I will have to read through that
Thank you tmuikku. Wow... the performance of those horn models is absolutely astonishing. Which tweeter was he working with? I would be interested to see the FR on the driver without any horn loading.
What I am interested in here is what happens to this backward travelling energy. Admittedly when I posted this thread, it was just intuition that told me that this energy was something worth not just attenuating, but guiding into something that enhances the sound (if not objectively, at least that makes it more pleasing).
Hi AllenB. The self sabotaging nature of the hypothetical I posed is not lost on me, but this is what I had in mind. I have seen people who take a dipole tweeter (I think planar?), then horn load both sides. My original thought to that was "If you are (presumably) interested in controlled dispersion, why dipole?" but according to those that conducted these experiments, the sound was quite pleasing. What I had in mind when I asked my question was something that mimicked the sound of this 2 sided dipole horn, but which is achieved through simply guiding the sound of a monopole in both directions. In my mind, this would be preferable because presumably the back wave would be much weaker than the direct sound with respect to the listener. I thought that having a configuration like this might add some perceived airiness without measurably compromising the benefits of a waveguide much. I may be overestimating the power of the ear here, but fortunately I have so far had you and other nice members on this site to correct me when I go too far off the deep end 😛
I know this is not the answer you are looking for, but it is hard for me to answer "what gets you interested in a waveguide?" What I am chasing is a sound quality that makes me smile, and presently I am not convinced one means to that end is better than the next. I am open to every possibility, hence my question. You are right though, it does seem a bit silly to go through the trouble of controlling dispersion, only to throw a backwave reflection into the mix
I've asked people the same question. It seems some of the time they are just reluctant to put such a device into a box. I wouldn't be.
The dipole is commonly used as a radio antenna. There the directivity represents gain and there are benefits over a monopole. However a speaker is a very different scenario.
The dipole is commonly used as a radio antenna. There the directivity represents gain and there are benefits over a monopole. However a speaker is a very different scenario.
There weren't any pics, just responses and the more I think about it I'm wondering if it was on the Basslist early on when the late/lamented JMMLC (politely) and some others (not so much) telling me that I was basically clueless WRT horn theory in general and sub bass horn design theory in particular until Tom Danley chimed in to explain in much more technical detail than I could at the time that I was right.
Mr Iwata did some work in the 70s with a soft transition at horn mouth. It's probably been known a long time.
Is it fair to call it "diffraction" when the horn mouth rolls back? My understanding is that the less abrupt the end of the horn, the fewer the disturbances to the wave because of a smooth impedance. An abrupt termination causes disturbances in wave front. Those are usually both audible and measurable.
Is it fair to call it "diffraction" when the horn mouth rolls back? My understanding is that the less abrupt the end of the horn, the fewer the disturbances to the wave because of a smooth impedance. An abrupt termination causes disturbances in wave front. Those are usually both audible and measurable.
'It takes one to know one', so you can't mimic something in this case without a mirror image.
Why would it ever be unfair?
Sure. The diffraction is spread out but it exists. (I notice you mentioned impedance, not diffraction but it's a similar result in any case.)
Yep, only part of sound transmits and some reflects back when impedance changes, same phenomenon, why would it be different between horns or any other obstacles? I mean as physical phenomenon. Wording migh change with context but why would waveguide edge be different than any other edge? or any other abrupt change is different than some other? If there is correct wording for different contexts then we should use them to avoid confusion.
Playing with ATH script the graphs show secondary sound source(s) making interference ripple to the response to various directions. Smoothing the mouth with rollback/no rollback looks similar in graphs to what baffle edge diffraction effects look like in simulation and same treatment cures both, smoothing out the edge, easing out the change of impedance.
Playing with ATH script the graphs show secondary sound source(s) making interference ripple to the response to various directions. Smoothing the mouth with rollback/no rollback looks similar in graphs to what baffle edge diffraction effects look like in simulation and same treatment cures both, smoothing out the edge, easing out the change of impedance.