Acoustic Horn Design – The Easy Way (Ath4)

Haven't withdrawn yet :)
 

Attachments

  • SH-3.JPG
    SH-3.JPG
    31.5 KB · Views: 347
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?

No to the first question (many things changed) and I have no idea to the second.

But you will notice that the results for the NA12 are very good, so we are looking at very small effects. These kinds of small details are hard to evaluate. Sure one can "guess" at the answers, but to state definitively is extremely hard to do. And you seem the type to reject any hypotheses that are not "proven".
 
Back to the guestion between flat DI or slightly rising one. A paper was posted on another thread
https://www.sausalitoaudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Interpreting-Spinorama-Charts.pdf

And a quote from page 17:
"... if the axial response is substantially flat,
the inverse of the directivity index gives a useful approximation of
how the speaker will measure in a room – of any size."

If this is true then people who would like a bit downward sloping response on a speaker would prefer the slightly risin DI waveguide since it would have downward sloping power response? But, when the DI is flat, the power is also flat if the on axis response is flat? This one would be outside of the circle of confusion, the flat? :)
 
Last edited:
If the axial response is substantially flat, the inverse of the directivity index is simply the power response. This is not the same as the in-room response but close.

Sure, this is still the same debate we had earlier. I'm only not sure I follow what you say of being "outside the circle of confusion".
 
Last edited: