Tom, give me the cell size and length and I'll calculate the cells for you.
Sladdbarn - what size horn do you want to make and how many cells? We could calculate a design for you. For example you could make an 18 cell horn with cell mouths 10x10cm. You might want to use a 2" driver for a big horn or a 1" driver for a small horn.
Sladdbarn - what size horn do you want to make and how many cells? We could calculate a design for you. For example you could make an 18 cell horn with cell mouths 10x10cm. You might want to use a 2" driver for a big horn or a 1" driver for a small horn.
You got to go aways further to keep up with the pioneers as they hand seam soldered individual tin pieces:
Thank you, very kind, but i dont have the time right now.
Which driver do you think would be the best for 400 - 5000 Hz?
Overview
2" Middle Range Driver
Unique patented Design
118 dB sensitivity 1 W / 1 m
300 Hz Crossover
90 mm Voice Coil
8 or 16 Ohm
Overview
1.5" Middle range driver
Unique patented design
118 dB sensitivity 1 W / 1 m
300 Hz crossover
90 mm voice coil
8 or 16 Ohm
Hmm, with the 4595 1.5" being somewhat inefficient down low Vs 9591; this alone makes it a 'no brainer' choice for me and factoring in that a theoretically ideal point source driver's diameter = ~[141.4*7072.13]^0.5 = ~1000 Hz mean* = ~13543/pi/1000 = 4.311"/10.95 cm eff. dia. throat, makes the 9595's 2" the 'boilerplate' choice of the two.
*equal acoustical power distribution
*equal acoustical power distribution
As GM says, use the 1.5" driver.
$#@! Didn't delete it quick enough.
Posted before noticing I had mislabeled one and response plots were on different horns, so recommend the 2" and if you think about it, this is the same basic scenario why you/some folks prefer the 511/1" be limited to > ~800 Hz XO or better still, the 511E/1.4" combo for 500 Hz XO.
That said, for HIFI/HT apps most are fine, or at least OK with, [me] the 511/1" [preferably attached to a baffle to increase effective mouth area] since it's rarely pushed hard enough to force throat 'honk', so won't be surprised if the majority choose the 1.5".
If you really need to cross low and will be using some sort of tweeter, then the 2" might be a better choice. But I prefer 1.4 or 1.5 because for home use I cross near 600-700Hz.
Presently my 803 multicell horns at driven by the BMS 4592 which sounds great and allows a fairly low crossover point to the Dayton 18" woofer below it. However, the response drops like a rock above 10kHz. This may be because of my backward use of an adapter to get a 2" throat driver onto a 1.4" throat horn.
For its current use in a large outdoor theater, it's not a great handicap. In all other respects it sounds wonderful.
Presently my 803 multicell horns at driven by the BMS 4592 which sounds great and allows a fairly low crossover point to the Dayton 18" woofer below it. However, the response drops like a rock above 10kHz. This may be because of my backward use of an adapter to get a 2" throat driver onto a 1.4" throat horn.
For its current use in a large outdoor theater, it's not a great handicap. In all other respects it sounds wonderful.I wonder, how many cells does one need to have the benefits of a multicell horn? Or is it only a function of cell size and low end cut off? I still have a pair of JBL2445s, which would deserve some nicer horns than the current 2380 clone (not bad, but too small). What would be the optimal cell size, count and LF cut-off for a 2445? I think the 3D printed mold is somewhere in this thread. I think I will modify that one for plywood construction, 3-4 mm thick.
Would the cell look the same for 2x4 and 3x5 size? 16 cells are easier to make than 30, but isn't 8 cells too small for a 2445? There will be a midbass horn below and a horn tweeter above it.
Would the cell look the same for 2x4 and 3x5 size? 16 cells are easier to make than 30, but isn't 8 cells too small for a 2445? There will be a midbass horn below and a horn tweeter above it.
The number of cells isn't related to the driver, AFAIK. Think of a multi-cell as a normal exponential horn first, cells later. Altec mostly kept cell size and length the same for each frequency range, 300, 400, 500 Hz and simply varied the number of cells to change the vertical and horizontal coverage. For example, the 1005 and 1505 horns. The 1005 has two rows of five cells, the 1505 has three rows of five cells. Same cell size for both. They made horns from 2 cells to 18 cells any of which could be driven by their 1.4" exit compression drivers.
First figure out what size and aspect ratio expo horn you want for your driver, then divide that up into cells. Consider the practical limit of how tightly you can cluster them at the small end. You'll see the OP sanded his to a thin wall to get them tight at the small end.
First figure out what size and aspect ratio expo horn you want for your driver, then divide that up into cells. Consider the practical limit of how tightly you can cluster them at the small end. You'll see the OP sanded his to a thin wall to get them tight at the small end.
I was a bit confused, now I think I get it. The total size dictates the low end cut off and coverage, the sizeof the cells HF performance. Sanding the throat part is a must as I see it with this material thickness. When my CNC arrives, I will definitely try at least one cell to see if I am able to finish a project like this.
For sure get those entrance cells thin and tight. I've seen a number of very beautiful wooden multi-cell horns that did not do this, the cell walls were full thickness at the small end. I don't think that's a good idea. Looking forward to seeing what you can do with the CNC.
Beside all the cells? Well, it's usually heavier and more expensive.
Far less high frequency beaming than a single cell horn. The multiple cells spread the goodness around for a better polar response. There are other ways to spread the high frequency response; vanes, sections, lenses. IME multiple cells do it best.
Right, the cell is a very narrow wide BW horn with the axial length based on the desired XO point, throat highest frequency and mouth area IIRC is the mean frequency the horn is tuned to = [[LF*HF]^0.5, but Pano/whoever with a known cell's dimensions can input them in an expo calculator, HR or similar to get all its specs.
Most definitely! The originals were sanded/buffed to a razor's edge to get tightest/smallest summed throat for highest nominally flat HF BW.
Right, it's a function of XO point, polar response, so only difference for JBL would be a different throat adapter.