I see a conical exit driven by what is most probably supposed to be a flat wavefront. I may be wrong though.
If the phase plug was so designed that it produced a spherical wavefront with a radius matching the cone angle, then it would be the correct way. We don't know unless we measure it, I'm afraid.
If the phase plug was so designed that it produced a spherical wavefront with a radius matching the cone angle, then it would be the correct way. We don't know unless we measure it, I'm afraid.
Last edited:
It is true that we know little about the horn, except that it can be used from about 400Hz in combination with the B&C (selected by Paul W. Klipsch himself).
We also know that its successor - the K510, is among the best commercially available waveguides.
Last edited:
Perhaps Dr. Geddes knows. He probably worked with such drivers during his time at B&C.
As usual, I agree completely. Multip0le horns are not only unnecessary, but a detriment to a great system design.
I do believe that the intense focus of "which" driver to use is misguided. I have found that the driver makes very little difference, the waveguide design will dominate the results. And IMO, B&C makes just about the best "value" in CDs today. Ever since I started to work with them I have been impressed by their capabilities. Although their lead designer recently left and that will have an impact.
AT the time I worked with B&C they had not considered the wavefront shape. I did enlighten them to it's importance and we devised tests to determine what it is (the same test that Mabat is attempting to recreate.) But, after that point I no longer worked with them and do not know to what extent they pursued the concepts.
Yes, that's true, but let's be clear on the context of my statements. In the passband loading is not critical, but of course as it falls to 0 as F -> 0 (cutoff,) where this occurs (F) is very important and the waveguides shape and size will determine where this is. But the loading above this point is not so critical.
In my designs I use the waveguide/CD system well below the passband and this works well as long as the system is used at reasonable levels such as in home use. This would NOT be a good idea in Pro applications however.
Last edited:
You mean you have better data for that one?
I had the original anechoic measurements, but these were lost earlier this year together with about 300 GB audio related data.
I have another minor upgrade - this time without the need to touch the driver, 1.4" again:
Original OS waveguide:
Modified profile:
Attached are also normalized data.
Want to know what the magic is? Simply use a profile for a greater nominal throat radius (2*r in this case)
Original OS waveguide:
Modified profile:
Attached are also normalized data.
Want to know what the magic is? Simply use a profile for a greater nominal throat radius (2*r in this case)
Attachments
Roberto Magalotti, I assume?
He's now Director of Acoustic Research at Bowers & Wilkins, so he moved from B&C to B&W.
I've owned several B&W loudspeakers over the years, but (luckily) got bored with MOR hifi products a long time ago.
Nice!
What does it look like?
One (or a few) cm additional depth should push the impedance a little lower and thus provide some additional loading.
Last edited:
