Hey guys...we need a little rallying here... - Page 226

Originally Posted by LTD02 

are you sure?

Originally Posted by PureBASS 

With all due respect to Jeff,

Originally Posted by LTD02 

yeah, i see erich mentioned 2" back in post #2791. i should have remembered that. :-)

Originally Posted by avpassion 

Wow! Nice! are we going to have access to that baffle? I am assuming since it is labeled FP15, that it integrates an SEOS 15 with a 15" woofer. Am I correct?

Originally Posted by Erich H 

Only a white matte finish. So they would have to be painted if you wanted a different color.

Originally Posted by smokarz 

So, any good news yet on the AE baffles?

Originally Posted by louisdamani 

Any news on the Fusion-8?

Originally Posted by pgwalsh 

I thought if I ever opened a bar or brewpub, I'd want to get some large waveguides in matte white and then have an artist paint the waveguide and cabinet. Just something a little crazy looking.

Originally Posted by beastaudio 

Don't mess with the brew-pub, we are taking all of your beer out of CO anyways at this point haha not really but New Belgium's addition will be a nice addition to "Brew City USA"

Originally Posted by pgwalsh 


Are they moving? News to me if so. There's 11 breweries in Fort Collins, where NB is located, and 130K people. That's a crazy amount of breweries for such a small population. A little live music works well in the brewpub, at least it does at Russian River.

Originally Posted by noah katz 

I was wondering about that too.

Originally Posted by Erich H 

The only other CD I'm working on is for the 1.4" SEOS-24. I've got the CD samples and maybe 5 different diaphragms, but more are coming to test. That's going to be difficult to get something smooth from 600hz all the way up to 18khz. I did get an unusual one with a mylar surround that sounded pretty good, but it did have some significant dips here and there. No reason to do much testing until I get the SEOS-24 to model them with anyway.

Originally Posted by beastaudio 

Not moving, just expanding!! We also have Sierra Nevada building out in Hendersonville!! Awesome to me Our city has about the same pop. and we have I would say about the same amount of breweries. :excellent:

Originally Posted by Erich H 

I was trying to do something nice to remember Zilch since it's been 2 years since he passed away. I was going to pay for the baffle, packing material, screws, gaskets, etc myself and include them for free to actually keep the price well under retail. Then I was going to put another $20 in on top of that to be donated.

It's just that simple. But nothing can be simple anymore, we all know that.

Of course, I do realize I could leave the speaker up and no laws are being broken at all. No one can tell me I can't donate money in memory of Zilch. No one can tell me I can't type his name either. I can do huge write ups showing every project Zilch did, and there's nothing anyone can do about that. But if they don't want his name or design being honored, it's simply not worth the trouble right now. We all know Zilch would have been thrilled to see any kit being even more 'Econo' than the original. Especially if money was being donated to a charity.

Of course they can say 'We don't know if Zilch would have liked that or not.' Well, they can't say he wouldn't either. Regardless, I don't need anyone's permission to donate to a charity in memory of another person. But I'm not going to spend the time to argue something so strange. It's hard to believe I even have to defend the idea at all. It is what it is.

There's really no reason to discuss it much anymore. I removed the photos and his name, and it can't be ordered. I highly doubt that's what Zilch would have wanted, but I tried.

Originally Posted by Ash R 

You folks couldn't be more wrong. The issue is trademark and that is determined by first use in commerce. By placing a trademarked name on a competing website, the infringer violated the trademark rights of the mark owner. Trademarks do not have to be registered to aquire rights. In fact priority in America is determined by first use.

You should also know that if the trademark owner did not tell the infringer to cease using the mark it would be abandoned. Once the infringer uses the mark (even if by innocent accident) the trademark owner must police the mark or lose it.

You can talk about a trademarked product or service because that's fair use. You just cannot take the name as your own because that causes market confusion.

Originally Posted by Erich H 

They can be ordered.....but they aren't too cheap. I've got the cut out measurements on my home computer if needed.

The only issue with those front panels is that they can't be ordered in gloss anymore. Only a white matte finish. So they would have to be painted if you wanted a different color.

Originally Posted by Ash R 

You folks couldn't be more wrong. The issue is trademark and that is determined by first use in commerce. By placing a trademarked name on a competing website, the infringer violated the trademark rights of the mark owner. Trademarks do not have to be registered to aquire rights. In fact priority in America is determined by first use.

You should also know that if the trademark owner did not tell the infringer to cease using the mark it would be abandoned. Once the infringer uses the mark (even if by innocent accident) the trademark owner must police the mark or lose it.

You can talk about a trademarked product or service because that's fair use. You just cannot take the name as your own because that causes market confusion.

Originally Posted by Erich H 

You say the issue here is trademark and that it's determined by the first use in commerce.......I don't believe Zilch sold any speakers or any audio gear under the Zilch name. Zilch was a screen name. So in reality, Polk Audio could take the speaker design tomorrow and call it The Zilch and no one could ever use it but Polk?

Zilch clearly wanted others to build his speakers. That was the entire goal of the threads. There was no money being made on the one single model I listed and that was clearly shown with a price breakdown. Only a donation to a charity in memory of him.

I had his design on the site for one day. I hadn't even named it yet, but while typing it up, and not knowing what to call it, I simply put it as Zilch-10. I was told that same exact day to remove the name, so I did. Then I was told to remove the statement that said Zilch designed the speaker. I did that too.....even though I didn't have to. I was then told to remove 'Zilch' from the actual website address link that might appear in a web browser. I did that too, even though I didn't have to.

I had something written about donating in memory of Zilch.....I was told to take every mention of Zilch off the page. I did that too......even though I didn't have to. I can talk about a friend on a website....and use their name or nick name. Just because someone says they were given full rights to a name doesn't mean they were. And my guess is that it could be bad if they aren't being truthful about that. But I take them at their word without asking for proof, I doubt a company would.

This has gotten so incredibly stupid at this point when a huge DIY Community can't do something for our friend Zilch in his name without 'getting in trouble'. It's actually quite sad. But it's over and done with. A speaker was listed for 1 day with Zilch in the title because I wasn't sure what to name it yet. No money was going to be made, no one bought it, no money was donated to the cancer fund that helps fight a cancer that took his life. Yeah, someone did a great deed by stopping that.

Originally Posted by LTD02 

"...the acoustic summation is minimum phase through the crossover."

jeff, congratulations on the alchemy 8.

does "minimum phase through the crossover" mean that if you flip the polarity, you will get a near perfect cancellation at the crossover point?

if so, shouldn't this be the case on all passive networks, or doesn't it work that way?