To Everyone, I know that round horns take up a lot more room and don’t forget about the construction difficulties Is there any benefit in sound quality and output level ? Maybe less reflection back when folding the expanding horn ? Subs / Mids and Tops ? I would love to hear what you know about this
Kind Regards clf
Kind Regards clf
Studio Sound . March 1994, Phillip Newell "'ROUND THE HORN"
rectangular shapes are useful for instances where different horizontal and vertical characteristics are desired.
https://americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Studio-Sound/90s/Studio-Sound-1994-03.pdf
rectangular shapes are useful for instances where different horizontal and vertical characteristics are desired.
https://americanradiohistory.com/Archive-Studio-Sound/90s/Studio-Sound-1994-03.pdf
Well, there are elliptical / oval shaped horns too! It combines both: better sq and different v/h dispersion.
But for low frequency reproduction, its quite unpractical to make huge round horns and even then it does not make sense that much as it does for midrange and up.
But for low frequency reproduction, its quite unpractical to make huge round horns and even then it does not make sense that much as it does for midrange and up.
Last edited:
I have a pair of elliptical horns - much like a downsized version of what was used in the "Paragon". Mine are very beamy but make ruler smooth curves on axis.
The only real benefit to round horns is the throat, mouth transition and with modern CAD/CAM other transition shapes can be made 'close enough'.
GM
GM
It is easy to start with a round compression driver and continue round without creating disturbances.
If we consider Olsen, then a round waveguide would not be the ideal candidate for minimum diffraction and the related FR anomalies..........the elliptical would be the best choice.
Now I wonder, is there elliptical horns available for 2" drivers. 700Hz - 5000Hz or so. I have pair of JBL 2445J + 2380A and looking for better horns.
Maybe you could try to cut a 1.4" elliptical waveguide off where it is 2" in diameter and construct some kind of mounting plate yourself.
I guess most of them are still round where the reach a diameter of 5". But I don't know how well it would actually sound.
Regards
Charles
Hi phase accurate,
The horn will only be about 5'' long, can't you make something out of cardboard to experiment, once you have worked it out make it out of fiberglass or wood or plaster
Kind Regards, clf
The horn will only be about 5'' long, can't you make something out of cardboard to experiment, once you have worked it out make it out of fiberglass or wood or plaster
Kind Regards, clf
I run round tractrix horns from 700hz to 5khz and the only issue with then is they beam like crazy. No problem for me because I only have one chair in my room. When I sit dead center between the horns,and they are pointing right at me, the sound stage is better than any speakers I've ever heard.
12 inches either side of center and it all falls apart.
12 inches either side of center and it all falls apart.
Yup. Head in a vice. It works quite well for many, many systems, but how we perceive tone, both from a hearing mechanism and a personal interpretation standpoint, makes laserbeam setups impossible for some listeners- they notice the absence of reflections. For others, it's the clearest lens into the music and so it's preferred.
Wavelengths hate symmetry. Here's a short list of reasons why round horns are inferior:
1) round horns have symmetrical radiation. Generally we prefer wide horizontal beamwidth and narrow vertical beamwidth.
2) round horns suffer from a dip on axis. The dip is caused by the symmetry of the device.
3) a fraction of the energy radiated by a horn is reflected back down the throat. AKA "higher order modes." In a round horn, those reflections are symmetrical.
4) For a given footprint, a round horn may have narrower beamwidth because the volume of the horn is 29.3% less than a rectangular horn. (Because a circle has a smaller volume than a square.)
There's probably some other reasons I forgot.
For my money, rectangular waveguides are the best choice. They break up the symmetry and offer the widest beamwidth for a given footprint.
I'm also a fan of taking it a step further and breaking up the symmetry all the way to the phase plug, like Voishvillo does in the JBL ring radiators.
@Patrick, your conclusions are half baked
1. The shape of the source and the room are incompatible with each other, finer compromises are needed to make the transition.
2. Dips are due to inadequate treatment. All shapes deal with the same diffraction. Non round scatters more in a less controlled way.
3. Sufficient treatment is a thorough treatment, on a round device.
4. Why assume these things are being left to chance?
1. The shape of the source and the room are incompatible with each other, finer compromises are needed to make the transition.
2. Dips are due to inadequate treatment. All shapes deal with the same diffraction. Non round scatters more in a less controlled way.
3. Sufficient treatment is a thorough treatment, on a round device.
4. Why assume these things are being left to chance?
Are Round Horns Better, for a given volume is maybe what I should have asked,
Example: you have just completed your horn in hornresp, now that data is the same no matter what shape it is.
So are Round Horns Better is the only variable. Maybe different parts of the horn could have a different shape but will always have the correct volume for that section
Now my view is and I’m no expert but looking at it from a flow point of view and from the fact that humans have been making horn for thousands of years and none of them are square also if you look at an orchestra, the drums are round the wind instruments are round, even the hole in an acoustic guitar is round etc. A round speaker fitted to a rectangle shape at the start of the horn would have far more uneven pressure applied to the cone and also a degree of filtering I would think, also not forgetting turbulence and air flow noise from uneven pressures, isn’t this exactly what you need to avoid when trying to connect / couple with the air, and all this before you have even compressed the air.
Example: you have just completed your horn in hornresp, now that data is the same no matter what shape it is.
So are Round Horns Better is the only variable. Maybe different parts of the horn could have a different shape but will always have the correct volume for that section
Now my view is and I’m no expert but looking at it from a flow point of view and from the fact that humans have been making horn for thousands of years and none of them are square also if you look at an orchestra, the drums are round the wind instruments are round, even the hole in an acoustic guitar is round etc. A round speaker fitted to a rectangle shape at the start of the horn would have far more uneven pressure applied to the cone and also a degree of filtering I would think, also not forgetting turbulence and air flow noise from uneven pressures, isn’t this exactly what you need to avoid when trying to connect / couple with the air, and all this before you have even compressed the air.
My thinking the way a horn should be, working on the basis of flow rate and minimal reflections within the horn all the way to the mouth are,
At the start a round entrance, a round compression zone, when the horn has to be folded the shape would become oval at the rate of expansion of the horn only, then back to round again, as you are approaching the mouth the shape would become rectangle only because of the size a round mouth would have to be but you must also consider vibration at the mouth so bracing would be required
Am I right in this thinking or completely way off, do sound waves bounce of the internals of a horn like you hit a ball around a squash court ?
At the start a round entrance, a round compression zone, when the horn has to be folded the shape would become oval at the rate of expansion of the horn only, then back to round again, as you are approaching the mouth the shape would become rectangle only because of the size a round mouth would have to be but you must also consider vibration at the mouth so bracing would be required
Am I right in this thinking or completely way off, do sound waves bounce of the internals of a horn like you hit a ball around a squash court ?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.