110dB/W Horn Line Array Cab

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
In reality anything above 106dB/ 1W/1M is said to be violating the Law of Conservation of Energy. So obviously the Specs are manipulated by even the best In the case of an expo horn subwoofer using a 1/2WL instead of a 1/4 WL horn will add 5 more dB to the output Using 4 high excursion drivers in such a horn and pushing the THD which is not very audible at that freq will give you the most a output irregardless of what number you want to put as the output If you disagree please comment.
 
Here is a Danley design 2x18" 40Hzs 1/4 WL expo horn showing 1/2 space specs of 112dB at 40Hzs and at 100 Hzs which is 1/2WL 117dB. In a folded collapsible horn were larger size is more acceptable then 1/2WL horns is the way to go since the 5 extra dB represents up to 5 of the similar 1/4WL subhorn cabs!
http://www.danleysoundlabs.com/danley/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/DBH-218-spec-sheet1.pdf
So 110 dB/W/M at 35 Hzs in a 1/2WL 35Hz expo subhorn as described above is realistic. But according to theory above the 106dB max level of the conservation of energy it is supposedly obtained thru constructive interference!?
 
Last edited:
Here is a Danley design 2x18" 40Hzs 1/4 WL expo horn showing 1/2 space specs of 112dB at 40Hzs and at 100 Hzs which is 1/2WL 117dB. In a folded collapsible horn were larger size is more acceptable then 1/2WL horns is the way to go since the 5 extra dB represents up to 5 of the similar 1/4WL subhorn cabs!
http://www.danleysoundlabs.com/danley/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/DBH-218-spec-sheet1.pdf
So 110 dB/W/M at 35 Hzs in a 1/2WL 35Hz expo subhorn as described above is realistic. But according to theory above the 106dB max level of the conservation of energy it is supposedly obtained thru constructive interference!?

Okay , but that's 2 times 18 inch drivers , a lot more cone area then your 2 times 10 inch drivers , about the same difference as Fernado Alonso in his Mclaren to Lewis Hamilton in his Mercedes ! Show pictures and measurements to prove your story !

Cheers ,

Rens
 
Last edited:
"Constructive interference" = narrowing of the pattern. The only way you'll get more than 106 (50% efficiency of the 112 theoretical max) is by radiating into less than 2 pi. A "sub bass horn with much better than 110db/w at 35 hz" is typically constructed out of multiple boxes. That's an array which will radiate into less than 2 pi. Been there done that bought the t-shirt. A mid/hi box that will do a solid 105 across the full band, in singles (115 stacked) without 10db of headroom robbing compression causing EQ - now that really would be something....
 
In the case of an expo horn subwoofer using a 1/2WL instead of a 1/4 WL horn will add 5 more dB to the output Using 4 high excursion drivers in such a horn and pushing the THD which is not very audible at that freq will give you the most a output irregardless of what number you want to put as the output If you disagree please comment

In a folded collapsible horn were larger size is more acceptable then 1/2WL horns is the way to go since the 5 extra dB represents up to 5 of the similar 1/4WL subhorn cabs!
So 110 dB/W/M at 35 Hzs in a 1/2WL 35Hz expo subhorn using 4 high excursion drivers in such a horn and pushing the THD which is not very audible at that freq is realistic.
 
HELLO DJK
YOU ARE CORRECT....SPECS CAN DECEIVE (106 at 40Hzs 111 at 100 Hzs) I USED THE SAME SET UP BUT
In the case of an expo horn subwoofer using a 1/2WL instead of a 1/4 WL horn will add 5 more dB to the output. Using 4 high excursion drivers in such a horn and pushing the THD which is not very audible at that freq will give you the most output irregardless of what number you want to put as the output. If you disagree please comment. |How to theoretically explain the 5 dB from the conservation of E 106 to 111dB becomes interesting.

thanks for the input
 
Last edited:
Right.....got all that. Luckely in this design huge mouth size is easily accomplished and understage placement makes the horn disappear. Depth of less than 5 feet for 1/2 WL of 35 Hz is manageable considering all it replaces. Dirt cheap and easy to make. 1/2 WL length horns is the way to go in my folding scheme!

Thanks
 
35 Hz wavelength is almost 10 meters (about 11-12 yards); half wavelength is half that ... not sure how that matches stated 0.6 meter (24") cabinet depth.

Even if we are talking only about the 75Hz horn, that will about halve requirements ... still way more than what´s available.
And we must not forget that we still need to add depth for the back chamber.

Folding the horn is not an option since that was specifically denied by OP.

The more I think about this, the more it sounds like a vague idea, which was never actually built (because it´s physically unbuildable?)
 
Talking about 2 different cabs the MR-HF cab is a 1/4 WL 75 Hzs folded design 24" deep. One version of the Bass subhorn is a 1/2 WL 35 Hzs folded cab 24"H x variable mouth x 5 feet deep. " ONLY All my SUB cabs designs are 1/2 WL". 4x8ohm drivers present a 2 ohm load so output is adjusted accordingly. Liked that tampoon leakage thing.....jaja. Really cannot giveout any more info....The Chinese mafia may look you up.

Luck

Signing out
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.