At least that's settled.
Trying to read this DI plot; please assist y/n as I proceed:
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0...ot_2023-10-14_170306_480x480.png?v=1697317415
While it looks pretty smooth (?), as frequency increases dispersion angle narrows. So, this horn would produce more of an indirect or They are Here sound, yes?
This larger horn-and which also can cross lower-may offer a wider sound stage (?), but it also generally displays indirect sound. https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0...BMS_4591-8_off-axis3_480x480.png?v=1649504045
However its smoothness of dispersion vs. frequency of the ES290 looks to be more spotty than the ES450 due the driver it’s paired with, yes?
And as you point out at 500Hz vs. 10kHz, the AH425 progressively beams more while output level decreases with rising frequency tends to give audible satisfaction, yes? Still, it didn’t stop Bryan from adding a 6” horn/tweeter to his 425/SB Audience CDNT combo. But again like Troy’s ES horns, the 425 gives indirect sound.
Rather ironically, Azurahorn’s Martin Seddon mentioned today that he much prefers You are There sound, though perhaps it’s only achievable with his humongous horns. https://www.diyaudio.com/community/attachments/dsc_0393-jpg.1219557/
I’d so much love to experience the amazing air that Bryan’s now enjoying, but fear that I won’t be able to get that from any driver in a high directivity index horn without adding a tweeter. Even using active crossovers like Bryan does, I’m way to weak kneed for trying any such DIYing at this point. And I have to make a choice between only having either one kind of event presentation or another.
And Troy went from offering custom speaker solutions https://josephcrowe.com/ to now only turnkey speakers, or so I was told.
OTOH, this horn (if it actually exists?? A simulation?) looks like it can produce good direct You are There sound because it has almost constant output from ~ 600Hz to at least 10kHz.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/attachments/1728825910982-png.1367403/
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...0-or-tad-th-4001-clones-makers.375215/page-17
Seems like very few horns can produce enough constant directivity across most of the AF range to be truly categorized as You are There horns.
Which ones can you name that definitely, or at least most likely, are?
At lower frequencies, it is wider, so more room reflections, as frequency increases dispersion angle narrows, less room reflections. I can't predict what frequency range or dispersion angles makes your particular subjective perception change.
Other than response above 5-10kHz, most polar response is horn, rather than driver related.
The AH425 progressively beams more at high frequencies, which makes the on-axis level remain uniform with rising frequency. People tend to find uniform frequency response satisfying.
The room, it's contents, acoustic treatment, the loudspeakers position in the room, toe-in, and listening position all affect any subjective qualities you may try to achieve in your system.
There are definitely horns with near constant directivity from ~600-10kHz (and higher) available in a variety of beam widths.
It would be foolish for me to suggest that a subjective "You are There" quality can definitively be attributed to a specific polar pattern.
Art
Yes as I see it the recording determines that You Are There quality. Not the speaker
Rob 🙂
Yes, but if you use a really good recording, like the Cowboy Junkies "Trinitity session" recording, you can separate the posers from the real deals.
A more modern recording that combings the ambiance of the trinity sessions with better dynamics is Nora Jones "til we meet again live".
In my experience you don't have to have constant directivity at all frequencies to get a certain imaging characteristic. I have played with systems that were fairly constant directivity above the modal region of typical rooms (several hundred hertz), systems with narrow beams that narrowed further as frequency increased (my current midwoofer / horn HF system), and systems that were only constant directivity above several kilohertz if you squinted really hard. I have noticed similar imaging differences with all of these systems which makes me think the higher frequencies are more influential than lower frequencies. Low directivity systems are more enveloping / have wider soundstages and center vocalists or instruments sound like they're further away / behind the front wall. As the directivity rises vocalists tend to move forward to be in the room / between the speakers and the sound stage narrows. This is when comparing with the same recording / room. In my mind, at a high level directivity = imaging characteristics (assuming all else equal).
About directivity of systems....
Some months ago I finished a very different system, for fun and... perhaps educational (and science fair, too). A fully low directivity system, omnidirectional to far higher in frequency than our hearing senses. Other than the amazing of "science fair" about the plasma flame making sounds (very good, in fact), the experience about directivity is interesting.
More interesting is about music. Even radically different systems engage the listener and drags onto the music when well done, even with radically different approaches that results sounding different.
That said, the omni system sounds absolutely atmospheric. I even tested it with games and series. The environment sounds is to die for. "3D" recordings are outstanding rendered. Even if I have a compromise in the high section: the crossover operates at 6kHz, but, with current plasma setup, is impossible to respect wavelenght lenght and the sum is correct for one direction. But the average sum for the listening position is very smooth (and is very large, BTW, due to omnidirectional system; the sweet spot is very large). Other than the HF crossover issue, the response is excellent for basically every direction. The midrange is used only to it's omni radiation pattern. So, the ambient reflections have basically same response from the main signal minus the ambient absorption (varies with frequency).
From that I learn that the very HF content also determines also the atmospheric effect.
My other experiences with it in DIY form was with open baffle (dipole), normal woofer+TW boxes, and the Troels TQWT (tweeter waveguide). With dipoles, is imperative to have a back firing tweeter in my opinion (of use a full range).
My normal current system is with the TQWT. Especially due to the SPL limitation from a free air plasma. It sounds amazing, in it's way of dipersion, but is not atmospheric like the omni system. Is more focused, much like various descriptions from this pages.
The plasma system is largely inspired from the Linkwitz Pluto system.
A photo at some first testing moment, before I move it to a bigger room for final alignment (adjusts):
The ASP section is totally tubed:
Note: sometimes is a little difficult to describe systems in languages not being the native, especially ones sounding "special" like this one.
Some months ago I finished a very different system, for fun and... perhaps educational (and science fair, too). A fully low directivity system, omnidirectional to far higher in frequency than our hearing senses. Other than the amazing of "science fair" about the plasma flame making sounds (very good, in fact), the experience about directivity is interesting.
More interesting is about music. Even radically different systems engage the listener and drags onto the music when well done, even with radically different approaches that results sounding different.
That said, the omni system sounds absolutely atmospheric. I even tested it with games and series. The environment sounds is to die for. "3D" recordings are outstanding rendered. Even if I have a compromise in the high section: the crossover operates at 6kHz, but, with current plasma setup, is impossible to respect wavelenght lenght and the sum is correct for one direction. But the average sum for the listening position is very smooth (and is very large, BTW, due to omnidirectional system; the sweet spot is very large). Other than the HF crossover issue, the response is excellent for basically every direction. The midrange is used only to it's omni radiation pattern. So, the ambient reflections have basically same response from the main signal minus the ambient absorption (varies with frequency).
From that I learn that the very HF content also determines also the atmospheric effect.
My other experiences with it in DIY form was with open baffle (dipole), normal woofer+TW boxes, and the Troels TQWT (tweeter waveguide). With dipoles, is imperative to have a back firing tweeter in my opinion (of use a full range).
My normal current system is with the TQWT. Especially due to the SPL limitation from a free air plasma. It sounds amazing, in it's way of dipersion, but is not atmospheric like the omni system. Is more focused, much like various descriptions from this pages.
The plasma system is largely inspired from the Linkwitz Pluto system.
A photo at some first testing moment, before I move it to a bigger room for final alignment (adjusts):
The ASP section is totally tubed:
Note: sometimes is a little difficult to describe systems in languages not being the native, especially ones sounding "special" like this one.
By "modern", in addition to being a completely digitally recorded track, might it also be one where minimal compression was applied in the mastering room? That is, a recording with very good dynamic range-rather than over compressed so that the overall level could then be boosted to compete in the "Loudness Wars"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war No, I doubt music from Cowboy Junkies would cater to that kind of market, though sadly lots of "modern" recordings do have their dynamics deliberately smashed down for this reason . Likewise, lots of my favorite music pop, r&b and soundtracks from the 60s, much of which was deliberately (e.g. Berry Gordy, George Martin, Phil Spector, Brian Wilson, et al) compressed, and also compressed of necessity (?) for vinyl's low resolution, to maximize storage space of LPs and for preventing mistracking of cheap vinyl players. However, where the analog mulitrack tape stems are still available, less compressed high resolution versions can be apparently be created.
https://www.hdtracks.com/?gclid=Cj0...aAlXMEALw_wcB#/album/5df1427d0bee25c09bc163fd
That is, even if those here could recommend one or more specific horns (for above my sealed Altec 416 woofers) with high directivity from ~ 700Hz to up to several kHz-and in a reasonably well corrected ~ 2660 cu ft room-could I still expect much "You are There" "direct sound" from a typical 1960s recording?
Thanks describing what definitely appears to be a very telling experience. The problem is I've yet to find horns with directivity plots which are generally the inverse of these https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0...BMS_4591-8_off-axis3_480x480.png?v=1649504045
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0...ot_2023-10-14_170306_480x480.png?v=1697317415
Though might this one offer less higher frequency narrowing?
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/attachments/1726661699779-png.1357794/
Or does it only look that way because the scaling of this plot is different than the other two (Crowe's) horns?
Or do they look different mostly because different drivers were used to run the directivity measurements?
I can't think of any horns offhand that have wider high frequency dispersion than low, the inverse of a beaming horn.
Some horns have what's known as called "waistbanding", where beam width at a lower frequency, say 500Hz, reduces then widens again.
The scaling and different measurement methods make it somewhat hard to compare, but it appears to have a more constant directivity pattern than the "beamy" ES-450 Biradial 2143 with RCF ND950.
Joeseph Crowe also measured the Yuichi 290 with a 2322 adapter and the same driver, a little waistbanding present, but less beaming and more pattern control, the 290 would have less room wall reflections below 2kHz than the ES-450.
Without vertical pattern, hard to say what the floor and ceiling reflections of either horn would look like.
Some prefer symmetrical pattern horns, so the vertical and horizontal room reflections are more similar, others prefer less ceiling/floor "illumination".
Art
@oltos
Why don't you wire up your current existing components ( which are > 4x custom subs, 2x GPA 416-8b woofs in 3cu' sealed cabs, 2x Radian 745nb-Be drivers, 2x Azurahorn AH425 horns ) and give them a good listen??
You might just like what you hear!
If not, you'll at least obtain ( as will other respondents ) a reference point from which to improve upon.
Here's a 10 year old quote of yours ( taken from this very thread, post # 11,949 ).
Clearly your current process needs some tweaking if you want to finalize your build any-time soon.
Remember ( to paraphrase others ); "The enemy of Good ( even Great ) is an exclusionary pursuit of perfection.
EarlK
Why don't you wire up your current existing components ( which are > 4x custom subs, 2x GPA 416-8b woofs in 3cu' sealed cabs, 2x Radian 745nb-Be drivers, 2x Azurahorn AH425 horns ) and give them a good listen??
You might just like what you hear!
If not, you'll at least obtain ( as will other respondents ) a reference point from which to improve upon.
Here's a 10 year old quote of yours ( taken from this very thread, post # 11,949 ).
Clearly your current process needs some tweaking if you want to finalize your build any-time soon.
Remember ( to paraphrase others ); "The enemy of Good ( even Great ) is an exclusionary pursuit of perfection.
EarlK
All this is theory, and you need to find out what is your personal preference wrt this topic. So, as I suggested, just listen to different systems with different directivity control. Change the listening sweep spot and try to detect changes of tone and sound stage. Some may like a beaming system and others a broader dispersion. I think there is no black/white wrt good or bad regarding directivity.
Personally, I prefer a broader dispersion, but a slightly rising DI is acceptable.
Personally, I prefer a broader dispersion, but a slightly rising DI is acceptable.
+1 👍
Yes, like amplifiers/systems, vinyl vs digital etc, each one will can find a preferred presentation method.
Yes, like amplifiers/systems, vinyl vs digital etc, each one will can find a preferred presentation method.
Valid questions but here's the facts: Despite my years at this thread, I'm only now learning what I most need to know-which compared to you guys is probably zip-about speaker measurements for selecting on a horn that most satisfies my goals and hopefully my (modifiable) acoustic space. And I know barely more than that much about good and bad speaker design, so any kind of from-scratch DIYing pursuits seem a waste of time and resources. But thanks to Art, John and others, including those links I've recently posted, this seems to be quickly changing, hopefully fast enough before circumstances press me to make a horn choice before I can finish up my questions and hear at least two of the three horns of chief interest.
"Wiring up" my current components? First, I don't know how many more times or ways I can express the fact that I do NOT have anywhere near the required knowledge in the applied physics of acoustics and speaker design, nor any experience generating needed FR, impedance and distortion curves, directivity and vertical plots response, et al, which are obviously essential for validating performance during the initial and final design and construction phases of a build. My brother the carpenter moved to NC long ago. I’d have to pour over my old tech texts and school lab manual to relearn resonant and filter circuits and formulas to calculate values for breadboarding even the most basic passive crossover, and so on.
Second, the Altec 416s are still with Troy, ~ 460 miles away, since the original plan was for him to test them (done) and have him build me a custom system. BUT even if the woofers were here with me, unlike probably many at this thread, my stifling 1100 sq ft co-op on this miserably overpopulated and overtaxed island leaves me virtually no kind of DIY workspace, I am still some years from retirement and I have no help with the weekly business of living.
So, it's either Troy or another nearby Canadian uses the chosen horn and driver (ship him my Radian745Bes if horn compatible??) to build and ship me the system, or Troy ships back the woofers, and I then take my chances having the owner of this local brand do it. https://altaspeakers.com/
Sure, having that JMLC reference system here could be highly instructive versus hearing the ES450 horn; Troy’s customer in Washington DC vicinity. Very upsetting is that it doesn’t appear that Nicolas’ NYC customer may have the improved version of what he calls the next gen TH4001 horn within the needed time frame. https://audiohorn.net/next-gen-bi-radial-horn/
But now you know why a hands on DIY build is not an option for me. Coincidentally, I do believe Pierre when he said that he misses the AH425/Radian745Be combo. https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/beyond-the-ariel.100392/page-764
And as much I want to hear them with the-indeed as Gary Dahl does with the same Altec 416 build (!) https://galibierdesign.com/wa-trip-01/ (Troy even has a pair of Yamaha JA6681B that Gary uses), from everything we’ve been discussing here regarding what I suspect are my ultimate horn directivity preferences, it looks like I’d get closer to happiness with a horn more like the A290 or Pierre’s TH-4001-despite their (problematic?) fins and being wholly obsolete, as Docali and Marco_gea claim.
So far, Pierre’s TH-4001/Radian745Be/TAD1601B seems to be the closest thing to a constant directivity system.
As for seeking perfection, I’d like to think I’m not that foolish.
While glad you reminded me of Troy’s issue of the A290.
https://josephcrowe.com/blogs/news/smooth-transition-throat-adapter-no-2322-for-yuichi-a290 as just noted, it and the TH4001 presumably do get justifiably attacked.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...001-clones-makers.375215/page-13#post-7802583
And long-time users Kevin and Profiguy have disappointments with the A290. https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...4001-clones-makers.375215/page-9#post-7797334
Though he finds reason to suggest the A290 over the 4001 for less than 5 meters away (me as close as 11 ft), Kevin stresses that with either horn in small rooms will require lots of treatment. Short of tearing out sheetrock and flooring, I’m willing learn and spend on that. And as my system is on Windows, presumably I can add the final corrections with DIRAC Live or other correction software.
But from Troy’s measurements above, how much performance from the A290 driver AND adapter is dependent? Indeed, Marco seems to emphasize how counterproductive it can be using even the most precisely made adapters-including the one that Docali helped Pierre design the one he needed. But what other choice but using adapters in many cases?
Otherwise, how to select the ideal driver? Troy says there that using a contour filter to get HF extension in a two-way speaker will increase distortion, as possibly needed with https://www.rcf.it/en/products/product-detail/nd350 in this system.
https://josephcrowe.com/products/speaker-system-no-1681
But no doubt the one which Pierre sweated to perfect for the 4001/RadianBe combo is too clean for that.
Or, as Troy more often does, add a tweeter, as he did in this with the SB Audience CDNT + Fostex 500 MK2, which he said beat out the 18Sound1480 beryllium in the second part of this review.
https://josephcrowe.com/blogs/news/18sound-nd1480be-beryllium-1-40-compression-driver-test-review
Aside the above and from Nicolas’ unreleased performance data for the next gen 4001 horn, what other CD horn options but https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/yamamoto-soundcraft-f-350-horns.411306/ ?
And these plans for a modified version https://www.araihorn.com/p/arai-290.html for Athos to build? https://www.athosaudio.com/products/
And driver??
I could ask Troy to provide the vertical plot but how forthcoming?
Once the basic and "rough" part of acoustical room correction is done, how hard would it be to tweak the room to then decide between those reflection pattern preferences?
I had no idea you already owned the Radian 745nb-Be drivers and Azurahorn AH425 horns.
Have Troy make you a pair of passive crossovers for your GPA 416-8b woofers and your horn/drivers.
No need for tweeters with Be drivers with smooth response past 20kHz.
Yes you can.
The horns you own will sound better on axis than one with fins or a diffraction throat that provides more constant directivity.
Art
If you are looking for a horn with a wider horizontal pattern (which is primarily what effects the perceived imaging ime as opposed to vertical pattern), you would want something that looks like a biradial horn and has a small enough driver / throat to maintain pattern control to ~20kHz and has a wide opening angle. I'm not sure if something like that exists. Personally I would design my own. I would probably start with a 180 degree included angle horn to be a significant difference from much narrower horns. If you want a horn that's omnidirectional in the horizontal plane, you could point a compression driver up (or down) and make a horn that turns 90 degrees and expands out into a 360 mouth opening. I think there are some speakers out there that do this or something like it but I don't know of anything you can just buy. The Apple HomePod does this but breaks it up into multiple drivers / horns to make the full circle. If you want a wide vertical pattern make the mouth short in the vertical direction. If you want vertical control, extend the horn and make the mouth larger until it's big enough to control the pattern down to whatever low frequency you're targeting.
On comparing polar maps, yes, the different scales make it tough to just visually compare them. I typically look at where the horizontal -6dB angle is to judge how wide the horn's pattern is / how it will image. If it's not constant directivity I try to mentally draw an average -6dB line in the ~2k-10k range to judge things. I'd say +/-30 to +/-45 degrees is going to be a narrow pattern, +/- 90 is kind of medium and omni directional is obviously the low end. Different driver exit sizes can affect things. For example that RCF driver has a 2" exit and that's probably what's giving the changes in pattern at around 15kHz. My JBL 2435 (1.5" throat) driver does similar above 10kHz on a LeCleac'h horn (see below - black line is -6dB). Also that last plot you linked to doesn't even show above 10kHz. In my system I added a super tweeter horn that I built myself above 10kHz to keep the pattern more constant (2nd image).
For my next speaker project-if this first one gets done (??)-I'd be happy if I can just learn how to use a two way active crossover with reasonable precision and to align alternate two or three way horn/driver combos atop my Altec 416 woofer cabinets. But building anything beyond a pre-designed high pass filter for a tweeter is not a realistic option. Btw, is this what you mean by a multi-driver horn? https://josephcrowe.com/products/speaker-system-no-2545-dual-15-2-way or
https://josephcrowe.com/blogs/news/2094?_pos=28&_sid=f213e78fc&_ss=r
Are your LeCleac'h horns the 425 or 340?
Any experience with these drivers? https://audioxpress.com/article/the-745neobe-compression-driver-from-radian-audio
https://josephcrowe.com/blogs/news/yamaha-ja6681b-compression-driver?_pos=1&_sid=6787df58a&_ss=r
https://josephcrowe.com/products/3d...nce-65cdn-t?_pos=2&_psq=sb+audio&_ss=e&_v=1.0
https://josephcrowe.com/blogs/news/...-for-yuichi-a290?_pos=18&_sid=f213e78fc&_ss=r
How problematic to design "perfect" adapters (don't tell Marco-gea) for either of them to use in these horns?
https://josephcrowe.com/products/3d-cad-plans-for-es-290-biradial-horn-horn-no-1670
https://josephcrowe.com/products/3d-cad-files-horn-no-1994-es450-biradial-for-jbl-2446-2-throat
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0...ot_2023-10-14_170306_480x480.png?v=1697317415
https://josephcrowe.com/products/cu...del-make-any-size?_pos=3&_sid=90781baa0&_ss=r
But how best to pair these driver/horn combos?
Troy Crowe's VERY complete video (more so than the print version) of the A290 really shows how seriously driver specific this horn is. This is very upsetting as it probably offers the widest sound stage (too wide for my room even if well treated??) of any driver discussed here, and also quite deep.
Can't be sure if the best compromise would be the the ES290 over the A290 and ES450. [/QUOTE]
Highly intrigued by Ironman's and Bryan's AH425 stories, especially the latter, who's also enjoying that airiness from that tweeter/horn combo. But wouldn't the AH425's directivity pattern produce, if not "head in vise" barrrier, than a ~ 4 ft wide x ? ft size, at ~ 11 ft away vs. say the AH340? Btw, Troy discusses AH340 a bit in the video; 16:17 to 17:33.
Of course, I thought of using the Radian745Be/AH425 all along. And apparently Pierre nailed the contour filtering as he enjoyed that two-way design for quite some time. But he obviously does get and prefers the You are There sound of the 4001 horn (as do Docali and Camplo, obviously, though via their own horn designs) even if, according to Marco, adapter geometry is always imperfect.
Again, I'm no DIYer, so I can't do any mods on anything Troy or anyone builds for me, much less do another build from scratch. I've got to make this first one hit as many of my YES buttons as possible, however imperfect it will surely be.
Driver/horn suggestions, please?
What are your thoughts on deciding this first, eg what angle do you want at each frequency, then discovering the curvature that produces this for you?