Loudspeaker impedance measurement comparision

© All Rights Reserved

0 views

Loudspeaker impedance measurement comparision

© All Rights Reserved

- Broken Delta Applications
- SIEMENS Surge Arrester Guide
- BG Electronics 2015
- AC servo ASD-B2
- Adjustable Constant Current Source 4mA to 3A
- VDV Infinity II Amplifiers
- catalogo pioneer 08_CE_ODR_EN.pdf
- ELECTRONICS
- Philips SFR16 25
- IES OBJ Electrical Engineering 1999 Paper II
- Designing Photo Diode Amplifier Circuits With Opa128
- A Guide to Practical Electronics 2
- project report
- Resistance Exercise
- Chaos Exxtreme - CX350
- Tda 7375
- CMicrotek 50 Nano Ampere Current Probe - UCP1x0_Probe_flier
- Circuits Solutions Sp14 Sp14Week3Homework
- Variable Power Supply Using Fixed Voltage Regulator Ic
- Ohms and Impedance (Speakers)

You are on page 1of 25

by Langston Holland

Background

It took almost a month to pull off, but predictably several of my assumptions went down in flames and

the guys with the physics backgrounds proved right. Imagine that. I am very thankful for the

significant time and effort put into the SAC list impedance thread by the usual suspects. What a gift

you guys are. :)

My goal was to find the most accurate way to measure audio related electrical impedance that was as

simple as possible to execute. I also wanted to understand it. I do have some weird applications in

mind, but that's for another day.

The Players

DATS, CLIO, Audio Precision APx515 with the LinearX VI-Box and a couple of other boxes I made.

Summary

The DATS tester very accurately covers 99% of loudspeaker impedance measurement needs at $100,

about 40dB less than the Audio Precision based methods I tried. You should buy this thing.

CLIO is almost as convenient, extremely accurate, wildly more powerful since it's a full audio

measurement system and reasonably costs about 30dB more than DATS. As you've probably noticed

in my prior posts, CLIO is my primary measurement platform.

I bought the Audio Precision APx515 about a year ago because I wanted to make higher resolution

electrical measurements in both analog and digital domains. The hardware performance of this thing

baffles me - on one hand it can show low level detail I didn't know was possible outside of a simulator.

On the other hand the philosophy behind the software interface is very restrictive for someone used to

EASERA or CLIO for example. Accuracy with the AP is state of the art if you setup the test correctly.

For impedance measurement I used two-channel setups that divided voltage by current represented

by a sense voltage. Z = V/I.

Note

Anyone interested in using one of the two-channel methods that I used with the AP can do so easily

with either the old version of Smaart v5.4 or the current version of SysTune Pro v1.2. Both achieved

very high accuracy in my tests using the high impedance TRS inputs of the Smaart IO hardware

interface. Smaart has by far the easiest calibration setup, but SysTune Pro obviously offers much

more power and has the slight advantage in that you can buy it. :)

Myth Buster 1

On the SAC list I speculated that voltage and current source methods would yield different results due

to: "Effectively zero electrical damping provided to the reactive loudspeaker load, which exaggerates

resonance peaks and general sensitivity relative to an actual connection to an amplifier." WRONG. I

found no difference between methods that had direct connections between amplifier and loudspeaker

vs. methods with up to 660 ohm generator source impedances. Jay Mitchell wrote "Measured

correctly, the impedance of a loudspeaker will indeed be the same when measured with different

methods." I didn't believe this until I saw it. The key appears to be keeping drive voltages low enough

that everything that moves remains linear.

Dale Shirk’s contribution to the thread clarified the reason that we see the same result from either

type of measurement. We are dividing voltage by current to calculate impedance. The lower source

resistance constant voltage type methods will show a decrease in voltage variation and an increase in

current variation, while the opposite occurs with the higher source resistance constant current type

methods. The V/I quotient remains the same in either case. This will be demonstrated in Part 2 where

differing V and I plots are shown generating virtually identical Z curves.

Take away (Pat™): Measure impedance any way you want to, just do it correctly with proper cabling

and connections. It's only when you want to measure at higher levels that you'll need to minimize

source (amplifier) to loudspeaker resistances.

1 of 2

Myth Buster 2

In reference to the constant current method, I stated “Very low voltage delivered to the loudspeaker,

thus high sensitivity to environmental noise induced errors.” DECEPTIVE. The fact is you have to keep

drive levels low regardless of method in order to stay within the linear region, you can’t just choose a

high drive level with S/N as your only consideration. Drive voltages at the loudspeaker terminals begin

to skew the impedance measurement results when you exceed very low average voltages (approx.

50mV) with constant current type methods. With constant voltage type methods, you can get away

with higher drive voltages prior to skewing the results (approx. 300mV). Methods that land in the

middle of this range, such as in DATS, show good S/N in normal indoor environments.

I adjusted each measurement method to about 40mV across a 10 ohm resistance to keep the results

from being biased due to drive voltage differences. The one exception to this was the VI-Box with the

0.01 ohm current sense resistor switched in which required nearly 300mV to get reasonable S/N.

For sake of discussion, I now define "constant voltage type" and "constant current type" methods as

those having resistances between source and loudspeaker of 1 ohm or less and 500 ohms or more,

respectively. Those landing in the middle of this range were called "voltage divider" methods by Bill

Whitlock and that is exactly what is going on.

Finally, as mentioned by both Bill and Jay, loudspeaker temperature makes a difference. Heating from

use can cause significant changes, but I also saw minor variations due to the temperature changes

throughout the day in my home (sorry - I mean laboratory).

lh

Soundscapes <><

15 November 2013

2 of 2

Impedance Measurement Comparison - Part 2

by Langston Holland

In Part 1 I gave an overview of the impedance measurement methods we would be comparing. More

importantly, we learned that we should expect equivalent results from each when driving the DUT at

low enough levels to stay within its linear region. Exceeding the linear region is easiest to determine

by increasing levels until the peaks at resonance begin to compress. In Part 2 we begin by describing

the measurement setup and conclude with a thorough look at each of the methods including actual

results into standard resistances as well as a loudspeaker.

Setup

Reference resistances were provided by a GenRad Type 1432M decade resistor. This eBay sourced

golden oldie is a work of art. It has extremely low reactance and measures as a perfect resistor per

the indicated value within the tolerances of my Fluke 8060A multimeter with the test lead resistances

subtracted out with the "REL" function.

1 of 23

GenRad Type 1432M - Internal View

The reference loudspeaker used was a fairly new Danley SM100 known to be in good working order. In

regard to the loudspeaker, tests were made both without and with an obstruction.

2 of 23

Without Obstruction

3 of 23

With Tool Box as Obstruction

This obstruction may seem severe, but little effect was visible with smaller items due to the fact that

there is very little horn-loading in this loudspeaker. You'll also notice on the plots that the traces

showing the obstruction are somewhat different between measurement methods. Given that the non-

obstructed measurements are virtually identical, we must conclude that I placed the obstructing box

slightly differently between measurements. Next time I'll go to the trouble of leaving the obstruction in

place and running through the different methods before moving anything. Bad scientist! :)

An overview of the mess:

4 of 23

Light Bulbs?!

DATS

Great engineering is the art of using the least resources to get the job done with the necessary

accuracy, reliability, etc. DATS is a home run in this dept. I've used DATS for several years - my

software was upgraded from when it was called WT3 while the hardware continues to work perfectly.

Though the manufacturer doesn't include this information, measurements show that the small epoxy

encapsulated USB based hardware interface uses a 100 ohm generator output impedance to drive and

measure the DUT. The unit boots up with a default indicated +5dBu output into no load regardless of

the setting you may have selected in a previous session. The 1.40V no load voltage drops down to

125.54mV when loaded with a 10 ohm resistor. The math to calculate the output impedance of a

circuit measured in this way is:

!"#$#%& − !"#$%

!"#$ = !"#$%

!"#$%

The circuit schematic probably looks like this:

5 of 23

DATS Schematic

This 100 ohm resistance allows a higher drive level than typical current source type methods. I

reduced it to an indicated -5dBu (616mV peak) during testing to make it equivalent to CLIO and the

other methods, but normally I'd leave it alone for improved S/N.

Resistive loads of 1, 5, 10, 50, 100 ohms measured 1.02, 4.99, 9.96, 49.81, 99.63 ohms at 1kHz with

flat traces. Measurements up to 3,000 ohms were good to within 1% at 1kHz with a slight HF rolloff.

Above that wasn't reliable.

SM100:

6 of 23

DATS SM100

SM100 with obstruction:

7 of 23

DATS SM100 with Obstruction

CLIO

CLIO also is a great work of engineering and more than justifies its cost for those who's work includes

a broad cross section of loudspeaker design and testing, acoustic work and electrical domain

measurement. CLIO offers four impedance testing methods, each of which can use four very different

stimulus types and associated calculations. Though they all yield the same answers when used

correctly, the non-FFT sine sweep and gated sine sweep methods have slightly lower frequency

resolution than the two FFT based methods of sine sweep and MLS. I chose FFT sine sweep for

loudspeaker measurements to keep apples to apples. CLIO's next version due out very soon will add a

5th method with a simultaneous division of voltage by current sense like SysTune Pro offers.

CLIO's "internal mode" impedance method was used in this test, which simply involves connecting a

XL cable to one of its outputs and attaching the DUT between pins 2 and 3.

The circuit schematic looks like this:

CLIO Schematic

This 660 ohm resistance provides a typical current source method low level drive to the DUT. You do

need a quiet environment during the test for adequate S/N.

Resistive loads of 1, 5, 10, 50, 100 ohms measured 1.01, 5.01, 10.01, 50.01, 99.98 ohms at 1kHz

with flat traces using the non-FFT based sine sweep method. Measurements up to 50,000 ohms were

good to within 1% at 1kHz with a slight HF rolloff. Above that wasn't reliable.

SM100:

8 of 23

CLIO SM100

SM100 with obstruction:

9 of 23

CLIO SM100 with Obstruction

APx515 with ZBox

This may sound crazy, but even at the 40dB price the APx515 is a very good deal in my opinion and a

stunning piece of engineering. Apart from all the fancy things it can do and its extreme accuracy, what

I really like is that you don't have to be careful to get dead-on repeatability.

The thing I call a ZBox is the result of an effort to get a highly accurate impedance measurement

method that didn't need an external amplifier and could be used for both loudspeakers and electronic

testing up to at least 50,000 ohms. It uses the V/I differential method nicely documented by Paul

Henderson and Chris Strahm. One of the lovely things about the V/I method is that the division

cancels any like values in the numerator and denominator, thus transfer function source imperfections

are removed.

The circuit schematic looks like this:

10 of 23

ZBox Schematic

The 100 ohm current sense resistor attached to circuit ground proved to be the best overall

compromise for the "one size fits all" design goal.

11 of 23

ZBox - Internal View

The 50 ohm generator output impedance added to the 100 ohm current sense resistor provides a

strong output level if desired given the APx515's capabilities.

Resistive loads of 1, 5, 10, 50, 100 ohms measured 1.03, 5.02, 10.01, 49.96, 99.85 ohms at 1kHz

with flat traces using a 5 second swept sine FFT with no averaging. Measurements up to 50,000 ohms

were extremely flat. Up to 100,000 ohms was within 1% at 1kHz with HF rolloff beginning above

2kHz.

SM100:

12 of 23

ZBox SM100

SM100 with obstruction:

The nominally 8 ohm loudspeaker results in more voltage swing than current given the 150 ohm

source:

13 of 23

ZBox SM100 - Voltage and Current

APx515 with VI-Box at 1 Ohm

The circuit schematic can be seen in the VI-Box manual linked to in the ZBox section.

The 1 ohm current sense resistor is attached to circuit ground given that the majority of voltage

across this resistor will be the same at either end, thus common, thus stressing the CMR ability of the

analyzer hardware. It is far better to place the loudspeaker load across the floating differential circuit

given that it will rarely get below 2 ohms and will mostly be much higher, resulting in a much greater

voltage drop across the differential input relative to the common voltage.

This will be 100 times as true in the next section that covers the VI-Box using the 0.01 sense resistor.

14 of 23

LinearX VI-Box with Joe Nickell Modification

We now must use an amplifier to drive the 1 ohm resistor into the load and this amplifier must have

it's negative terminal in common with the circuit. A bridged type amplifier will overwhelm the CMR

15 of 23

requirements of many analyzers, and switching to the 0.01 ohm sense resistor with a bridged amp will

overwhelm the CMR of any analyzer.

The amplifier used in each of the following constant voltage type measurements was a Stewart Audio

PA-50B in common ground mode. Although the amp is not rated for use below 4 ohms, the low levels

used in these tests allowed operation into 1 ohm for the duration of the sweep without problems.

Again, the V/I division is our friend as it removes transfer function imperfections from the measured

results.

Resistive loads of 1, 5, 10, 50, 100 ohms measured 1.04, 5.03, 10.01, 49.89, 99.78 ohms at 1kHz

with flat traces using a 5 second swept sine FFT with no averaging. Measurements above 100 ohms

are somewhat impractical due to the diminishing output from the current sense resistor. With greater

current capability in my resistors, I could have measured above 100 ohms - but this isn't the right

hammer for high Z measurements - it's designed for higher power, in-use type measurements which it

does beautifully.

SM100:

SM100 with obstruction:

16 of 23

LinearX VI-Box SM100 - 1 Ohm Sense with Obstruction

The nominally 8 ohm loudspeaker results in much less voltage swing than current given the 1 ohm

source:

APx515 with VI-Box at 0.01 Ohm

We again use an amplifier to drive the 0.01 ohm sense resistor into the load and it's more important

than ever that this amplifier have it's negative terminal in common with the circuit. Given the 100 fold

decrease in the current sense voltage, I was forced to increase the DUT drive voltage to about 300mV

17 of 23

to get adequate electrical S/N. Fortunately, the nearly direct connection between amp and

loudspeaker kept it within its linear region, thus the measurements are again virtually identical to all

the other methods.

Resistive loads of 1, 5, 10, 50, 100 ohms measured 0.96, 4.98, 9.96, 49.93, 99.30 ohms at 1kHz with

flat traces using a 5 second swept sine FFT with no averaging. Measurements above 100 ohms are

completely impractical due to the diminishing output from the current sense resistor at the chosen

drive level.

SM100:

SM100 with obstruction:

18 of 23

LinearX VI-Box SM100 - 0.01 Ohm Sense with Obstruction

The nominally 8 ohm loudspeaker results in nearly zero voltage swing. Almost all the action is in the

current realm with the amp's 0.04 ohm source impedance rating combined with the 0.01 current

sense resistor:

APx515 with IBox

I call this an IBox to highlight the fact that it uses a Pearson 411 current monitor to directly measure

the current going through an 8" piece of 12 awg wire. The goal of this project was to eliminate the

need to use common ground amplifiers and to increase the maximum voltage and current the device

could handle beyond the capabilities of any bridged audio amplifier for the foreseeable future. Gene

Brandt sent me one of his two model 110 CM's which are identical to the 411 excepting size and

somewhat higher RMS current handling capability. After using Gene's for about an hour I wanted one

really bad and got the 411 because it's smaller, yet still rated at 50 amps continuous and 5,000 amps

peak. I think it'll handle audio amplifiers into the next century.

I called Pearson and talked to a guy that I could tell knew his stuff. I asked him if the wire needed to

be run through the middle of the eye, if a metal box would affect it, etc., and he said no - all the

action is in the eye and it doesn't matter where you route the wire through it. That sounded too good

to be true, so I took Gene's 110 with 2" eye and placed the current wire in the middle, flush against

the inside wall, even diagonally from one side of the eye wall to the other and got the same

measurements within 10nV! (0.00001V) Then I laid it on top of steel and aluminum boxes - again the

measurement was unchanged and virtually identical to what Ohm's Law said it should be with the 4

ohm power resistor I was driving. After installing the 411 inside the final IBox, measurements again

were perfect.

The circuit schematic looks like this:

19 of 23

IBox Schematic

The physical unit:

20 of 23

IBox - Internal View

We have to use an amp of course, but this time it doesn't matter which type as long as it can drive the

loudspeaker successfully to the level of interest. An interesting observation with the CM is that both

the voltage and current outputs of the IBox show identical THD on the AP analyzer no matter what the

amp's output is. This simply means the CM is tracking flawlessly. It also means that the V/I division

will again remove any transfer function source imperfections.

Resistive loads of 1, 5, 10, 50, 100 ohms measured 1.04, 5.01, 9.98, 49.71, 99.34 ohms at 1kHz with

flat traces using a 5 second swept sine FFT with no averaging. Measurements above 100 ohms at low

drive levels are again impractical due to the diminishing output from the CM.

SM100:

21 of 23

IBox SM100

SM100 with obstruction:

The nominally 8 ohm loudspeaker results in the least possible voltage swing from this setup given the

0.001 ohm resistance added by the 8" piece of 12 awg cable:

22 of 23

IBox SM100 - Voltage and Current

lh

Soundscapes <><

15 November 2013

23 of 23

- Broken Delta ApplicationsUploaded byAnonymous vcadX45TD7
- SIEMENS Surge Arrester GuideUploaded bycalvinobeta
- BG Electronics 2015Uploaded byFrancisco Russo
- AC servo ASD-B2Uploaded byThai Trinh Cong
- Adjustable Constant Current Source 4mA to 3AUploaded byMarcos Filho
- VDV Infinity II AmplifiersUploaded byhmelgarejo8650
- catalogo pioneer 08_CE_ODR_EN.pdfUploaded byJoao Paulo Mira
- ELECTRONICSUploaded byKingsley Sarpong Nyamekye
- Philips SFR16 25Uploaded byVeronicaGonzalez
- IES OBJ Electrical Engineering 1999 Paper IIUploaded byjiten
- Designing Photo Diode Amplifier Circuits With Opa128Uploaded bymbenhebi
- A Guide to Practical Electronics 2Uploaded byDalo Ekhabafe
- project reportUploaded byAminu Quadri Oluwaremilekun
- Resistance ExerciseUploaded byD7ooM 612
- Chaos Exxtreme - CX350Uploaded byGeorge Enriquez
- Tda 7375Uploaded byStephanie Moreno
- CMicrotek 50 Nano Ampere Current Probe - UCP1x0_Probe_flierUploaded bynicefirework
- Circuits Solutions Sp14 Sp14Week3HomeworkUploaded byAlex Atao Enriquez
- Variable Power Supply Using Fixed Voltage Regulator IcUploaded byBuzurjmeher
- Ohms and Impedance (Speakers)Uploaded byherow9999
- LM3886 Audio AmplifierUploaded byAriel Schunck
- International Zhautykov Olympiad 2015 Experimental TaskUploaded bytroll
- Class-e Silicon Carbide Vhf Power AmplifierUploaded byRakesh Prajapati
- secondary_injection_high_impedance_.docxUploaded byEngr Fahimuddin Qureshi
- Assignment 1Uploaded byLourence Adriel Dimaunahan
- Sony MDX-C6500X Service ManualUploaded byFrancis Taisant
- Lecture16(20-3-11)Uploaded byMạnh Cường Trần
- Basic Electronics1.pptUploaded byRajib Samadder
- Current Electricity_01 Page 19-21Uploaded bymaddy449
- Rockford Fosgate 2.9x AmpsUploaded bywYzEgYe MonsterBox

- Presentation Ab INITIO CalculationUploaded bydzymytch
- JBL Technical Note - Vol.1, No.34Uploaded bydzymytch
- Faraday Rings Voice Coil ImpedanceUploaded byMatthew Miller
- 1997_850_wiring_diagram.pdfUploaded bydzymytch
- Dopler Distortion in Loudspeakers JASA 1980 - Vol 68 No.06Uploaded bydzymytch
- The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America Volume 73 Issue 6 1983 [Doi 10.1121%2F1.389585] Wright, Wayne M. -- Propagation in Air of N Waves Produced by SparksUploaded bydzymytch
- A Novel, Cost-Effective Method for Loudspeakers Parameters MeasurementUploaded bydzymytch
- W J Cunningham-Introduction to Nonlinear Analysis-Mcgraw Hill(1958)Uploaded byAbhyuday Ghosh

- 1C500 D5.pdfUploaded byTiên Tony Chopper
- Ieee Device NumbersUploaded bysitanshumnit
- Chromium ComplexesUploaded byNitty MeYa
- 117101 TransmitionUploaded byRubenn54
- WD40 Specialist TDSUploaded byiggymax
- PD362278 (2).pdfUploaded byRinu Ravikumar
- Rev 1 Electrical Cable SizingUploaded byRe Za
- LVM_change_VG_version.pdfUploaded byAnonymous YgQswRR
- fetch / execute cycleUploaded byazhi
- Eye Gaze Tracking With a Web Camera in a Desktop EnvironmentUploaded byaswin
- Poly CabUploaded byAnujKumar
- Smart QuillUploaded byTwinkle Sri
- Introduction to Computer.pptUploaded byGunaya
- AIEEE 2010 Chemistry Chapter Wise QuestionsUploaded bypushpzala86
- KUint 2017 03 the-Dynamic-DieUploaded byWerner Conny
- GSM KPI AnalysisUploaded bylenny majaw
- UMW-09015-2DHUploaded byAnnBliss
- 9-MainframeComputersUploaded byChenna Mahendar
- Amiga Hard Ref ManualUploaded byDaniel Murphy
- IMS_netSPUploaded byBraulio Araya
- ua748Uploaded byJohn Helver Pacheco Palacin
- Mass Flow Controller Installation ManualUploaded byPooja Bhati
- Material Science - Selecting Materials and Processing for a Specified ProductUploaded bySteven Goddard
- Ultimo 20 supch13.pdfUploaded bymri_leon
- كل قوانين الكهرباء-gooooodUploaded byhawk_hadm
- Lcd DisplayUploaded byMirnalini Madavan
- Jptc Req Jan 12Uploaded byLK Shukla
- des3326SRM_Manual_402B13.pdfUploaded by0x0000AF56
- DCA.pdfUploaded byEdgar Liler Collazos Ortega
- SE23 The USER keyboard.pdfUploaded byFabinho Juntá Ká Afer Tuxá