Danley/LeCleach inspiration

[tinitus]

Wonder if this thing would work

One CD driver in the middle, and any number of low mids
Sort of MMMTMMM modified Danley Synergy horn, with Lecleach mouth

Its big allright

[Mach5]

I think the distance between drivers is too far for 1/4 wavecoupling(the danley way)

1/2 wave coupling on a unity horn! Talk about uncharted territory.

What the advantage this design has over mounting the drivers on the sides, OR what are you trying to accomplish, design goals?

[CLS]

No expert, but I guess the biggest problem would be around the center tweeter. The shape of that "throat" looks a no no for a high frequency operation

[tinitus]

Originally posted by Mach5

What the advantage this design has over mounting the drivers on the sides, OR what are you trying to accomplish, design goals?

Im not sure what I was thinking really

Looking at it now, I may have thought about the problems with an array with just one tweeter

I thought maybe a waveguide array like this would present a unity wavefront, making the distance between drivers a no issue
I also thought, maybe the array mounting, with mid drivers right at the throat would be more ideal than having them on the sides, away from the throat
I believe Danley is doing something similar

The LeCleach back rounding of mouth should be significant too

About the throat
It could easily be even more ideal than any other horn, as you can shape it any way you like, maybe even use an apropriate adaptor
The transistion of the horn itself is on the other hand far from ideal, but that doesnt mean it wouldnt work well in other areas
Most horns/waveguides around arent ideal either

I would like to try it, but too many other projects at the moment

[Mach5]

Originally posted by tinitus




I thought maybe a waveguide array like this would present a unity wavefront, making the distance between drivers a no issue
I also thought, maybe the array mounting, with mid drivers right at the throat would be more ideal than having them on the sides, away from the throat
I believe Danley is doing something similar

The LeCleach back rounding of mouth should be significant too

A unity wavefront doesn't just happen because drivers are close
blending is a matter of wavelength size.
For instance:
IF you have a 25in wavelength(500hz) then in 1/4 wave mode your drivers must be within 6in of each other.
If you have a 7in wavelength(2khz) then your drivers must be within 2.75in



Even if you use 2in cone drivers you'd never be able to get a crossover that was high enough for all those drivers. You would have subwoofer coupling

You might make it work if you had a cascading crossover. Inner drivers coupled at higher frequencies. Outer drivers coupled at lower frequencies.


It seems to me that the horn would only be effective in one plane and not two



All of the danley speakers I've found have the drivers mounted at the sides, near the throat, within a 1/4 wave of the XO frequency. If you know something I don't I am more than interested to hear about as I have my own unity project I am developing right now


I'm not familiar with LeCleach, could you explain a little how this helps? My understanding is it is just a way to way to minimize horn reflections AKA honk.

[tinitus]

Originally posted by Mach5


All of the danley speakers I've found have the drivers mounted at the sides, near the throat, within a 1/4 wave of the XO frequency.
If you know something I don't I am more than interested to hear about as I have my own unity project I am developing right now


I'm not familiar with LeCleach, could you explain a little how this helps? My understanding is it is just a way to way to minimize horn reflections AKA honk.

Im really not very theoretical minded
But I have build many backloaded fore fullrange
Not as many available back then, like there is today
All I can say is that the ones I designed myself, just by using my guts judging by looks, they all sounded better than any of the so called proven design, which vere all pretty much awfull

Nothings perfect, not even when all the theoretical stuff is considered and in place
Many people have build arrays that shouldnt work properly, but people seem to like the sound of them, despite of not being perfect
I know its very different with horns/waveguides

All I want to say is that sometimes things work ok despite of not beeing theoretical perfect
And even the theoretical perfect doesnt always end up very good at all

About LeClech you better search around the forum
Theres plenty of good well documented stuff
Its stated that main differense is the use of very big roundings of mouth
And that it really works
All else is pretty much ordinary

Forgot about 2.5way, could be a good idea with 4 mid drivers
But, MTM might really be the best option

FaitalPro makes a nice 99db 5", and said to be very good, and affordable
Picture below is modified version, 2way or 2.5way
And with a small throat adaptor fore CD driver
Could be elliptical, but would result in mid drivers being slightly further apart
But might be better to favour better conditions fore CD driver

Maybe it could be even bigger, and use bigger midwoofers
And maybe with advantage mount bigger horn "adaptor" fore CD driver

I imagine that the needed woofer system fore this would be a 4 woofer array

Its by far not perfect, but maybe no less than the setup problems of a "standard" big multiway horn system

More critical comments, please

edit
Sorry, forgot you question about the Danley inspiration
Somewhere around here there is a picture of a " mysterious"
Danley array synergy/unity/tapped or whatever
I believe its proto show model, and you probably wont find any info on his site, yet

[MaVo]

Two problems are rendering this idea probably unusable:

First, distance between mid drivers is way to high for lossless addition. It has to be around 1/4WL of the crossover frq. This is a central point of the synergy horn. Yours is just a horn loaded line array with all the line array problems, which the synergy horn solves.

Second, the throat shape for the high freq. driver doesnt look good. No idea what the consequences will be.

Overall, you will get severe comb filtering in the midrange and a distorted high frequency soundfield. Only solution would be to make the xover from mid to high very (impractically?) low, to avoid the comb filters.

[tinitus]

Im not really sure about it either

But Danleys synergy dont look very ideal either, but it still works

But ok, lets try with 2 mid drivers on each side
And maybe also a midwoofer on top and bottom

A bit closer to Danley style
But I really dont see why this would be any better
To me the waveguide mid driver relation/loading looks far worse

Could be that I really dont understand the Danley principle, which to me looks like something that shouldnt work too good, but we know it does

[tinitus]

Originally posted by MaVo


Second, the throat shape for the high freq. driver doesnt look good. No idea what the consequences will be.

Its not really possible at all to see the throat on these drawings
Drawings are not that detailed, nor accurate
What you see is either an adaptor or a complete waveguide, mounted on back of vertical waveguide, if we should call it that instead of synergy/unity

[tinitus]

Nah, I didnt really think it looked good at all

This one is a bit more develloped, and close to what I had in mind and would do, if I had the space

Not much LeCleach about it though, as it would make it even bigger
But I reckon the synergy looks ok now

But it sure is BIG