MJK's Fostex FF125wk BLH project - Page 3 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Full Range

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 9th January 2013, 07:43 PM   #21
diyAudio Member
 
Godzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New York
Thanks Scott! One day I'll get around to building another back horn.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th January 2013, 09:49 PM   #22
chrisb is online now chrisb  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: victoria BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottmoose View Post
Right. See the thread I linked to. It's an internal Helmholtz resonator / absorber. It works in the same way as the bass-traps sometimes used to kill a problematic room-mode, which are essentially a big empty box tuned to said problem frequency.

In this case, Martin has tuned it to, or just above, the intended Fh (upper corner-frequency) of the horn in order to provide a higher order acoustic low-pass slope. Since most such resonators are narrow band devices, the slope will ultimately resemble a cauer filter, so the trick is to shunt the secondary peak > 40dB down to maximise the benefits.


Are the funny little vented chambers in Lowther designs like the Fidelio, etc at all related to Hemholtz resonators, or something else altogether - and is it possible to model them with DIY accessible software?
__________________
you don't really believe everything you think, do you?
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com commercial site planet10-HiFi
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th January 2013, 09:53 PM   #23
diyAudio Member
 
Scottmoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
It's been a while since I looked at them, & I'm on my decrepit laptop at the moment, so probably best if I don't try now. From memory though, yes, they're a variation on the theme. Akabak can model them easily enough.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th January 2013, 12:25 PM   #24
Colin is offline Colin  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
In Martin's article he talks about the line transitioning from TL to horn loading.

What is the benefit of the horn-loading part of this? Is it purely to provide more output for low xmax drivers?
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th January 2013, 03:45 PM   #25
diyAudio Member
 
Scottmoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
No, it's an inevitability with an expanding line. Martin defines horn loading in terms of impedance matching, i.e. the lowest frequency to which the pipe is impedance matched (determined by the terminus area & local boundary conditions), & anything below that as TL action.

Not that it matters, I just call anything that expands toward the terminus a horn, since it will have some degree of 1/2 wave resonant behaviour present. In both cases, the point is that in a compromised horn where the expansion area is reduced compared to the theoretical ideal, even when boundary loaded, Fo and Fc are not necessarily the same, and if that is the case, the region between the two is dominated by QW action. Martin's approach to the nomenclature makes this point somewhat more overtly.

Last edited by Scottmoose; 10th January 2013 at 03:48 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th January 2013, 03:51 PM   #26
Colin is offline Colin  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Thanks. I must say I like the pragmatic approach Martin takes with his designs and the reverse approach of this one seems very practical.

Now, I'm not against horns but I presume that these days the need for a horn or horn/TL hybrid is purely to make best use of a particular drive unit, especially when operating with a single driver?
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th January 2013, 04:50 PM   #27
diyAudio Member
 
Scottmoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
No problem.

Reverse approach?

Depends on circumstance when it comes to 'best use.' Horns & their variations are generally efficient, & are broader band gain devices compared to smaller vented boxes, which can be useful for lower Q drivers. With that said, it's a myth that very low Q drivers are necessary or indeed optimal for back horns. If the driver's mass-corner is higher than it is practical to run a back load of any kind (once amplifier output impedance is factored in), then you'll need some Eq, or a short front horn to fill in the dip in the response.

Outside of that, many people like the sound. A horn is usually coupling to substantially more air than a small vent BR, sealed box, OB or whatever, so the in-room power-response is very different.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th January 2013, 05:03 PM   #28
chrisb is online now chrisb  Canada
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: victoria BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin View Post

Now, I'm not against horns but I presume that these days the need for a horn or horn/TL hybrid is purely to make best use of a particular drive unit, especially when operating with a single driver?
While it's not always the case, this is particularly true when higher sensitivity FR drivers are selected - such as in combination with a cherished flea-power SE amp (say a DHT 45 or 2A3).

This class of driver, ranging from budget Fostex such as FE126, to the esoteric Lowthers, AER, Feastrex - name your poison - often require the LF gain that a BLH can provide if not supported by separate woofers .
__________________
you don't really believe everything you think, do you?
community sites t-linespeakers.org, frugal-horn.com commercial site planet10-HiFi
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th January 2013, 05:07 PM   #29
Colin is offline Colin  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
By reverse approach I meant the selection of enclosure dimensions as a starting point. I'm more used to reading that you start with the horn and then figure out how to fold it into a box.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th January 2013, 05:13 PM   #30
diyAudio Member
 
Scottmoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Ah, I see what you mean. Yes, I agree, designing a horn & then trying to work out a way to fold it up afterward isn't ideal. Since I tend to use the folding scheme as a functional part of the low-pass filter, it's viewed as a component throughout the design stages.

Last edited by Scottmoose; 10th January 2013 at 05:23 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Disadvantage for place the Fostex 168e sigma into Fostex 166e BLH enclosure ? davidshya Full Range 2 27th January 2013 09:41 PM
Fostex ff125wk drivers and amps and more for sale? cross reference Swap Meet 0 15th December 2012 08:31 PM
Mileva Build Using Fostex FF125WK Drivers tomlang Full Range 7 21st November 2012 03:52 AM
fostex ff125wk vs markaudio alpair 7.3 (or10.2) castorG Full Range 4 20th October 2012 07:12 PM
taming harshness of fostex FF125WK hajj Full Range 133 15th October 2012 04:34 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:14 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2