Hornresp does not include the effects of losses in its TH sims. You can simulate the effect of the losses a bit by adding a tiny bit of stuffing to each section in the sim.
This was a fun and Mind opening experiment where the entire skinnier /shorter stuffed section (as an offset stub) was looked at both as Empty/ bare and then stuffed (and the layout matched the upstream and the folding by a direct proportion so it was kind of unique in the affect and where it created and resolved the issues and before this stuffing for me was just ‘random and to taste’.. but the it was much more fun/intersting like a much more ‘precise’ tuning tool for me?
Attachments
In this form it has a very poor mud band response and it was canceling its own as you can see the Goofy driver location and distance away from the closed end of the larger area and tap entry to exit after motors.. it is a mess of all that pressure /velocity change that occur all over that zone in freqs.. but in the end it worked out really really nice(but still, thats all wasted space not ever needed to be there originally. Just a way to look at try to …).
Attachments
At the end of the day, all such threads eventually end up in the eternal debate "horn vs. direct radiator". And there doesn't seem to be a clear answer to that. People start talking about limited bandwidth which needs multiple horns to cover the full range, about directivity and beaming, about size, about cost, about difficulty of construction, yada, yada yada. No one comes right out and says whether a good, well designed horn loudspeaker system sounds better than a good, well designed direct radiator loudspeaker system or not.
That is just intuitive. Horns are superior to direct radiating. Always.
Some people might disagree, but they are wrong.
