In some respects (like friendly user interface, wizards, sliders and PAR segments and many more examples) this has been the case for YEARS already.
But in other respects (like more segments, ability to check velocity and pressure at any node inside the enclosure, multiple drivers in different places, multiple parallel paths, multiple paths that can converge, diffraction effects and many more examples) it appears that Akabak will remain a necessity, maybe forever. Fortunately the list of things that I need to use Akabak for is getting smaller with every Hornresp update but some of the things on this list are clearly never going to be included in Hornresp.
Regardless, Hornresp remains my favorite choice and I never use anything else unless absolutely necessary. (I'm probably never going to be able to completely get rid of MJK's worksheets, TL.app and Akabak.)
Some of what you are saying leaves me unimpressed.
Multiple drivers in different places.
That is the one thing that would really be a big benefit to Hornresp for me.
But my guess is that it would be a huge development nightmare.
If David ever gets bored out of his mind he can tackle that one.
The multiple segments and being able to check the particle velocity at any point is not so impressive.
Particle velocity is only a calculation. And not to be held onto for dear life.
Throat particle velocity matters more and we have that already.
I have developed a dual concentric horn that I am working on probably the end of this week.
It would be so nice to be able to model it as a set.
But right now I'm content with modeling it in sections.
I'm not even sure that a dual or triple concentric model would be possible to achieve any level of realistic accuracy.
It's very easy to get seduced by all the graphs.
Measurements rule.
Multiple drivers in different places.
That is the one thing that would really be a big benefit to Hornresp for me.
But my guess is that it would be a huge development nightmare.
If David ever gets bored out of his mind he can tackle that one.
The multiple segments and being able to check the particle velocity at any point is not so impressive.
Particle velocity is only a calculation. And not to be held onto for dear life.
Throat particle velocity matters more and we have that already.
I have developed a dual concentric horn that I am working on probably the end of this week.
It would be so nice to be able to model it as a set.
But right now I'm content with modeling it in sections.
I'm not even sure that a dual or triple concentric model would be possible to achieve any level of realistic accuracy.
It's very easy to get seduced by all the graphs.
Measurements rule.
Everything a simulator does is "only a calculation".
Throat velocity only "matters more" if the throat is the narrowest point in the path. If the path narrows significantly anywhere it's very wise to check velocity at that point. Also, if the design is not truly Nd (most are not, most are Od) then the throat velocity makes no difference, in an OD design the throat is closed and velocity is zero so throat velocity is useless information. Thankfully this is not what Hornresp shows, instead it shows Offset Throat velocity, showing that it is indeed useful to look at different places along the path. And how on earth could you properly size a duct between chambers for velocity issues unless you have both more segments (to be able to simulate this scenario in the first place) AND the ability to check velocity at different nodes?
Some designs can't be simulated at all without having multiple parallel pathways. Even an optimized mltl can't be simulated unless you can move the port around and see where you can get best results. And a lot of designs simply have too many abrupt changes in cross sectional area to be simulated at all with Hornresp, so more series segments would be a huge advantage. As I showed very clearly in another thread, stepped horns cannot be simulated accurately with Hornresp, which can only do 2 steps, and there are a LOT of other enclosure types that can't be simulated at all with the current functionality.
If there are significant differences between your sim and your measurements you didn't do an accurate sim. There are obviously things the sim doesn't and can't account for but these things are well understood and we know how the deficiencies will affect the results.
Some people value accurate simulation, some people say simulations are "only a calculation" or some such nonsense. Although Hornresp is by far my favorite simulator, I would never even attempt to use it for something as simple as an mltl since you can't move the port along the path length, and therefore there is no way to optimize an mltl design or simulate an existing mltl if the port is not at the end of the line. But you would never even know that moving the port has such a huge effect on response if your attitude is that simulations are "only a calculation" and "measurements rule". Why not just use WinISD if this stuff doesn't matter? People that have actually done the work will know that accurate simulations match measurements within reasonable and well understood limits and simulators are tremendously useful for things like properly locating a port in an mltl.
To be very clear here, Hornresp is a wonderful tool and I would never want to live without it. In fact I use Hornresp approximately 100 times more than all other simulators combined so clearly it does almost everything I need. But there are some huge glaring gaps. This is not a huge issue though since there are other simulators that cover the gaps nicely. It would be great if Hornresp could do everything but that's simply not reasonable and certainly not to be expected.
Last edited:
Hi Mark and just a guy,
AkAbak and Hornresp are complementary, which is why the AkAbak script export feature was included in Hornresp.
AkAbak can do things that Hornresp can't, and Hornresp can do things that AkAbak can't
.
When using AkAbak for horn design, just remember that it does not have an isophase wavefront model, which means that it is really limited to simulating bass horns, where flare rates are relatively low and mouth sizes are generally small for the cutoff frequency being considered. Also, the horn directivity results can become quite inaccurate in some cases due to the simple "radiation cone" model used.
Kind regards,
David
AkAbak and Hornresp are complementary, which is why the AkAbak script export feature was included in Hornresp.
AkAbak can do things that Hornresp can't, and Hornresp can do things that AkAbak can't
.When using AkAbak for horn design, just remember that it does not have an isophase wavefront model, which means that it is really limited to simulating bass horns, where flare rates are relatively low and mouth sizes are generally small for the cutoff frequency being considered. Also, the horn directivity results can become quite inaccurate in some cases due to the simple "radiation cone" model used.
Kind regards,
David
Hi Mark and just a guy,
AkAbak and Hornresp are complementary, which is why the AkAbak script export feature was included in Hornresp.
AkAbak can do things that Hornresp can't, and Hornresp can do things that AkAbak can't
When using AkAbak for horn design, just remember that it does not have an isophase wavefront model, which means that it is really limited to simulating bass horns, where flare rates are relatively low and mouth sizes are generally small for the cutoff frequency being considered. Also, the horn directivity results can become quite inaccurate in some cases due to the simple "radiation cone" model used.
Kind regards,
David
Looking at research int horn modeling leaves you in awe of what is being accomplished in Hornresp.
Seriously heavy duty FEA programs are used to try and simulate what goes on in some cases and is still only scratching the surface for accuracy.
I have a few paper on simulations of musical instruments and pipe organ pipes.
Interesting stuff indeed.
Yet we are getting useful information from David's "little" program for a plethora of different enclosure designs. And the information is most often pretty close to the measurements.
I can testify to that quite often.
Those reasons are EXACTLY why HR is superior to other modeling programs!
Hi BP1Fanatic,
Let's not get too carried away
.Hornresp doesn't have the flexibility of AkAbak, nor does it have the accuracy that comes with more sophisticated (but slower?) Finite Element programs.
Hopefully though, it strikes a reasonably happy balance between ease-of-use, and the number of features offered.
Kind regards,
David
Hi BP1Fanatic,
Let's not get too carried away
Hornresp doesn't have the flexibility of AkAbak, nor does it have the accuracy that comes with more sophisticated (but slower?) Finite Element programs.
Hopefully though, it strikes a reasonably happy balance between ease-of-use, and the number of features offered.
Kind regards,
David
The most interesting thing I can say that is Hornresp is no less accurate than the FEA programs.
And the difference in the speed of the processing is glacial compared to a Bounding jack rabbit.
Maybe a kangaroo?
Hornresp is Australian after all.
Speaking of things to send Master McBean.
I do remember that you enjoy a nice tipple or two.
What be the beverage of choice ?
We has to send you something , as is forward the bucks so you can get it there of course.
Hi Mark,
It would seem that you haven't compared directivity results then.
Water.
For the umpteenth time - no, you don't!
Kind regards,
David
It would seem that you haven't compared directivity results then
.Water
.For the umpteenth time - no, you don't!
Kind regards,
David
Hi Mark,
It would seem that you haven't compared directivity results then
Water
For the umpteenth time - no, you don't!
Kind regards,
David
True directivity is not up to the big boys.
I'll mail you some dehydrated water .
This stuff is great. Here in Germany its sold as "instant water". Simply pour some water on it and you get instant H20. Works everytime, the quality controls of the suppliers must be very good.
If bought in big quantities, its not too expensive, we buy about 2565³ Units a year. Surprisingly, this stuff ways next to nothing, I wonder how they do it. Comes in two envelopes, air sealed packed, I think they even use it in hospitals - the quality is that good. Great engineering.
Its usable forever. In the past we had seperate Hydrogen and Oxygen plus "instant water", which we had to mix - some heavy explosions back then in our company. A lot of the material was wasted. Nowadays, instant water comes as pre-mixed ingredient which works with simple water from the tab - science has brought as a long way.. No side issues, free from chemicals, simply great.
We tried 2k Instant Water ones instead of the 1k one, but the 1K Instant-Water is good enough. Application of the 1K is much easier, simply mix with water. The 2K was much harder to work with, the set-up time and the cleaning of the tools was too much to deal with.
Almost as good as "air in cans", which sadly got too expensive over the years. Probably some conspiracy behind that....
Last edited:
Adding a fifth segment to Hornresp would impact on most parts of the program and require a massive amount of re-coding. It's not going to happen
.Besides, we need to have something for AkAbak to do
.
Adding a fifth segment to Hornresp would impact on most parts of the program and require a massive amount of re-coding. It's not going to happen
Besides, we need to have something for AkAbak to do
LOL!
run-time error '52'
Got this several times recently with the outdated program, but didn't post it as I thought the new version solved it, but apparently not.
Not sure if all were caused the same way, but this one I'd been looking at the response plot, then returned to the INPUT, clicked EDIT, then TOOLs........
New HP probook/win 7 pro that MS keeps trying to upgrade to win 10 via 'updates' even though it came with a free upgrade disc.
GM
Got this several times recently with the outdated program, but didn't post it as I thought the new version solved it, but apparently not.
Not sure if all were caused the same way, but this one I'd been looking at the response plot, then returned to the INPUT, clicked EDIT, then TOOLs........
New HP probook/win 7 pro that MS keeps trying to upgrade to win 10 via 'updates' even though it came with a free upgrade disc.
GM
