No, original thingies, and not exactly the cheapest of the range.
Obviously, he also uses KH 80s for nearfield stuff.
Obviously, he also uses KH 80s for nearfield stuff.
Last edited:
I owned an SPe pair several years ago with AN amp entry equipment. This was a nice combo but tbh deep bass was completely absent. It is interesting to see those as mastering equipment and their sound represent almost the opposite what was intended in this thread.
Which tend to proove that for being a successful mastering engineer, it is all a mater of preference in monitor choice, knowing his/her tools and a 'savoir faire' ( know how).
???? it would seem that if excursion is low enough....skys the limit....???? Letting go of the issues of off axis, just looking at the sweet spot. Does a horn allow one to always play to almost cutoff?
Last edited:
The sky won't limit excursion, Xlim is determined by the driver's construction.
If one is satisfied with the driver's output level and sound quality at the horn's Fc, the horn certainly won't stop you from playing it that low.
Thats not what I am asking....
If I have a 50hz tractrix horn, the axis can be used with, to 150hz? Just as easily as I can make it to 300-400hz with my 150hz?
I think that as we play lower, excursion becomes an issue, no matter the horn size. For the axi using a horn... I wonder when that happens. Is all
a trip to hornresp
Soooo now...I can see that 150hz
isn't so different from a 50hz horn
But tbe output, obviously is.....
Interesting
isn't so different from a 50hz horn
But tbe output, obviously is.....
Interesting
An idea, Place mic inside of horn on exit....increase 20hz until I get 7-10% 2nd order distortion....try out different cross overs to establish max linear headroom ideas....
Is this flawed?
Is this flawed?
I was told I need a better mic... does anyone have proof? I've heard that all mics are flawed. In what way is a "better" mic...better. The information I displayed earlier, on microphones, showed more similarities than differences in FR measured. Curious
Here< I placed the mic on the driver exit, inside the horn, and found an input level that might have reached near xmax using no XO.
After placing a 48db filter at 65hz and retaking the measurement I get this;
maybe its too noisey ?
Indeed, but that doesn't imply that such speakers are 'useless'.
Of course, the WE 555 - with 2" diaphragm, was used from 32 Hz with the Denman expo horn (your picture), but it is generally recommended to use the 555 > 100 Hz.
In combination with that horn (27 feet (8.23m) length with a 2.16m sq. mouth), the Axi2050 can also be used below 100 Hz, provided you limit power to 1, or a tiny bit more.
Last edited:
2 such horns (I'd go for a 4m² mouth), of which the throat starts somewhere deep in the garden and the mouths are integrated in a large (otherwise blind) wall... 
Last edited:
Did i say something like this?
That said i'm somewhat astonished: this kind of box is probably about the worst you can do about diffraction. Not something i would perform quality control on, but... he is an award wining engineer, i'am not.
Docali,
From my experience with M.E. there is zero rules about the tools and approach: from the guy which have 'preset' eq and routing ( signal path) applied to each track ( whatever the style or artist!) and which monitor on small nearfield to individual treatments of each tracks without using any compressor and monitoring through Magnepan ( i -sadely- had no experience with Barry Diament)... and all the inbetween you could think about...
We all listen to different things and so there is preferences regarding monitoring. In fine this doesn't really mater as long as people have references on their system. Really it's all about having a target and know how to achieve it, and how it sound on your reference system.
Camplo recently talked about it as this trip into loudspeaker made him able to know 'before' tweaking what was to reach by only analysing the audio with the good tools...
And why there is ( was?) a crazy trend to have automated mastering robots/routine...
Last edited:
Yes.
Levels at the throat could reach more than 130dB at 20Hz, above the level that your mic can handle without gross distortion.
Output at the horn throat won't be of much use for anything relating to establishing cross-over frequencies.
If you want to find the low frequency limits of the driver, the CEA-2010 Burst test would make it obvious.
A simple comparison of the output of the 15" by ear should make it clear how much more clean headroom it has below 400 Hz or so.
Of course you didn't 😉
Diffraction, while I don't want to downplay the influence, the AN-e's wide baffle is clearly be a step in the right direction to minimize it.
Last edited:
Just seems like a step in a different direction to me. For a direct radiating tweeter minimizing the baffle around the driver is the only real way to get a lower diffraction result more like a waveguide. "Avalon" style faceted baffles being a practical way to do it.
Whether that matters or someone prefers one over the other is a different question.