Hello everyone, been on here quite some time but as a reader until now. I really have something that I can't get sorted in my head, I would really appreciate if you could help.
So the problem is the horn mouth area to achieve true horn loading down to 30/40Hz. Everyone knows a true, real, no compromise horn mouth for that area is going to be big.
I have been thinking a lot lately about multicell horns and how they kind of "bend" the horn mouth of the array as a whole. It becomes a curved rectangle in 3D-space. Since the horn mouths of the individual "cells" touch each other, the cutoff is of course not determined by the horn mouth area of a single cell, but more by the whole array's mouth surface if I understand correctly, just like stacking PA horn subs.
another thing I stumbled upon is the "seismic" sub by Dr Edgar. It is stated that this "down-firing" horn uses the pyramid-shaped deflector to effectively make the surrounding three sides where the sub is elevated the "horn mouth". This horn mouth is therefore a three-dimensional mouth as it is a rectangle that is bent around 2 corners if you will.
Is the pyramid area still a "waveguide"? where do you draw the line?
What do you think of this whole concept? I am trying to find out if I could NOT have a huge planar area that is the horn mouth. I would like to find a way of creating a horn mouth that is "rolled up" in space to a certain degree for the sake of reducing the size of a unit in at least one dimension.
I am talking about monolithic sub horns using one driver here, so this is not a stacking thing.
What are your thoughts on directivity, higher frequency problems or the resulting aspect ratio of the mouth?
I'd love to hear some opinions.
So the problem is the horn mouth area to achieve true horn loading down to 30/40Hz. Everyone knows a true, real, no compromise horn mouth for that area is going to be big.
I have been thinking a lot lately about multicell horns and how they kind of "bend" the horn mouth of the array as a whole. It becomes a curved rectangle in 3D-space. Since the horn mouths of the individual "cells" touch each other, the cutoff is of course not determined by the horn mouth area of a single cell, but more by the whole array's mouth surface if I understand correctly, just like stacking PA horn subs.
another thing I stumbled upon is the "seismic" sub by Dr Edgar. It is stated that this "down-firing" horn uses the pyramid-shaped deflector to effectively make the surrounding three sides where the sub is elevated the "horn mouth". This horn mouth is therefore a three-dimensional mouth as it is a rectangle that is bent around 2 corners if you will.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Is the pyramid area still a "waveguide"? where do you draw the line?
What do you think of this whole concept? I am trying to find out if I could NOT have a huge planar area that is the horn mouth. I would like to find a way of creating a horn mouth that is "rolled up" in space to a certain degree for the sake of reducing the size of a unit in at least one dimension.
I am talking about monolithic sub horns using one driver here, so this is not a stacking thing.
What are your thoughts on directivity, higher frequency problems or the resulting aspect ratio of the mouth?
I'd love to hear some opinions.
Years ago there was a discussion in Sweden about the RT-2 and RT-3 bass horns that have a mouth that is a low slot around 3 sides of the horn. The argument was that the "mirrororing" of the low horn mouth in in the floor further increased the apparent mouth size.
With regard to the stacked pyramide, as far as low bass say below 100 Hz it should do no difference. Lack of reflectors at the bends increase the low pass effect of the bends at higher frequency. On the other hand the pile of boards do add both mass and stiffness to both the bottom and back piece of the horn.
My own test with Kuben internal corner reflectors may improve, worsen or not affect high frequency response depending on the driver and the locations of the bends, If you drive a 12 or 15" driver above 300 Hz deviations from piston behaviour and perhaps different cone and dust cap geometries affect the outcome of adding or removing a reflector in any given design. Trial and error!
With regard to the stacked pyramide, as far as low bass say below 100 Hz it should do no difference. Lack of reflectors at the bends increase the low pass effect of the bends at higher frequency. On the other hand the pile of boards do add both mass and stiffness to both the bottom and back piece of the horn.
My own test with Kuben internal corner reflectors may improve, worsen or not affect high frequency response depending on the driver and the locations of the bends, If you drive a 12 or 15" driver above 300 Hz deviations from piston behaviour and perhaps different cone and dust cap geometries affect the outcome of adding or removing a reflector in any given design. Trial and error!
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.