As a nubie to the realm of horns what are peoples opinions of the Lavoce DN10.142 it's response seems fairly benign (I'm not a bat so see no need of 15K+ hz) it's reasonably low cost and is presently available. So, what's not to like? If bad what's a better alternative?
Thanks for the advice.
https://en.toutlehautparleur.com/compression-driver-lavoce-dn10-142-8-ohm-1-0-inch.html
Thanks for the advice.
https://en.toutlehautparleur.com/compression-driver-lavoce-dn10-142-8-ohm-1-0-inch.html
I wasn't thinking of any particular horn/flare at the moment, just picking a starting point, which I had assumed would be the compression driver. I understand it's got a 1" throat.
Thanks all the same.
Maybe I should have started a new thread.
I just wanted to make sure you didn't buy those drivers thinking they'd work with these horns as they're designed for a 2".
No need to start a new thread as there's already a good recent one on CDs. Lots of info there. I'd also hit the search function as these threads come up regularly and CDs aren't changed out that often in model lineups.
https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/best-compression-drivers-today-2022.382609/
I had used the search function, as far as I could see that driver has not come up at all. Though the make Lavoce has. after looking through a number of their products and other makes too these seemed a reasonable product at a good price. Whether it would be better to use another throat size etc is I suppose part of the question. I'm not in the market for Tads or multi $000's drivers at this point.
For instance, I see Celestion Axi2050 mentioned quite a bit, other than power rating I don't see (as a nubie) much difference in frequency response and the Celeston is fifteen times the price. Then regarding flairs, though they may need dampening a bit I wonder how they perform compared with the handmade wooden types?
For instance, I see Celestion Axi2050 mentioned quite a bit, other than power rating I don't see (as a nubie) much difference in frequency response and the Celeston is fifteen times the price. Then regarding flairs, though they may need dampening a bit I wonder how they perform compared with the handmade wooden types?
Last edited:
The horn is what matters, the driver is mostly just along for the ride. Ok, maybe that's an oversimplification. Yes, that thread sounds like a good idea.
Allen, I find that really difficult to understand, I could see that the horn/flair has a big effect as shown here:-
If you took two similar but different drivers and mounted them on same horns, then you equalised them to be identical. Would you expect them to sound different? If so, in what ways?
By implication you seem to be suggesting that FR is the only determinant of how a driver sounds.
Absolutely not. I'm suggesting it is a significant part of the difference between two similar but different drivers on a horn.
Allen, when you say "equalised them" do you mean by using an active type crossover? The video shows how given the same input, outputs differ due to the effects of both the driver and the horn. I would have assumed (though stand to be corrected) that the emitter (driver/instigator) was as the first part of the system and hence most important. I'm possibly wrong in that.
I found the video difficult to follow.
By equalising I mean changing the response. Yes, an active crossover is just one way that can be achieved but it is only the response I'm taking about.
Consider the polar map. This doesn't change when you equalise the response. This is the way the horn sounds. Equalising the driver responses just gets that out of the way (eliminates response as a factor) so the primary remaining thing you hear is the horn.
By equalising I mean changing the response. Yes, an active crossover is just one way that can be achieved but it is only the response I'm taking about.
Consider the polar map. This doesn't change when you equalise the response. This is the way the horn sounds. Equalising the driver responses just gets that out of the way (eliminates response as a factor) so the primary remaining thing you hear is the horn.
"I found the video difficult to follow."
That's a shame, is he not comparing frequency response, distortions/diffractions and polar response between the items? Are there any other major factors that should be considered that he does reference? I would always as a initial aim try to use passive crossovers with low order slopes, allowing the native driver to "do it's thing".
Thanks for your help.
That's a shame, is he not comparing frequency response, distortions/diffractions and polar response between the items? Are there any other major factors that should be considered that he does reference? I would always as a initial aim try to use passive crossovers with low order slopes, allowing the native driver to "do it's thing".
Thanks for your help.
Yes, comparing but not necessarily in the most productive way. Eg comparing decay in some cases should be done after equalising because that reduces its inconsequential effects. When the poster of the video considered using the TAD because it had a flatter response, what was it that he was considering?
So on this matter I agree with you to a point, but I would not do nothing.
Equalising is as necessary as it is. Apart from our house curve, all we want to equalise is resonance. Resonance tends to happen so why leave the native driver to do its thing? Well actually there is a good reason to be careful as often more than just resonance gets equalised and sometimes that's a mistake.
So on this matter I agree with you to a point, but I would not do nothing.
Last edited:
Allen.
"comparing decay in some cases should be done after equalising because that reduces its inconsequential effects"
I clearly have much to learn because I would have thought that first comes raw data for the parts upon which one equalises to take account of "hopefully" minor deficiencies. The video just showed the raw data, unless I am mistaken.
"comparing decay in some cases should be done after equalising because that reduces its inconsequential effects"
I clearly have much to learn because I would have thought that first comes raw data for the parts upon which one equalises to take account of "hopefully" minor deficiencies. The video just showed the raw data, unless I am mistaken.
It all depends why they are different to begin with. It becomes difficult to assess something when you are looking at two or more different effects combined. Would you judge your car wheel alignment if you were driving on a road with significant camber? Better you take it to a large level car park when it's not busy to do your tests.
If you want to use horns, my advice would be to learn how they work first. Olson's Elements of Acoustical Engineering is a good start. It's available online of you look.