Noise cancelling curcuit

Uhh to complicated to me to visualise such ^^ rather some audioengneering stuff it is isn't it ???

Would noise A + the inversion B = a higher pressure wave C?

In a perfect senario if B is 180° out of phase with A ...a null of the signals will happen. If they were in phase, the result would be a 6db. increase. The inverted phase of B cancels out A. This how noise cancelling headphones work. This concept is much harder to produce in open enviroments

I must be deaf completly cuz don'r hear any noise in normal headphones maybe too loud music damp my ears cuz as my main hobby except this one are analog synths and sometimes all night in headphones hearing those drilling sounds on full reg when tested new ring mod will make me deaf partially.

I was thinking more for audio mixing environments. To obtain a frequency response that is flat in a room, a lot of bulky absorbers and deflectors are needed. This hogs up space and is costly . I would like to be able to make a device that drowns out the persons unwanted room modes that cause bad mixing decisions.... btw I use software synths! Blasphemy I know.

Actually i also preffer soft synths for dsp processors whose can be loaded to preffered dsp host armed with "analog" knobs for real time control and keyboard. Analog solutions has only reasonable use at situiations where fitting diigital solutions is possible but is simply foolish like resonant filters and for example ring modulators where digital solution cant give better response by inherent deffinition of digitising (if it is better this means it's not a digital circuit anymore) but more important is ammount of resources where milions of transistors closed in ultra miniature IC acompanied by bunch of externalities try to be comparable to single transistor analog solution whose not suffer problems like detuning in analog VCO and due to this digital solution can be reasonable solution. Imagine nonsense of emulating 4 diode 4 capacitor based simple ring mod with two dsp processors. I know it give the same result but it is like calling a heavy airport firesquad because u trashbin starts emmits smoke lol. What are propability that even ideal digital, algorithm will not be f&*ed up by human errors in poroduction how high it give place for counterfeiting and how many resources is allocted to simulate a pack of 4 stupid diodes. And of course i will not see sense of packing by way of force a real vco generators to modern synths cuz "they sounds better" yeea my burps are sounds better than your burps because my are whyske soda based burps lol for one this better sound will be sound of tragedy not counting to insane ammount of time spent to tune analog vco and it will anyway always detune in critical situations means when u perform live on stage lol

I always stated that we create innovation by joinning best parts of two or more older solutions. That's why none full analog can be good way nor full digital one also. Real wonder will grow when u conjoin best features of both technologies in one . Like so called virtual modulr synths. Where analog controll is a way better than digital button based and modular multi processor structure is also way better. As s for oscillators vco's are no good way. And also a pure digital way of synthesis also is not very exciting but a DCO module or digitally performed dsp based substractive method of sound synthese armed with digital HD sound registering and analog tuned filter section for fine shaping u newly created soud idea is a way it should be done.

I am keen to see EC first Loudspeaker symbol ;-)

Algorithms == each other as long as the output is an identity. So technically a cancellation could perform to the truest potential when if the sound doesn't leave the room or its cancelled out at least immediately using electron flow faster than sound picking up from say the middle off the room then beating the distance sound could travel and outputting the inverse at exact distance away thus creating output null which is overall sound outcome..analog or digital..tadaa