Hi guys,
Thanks for your help! Originally, all I wanted to do was re-use my FE166E's (with a little Bottlehead 2 watt amp) in a cool-looking corner horn design.
But then I became curious about the whole question of scaling the width of the horn to match throat area to another driver -- that just seems like an intriguing shortcut (and I gather, if it worked, it would be luck).
In terms of horn design, Scott, I came across this post of yours which is incredibly helpful:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1288512#post1288512
I had been working backwards as usual (from chamber to mouth rather than vice versa).
Thank you again -- I think I'm finally starting down the right path. I have tremendous respect for you guys who have the perseverance and smarts to design a horn from scratch.
Thanks for your help! Originally, all I wanted to do was re-use my FE166E's (with a little Bottlehead 2 watt amp) in a cool-looking corner horn design.
But then I became curious about the whole question of scaling the width of the horn to match throat area to another driver -- that just seems like an intriguing shortcut (and I gather, if it worked, it would be luck).
In terms of horn design, Scott, I came across this post of yours which is incredibly helpful:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1288512#post1288512
I had been working backwards as usual (from chamber to mouth rather than vice versa).
Thank you again -- I think I'm finally starting down the right path. I have tremendous respect for you guys who have the perseverance and smarts to design a horn from scratch.
Hi guys,
It's truly mind-boggling how many parameters go into this. Still, I imagine it's ultimately worth it when it all snaps together -- driver's forward radiation, precisely sized supra-baffle, crossing over to the horn action, blending in with the QW action. *gulp*
I always break out into a sweat at this point. Thank you for your help, guys!
It's truly mind-boggling how many parameters go into this. Still, I imagine it's ultimately worth it when it all snaps together -- driver's forward radiation, precisely sized supra-baffle, crossing over to the horn action, blending in with the QW action. *gulp*
I always break out into a sweat at this point. Thank you for your help, guys!
Obs are in Houston Texas (work),A166s are in SC. Depends on how much time i can get off and fly home (SC).
Overall i perfer the OBs.
Reason: Very open spacious sound with a bottom end around 50 Hz, once you dink with room position.
The A166 gets to around 40 Hz with a very defined LF response, but overall the OBs sound more accurate and more live.
I wrapped some 3" dia. pipe insulation around the edges of the OBs (edge diffraction reduction) and the sound was much better.
Why OBs? Well its a very simple (like me) application and properly done achieves what i want.
ron
Overall i perfer the OBs.
Reason: Very open spacious sound with a bottom end around 50 Hz, once you dink with room position.
The A166 gets to around 40 Hz with a very defined LF response, but overall the OBs sound more accurate and more live.
I wrapped some 3" dia. pipe insulation around the edges of the OBs (edge diffraction reduction) and the sound was much better.
Why OBs? Well its a very simple (like me) application and properly done achieves what i want.
ron
Problem is , they have been sold and i wasent even there when they were sold. My better half (makes me the worst half BTW) sold them to a guy who was an audio nut who had around 10K$ invested in multi way speakers. He heard the horns and bought them on the spot.
I am going with Daves modified 166s in an OB with 2 alpha 15s/side and bi amp. I figure plate amps for the alphas and my old SMPS GC(24 watts/channel) for the FR.
Havent decided if i want WWFR or WFRW yet.
ron
I am going with Daves modified 166s in an OB with 2 alpha 15s/side and bi amp. I figure plate amps for the alphas and my old SMPS GC(24 watts/channel) for the FR.
Havent decided if i want WWFR or WFRW yet.
ron
Ron, do you think you might post your OB design sometime down the road? I'm curious about the whole OB thing, and when I get my move all done and re-settle ,I may give it a go. Thinking on the Feastrex D5nf drivers in some cab or OB.. Dave
Ps. To keep on topic, what is your opinion of stuffin the 166 into the Frugal Horn? . I'd say forgetaboutit!!...
Ps. To keep on topic, what is your opinion of stuffin the 166 into the Frugal Horn? . I'd say forgetaboutit!!...
Ps. To keep on topic, what is your opinion of stuffin the 166 into the Frugal Horn? . I'd say forgetaboutit!!...
Terrible idea. The half chang or a BVR would be simple and effective. I like horns due to the technical challange, but they can be a complicated build that many will not be able to or want to accomplish. If you want a SD FR then its the only way to go but as with many things in life you have to give up one thing to gain another.
Two ways solve many of the problems yet will never be as dynamic as a multi way horn system.
ron
Terrible idea. The half chang or a BVR would be simple and effective. I like horns due to the technical challange, but they can be a complicated build that many will not be able to or want to accomplish. If you want a SD FR then its the only way to go but as with many things in life you have to give up one thing to gain another.
Two ways solve many of the problems yet will never be as dynamic as a multi way horn system.
ron
I think GM is smiling as he reads this.
Well its nothing new. Its hard to beat a compression driver in a proper horn. Simple physics, a very light mass moving in a very strong guass field with collimated energies being projected.
One of the best sounding systems i have heard was an Altec Mdl 14 that had been bi amped. Some state that with the designed XO its not necessary, but hearing is believing. It wasent a VOTT but still for the size and performance it performed better than I thought it would.
IMHO an OB is very little more than a dipole horn with zero length that has no gain or waveguide effect. So you work from there.
Back to the subject. You have to design the cab, be it whatever, around the driver parameters. The reason i like OBs is the simple approach and the sound, the reason i like horns is the technical challenge. But there are many excellent alingments that when specifically designed for a driver perform above average. One of the best sellers of commerical cabs was the Dynaco A-25. A simple, relative small cab that when powered correctly performed dang well. However things like edge diffraction, at that time, was not a consideration. So , in essence, that basic design could be improved.
ron
Well its nothing new. Its hard to beat a compression driver in a proper horn. Simple physics, a very light mass moving in a very strong guass field with collimated energies being projected.
One of the best sounding systems i have heard was an Altec Mdl 14 that had been bi amped. Some state that with the designed XO its not necessary, but hearing is believing. It wasent a VOTT but still for the size and performance it performed better than I thought it would.
IMHO an OB is very little more than a dipole horn with zero length that has no gain or waveguide effect. So you work from there.
Back to the subject. You have to design the cab, be it whatever, around the driver parameters. The reason i like OBs is the simple approach and the sound, the reason i like horns is the technical challenge. But there are many excellent alingments that when specifically designed for a driver perform above average. One of the best sellers of commerical cabs was the Dynaco A-25. A simple, relative small cab that when powered correctly performed dang well. However things like edge diffraction, at that time, was not a consideration. So , in essence, that basic design could be improved.
ron
One thing I wonder about OB is the driver protection factor.. Using my 108`s as an example, in my BIB cabs the drivers hardly move for the sound given in the room. I guess it`s way easier to ruin a driver in OB as there is no real loading to protect it(question mark no worky).
What if a person was using a pricey driver in OB like Lowther, AER or Feastrex, is there a way to protect it besides keeping the volume down(question mark went awol) ... Dave
What if a person was using a pricey driver in OB like Lowther, AER or Feastrex, is there a way to protect it besides keeping the volume down(question mark went awol) ... Dave
You would never run the Lowther (or other high efficiency full range driver) full range, no bass possible so why do it. You would add a woofer or two filling in below 100 - 200 Hz. The crossover, typically 2nd order protects the Lowther. My Lowther PM2A drivers barely move in my OB set-up. The low frequency motion of the Lowthers in the OB is much less then it would be in a ML TL or BIB enclosure.
What if a person was using a pricey driver in OB like Lowther, AER or Feastrex, is there a way to protect it besides keeping the volume down(question mark went awol) ... Dave
That is the energy applied at the XO. Remember that its a slope(going up as the frequency increases) and not a point. Now run without an XO (fullrange) of course its going to destroy it self without loading. Look at it this way, if i XOed a 8" driver with a 1 mm x-max at 5Khz, due to the frequency, it would not get near the maximum cone movement. If you XOed a Lowther > (approx) 7-9 Khz the only thing that would be moving (to a degree) would be the wizzer as the wizzer would de-couple.
On my current OBs(MKs design) at 90 Db at the listening position(approx 10') the Alphas and the little 3" fostex have to have the cones touched to realize any cone movement,you cant really see the cones move. Now if i put a FR Lowther on an OB( no XO ,no LF support) and tried to give it a 60 Hz signal for a 90 Db response at 10' i better be ready to catch the cones coming at me, mid air and spend some money.
ron
(add on from MKs post):
The low frequency motion of the Lowthers in the OB is much less then it would be in a ML TL or BIB enclosure
And this leads to greater signal defination as the coil is closer to the flux field,
That is the energy applied at the XO. Remember that its a slope(going up as the frequency increases) and not a point. Now run without an XO (fullrange) of course its going to destroy it self without loading. Look at it this way, if i XOed a 8" driver with a 1 mm x-max at 5Khz, due to the frequency, it would not get near the maximum cone movement. If you XOed a Lowther > (approx) 7-9 Khz the only thing that would be moving (to a degree) would be the wizzer as the wizzer would de-couple.
On my current OBs(MKs design) at 90 Db at the listening position(approx 10') the Alphas and the little 3" fostex have to have the cones touched to realize any cone movement,you cant really see the cones move. Now if i put a FR Lowther on an OB( no XO ,no LF support) and tried to give it a 60 Hz signal for a 90 Db response at 10' i better be ready to catch the cones coming at me, mid air and spend some money.
ron
(add on from MKs post):
The low frequency motion of the Lowthers in the OB is much less then it would be in a ML TL or BIB enclosure
And this leads to greater signal defination as the coil is closer to the flux field,
Have you got the FE166eN into the horns yet (i could use one of the pairs of FE166 back at some point)
NP Dave, i will send a MO to the listed addy. Its either send an MO or 25 gallons of gas.
(my calculations based on carbon gasification using pine chips and endothermic process with the FT process(iron wool) is that it takes $.60 to make one gallon of bio diesel and still maintains a carbon balance). This would still produce greater amounts of steam than consumed which could run a turbine for electrical generation and heat a house.
H2O + C ...> H2 +CO...> FT process...> bio diesel
I know this is OT but in the current state of the fuel crises it should be stated.
Thanks
ron
NP Dave, i will send a MO to the listed addy. Its either send an MO or 25 gallons of gas.
(my calculations based on carbon gasification using pine chips and endothermic process with the FT process(iron wool) is that it takes $.60 to make one gallon of bio diesel and still maintains a carbon balance). This would still produce greater amounts of steam than consumed which could run a turbine for electrical generation and heat a house.
H2O + C ...> H2 +CO...> FT process...> bio diesel
I know this is OT but in the current state of the fuel crises it should be stated.
Thanks
ron
Thanks guys for the explanation. I'm sure my ? <-- it works now seemed stupid but I have zero experience with OB... Anyhow when the time comes I think I would like to give it a go, and see what all the fuss is about.. Plus with my wood working skills being what they are, getting the ''out of box'' experience seem's right up my alley..... Dave
seemed stupid but I have zero experience with OB... Anyhow when the time comes I think I would like to give it a go, and see what all the fuss is about.. Plus with my wood working skills being what they are, getting the ''out of box'' experience seem's right up my alley..... Dave- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.