Hornresp

[LORDSANSUI]

The system model can be viewed in the Loudspeaker Wizard, which is where you will probably want to be anyway when designing a paraflex horn

Hi David,

Thanks to reminds me, I wasn't able to find it, looks like the time you update the hornresp is faster the the time we needs to memorize and learn all features.


One more questions, Do the lines in the System model represent how each segment connects? if yes, so the lines defines where they start and where they finish witch also defines the orientation of the segment, I mean cross sectional areas are in the "line sides" of blocks H.

have a good day.

 

[David McBean]

Do the lines in the System model represent how each segment connects?

Yes.

The system model can be thought of as the acoustical equivalent to an electrical circuit diagram. In the system model, current becomes volume velocity and voltage becomes pressure.

if yes, so the lines defines where they start and where they finish witch also defines the orientation of the segment, I mean cross sectional areas are in the "line sides" of blocks H.

Yes again.

Note that when a loudspeaker wizard slider has the focus, the location of the associated parameter is shown on the system model.

Using the default record as an example, when the S2 slider has the focus the planes of the horn segment 1 mouth cross-sectional area and the horn segment 2 throat cross-sectional area are highlighted in red, as shown in Attachment 1.

Similarly, length L23 is shown highlighted in Attachment 2, volume Vrc is shown highlighted in Attachment 3, front and rear diaphragm areas Sd are shown highlighted in Attachment 4 and horn segment 1 filling material Fr1 is shown highlighted in Attachment 5.

 

[LORDSANSUI]

amazing, thank you for the explanation and involved work to implement the feature.

 

[Brian Steele]

What would be the best way, if there was a way at all, to simulate something like this in Hornresp?

Basically I'm trying for something like a Paraflex, but with a larger rear chamber and smaller front chamber.

 

[David McBean]

What would be the best way, if there was a way at all, to simulate something like this in Hornresp?

A BP6P system with an offset driver is probably the closest you are going to get.

 

[Booger weldz]

amazing, thank you for the explanation and involved work to implement the feature.

setting

What would be the best way, if there was a way at all, to simulate something like this in Hornresp?

View attachment 1091269

Basically I'm trying for something like a Paraflex, but with a larger rear chamber and smaller front chamber.

Don’t because it’s wrong already

am i the only one who listens to GM? He’s never ever steered me wrong and everything he says always leads to a gold mine

www. hyper phs..

 

[Booger weldz]

This isn’t rocket science once you do it the right way and give horn response a fair opportunity to show you something

In fact, you quickly figure out how it’s all the same exact thing youre just approaching it from the other side or upstream of the same side akready (2 x lamda/4)

Either you’re lining it up appropriately as one entire system or you’re screwing it all , up it’s up to you


30,60degres (0.5236, 1.0472 ) or :


0.8660254
1.7320508

100cm (104.72)
50(52.36)

86.4hz
172.8hz

sq rt 0.75
sq rt 3

864 x2 minus 864 is sq rt of 3 • 864


Heart and soul to Pythagorean theorem and the explanation of the exact location of the earth and its orbit of mean radius The astronomical unit) 149.6

 

[Booger weldz]

149.6 hz is 1496000000
metes If you look outside of ‘speAker building

 

[Booger weldz]

What would be the best way, if there was a way at all, to simulate something like this in Hornresp?

View attachment 1091269

Basically I'm trying for something like a Paraflex, but with a larger rear chamber and smaller front chamber.

This doesn’t fit however it is faze aligned or whatever you wanna call that lack of discontinuity between both sides which poisons every single Paraflex model as ‘advertised’ and has since been damped out by stuffing the equivalent of an entire carnival prize guts into the angle bracing😝 Poor little stuffed animals get no respect, I just steal one of the wife’s pillows🤫

 

[Kolbrek]

864 x2 minus 864 is sq rt of 3 • 864

So 864 = sqrt(3) * 864? Interesting...

 

[LORDSANSUI]

Hello David,

Brain Steele make a very good job as you programming the spreadsheets, but unfortunately It didn't work well with Libre Office nor Only Office and due to this I wasn't able to use them to check how they fit each type of Loundspeaker design to Hornresp model types. in addition. I prefer to used CAD system with parametric sketch, so I can check real enclosure 3D model very fast and I have more freedom to change the model, for this purpose FreeCAD has showing a very good tool, while in the past I was using Solidwork but it needs licence, so I drop it for economic reason.

Questions:

Do you mind to confirm that my understanding of system model is right while applying the Hornresp Paraflex PH1 to the Paraflex design type C? see attachment.

S7 can't be defined in the input screen, there is no box for it, it will assume S6 value, right?

S9 defines how big is the area that couples to H3 & H4, and it not correlates with S4 because they are perpendicular (90º) in the 3D space, is this right?

 

[LORDSANSUI]

David, one more thing,

I think there is a BUG with with hornresp using PH1, don't know if affect other types.

Besides I save the input screen in a specific way (see attachment #1) if I close hornresp and open it again, it change below parameters (see attachment #2) resulting in a complet different simulation results and needing the user to change back the unwanted changes.

Below S6 it change from Con to Lrc
Below S8 it change from Con to Tal
Below S9 it change from Con to Atc

It happen all the time, easy to reproduce, and I'm using the latest version 54.30

 

[Booger weldz]

So 864 = sqrt(3) * 864? Interesting...

all of that needs to be squared as in (A squared plus B squared equals C squared) hence the reference to the pythago theorem reference but unfortunately I left that detail out when showing the example as you found, (thank you!)

and C is the same as you would find in e equals MC squared?

e/pi is0.865

Sine and cosine of 30° are both 0.8660254 and 17320508..(60)

86.4 Hz is 1 m 172.8 is 1/2 of meter


1 m long pendulum at the equator swings exactly 30° and one second that is 05236 or 104.72 off of 90


Now look at the driver entry for 300 or 150 cm transmission line which would then cancel the cancellation already at 172.8 Hz or 86.4 Respectively

104.72/300
52.36/150


12 on 6.9375
24 on 13.875
48 on 27.75
96 on 55.5
192 on 111
384 on 222
768 on 444
1536 on 888
3072 on 1776

 

[David McBean]

Do you mind to confirm that my understanding of system model is right while applying the Hornresp Paraflex PH1 to the Paraflex design type C? see attachment.

The connection of H7 to H3 and H4 as shown in your physical design is not the same as that assumed by the system model. You have the mouth of H7 feeding into the sides of H3 and H4, not into their mouth and throat ends respectively.

S7 can't be defined in the input screen, there is no box for it, it will assume S6 value, right?

If S8 is set to Manual the value of S7 will be consistent with the expansion profile defined by S6, S8 and L67 + L78.
If S8 is set to Auto the values of S7 and S8 will be consistent with the expansion profile defined by S6, S9 and L67 + L78 + L89.

S9 defines how big is the area that couples to H3 & H4, and it not correlates with S4 because they are perpendicular (90º) in the 3D space, is this right?

Correct.

S9 defines the mouth area of H7, whereas with unstepped segments S4 defines the mouth area of H3 and the throat area of H4.

 

[David McBean]

I think there is a BUG with with hornresp using PH1

It works just fine for me in a Windows environment. What happens if you export the record and then import it? Do you have the same problem? The other interesting thing is that your screenprints show -0.00 for Fta when all segments are cylindrical. Fta should be 0.00, without the negative sign.

 

[woodo]

I had a play with the new TL controls basically comparing the BS2022 and MJK2021 methods with my as built speakers of a couple of years ago inspired by the BabyLabs boxes. The new tool is a great addition especially providing a good starting point or even an optimum point depending on preferences. I didn't adjust any settings except filling in the new tool.

 

[LORDSANSUI]

The connection of H7 to H3 and H4 as shown in your physical design is not the same as that assumed by the system model. You have the mouth of H7 feeding into the sides of H3 and H4, not into their mouth and throat ends respectively.

Hello David, is there any clue how to proper represent it?

Considering that the system model indicates tree connections at the same time, I can't think other way to do it in a real case. See the attachment #1 for more clear understand what I was thinking, so I took the middle line of H7 mouth and connect this middle line in between H3 (mouth) and H4 (throat) because they are also connecting each other, so it became a side connection wich is wrong, but we can't let an empty volume like in the attachment #2 besides it would be more aligned with the system model, and if I extend H7 (attachment #3) and put it in between H3 and H4 as attachment #3, it would generate only 2 connections but not 3.

Regarding the bug, maybe it's because the record was created in a old version of hornresp? I exported and imported as you suggested and it didn't change, I going to create a new record using the new version and not using old one and see if it fix it.

Thank for the support.

 

[NiilaH]

Firstly, I'd like to say a huge thanks for David J McBean for everything. I've been a hornresp user for more than 15 years and I don't see an end to it. It's been amazing to follow how everything has developed over the years. The refinement process has been great with all the new features that have popped up along the years. Thanks once again.


Considering the use of hornresp, I have one suggestion about a peculiarity which very likely many of you have spotted already, but since I'm not aware of the current state of suggestions/bug reports, I'd like to bring it out just to make sure that that it's out there. The gist of it is that the driver power chart in the filter wizzard section is capped at 800w. It would be very useful if the power (Y axis) would scale similarly to the other charts. Seeing the predicted driver power in it's full effect would make it a whole lot easier to determine suitable filters and limiting for the simulated system when dealing with higher powers.

Thanks once again, and keep up the good work!

 

[David McBean]

I had a play with the new TL controls basically comparing the BS2022 and MJK2021 methods with my as built speakers of a couple of years ago inspired by the BabyLabs boxes. The new tool is a great addition especially providing a good starting point or even an optimum point depending on preferences. I didn't adjust any settings except filling in the new tool.

Hi woodo,

Thanks for the feedback. It's great to hear that the new TL Design tool will be put to good use .

Kind regards,

David

 

[David McBean]

Considering that the system model indicates tree connections at the same time, I can't think other way to do it in a real case.

Me neither. Perhaps it could be worth checking with the experts on the Paraflex Facebook group to see how they go about it?

https://www.facebook.com/groups/bassaz/

My knowledge of paraflex loudspeaker design is effectively non-existent. I was asked to provide the four system models now included in Hornresp, but how they are best applied I must leave to the user .

Regarding the bug, maybe it's because the record was created in a old version of hornresp?

The fact that the record was created using an earlier version of Hornresp should not cause the problem you are seeing, but it would certainly be worth checking just to make sure. I assume that you are probably not using Windows as your operating system, which is the more likely reason.

I going to create a new record using the new version and not using old one and see if it fix it.

Could you please let me know if it makes any difference.