Hi there,
Ive been playing with hornresp for a while now and keep trying different drivers and started to feel like I was going around in circles to be honest. I have tried several drivers and found that the AV12X dual 2 ohm looks like it models pretty well so here is what I have come up with 2 off them in a 636 litre horn. Power is at 800 watts max before going over max excursion.
When you sample frequencies in spl mode it is showing good response down to 15hz and excursion at 15hz is only 18mm.
Would you mind having a look at it and let me know what you think.
I have had nightmares with the folding part as I just can't seem to get my head around it so any easy suggestions would be appreciated. I would be looking at something taller rather than wider.
cheers
Graham
Ive been playing with hornresp for a while now and keep trying different drivers and started to feel like I was going around in circles to be honest. I have tried several drivers and found that the AV12X dual 2 ohm looks like it models pretty well so here is what I have come up with 2 off them in a 636 litre horn. Power is at 800 watts max before going over max excursion.
When you sample frequencies in spl mode it is showing good response down to 15hz and excursion at 15hz is only 18mm.
Would you mind having a look at it and let me know what you think.
I have had nightmares with the folding part as I just can't seem to get my head around it so any easy suggestions would be appreciated. I would be looking at something taller rather than wider.
cheers
Graham
Attachments
There is a very good reason ( I think ) for building two. And that is to better the current system I have which is two 15 cu ft FI Q18's. I built them so they have multi tunes. I have a 12.5hz, 17.5hz and 21.5hz tunes and winisd models one sub in the 17.5hz tune to 117db at 20hz. A single horn models about 125db at 20hz and that is with 800 watts instead off 1000 watts.
I prefer my 17.5hz tune which is why I would go for a horn with that kind off tune.
I have read that horns have alot less distortion and have more 40hz and up impact which is what I am looking for.
I just wish I could get my head around this folding lark. Maybe it will just click. I can use sketchup and have plotted a single long horn, I just can't get it in my head how to fold it.
cheers
Graham
I prefer my 17.5hz tune which is why I would go for a horn with that kind off tune.
I have read that horns have alot less distortion and have more 40hz and up impact which is what I am looking for.
I just wish I could get my head around this folding lark. Maybe it will just click. I can use sketchup and have plotted a single long horn, I just can't get it in my head how to fold it.
cheers
Graham
Hi again,
Take a look at the AVS-Forum thread on the DTS-10, that will give you an idea on the folding, you can study that layout, and bend around the sections to fit your requirements (scratch it out on a piece of paper, cut it out, and re-sort the sections).
As to the Hornresp model, use Par instead of Con, it has been reported, that Par more closely reflects the type of build with two parallel sides and two slanting sides. Use the four section model, it has more fexibility when you are trying to design anything with more than one major fold. There are two dips right around the first major peak, by changing L45 you can level out that area. In general keep S2 larger than Sd/3 (or, for a dual, 2xSd/3), also you may want to shoot for a response that's slightly tilted downward at the low end to compensate for excessive lows. Maybe you have noticed, that you can click "Show Baseline" in the Wizard, that can be handy to see the impact of this or that change in the model. Try not to have any dimensions that are so critical, that even changing the slider a little bit will result in major frequency response changes.
Regards,
Take a look at the AVS-Forum thread on the DTS-10, that will give you an idea on the folding, you can study that layout, and bend around the sections to fit your requirements (scratch it out on a piece of paper, cut it out, and re-sort the sections).
As to the Hornresp model, use Par instead of Con, it has been reported, that Par more closely reflects the type of build with two parallel sides and two slanting sides. Use the four section model, it has more fexibility when you are trying to design anything with more than one major fold. There are two dips right around the first major peak, by changing L45 you can level out that area. In general keep S2 larger than Sd/3 (or, for a dual, 2xSd/3), also you may want to shoot for a response that's slightly tilted downward at the low end to compensate for excessive lows. Maybe you have noticed, that you can click "Show Baseline" in the Wizard, that can be handy to see the impact of this or that change in the model. Try not to have any dimensions that are so critical, that even changing the slider a little bit will result in major frequency response changes.
Regards,
Attachments
i thougt ratio 3:1 for 12",but maybe others can comment on that.
if u make s2 bigger ,it gets more "peaky" on the ends of the pasband.
u could compensate that with a inducter coil in series wit the driver.
Hi Graham,
The consensus seems to be that properly designed tapped horns have lower losses at high SPLs, and generally provide an additional 9 to 10 dB output. When you read through some of the comments in the AVS-Forum thread on the DTS-10 you will find, that people have replaced some very large subwoofer installations with one or two of the dual 12" tapped horns. Two should be sufficient to do structural damage, what more can you ask for
.
Epa's layout from Post #9 looks fine, especially for a single, it is basically the layout Don Snyder made for the LAB12. I would still recommend you look at the DTS-10, the dual driver "push-pull" position does reduce distortion.
There have been higher compression ratios used when providing a coupling chamber between the drivers and the horn throat, but the design becomes a bit more complex (see JLH's work in the collaborative thread around Post #2362). It all depends on the usage and the drivers.
Regards,
The consensus seems to be that properly designed tapped horns have lower losses at high SPLs, and generally provide an additional 9 to 10 dB output. When you read through some of the comments in the AVS-Forum thread on the DTS-10 you will find, that people have replaced some very large subwoofer installations with one or two of the dual 12" tapped horns. Two should be sufficient to do structural damage, what more can you ask for
.Epa's layout from Post #9 looks fine, especially for a single, it is basically the layout Don Snyder made for the LAB12. I would still recommend you look at the DTS-10, the dual driver "push-pull" position does reduce distortion.
There have been higher compression ratios used when providing a coupling chamber between the drivers and the horn throat, but the design becomes a bit more complex (see JLH's work in the collaborative thread around Post #2362). It all depends on the usage and the drivers.
Regards,
Last edited:
Oliver,
This is why it is so important to get this right. I am willing to pay someone if it comes to it. Its easy to design a ported sub which has lots off output but getting one with a very low group delay is another matter. I want the tightness off a sealed sub but with the low end output off a ported and I think that the horn will give me that, I hope.
What do you think?
cheers
Graham
This is why it is so important to get this right. I am willing to pay someone if it comes to it. Its easy to design a ported sub which has lots off output but getting one with a very low group delay is another matter. I want the tightness off a sealed sub but with the low end output off a ported and I think that the horn will give me that, I hope.
What do you think?
cheers
Graham
Hi Graham,
I would start with getting the T/S parameters of my speakers nailed down (before and after break-in), if they are similar to the factory specifications, I would design a fold around the Hornresp Input from Post #11. With your posted specs the AV12X looks like a formidable candidate for a TH.
Regards,
I would start with getting the T/S parameters of my speakers nailed down (before and after break-in), if they are similar to the factory specifications, I would design a fold around the Hornresp Input from Post #11. With your posted specs the AV12X looks like a formidable candidate for a TH.
Regards,
Hi Graham
Here's one folded like Chris' & Tony's Lab12. It's 17.5 x 42.5 x 72 inches outside, and has the drivers inline. It would be better if one of the drivers
could be flipped and wired reverse polarity, but it would make the fold much more complicated. The Lab12 (left) is total overkill, your's would be twice
as powerful plus!
Here's one folded like Chris' & Tony's Lab12. It's 17.5 x 42.5 x 72 inches outside, and has the drivers inline. It would be better if one of the drivers
could be flipped and wired reverse polarity, but it would make the fold much more complicated. The Lab12 (left) is total overkill, your's would be twice
as powerful plus!
Attachments
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.