Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Subwoofers

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 24th December 2011, 03:32 PM   #1161
NEO Dan is offline NEO Dan  United States
diyAudio Member
 
NEO Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: N.E. Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by PASC View Post
Hi!
Hey PASC,
Could you post the images instead of linking back to your host page? They have adds for adult stuff above your images. Use the link for your picture and the [IMG] tag.
__________________
Regards,
Dan
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th December 2011, 03:33 PM   #1162
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by djk View Post
1W into one, two, or four TH.

Click the image to open in full size.
Why do I read contradicting statements all the time about multiples not pushing the "knee" a few hz lower?

You can clearly see in the sims that the way the knee falls off around 40hz is much lower with 4 cabinets then it is with only 1.
Is this just due to a smoothed response?
Yet some say this is true some say this isn't....

Last edited by m R g S r; 24th December 2011 at 03:37 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th December 2011, 03:34 PM   #1163
AndrewT is offline AndrewT  Scotland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Scottish Borders
Attach documents to the post.
Don't use remote server.
__________________
regards Andrew T.
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th December 2011, 03:43 PM   #1164
NEO Dan is offline NEO Dan  United States
diyAudio Member
 
NEO Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: N.E. Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by m R g S r View Post
Why do I read contradicting statements all the time about multiples not pushing the "knee" a few hz lower?

You can clearly see in the sims that the way the knee falls off around 40hz is much lower with 4 cabinets then it is with only 1.
Is this just due to a smoothed response?
Yet some say this is true some say this isn't....
It depends if your TH array adds up to a propper mouth area. I find it to be effective.
Attached Images
File Type: png EBTH_AURA_NS6_TPV.png (102.6 KB, 294 views)
__________________
Regards,
Dan
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th December 2011, 06:35 PM   #1165
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by m R g S r View Post
Why do I read contradicting statements all the time about multiples not pushing the "knee" a few hz lower?

You can clearly see in the sims that the way the knee falls off around 40hz is much lower with 4 cabinets then it is with only 1.
Is this just due to a smoothed response?
Yet some say this is true some say this isn't....
Those of us that have actually measured single TH against multiples have found the low corner does not change as it does for FLH in multiples.

Going from one to four cabinets with the same voltage drive gives a 12 dB increase in level, and the increased frontal area provides greater directivity, which can add even more level on axis.

Those level increases make it easy to think the low corner has gone lower, but so far I have not seen any actual measurements showing that to be the case.

Art Welter
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th December 2011, 08:52 PM   #1166
NEO Dan is offline NEO Dan  United States
diyAudio Member
 
NEO Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: N.E. Ohio
Quote:
Originally Posted by weltersys View Post
the low corner does not change as it does for FLH in multiples.
Hi Art,
Why do you think this is?
__________________
Regards,
Dan
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th December 2011, 08:55 PM   #1167
Djim is offline Djim  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: 'Ollanda
Quote:
Originally Posted by NEO Dan View Post
Hi Art,
Why do you think this is?
Sorry I'm not Art but I can explain.

‘Traditional’ horns like Front Loaded Horns (FLH's) are designed in such way that the mouth area is smaller than optimum. We do design ‘traditional’ horns with a smaller than optimum mouth area to make them physically smaller so they become transportable.

By the acoustic coupling of several mouth areas of ‘traditional’ horns they become one large mouth area that is closer to its ‘ideal’ area. Because of this phenomenon you will see besides the drop of the low corner a further rise in amplitude of its low corner.

TH’s already have an ‘ideal’ mouth that is already in full conjunction with its system. Actually that is the point behind TH’s what makes them unique. That the mouth area is much smaller than those of ‘traditional’ horns is just a matter of a different working mechanism and a personal choice. In other words: if you design a traditional horn with an ideal sized mouth they would couple more or less the same as TH’s! (I stated more or less because its a little more complex but that isn't of major importance in this matter).

People that have worked with large stacks of FLH’s know that after a certain amount of units there is almost no drop in low corner any longer. With the old classical Fane horns that number was around 8 while the “Punisher” needs more then 12 to find to this point.

I’ll try to explain it in another way. If you build a physical extension for your TH (by the 0.6 diagonal concept) it will lower it’s low corner but will not give any extra dB to the output! If you build a physical extension for a traditional horn (by the 0.6 diagonal concept) the low corner drops AND you will see a rise in amplitude of the low corner.

You can easily model that in HornResp. Pick any TH and when you extend the total horn path after S4 (driver position) with factor 0.6 of the diagonal of the mouth (in other words keep S4 on the exact same position) and multiply the mouth area by 2, you will see a small drop of its low corner but no amplification at the low corner!

Now pick any FLH with a smaller than ideal mouth area (iow non full sized horns). When you extend the horn path length with 0.6 of the diagonal of the horn mouth and multiply the horn mouth area by 2 you will see a similar drop of the low corner but with a rise in amplitude at the low corner. This means the mouth area is getting to a better ratio with the system behind it.

Hopefully this clears up your question.

Last edited by Djim; 24th December 2011 at 09:06 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th December 2011, 09:42 PM   #1168
NEO Dan is offline NEO Dan  United States
diyAudio Member
 
NEO Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: N.E. Ohio
I think the answer is if you do it right it works.
As an example I'll use the design I posted above as an example:
Click the image to open in full size.

1@2.83v vs 4 @2v
Attached Images
File Type: png 1vs4.png (25.3 KB, 211 views)
__________________
Regards,
Dan
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th December 2011, 10:47 PM   #1169
Djim is offline Djim  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: 'Ollanda
Quote:
Originally Posted by NEO Dan View Post
I think the answer is if you do it right it works.
As an example I'll use the design I posted above as an example: 1@2.83v vs 4 @2v
Hi Dan,

Some people noticed their TH in real live do measure lower and have an earlier roll off. The main reason is because of what you show us. Your ‘real’ cab isn’t represented by any HornResp plot . The red surfaces are not seen at all by HornResp and therefore a real measurement from such stack will look different.

What happens is you extend the radiating area (red surfaces) and therefore the "horn bubble". Also you extend the path physically by placing the cabs under a small corner from each other. In such example you will see in measurements your knee point drops while the roll off starts earlier as predicted. In other words your TH plays lower as predicted at the cost of an earlier roll off. This way of positioning can make up till a certain degree but I call that: 'tuning until you'll get the best response', which is a very good way the get the maximum efficiency from your system.

HornResp only shows what happens if the mouth areas are coupled without any space between them and no extra radiating surface is created. If you want to get close to the response from any HornResp, design your cab in such way there is a minimum of radiating surface. If you do so you will see the drop of the low corner after stacking, just like HornResp predicted.

Click the image to open in full size.

Last edited by Djim; 24th December 2011 at 10:52 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th December 2011, 10:50 PM   #1170
NEO Dan is offline NEO Dan  United States
diyAudio Member
 
NEO Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: N.E. Ohio
The red surfaces are accounted for in the 4 cab sim.
__________________
Regards,
Dan
  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
Here is a Challenge latala Solid State 41 12th May 2011 01:13 AM
Renovation Challenge ZirconiumZephyr Multi-Way 16 1st September 2009 08:38 AM
Design Challenge #1 kgillies Subwoofers 12 13th June 2007 03:20 PM
a challenge --or I need help lawrence99 Car Audio 0 9th March 2005 04:44 AM
The challenge ! thylantyr Solid State 51 24th July 2003 08:41 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16 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