Hi Ernie, use what ? The xt1464?
It would take some pretty fancy work to cut the ribs and make an adapter place to mount some small mids close to the throat i think. (Kinda stuff PB is good at.)
Trying to go straight to a larger diameter driver without using small mids would probably be even more of a challenge as the horn is very elliptical on the back sides, with no flat areas.
And then there's still the issue of mating the eliptical mouth with the panel extensions..maybe it would need to be done like CowanAudio does horns...??
Would be a great project...one that looks to be over my head !
It would take some pretty fancy work to cut the ribs and make an adapter place to mount some small mids close to the throat i think. (Kinda stuff PB is good at.)
Trying to go straight to a larger diameter driver without using small mids would probably be even more of a challenge as the horn is very elliptical on the back sides, with no flat areas.
And then there's still the issue of mating the eliptical mouth with the panel extensions..maybe it would need to be done like CowanAudio does horns...??
Would be a great project...one that looks to be over my head !
Indeed it is bushmeister with the build documented in this thread: A Bookshelf Multi-Way Point-Source Horn (XRK made a similar attempt with a slightly different horn, the Faital Pro LTH142).
Bushmeister's build isn't quite standard with a little full range driver feeding the horn:
Lots of attention to detail there...
Hello ra7;
I was lucky enough to have a pair.
I loved them so much and wanted to use them in other projects that I digitized them and made the throats from billet aluminum and commissioned a permanent mold and had a dozen cast from mineral loaded rigid urethane.
The horns in my 4365’s are a slightly larger variation of these and they measure and sound very very similar. They are very well designed and with the right driver and diaphragm they are easy to tame.
Also, I have a pair of Danley SH50’s.. A small 2-3dB low Q push in the very top octave and take the grills off, add subs and they really get it. Like Pano alluded to.
Barry.
Actually I will amend that.
I don’t like to see a 12” crossing above 1.2khz
But pa is about higher volumes, higher crossovers = less warranty costs for them.
That horn, for 1khz, I’d like to see the mouth about a foot across, I’ll forgive the vertical height for a 90x40 dispersion, and a bit of hf boost for free.
I don’t like to see a 12” crossing above 1.2khz
But pa is about higher volumes, higher crossovers = less warranty costs for them.
That horn, for 1khz, I’d like to see the mouth about a foot across, I’ll forgive the vertical height for a 90x40 dispersion, and a bit of hf boost for free.
Getting back to a favorite horn/cd combo....
That's my No1 audio project right now....determining that...
For the last year and a half, other than a minor diversion into a ringed-array project, my sole attention has been on synergies.
Despite the annoying measurement anomalies compared to smoother measuring commercial horns etc, they simply sound better to me than anything else.
Of the various prototypes and iterations, three versions made it to full completion. I have pairs of the three, save for Syn5 (cause it's so dang heavy).
Here's a table of the three, shown left to right in the pict below.
All three use either the bms4594HE or dcx464 CD.
All cross between the CD and mid/low cones between 480 and 650Hz. All use steep linear phase xovers and FIR tuning.
All are tuned the same as possible, and all still sound a bit different.
Hope the heavy Syn5 (on the right) doesn't finally win...will have to build another one of it Lol
That's my No1 audio project right now....determining that...
For the last year and a half, other than a minor diversion into a ringed-array project, my sole attention has been on synergies.
Despite the annoying measurement anomalies compared to smoother measuring commercial horns etc, they simply sound better to me than anything else.
Of the various prototypes and iterations, three versions made it to full completion. I have pairs of the three, save for Syn5 (cause it's so dang heavy).
Here's a table of the three, shown left to right in the pict below.
All three use either the bms4594HE or dcx464 CD.
All cross between the CD and mid/low cones between 480 and 650Hz. All use steep linear phase xovers and FIR tuning.
All are tuned the same as possible, and all still sound a bit different.
Hope the heavy Syn5 (on the right) doesn't finally win...will have to build another one of it Lol
Do they sound as good and as big as they look?Thanks Pano !
Yeah, they totally rock.
Each of them a bit different, which drives me crazy.
On them all, the lower frequency control from their large size adds a pulling together that's hard to describe... ....perhaps described like it pushes imaging capability lower in freq.
But even in mono, it makes for simply tighter sound, and crushing dynamics....
Big synergy's forever Lol
Yeah, they totally rock.
Each of them a bit different, which drives me crazy.
On them all, the lower frequency control from their large size adds a pulling together that's hard to describe... ....perhaps described like it pushes imaging capability lower in freq.
But even in mono, it makes for simply tighter sound, and crushing dynamics....
Big synergy's forever
Lol
My prediction...our bodies can sense source size....outside of spl level reading at listeners position....which I guess in so many words means I our bodies can read the polar, in 3d, no different than how we map it out in polar graphs...our bodies can interpret this in real time....I finally figured it out!Thanks Pano !
Yeah, they totally rock.
Each of them a bit different, which drives me crazy.
On them all, the lower frequency control from their large size adds a pulling together that's hard to describe... ....perhaps described like it pushes imaging capability lower in freq.
But even in mono, it makes for simply tighter sound, and crushing dynamics....
Big synergy's forever
The speaker in question is a theoretical point source (a sector of..). If this point source operates properly over a sufficient bandwidth (normal waveguides included), then according to what you've suggested I'd expect it to sound tiny. What am I missing? I'm not thinking a lack of reflections makes a speaker sound bigger or smaller... and what if it does this sufficiently at all audible frequencies so there's no noticeable transition?