The only thing I understand is you guys are saying it's OK to model pyramidal segments and build a 2 parallel sided enclosure. I don't need to have measured any enclosures or have a PhD in acoustics to know that situation is not correct. My initial argument is, if you are not building a pyramidal enclosure, then don't use CON or EXP in HR. It's basic knowledge that a rectangle is not a cone or pyramid.
I stated a parabolic enclosure can have exponential expansion, meaning the CSA's can go 2cm2, 4cm2, 16cm2, etc and the segment lengths can go 2cm, 4cm, 16cm, etc. The 2 parallel sides kills the exponential performance. How is that not understanding?
It's funny how I provided links to articles and an actual conical horn build that say the same thing, yet I'm the one not understanding.
Geez, I can't believe I forgot to mention...PAIR and PARAlleL are in the word PARAboLIc. 2 is key. You guys really need to watch that video I posted.
There are no pairs or parallels in conical or exponential.
I stated a parabolic enclosure can have exponential expansion, meaning the CSA's can go 2cm2, 4cm2, 16cm2, etc and the segment lengths can go 2cm, 4cm, 16cm, etc. The 2 parallel sides kills the exponential performance. How is that not understanding?
It's funny how I provided links to articles and an actual conical horn build that say the same thing, yet I'm the one not understanding.
Geez, I can't believe I forgot to mention...PAIR and PARAlleL are in the word PARAboLIc. 2 is key. You guys really need to watch that video I posted.
There are no pairs or parallels in conical or exponential.
The directional megaphone I saw had the same general shape as the horn in the attached photo. Unlike a bullhorn though, it had no amplifier.
(The dimensions were different and the included angle was less than the ones shown in the image below).
In that situation, would the model have mixed segments....parabolic for most of the length and then some type of curved segment for the last few centimeters?
Interesting, all 4 sides are expanding in these pics. We need to see the mouth view of David's pic to see if it really has a parabolic segment.
Probably clickable hyperlinks ...
You obviously do have a mission, but it's still not clear to me what your message is?
I stated MANY times, do not use CON or EXP segments in HR unless you are building a pyramidal enclosure.
CON = straight pyramid.
EXP = curve pyramid.
CON = straight pyramid.
EXP = curve pyramid.
Last edited:
You're correct.
There's that number 2 again!
Ya'll should REALLY watch that video I posted.
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/parabolic
The horn would be modelled as a single parabolic segment with the mouth area set equal to the maximum width of the two parallel panels multiplied by the distance separating those panels. Hornresp cannot take the curved "lip" extension into account.
It is an exponential horn, similar to the Smith Horn design you posted.
The megaphone I actually saw had a parabolic flare. It was of very simple design with just four flat panels.
... but it is actually an exponential horn.
I cannot agree. The Smith horn that I posted has 2 parallel sides. The flare rate could be exponential, but the enclosure is not.
Horn response doesn’t even know the height or width of any of these? It’s just a crossectional area Described over a length.
I’m so confused now… BP fanatic, you owe us all a beer for this wild goose chase 😝
I’m so confused now… BP fanatic, you owe us all a beer for this wild goose chase 😝
So this particular ‘horn’ has a standing wave/resonance based on that ‘1.0’ dimension that’s not even considered in the simulation either….