Whispers of a working chip, page-137

I don't want to labour it but my original description of "

When an AP element is in the 'on' state it vibrates at 200khz and this is simply more efficient at generating sound waves than moving a larger element more slowly.​

" is perfectly consistent with what you have said above. By vibrate I did mean 'pulse'. Switching between the up and down position at 200khz it is as good as vibrating.

I'm looking forward to seeing exactly how the pixels fire when outputting a steady tone at the extreme limits of its range:

1. Highest frequency (20khz?) at full volume (1024 pixels?).
2. Highest frequency at lowest possible (non zero) volume (1 pixel?).

3. Lowest frequency (?khz) at full volume.
4. Lowest frequency at lowest possible volume.

When I can picture what happens in these use cases I'll be closer to understanding it. But the original question was 'why is an AP chip louder than a conventional speaker of the same size?'. It is obviously converting electrical energy into sound waves in the air more efficiently but why is stacking more efficient than not stacking?

Conventional subwoofers (and speakers generally) are said to 'move a lot air' and that is given to explain why they are so loud. If AP speakers are as loud as but move less air than a conventional speaker (of comparable size) then 'moving air' is not sufficient to explain how speakers generate 'loudness'.

And here where I say 'loud' I mean the measured SPL.

​