I'm interested in building a 4.5foot tall version of this box can any one offer me some advice. on weather extending the horn path and refolding the horn to create a cabinet of suitable dimensions for my needs is going to have a negative effect?
Chances are that unless you are very well versed with horn resp & have a multitude of horn designs under your belt modifying the Othorn will prove a frustrating and arduous process with very little gain.
A 4.5' tall x 3' deep x 2' wide enclosure is gross 27ft^3 & with that size in mind I would say you should look at either other plans floating around or, if you really want to do some heavy lifting, simming up your own design in that size range.
Don't heed me too much though, I'm fairly green.
-Josh
Extended Othorn 56x36x24
Hi bendepearce,
Assuming that you want to extend one of the 36" dimensions to 54" (4.5ft), and using as reference: the Hornresp simulation from Post #1, and the technical drawing from Post #2:
As a first attempt, if you leave L12 (throat, and the whole left side of the box) alone, and just pull out the right side (mouth, and the turns above the mouth) by moving it 14" [45.72cm] to the right you will increase the individual section length as follows:
L12 from 27.50 to 27.50 (original + 0 x 45.72)
L23 - 218.46 - 355.62 (+ 3 x 45.72)
L34 - 102.76 - 148.48 (+ 1 x 45.72)
L45 - 36.51 - 82.23 (+ 1 x 45.72)
L_total - 385.23 - 613.83 (+ 5 x 45.72)
In other words, take the plan from Post #2, cut it vertically in the middle, add your desired additional box size in the middle, and connect the old turn (corner) points to arrive @ the new divider positions/angles.
You'll end up w/ a lot of low frequency extension, something similar to the DTS-10. I would expect the big peak @ 69Hz to be smaller than in the simulation, but the upper end will not extend as far as the Othorn.
Regards,
P.S.: I used the manufacturer's T/S and Eg=2.83V in my attached simulations.
Hi bendepearce,
Assuming that you want to extend one of the 36" dimensions to 54" (4.5ft), and using as reference: the Hornresp simulation from Post #1, and the technical drawing from Post #2:
As a first attempt, if you leave L12 (throat, and the whole left side of the box) alone, and just pull out the right side (mouth, and the turns above the mouth) by moving it 14" [45.72cm] to the right you will increase the individual section length as follows:
L12 from 27.50 to 27.50 (original + 0 x 45.72)
L23 - 218.46 - 355.62 (+ 3 x 45.72)
L34 - 102.76 - 148.48 (+ 1 x 45.72)
L45 - 36.51 - 82.23 (+ 1 x 45.72)
L_total - 385.23 - 613.83 (+ 5 x 45.72)
In other words, take the plan from Post #2, cut it vertically in the middle, add your desired additional box size in the middle, and connect the old turn (corner) points to arrive @ the new divider positions/angles.
You'll end up w/ a lot of low frequency extension, something similar to the DTS-10. I would expect the big peak @ 69Hz to be smaller than in the simulation, but the upper end will not extend as far as the Othorn.
Regards,
P.S.: I used the manufacturer's T/S and Eg=2.83V in my attached simulations.
Attachments
4.5ft is 54 inches. Funny.
My newest cab the Skhorn is 24x32x54" exactly. Haven't mentioned it over here yet. The first 4 have been built and my pair are about to ship to me so I'll be testing them this spring. It is meant to cover the same bandwidth and applications as the Othorn but offer a bit more sensitivity and higher headroom over most of the bandwidth when using the upper tier drivers. It's not a TH or FLH though. It's a 6th order OD/BP. It's a little bit easier build and is a little more tolerant of a wider range of drivers. It requires 2 drivers per cab though.
Guess I may as well make a design/build thread for it when I get a chance.
Last edited:
Post #323
Hi Y'all,
I should have caught that while I was typing away, but in the second paragraph: 45.72cm is not 14" but 18". The rest seems correct.
Well, hope I got it this time. Looking forward to Josh Ricci's OD/PB. 🙂
Regards,
Hi Y'all,
I should have caught that while I was typing away, but in the second paragraph: 45.72cm is not 14" but 18". The rest seems correct.
Well, hope I got it this time. Looking forward to Josh Ricci's OD/PB. 🙂
Regards,
I really want to see more details about 6th order, i read too much negative feedbacks about it but details can change everything.
There's already a couple of models designed and built. This recent one meant to outperform the Othorn is the Skhorn. There's a big thread on it here with design details, a really nice CNC build (x4), lots of pictures and there's even one for sale - SKHorn - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
The other model is the ZOD Audio MAUL, there's probably a thread on avs about that one too. And there's probably threads on both of them on data-bass forum. One or both of them might already be up on data-bass.
For years I have disliked unnecessary or overly deep slots like the PPSL format and deep OB manifolds for two reasons and occasionally I've been vocal about it. One of the reasons is that it unnecessarily turns the design into a bandpass. Two very bad designs like that are the 12 Dancing Shivas OB and the terrible floor to ceiling length slot loaded "Subwoofer That Shook the World".
At the same time I've been saying that if you WANT to turn the design into a bandpass you can easily do so by slot loading the front of the driver.
Ricci's new designs do exactly that, ported on the rear and slot on the front. He uses a fairly long horn shaped slot to get the desired resonance frequency and shape.
The results can be quite good. For very low tuning this can work really well because the lowest frequencies are port loaded, not horn loaded, so you save a bit of space and wood.
Inspired by Ricci's designs I tried to sim one too recently. I'm not suggesting this is a great design or even that it would beat a simple ported box of the same size (I didn't bother to check, I was just playing), but as you can very clearly see it's easy to get a fairly flat and very wide frequency response out of these things. That's not what most people think of with 6th order bandpass.
This uses a single B&C 21sw115 which is a good bit cheaper than even the 21sw152. And it's got a 10 hz low knee. Shown with and without 8 hz 4th order high pass and 36 hz 1st order lowpass (lowpass for contouring and flattening response). It's only using 320 watts peak and pressures on the cone are extraordinarily low.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Hello everyone. Can someone point me Howard's the final design and cutshert for the othorn please. Thanks
The answer to that is how do you define better? Smaller, lighter, cheaper? Or maybe higher sensitivity, higher long term power handling, more output, deeper extension, easier to build?
Hi Ricci,
Thanks for sharing the above if i am planing to make new subs so, if you send me those files it will really help me out. you send me here asif.zypher@gmail.com
Thanks!
Probably because my PM box here is constantly full. This isn't really the best place to get ahold of me.
does anyone have advice or input on:
1. adding handles or wheels to this plan? 200+lbs is a lot to lift without any handles etc
2. if theres anyway to modify the front of cabinet so it is a bit more aesthetically pleasing? whether thats just a mounting plate to add a grill or something more elaborate?
tnx
1. adding handles or wheels to this plan? 200+lbs is a lot to lift without any handles etc
2. if theres anyway to modify the front of cabinet so it is a bit more aesthetically pleasing? whether thats just a mounting plate to add a grill or something more elaborate?
tnx
Hey so long time Othorn build lurker, I'm looking to build one of these this summer and I have the PDF plans that Ricci put together, I was wondering how necessary the dados and joinery are. In the initial version it looked like they didn't use any. Are they mostly for alignment purposes? This is the version with the doubled up bracing I am referring to.
Thanks, Michael
Thanks, Michael