Collaborative Tapped horn project - Page 114 - diyAudio
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 10th February 2008, 10:05 AM   #1131
AndrewT is offline AndrewT  Scotland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Scottish Borders
Quote:
Originally posted by MaVo
Well if one made each pipe 1 meter long and did the expansion in 6 steps what would you get?

Quote:
Originally posted by AndrewT
85Hz has a wavelength of 4m, leaving the quarter wavelength at 1m.

Quote:
Originally posted by GM


Where did you get 85 Hz/4 m?
He asks what would you get for 1m long stepped pipes.
85Hz has a 4m wavelength and based on the info in the Danley quote, he asks us to believe that if the quarter wavelength is longer than any physical speaker dimension it equates to the theoretically correct shape.
__________________
regards Andrew T.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2008, 01:44 PM   #1132
MaVo is offline MaVo  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
I am wondering, in which kind of implementation the tapped horn has the biggest advantage in comparison to a similar sized frontloaded horn. for example, i modeled a 40-300hz horn of both kinds, both use the same driver, have the same +-1db frequency response, the same volume, maxspl etc. here, using a TH has no benefit. can you show me cases where a TH is better (lower cutoff or more max spl or more linear response etc.) per volume than a normal frontloaded horn?

The attached picture shows both.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg comparison.jpg (50.0 KB, 1088 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2008, 06:37 PM   #1133
tb46 is offline tb46  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Default MaVo_horn comparison

Hi MaVo: I think Tom Danley pointed out, that the main benefit for the tapped horn is size reduction. Bye the way, what is the speaker you are modelling?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg diyaudio_mavo_comparison.jpg (50.0 KB, 1016 views)
__________________
Oliver
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2008, 06:40 PM   #1134
tb46 is offline tb46  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Default MaVo_horn comparison

Here is a quick re-model.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg diyaudio_mavo_comp_try.jpg (85.5 KB, 1053 views)
__________________
Oliver
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2008, 09:05 PM   #1135
MaVo is offline MaVo  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Default Re: MaVo_horn comparison

Quote:
Originally posted by tb46
Hi MaVo: I think Tom Danley pointed out, that the main benefit for the tapped horn is size reduction. Bye the way, what is the speaker you are modelling?
This speaker was just a test, nothing i would build. I am still researching what kind of subwoofer will be the best for my listening preferences.

Yes, Danley said that, but as my example showed, the size reduction is not allways there. There have to be some paramter combinations, where the TH benefit over a normal horn is maximised and i want to know which that are.

Quote:
Originally posted by tb46
Here is a quick re-model.
Thats not really comparable, as i used 2 drivers and you one. But your example shows, that one is sacrificing the midbass smoothness for a smaller cabinet. Perhaps this is the direction in which the optimum performance of THs lies, as narrow bandwidth (2 octaves) low frequency transducers. The more you approach the normal frontloaded horn geometry / size, the more bandwidth you gain and the smaller is the difference between TH and normal horn.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2008, 09:23 PM   #1136
tb46 is offline tb46  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Default MaVo_horn comparison

Hi MaVo: I agree it is obviously a subwoofer. Sorry for overlooking the dual drivers. Here is an example with 2 drivers, and with some more work the size can probably be decreased a little more, but this is already quite "small".
Attached Images
File Type: jpg diyaudio_mavo_comp_try2.jpg (84.3 KB, 1013 views)
__________________
Oliver
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2008, 09:57 PM   #1137
MaVo is offline MaVo  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Thanks for the participation tb46, it seems - as you pointed out, that the interesting thing in THs is the ability to make the compromise of having a smaller bandwidth and getting the bonus, that a smaller volume can reproduce it with good response, all in comparison to a normal horn.

The only thing i want to get rid of, are the extreme high q peaks in the octave above the passband, to minimise the distortion of the horn, which will be to a big part, directly above the passband. So, if we achieve a TH with a falling response above its passband, it will be considerably lower in distortion.

As cowanaudio pointed out, the peaks may in reality be smaller than in simulation due to various "losses", but still, a falling response will be better.

I assume, the magic lies in choosing the right type of driver. This very high fs, high bl driver i used, has a really high cutoff, and is not practical for a TH sub. For the right driver, a high LE may help, as it lowers the R/L corner and so the upper cutoff. High mms, low fs, medium qes drivers would be probably the right choice for a lower frequency oriented small bandwidth horn. something as the lab12 perhaps?
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2008, 10:52 PM   #1138
tb46 is offline tb46  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Texas
Default MaVo_horn comparison

Hi MaVo: quote Post #1137: "I assume, the magic lies in choosing the right type of driver."

I agree. William Cowan seems to be the expert on that subject (besides Tom Danley, of course). But, it is also a systems design challenge. Yesterday I found a thread on the Klipsch Forum: "Danley Labs DTS-20 On The Way." This is a great thread pertaining to a DTS-20 installation (and major home remodelling), and contains a few internal pictures that confirm what I had assumed before, namely that Tom uses resonators and passive filtering to tame some of the major problems. Even if these big peaks can be reduced with parametric filters and a high order low pass, it still makes a lot of sense to do what you can do relatively easily right at the speaker level. It might also make the integration with the main speaker system easier.
__________________
Oliver
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2008, 12:14 AM   #1139
MaVo is offline MaVo  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Those interior DTS20 photos utterly confuse me! What purpose have the pipes?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg dts20in.jpg (72.8 KB, 1223 views)
  Reply With Quote
Old 11th February 2008, 12:28 AM   #1140
diyAudio Member
 
cowanaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Canberra, Australia
G'day MaVo

They are resonators tuned to the same frequency as the first few response peaks. You'd probably find that each branch is 1/4 WL of each peak in question. The ~5mH series inductor flattens the response and removes some of the higher frequency stuff (It's DCR doesn't hurt in many cases, too).

Cheers

William Cowan
  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



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21 AM.


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