Acoustic Horn Design – The Easy Way (Ath4)

Good question!

Waterfall?

//
Yeah, that may be the way to inspect it -

So who knows? 🙂

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • sandhorn_csd.png
    sandhorn_csd.png
    44.1 KB · Views: 764
  • sandhorn_sonogram.png
    sandhorn_sonogram.png
    41.7 KB · Views: 315
Last edited:
Suspicious activity around 4,8K? and at 2x just below 10. Otherwise very nice - isn't it?

The 10k stuff just on my boarder of FR... 20k stuff wouldn't bother me - is that the CD?

Is this the HF108?

Impedance at 4,8k, no trace at all?

//
 
I tried the CDX1-1425 but the high-pass response itself drowns this out. Because of this a whole full range loudspeaker should be measured. Anyway, it tells a bit, at least what is due to the drivers.

Faital HF108 (again):

attachment.php


CDX1-1425:

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • HF108_CSD.png
    HF108_CSD.png
    39.9 KB · Views: 498
  • CDX1-1425_CSD.png
    CDX1-1425_CSD.png
    37.9 KB · Views: 517
I know the spectra of the "ringing" when tapped intentionally, that's not a problem to see on RTA. What I don't know is to what degree are these modes excited during playback, i.e. to what degree this is a real problem for the resulting sound quality (it definitely doesn't sound like resonating when played a sound).

Maybe a way around this would be to damp the waveguide somehow and try to find the differences, I don't know.
 
Of course it wasn't the waveguide.
To measure ringing you'd have to run mechanical tests of the waveguide under impact loading.
I don't think a compression driver would provide enough "load" to this particular material to cause severe ringing.
 
I don't see how you guys are concluding that the waveguide doesn't ring. I see two dominate resonances at about the same frequencies (the two drivers have different weights) which certainly could be waveguide resonances and both do affect the direct response. Both show dips and then ringing - a clear sign of energy being drawn off to the resonance and then dissipated through radiation.

As to the audibility, well, that's another question without answers. But my approach has always been to try and reduce all sources of aberration - a fairly safe bet.
 
python

I have been working on a little python script to step through a number of simulations.

Here I have 16 sims where Length and Term.N have been stepped through 4 numbers each.

It took around 20 mins to complete

athSequence.PNG

The code is far from optimized, but it didn't crash, so that's something 😛
 
I believe it doesn't ring 🙂
At least the half of the waveguide closer to the driver is virtually dead. It's only the rim where the wall is the thinnest (~12 mm) where it does respond to tapping. It would probably wouldn't be so difficult to damp it completely.
 
Last edited:
I don't see how you guys are concluding that the waveguide doesn't ring. I see two dominate resonances at about the same frequencies (the two drivers have different weights) which certainly could be waveguide resonances and both do affect the direct response. Both show dips and then ringing - a clear sign of energy being drawn off to the resonance and then dissipated through radiation.

As to the audibility, well, that's another question without answers. But my approach has always been to try and reduce all sources of aberration - a fairly safe bet.

Yes, I spotted those two resonances as well, but those are still small and could probably be reduced or eliminated by placing a felt damping ring between the mounting plate and the driver.

I believe it doesn't ring 🙂
At least the half of the waveguide closer to the driver is virtually dead. It's only the rim where the wall is the thinnest (~12 mm) where it does respond to tapping. It would probably wouldn't be so difficult to damp it completely.

You may also try to wrap a thick towel around the horn, covering the thin walled rim.
 
Last edited: