考虑使用两个或更多。如果你有空间的限制，并听取在愤怒程度只是家庭影院，然后用一切手段排序兑美元的可能性和流离失所获得最大线性冲程可以。

最后需要注意本文中的：那些谁看了这样的跑一个论坛，宣布：“我听说，低线性冲程声音更好”低音扬声器显然没有得到本文的要点。此外，那些谁立即说“Zaph是出于他的头脑”只是没有得到，要么。这不是广泛的，一概而论，有时是唯一正确的。这是关于承认权衡是进入更高的线性冲程驱动器设计。有很多的权衡。当然，更昂贵的司机可能有昂贵的设计特点目的是要减轻权衡。但也认识到有一些不容易被扔在一个驱动器设计的钱解决权衡。在某个时刻，在一个多线性冲程低音只是没有意义。它是由你来决定这一点的。



-------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------

约翰“Zaph”Krutke © 2005做网页
还访问Zaph |音像

YYBL

不懂

hya1951

6# windowsdq
n你这个是自动翻译的吧,完全看不懂啊,等L版有空吧

hya1951

Woofers with lower Xmax sound better
冲程较短的低音喇叭声音较好
Warning: This article appears, at first glance, to contain broad sweeping generalizations. I wouldn't generalize if I didn't have enough experience to see the trends. A generalization is simply something that's more true than not. In this discussion, I'm not referring to minor millimeter differences in midwoofers, but large Xmax differences in larger woofers.
注意:这篇文章乍看之下,好象包含广泛的,一概而论的结论,如果我没有足够的体验去察觉这种倾向,是不能一概而论的,在以下讨论中我们不是去比较中低音喇叭的亚毫米级别的冲程差异,而是比较大直径低音喇叭的大幅度的冲程差异.
I never gave it much thought as to why, in my experience, lower Xmax woofers sound better. What I did notice though is that this statement stirs up a few folks who would like to think that their super-ultra-Xmax woofers are the best sounding woofers available. This is the 2"+ peak to peak crowd who determines a subwoofer value by a dollar to displacement ratio. Bragging rights are important to some people, and when you get the right to brag about having the highest output, you definitely cannot brag about having the highest quality sound.
我从来没有对此思索很多,根据我的经验,冲程较短的低音喇叭声音较好.我之所以关注这个命题是因为有些人声称他们那些超级大冲程的低音喇叭是现有的声音最好的低音喇叭,这是些2英寸以上冲程的喇叭,有人定义超低音喇叭的性价比为单位美圆与空气徘量的比率(排量也就是辐射面积X冲程,译者添加).吹牛是某些人的重大权利,但是当你吹嘘你的喇叭有最高的低音输出能力时,肯定地,你不能同时吹嘘声音的质量也是最好.

hya1951

Lower Xmax woofers, as a generalization, sound better. It's the result of a simple design philosophy. While increasing a woofer design's Xmax, at some point the woofer stops being a reproducer of music, and starts being a power tool of noise making. These "power tools" are more suitable for home theater where the typical sound being reproduced is noise anyway. But for music, forget it.
通常,小冲程的低音喇叭声音较好,这是简单的设计原则的结果.当增加低音喇叭的冲程时,它作为重现音乐一些特点被限制了,而开始变成制造噪音的强大工具,这对于家庭影院倒市是蛮适合的-那些声音中到处都是噪声,但是如果要听音乐-忘了它吧.
I can summarize what I speculate are most of the issues:
我总结与思索的主要论点如下:

恶熊1号

谢谢,1951.
继续等待中文********

神经汉

主要是指大口径的。

小口径的长冲程是一种妥协，不然根本没有像样的低频。

hya1951

Long voice coils have associated response problems. Look at any monster woofer's response in the lower midrange and you will surely see a massive peak and dip. Many short voice coil woofers don't have this problem. With some woofers, the initial peak is still audible even with a low 4th order rolloff. In fact, peaks are still audible even if completely filtered out - They re-appear lower in frequency as 3rd order harmonic distortion. This is why some subs are easily localized even when crossed over at 80 hz.
长音圈的低音喇叭有频率响应方面的问题.看那些怪物低音喇叭的中低音频响曲线,你必然会发现巨大的峰谷,很多短音圈的低音喇叭就没有这个问题.对于某些低音喇叭,这些低频峰即使用4阶低通滤波仍然可以听见.实际上这些低频峰即使经过完善的低通滤波仍然可以听闻,是通过3次谐波失真的形式出现的,着就是为什么即使分频点在80Hz,很多超低音还是很容易被声音定位.

Large excursion woofers are typically designed to work with high power in smallish enclosures, making the stroke very non-linear at the extremes of operation due to extreme pressures. That results in distortion. This is a good read on the subject.
巨大冲程的低音喇叭通常设计用于在小箱子里承受大功率的,由于压力巨大,这种极端的操作当然会造成很大的非线性.这一点值得一读.
Long voice coils generally have very high Le. Some begin rolling off at 80hz already.
长音圈通常有很高的电感量,有的从80Hz开始滚降.
Long voice coils generally have higher Le distortion - inductance changes greatly based on the coil's location in the gap.
长音圈通常有高的电感量畸变-电感两随着音圈在极板中位置的改变而变化极大.

hya1951

Large excursion woofers often have more mechanical operating noise - slapping voice coil leads, and air noise from high pressure escaping from the pole piece vent
巨大冲程的低音喇叭通常有大的机械噪声-噪声来之于高速运动的音圈,高压的空气从管道边缘被释放.
Large excursion woofers are required to have huge surrounds to support their excursion. Often these are poorly designed and suck-back or deform under heavy load, causing distortion. Or on the other side of this argument, to avoid deformation, the surrounds are made so thick and stiff that the Fs of the driver goes way up.
超长冲程喇叭的悬边必须很宽才能实现超长冲程的目的,通常都设计得不好,在重负载下变形,造成失真,从另一方面来说,为了避免变形失真,悬边很厚很硬,造成喇叭F0上升.
Related to the issue above, large excursion woofers often have poor bass extension and require active EQ to get a reasonable bass response.
巨大冲程的低音喇叭通常有很差的低频延伸,需要有源EQ均衡电路来获得合理的低频响应.
Larger surrounds mean less effective radiating area, and higher even order distortion lower in frequency. Look at the low end distortion of an XT25 tweeter for an example of the distortion created when a higher percentage of radiating area comes from the surround.
宽大的悬边意味着较小的有效辐射面积,以及在频率低端较高的偶次谐波失真.当悬边的面积相对于辐射面积有较高百分比时,就会造成这种失真,高音喇叭XT25就是一例.

hya1951

This is not related to sound quality, but is still very important: The large magnets required to move these large masses of voice coil and cone are occasionally so large that they can't be placed within 10 feet of a TV. Specifically, keep those damn magnets away from my expensive ISF'd RPTV.
这一点无关音质,但还是很重要,为了驱动大质量的音圈与音盆,巨型磁铁是必不可少的,以至于必须离开电视机10英尺以上,尤其要使这些磁铁远离我昂贵的ISF'd RPTV
A good woofer design can minimize many of the problems listed above, but there's a point of diminishing returns. And here's the core statement of this article: The more output a woofer has, the more tradeoffs have to be made in it's design. You can disagree with portions of this explaination, but you can't disagree with the core statement. There are a few workarounds that help the situation, such as underhung motors like the ones used in Aurasound's subs, or the dual gap/short coil design used in Adire's XBL^2 subs. These help greatly, but many core design tradeoffs remain.
一个良好设计的低音喇叭可以尽量降低上述所列问题,但这儿有收益递减这一点,这篇文章的核心命题为:一个低音喇叭的低频输出越高,在设计中的权衡和折衷也越多,你可以不同意我部分的解释,但是不可能否认这个核心命题.有一些设计是很有帮助的,如Aurasound's超低音喇叭中突出下颚的驱动器,以及可怕的XBL^2 超低音喇叭中运用的双磁隙,双短音圈设计,这些都有巨大帮助,但是仍然保留很多(核心,磁心?)设计折衷方案

hya1951

L版赶鸭子上架,太吃力了,明天继续

1999

被点名了，我就在楼主的基础上继续翻，以及对文中的一些观点谈自己的看法

1999

以下为在楼主的基础上修改的部分（括号内为我的增注）

I prefer woofers with lower Xmax - Stop the presses!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Woofers with lower Xmax sound better
拥有更低的XMAX的低音单元有更好的声音？

Warning: This article appears, at first glance, to contain broad sweeping generalizations. I wouldn't generalize if I didn't have enough experience to see the trends. A generalization is simply something that's more true than not. In this discussion, I'm not referring to minor millimeter differences in midwoofers, but large Xmax differences in larger woofers.
注意：本文主要讨论大口径低音单体而非中低音的Xmax之差异。
I never gave it much thought as to why, in my experience, lower Xmax woofers sound better. What I did notice though is that this statement stirs up a few folks who would like to think that their super-ultra-Xmax woofers are the best sounding woofers available. This is the 2"+ peak to peak crowd who determines a subwoofer value by a dollar to displacement ratio. Bragging rights are important to some people, and when you get the right to brag about having the highest output, you definitely cannot brag about having the highest quality sound.
我从来没有对此思索很多,根据我的经验,冲程较短的低音喇叭声音较好.我之所以关注这个命题是因为有些人声称他们那些超级大冲程的低音喇叭是现有的声音最好的低音喇叭,这是些2英寸以上冲程（指P-P）的喇叭,有人定义超低音喇叭的性价比为单位美圆与空气徘量的比率(排量也就是有效辐射面积SD X 冲程Xmax,译者添加).吹牛是某些人的重大权利,但是当你吹嘘你的喇叭有最高的低音输出能力时,肯定地,你不能同时吹嘘声音的质量也是最好.（以上为hya1951兄的翻译，有修改）
Lower Xmax woofers, as a generalization, sound better. It's the result of a simple design philosophy. While increasing a woofer design's Xmax, at some point the woofer stops being a reproducer of music, and starts being a power tool of noise making. These "power tools" are more suitable for home theater where the typical sound being reproduced is noise anyway. But for music, forget it.
通常,小冲程的低音喇叭声音较好,这是简单的设计原则的结果.当增加低音喇叭的冲程时,它开始变成制造噪音的强大工具,这对于家庭影院倒市是蛮适合的-那些声音中到处都是噪声,但是如果要听音乐-忘了它吧.
I can summarize what I speculate are most of the issues:
我总结与思索的主要论点如下: （以上为hya1951兄的翻译，有修改）
Long voice coils have associated response problems. Look at any monster woofer's response in the lower midrange and you will surely see a massive peak and dip. Many short voice coil woofers don't have this problem. With some woofers, the initial peak is still audible even with a low 4th order rolloff. In fact, peaks are still audible even if completely filtered out - They re-appear lower in frequency as 3rd order harmonic distortion. This is why some subs are easily localized even when crossed over at 80 hz.
长音圈的低音喇叭有频率响应方面的问题.看那些怪物低音喇叭的中低频段的响应曲线,你必然会发现巨大的峰谷,很多短音圈的低音喇叭就没有这个问题.对于某些低音喇叭,这些低频峰即使用4阶低通滤波仍然可以听见.（注：可以采用陷波或者其他类型等化器来一定程度上改善）实际上这些低频峰即使经过完善的低通滤波仍然可以听闻,是通过3次谐波失真的形式出现的,这就是为什么即使分频点在80Hz,很多超低音还是很容易被定位（超低音本来应该是无指向性的）. （以上为hya1951兄的翻译，有修改）
Large excursion woofers are typically designed to work with high power in smallish enclosures, making the stroke very non-linear at the extremes of operation due to extreme pressures. That results in distortion. This is a good read on the subject.
巨大冲程的低音喇叭通常设计用于在小箱子里承受大功率的,由于压力巨大,这种极端的操作当然会造成很大的非线性.这一点值得一读.（注：这段话值得商榷。我个人的理解，箱子容积越小，同等功率下需要的XMAX就越小。所以为小箱子大功率的设计，比起大箱子来对于XMAX的要求反而相对低了点。至于说压力引起的非线形？不明白作者具体所指，按字面的理解是运动的非线形，而这个恰恰是需要更大的XMAX才能保持的，这很好理解）（以上为hya1951兄的翻译，有修改）
Long voice coils generally have very high Le. Some begin rolling off at 80hz already.
长音圈通常有很高的电感量,有的从80Hz开始滚降.*（以上为hya1951兄的翻译，有修改）（这个比较少见啊，从80Hz开始那得需要多大的电感量啊，可能作者指的是怪兽级的了。再者，对于磁路的处理可以大幅度降低感抗的，这个需要指出）
Long voice coils generally have higher Le distortion - inductance changes greatly based on the coil's location in the gap.
长音圈通常有高的电感量畸变-电感量随着音圈在磁隙中位置的改变而变化极大. （以上为hya1951兄的翻译，有修改）（这个需要，而且可以，通过KLIPPLE测试系统得到。而且这个也应该是扬声器设计的时候就要考虑和优化的问题，我觉得归结为长音圈带来的有点冤枉了。而且，长冲程可以采用短VC+径向磁路以及各类变形磁路的设计啊，比如AURA的，JBL的专利等）
Large excursion woofers often have more mechanical operating noise - slapping voice coil leads, and air noise from high pressure escaping from the pole piece vent.
巨大冲程的低音喇叭通常有大的机械噪声-噪声来之于高速运动的音圈,高压的空气从管道边缘被释放. （以上为hya1951兄的翻译，有修改）（这个问题是由功率带来的，并且可以通过在各个位置上预留气压平衡孔以及对通孔的处理得到一定的改善。再者，降低到一定程度后，由于这些噪音来自箱子内部，在不对外辐射的前提下，或者说辐射出来的影响较小的前提下，就不用考虑了，已经被直接辐射的声压给覆盖了）
Large excursion woofers are required to have huge surrounds to support their excursion. Often these are poorly designed and suck-back or deform under heavy load, causing distortion. Or on the other side of this argument, to avoid deformation, the surrounds are made so thick and stiff that the Fs of the driver goes way up.
超长冲程喇叭的悬边必须很宽才能实现超长冲程的目的,通常都设计得不好,在高负载（指大功率）下变形,造成失真,从另一方面来说,为了避免变形失真,悬边很厚很硬,造成喇叭Fs上升. （以上为hya1951兄的翻译，有修改）（同上，这个也是设计的问题，不能加到大冲程的头上。只能说，大冲程的悬挂系统的线性要求比小冲程的要高。另外，上面作者说反了，悬边设计很硬，是为了降低Cms，让大功率下振幅不要那么大，Fs的上升是带来的负面作用，一般需要用重量来均衡此负面作用。换句话讲，Cms和Mmd/Mms共同控制了Fs。这个也是扬声器低频设计的两难，必须作出取舍和妥协。再者，扬声器许多参数都是相互关联和影响的，设计的时候就必须从系统的角度出来来考虑问题）
Related to the issue above, large excursion woofers often have poor bass extension and require active EQ to get a reasonable bass response.
从上面几点可以得出这个观点，那就是巨大冲程的低音喇叭通常有很差的低频延伸,需要有源EQ均衡电路来获得合理的低频响应. （以上为hya1951兄的翻译，有修改）（不敢苟同作者的看法。首先，如何得出大冲程就一定带来差的低频延伸？我看这话说反了，还是在怪兽的世界中本来就是反的？其次，用EQ来改善低频是可行的而且在HIEND系统中我觉得是必须的，但是不是简单的对某些频点的补偿，具体的分析有兴趣的朋友可以参考下一些专业音响的文献）
Larger surrounds mean less effective radiating area, and higher even order distortion lower in frequency. Look at the low end distortion of an XT25 tweeter for an example of the distortion created when a higher percentage of radiating area comes from the surround.
宽大的悬边意味着较小的有效辐射面积,以及在频率低端较高的偶次谐波失真.当悬边的面积相对于辐射面积有较高百分比时,就会造成这种失真,高音喇叭XT25就是一例. （以上为hya1951兄的翻译）（我觉得不能这么比。大冲程的扬声器，需要的是大的冲程，而不是大的悬边，更不是意味着宽的悬边。其次，关于有效辐射面积的计算，很多时候，是包含了部分悬边面积的，至于算进去多少，有兴趣的朋友可以去找下有关计算有效辐射面积的文献。作者表达的不清楚，实际上带来的问题是边的失真，以及边本身的辐射的声音，以及边反射回来和对CONE的干涉等等，所造成的失真。至于XT25高音，有兴趣的可以去找下该公司关于该高音的设计说明以及专利就明白了）
This is not related to sound quality, but is still very important: The large magnets required to move these large masses of voice coil and cone are occasionally so large that they can't be placed within 10 feet of a TV. Specifically, keep those damn magnets away from my expensive ISF'd RPTV.
这一点无关音质,但还是很重要,为了驱动大质量的音圈与音盆,巨型磁铁是必不可少的,以至于必须离开电视机10英尺以上,尤其要使这些磁铁远离我昂贵的ISF'd RPTV（以上为hya1951兄的翻译）（目前进入平板电视年代基本没CRT/CDT什么事了，所以这个也就不是问题了）
A good woofer design can minimize many of the problems listed above, but there's a point of diminishing returns. And here's the core statement of this article: The more output a woofer has, the more tradeoffs have to be made in it's design. You can disagree with portions of this explaination, but you can't disagree with the core statement. There are a few workarounds that help the situation, such as underhung motors like the ones used in Aurasound's subs, or the dual gap/short coil design used in Adire's XBL^2 subs. These help greatly, but many core design tradeoffs remain.
一个良好设计的低音喇叭可以尽量降低上述所列问题,但这儿有收益递减这一点,这篇文章的核心命题为:一个低音喇叭的低频输出越高,在设计中的权衡和折衷也越多,你可以不同意我部分的解释,但是不可能否认这个核心命题.有一些设计是很有帮助的,如Aurasound's超低音喇叭中突出下颚的驱动器,以及可怕的XBL^2 超低音喇叭中运用的双磁隙,双短音圈设计,这些都有巨大帮助,但是仍然保留很多(核心,磁心?)设计折衷方案
（以上为hya1951兄的翻译）（基本同意作者）
I don't want to take this argument too far either - too little Xmax is just as bad as too much.
不想扯得太远了，因为过小的冲程的单元也是很差的
所以，下面，作者开始谈数据了

1999

Difficult data comparisons
艰难的数据比对
I'm not the type to make a point without data to support it, but this particular point is somewhat difficult to prove simply because every woofer is different. It's impossible to have one standard woofer, and then another one just like it but with double the Xmax. I can however compare woofers to subwoofers all day, and when I do that it's pretty clear which is performing better. I've got many examples, and here's one.
我是个用数据说话的人，但是在这里很难用数据来证明我的观点，因为所有的低音单元都是不同的，我找不到2只除了XMAX外其他一切相同的单元。不过以下我尽量用一些我作过的成功设计来举例。
Dayton RSS315HF Subwoofer
Dayton RS270 Woofer
One might immediately say "you can't compare those, they are completely different woofers." Well, I just did compare them. Same SPL at 100 hz. The little 10" low Xmax RS270 was moving quite a bit more to reach that level, probably about 2/3 of it's Xmax. It still managed to outperform the subwoofer through most of the low end, even when factoring in the RS270's slightly earlier rolloff. Make no mistake, I love the Dayton 12" RS sub - but I only use it when I really need that much output.
某人可能立刻会说了，你怎么能拿12寸和10寸的来比呢？不过我还是做了些比较。在100Hz输出同样的声压级，小冲程的10寸RS270达到了约2/3的冲程，但是从效果上来讲要超越有着更大XMAX的12寸，即使10寸的炮其低频滚降更早*（即F3比较高）。正确地说，我喜欢12寸的，但是我只会在需要很大的输出的时候才会使用它。
I think most people would be surprised how, on average, a good large "woofer" compares to a similar sized high Xmax subwoofer. I've seen it, I've heard it and I have lots of hard, objective data to show it.
这段实在不知道怎么翻~V~

My advice to all in factoring Xmax of a woofer into a purchase decision is to first consider the woofers with the lowest distortion and then factor in your preferred music listening level and the amount of Xmax the driver has. If you can't reach that level with one woofer of reasonable Xmax, consider using two or more. If you have space limitations and listen only to home theater at outrageous levels, then by all means sort your possibilities by displacement per dollar and get the most Xmax you can.
我的建议是，在购买SUBWOOFER的时候不要只盯着XMAX这个参数，而是应当选择在您常用的功率范围内能满足的“最小的“XMAX单元即可。又或者当单只单元无法满足您，您可以考虑使用两只或者更多来达成您的要求。而那些有超大面积别墅的以及喜欢以怪兽方式超大音量来玩家庭影院的可以无视本文了。
One final note in this article: Those who read this and run off to a forum to announce "I heard that woofers with lower Xmax sound better" are clearly not getting the gist of this article. Additionally, those who immediately say "Zaph is out of his mind" are just not getting it either. It's not about broad, sweeping generalizations that are only sometimes right. It's about acknowledging the tradeoffs that go into higher Xmax driver design. There are a lot of tradeoffs. Of course more expensive drivers may have costly design features intended to minimize the tradeoffs. But also realize that there are some tradeoffs that are not easily resolved by throwing money at a driver design. At some point, more Xmax in a woofer just doesn't make sense. It's up to you to decide where that point is.
最后必须要指出的是，如果看完本文后得出”低Xmax单元音质更好“的结论的朋友，你们误解了，或者看完后得出”Zaph疯了“的观点也属此类。Xmax大还是小并无标准的说法，本文要抨击的是那些明明不需要130dB超低频输出的但是却在购买时盯着超大Xmax的网友，你们中了JS的诡计了。合适就是最好的，根据自己的要求要选择合适的产品才是聪明的消费者。

翻后语：本文有现实指导意义，无论对于消费者还是经销商还是产品开发者，撇去一些需要商榷的地方，本文不失为一篇选购前必读的文章。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page done by John "Zaph" Krutke © 2005
Also visit -Zaph|Audio-
翻译By hya1951 & 1999, 2009-9-20

hya1951

1999版你英语很棒,但是2英寸是50.8mm啊,这确实是超大冲程了,我至今还没有看到过