Acoustic Horn Design – The Easy Way (Ath4)

Better state post #... seem to send you to different places...

I linked to the specific post, exactly to avoid that problem.
Yes, it's a real nuisance when people don't use the specific post address (in the top R. of the post).
But to save the need to follow the link.

The better polar response is as expected, that's the whole point, of course.
Why was the frequency response worse?
Sources sum in a known way so it must be down to a disturbance in one or other of them.
I would expect neither the horn/WG nor the woofer response to be much disturbed unless the woofer was pushed quite far into mouth.
Which I assume you didn't do, based on other speakers of yours that I have seen.
But I haven't actually seen the NA12, can you post a picture?

Best wishes
David
 
Last edited:
If you put the cursor on the link then you can see the link address at the bottom of the screen.
When I do this it shows the address of my specific post, not the format where there is a page number count embedded in the address.
So I don't understand why you had a problem.
Anyway, I edited the post to include a quote of the relevant questions in case anyone else has problems.
I try not to clutter up the thread with duplicated text, just a link seems more polite, didn't know it could cause problems.

Best wishes
David
 
Last edited:

Attachments

  • NA12_01.jpg
    NA12_01.jpg
    333.4 KB · Views: 335
  • NA12.png
    NA12.png
    280.7 KB · Views: 331
The back side stays as you see it, it's really not critical. ...
Actually, the thin wall version is smoother (for me this is not really intuitive and I wonder if this is not just a simulation thing):

attachment.php


"Filled-back" (sand printed version with a thick wall):

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • mesh-sandhorn_copy.PNG
    mesh-sandhorn_copy.PNG
    101.8 KB · Views: 267
  • mesh-sandhorn_fill.PNG
    mesh-sandhorn_fill.PNG
    89.8 KB · Views: 73
  • sandhorn_thin.png
    sandhorn_thin.png
    109.7 KB · Views: 470
  • sandhorn_fill.png
    sandhorn_fill.png
    113.4 KB · Views: 437
Last edited:

Thank you.

...find all that I have on them.

I knew you had stopped manufacture of this speaker, didn't realise you still had the picture up.
This confirms that the woofer has only been nested very little into the WG, as expected based on your previous comments.
But that only makes me more curious as to why such small difference would make the frequency response worse.
Presumably either the woofer or WG frequency response must have altered.
Did you determine which was responsible?
Is diffraction from the woofer frame and surround detectable when it's recessed to match as neatly as shown in the picture?

Best wishes
David
 

TNT

Member
Joined 2003
Paid Member
1) The binders for printing ifself: ExOne | Sand Casting Materials & Binders
2) Then it's possible to further impregante with epoxy, after the printing is done (they do it on demand).

Interesting - if I here you I would try to get equal formed samples using the different binders and listen to them while being struck. Silica i guess will ring as it is glass...

//