Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveHao 
Hi All
The Enligther 4K, being a more extremely tightly woven material, will actually have worse sound performance than both Seymour and our materials. The holes are simply too small and it severely impedes the movement of air across the material. This results in large attenuation as we move to the higher frequencies of human hearing. We actually experimented with very tight weaves during our design and development stage. We decided against extremely tightly woven weaves as it conflicted with our No Compromise design principle. Our design goal was to create a material that did not compromise video performance over audio performance or vice versa. The holes were essentially microscopic and just simply too small for the air to move properly. This resulted in 4 db of attenuation. Furthermore, the linearity of the material is also not very good, as the response curve of the material does not follow the response curve of the speakers. This means you can’t simply just increase the volume to compensate, certain frequencies will be too loud and some too quiet. Also, remember, when you boost the volume you are also increasing the distortion of your audio system.
You can actually see the audio performance of the Enlightor 4K material in the image below, this is pulled from their own test results:
You can see from the curve that the difference varies from 0.5db to over about 5db as the frequencies increase. Average is about 3 db. Another thing you notice is that the material is that even for frequencies even less than 1kHz, there is 2db of attenuation, where as with our material, frequencies under 1kHz, there is essentially zero attenuation. This is because lower frequencies with longer wavelength pass through materials much easier. Also you notice the lack of linearity from the graph. You can see that at about 4-5kHz, the gap actually narrows and the difference becomes zero, this shows that the material is actually non-linear and causing certain frequencies to peak and others to get lower. You can see especially in the midrange frequencies, the difference between the red and blue lines changes quiet rapidly showing non-linearity.
With no perceivable difference in video quality and far degraded audio quality, we did not go in the direction of super tightly woven materials. Instead we designed our material to be tightly woven with a high density of very small holes for audio performance.
To get a better understanding of this, visit this link:
http://elunevision.com/audioweave-fixed-features.html
I know it is pretty, technical but it will give you a good understanding of just how the materials work.
So really, in conclusion, we designed a material that is the best balance in terms of audio and video performance. From realistic viewing distances of 7’ or more, you cannot see any difference between the perfectly smooth Reference Studio 100 4K material and the AudioWeave 4K.
If anyone has any questions, feel free to ask me.
Thanks
Dave, BEng
EluneVision
Hi All
The Enligther 4K, being a more extremely tightly woven material, will actually have worse sound performance than both Seymour and our materials. The holes are simply too small and it severely impedes the movement of air across the material. This results in large attenuation as we move to the higher frequencies of human hearing. We actually experimented with very tight weaves during our design and development stage. We decided against extremely tightly woven weaves as it conflicted with our No Compromise design principle. Our design goal was to create a material that did not compromise video performance over audio performance or vice versa. The holes were essentially microscopic and just simply too small for the air to move properly. This resulted in 4 db of attenuation. Furthermore, the linearity of the material is also not very good, as the response curve of the material does not follow the response curve of the speakers. This means you can’t simply just increase the volume to compensate, certain frequencies will be too loud and some too quiet. Also, remember, when you boost the volume you are also increasing the distortion of your audio system.
You can actually see the audio performance of the Enlightor 4K material in the image below, this is pulled from their own test results:
You can see from the curve that the difference varies from 0.5db to over about 5db as the frequencies increase. Average is about 3 db. Another thing you notice is that the material is that even for frequencies even less than 1kHz, there is 2db of attenuation, where as with our material, frequencies under 1kHz, there is essentially zero attenuation. This is because lower frequencies with longer wavelength pass through materials much easier. Also you notice the lack of linearity from the graph. You can see that at about 4-5kHz, the gap actually narrows and the difference becomes zero, this shows that the material is actually non-linear and causing certain frequencies to peak and others to get lower. You can see especially in the midrange frequencies, the difference between the red and blue lines changes quiet rapidly showing non-linearity.
With no perceivable difference in video quality and far degraded audio quality, we did not go in the direction of super tightly woven materials. Instead we designed our material to be tightly woven with a high density of very small holes for audio performance.
To get a better understanding of this, visit this link:
http://elunevision.com/audioweave-fixed-features.html
I know it is pretty, technical but it will give you a good understanding of just how the materials work.
So really, in conclusion, we designed a material that is the best balance in terms of audio and video performance. From realistic viewing distances of 7’ or more, you cannot see any difference between the perfectly smooth Reference Studio 100 4K material and the AudioWeave 4K.
If anyone has any questions, feel free to ask me.
Thanks
Dave, BEng
EluneVision
Hi Dave -
Your testing of the samples you freely requested from us was not done under proper tensioning. The Enlightor-4K must be tensioned for it to meet its acoustic specifications and accurately indicate what the real-world performance is. The chart you reference shows the combination of the 4K and the secondary black backing layer, which in most cases is not required. While I appreciate the design directions you took, your conclusions on our materials are fundamentally flawed.
Please call to discuss if you'd like to learn more about design and testing of acoustically transparent materials.
Cheers,
Chris
515-450-5694
