Here is the original ROAR.
It's bascally a simplier cyclops built TH. It looks ALOT better than a normal TH.
https://www.martinsson.cc/blog/index.php?m=03&y=17&entry=entry170302-170401
I guess every response looks like a BP to a fanatic 😉
Mark100's Hornresp simulation upper response doesn't look at all like the actual raw response of his BMS 18N862 loaded "V Twin".
The "V" horn loading causes a smoothly rising response up to 250Hz, then dips and peaks up to the driver's mass roll-off:
The BMS 18N862 upper range when front loaded shows its mass roll-off above around 1500Hz:
That ROAR only has about a 2 octave usable range (40-160Hz), no better than a "normal TH", and still far short of this thread's 20Hz to ≥200Hz goal.
Last edited:
Art, don't laugh, but until now I never noticed how different the hornresp sim for my v-twin differs from the raw ground-plane measurement,
once above about 250Hz.
One of the first things I do in hornresp, is slap a low pass filter into the Filter wizard. And never above 120Hz, not caring about response higher up.
Come to think of it, the only time I've ever used a sub above 120Hz,
was when pairing the B&C ME/DCX 464, horn and CD combo, to reach down to a sealed sub crossed at 300Hz.
Let subs be subs lol
once above about 250Hz.
One of the first things I do in hornresp, is slap a low pass filter into the Filter wizard. And never above 120Hz, not caring about response higher up.
Come to think of it, the only time I've ever used a sub above 120Hz,
was when pairing the B&C ME/DCX 464, horn and CD combo, to reach down to a sealed sub crossed at 300Hz.
Let subs be subs lol
That enclosure could be modeled with the CH function in HR.
CH = BANDPASS 6th order parallel (BP6P) enclosure.
You actually said BANDPASS with "The "V" horn loading causes a smoothly rising response up to 250Hz."
ALL horns are BANDPASS enclosures.
When I posted your "V-Twin" as a possibility for "High Output Subs that play 20Hz to ≥200Hz" in post #57, I wrote: "don't know if it's 200Hz range would still sound good modulated by over 15mm excursion".
At the 38mm (1.5") peak to peak you suggest for it in post #140, I think amplitude modulation and intermodulation distortion from a low distortion driver like the BMS 18N862 would still become objectionable in the 200Hz range.
That said, I've never had drivers with that much displacement to audition the effect, but I'd agree with your "let subs be subs" sentiment.
I've trying to tell y'all that but there is always someone trying to make a SUBwoofer play out of its designed range.
If you want a WOOFER to play to 250hz or greater, then design a bass bin, not a SUBwoofer.
That's what i also think, and then a scoop horn or a reflex is probally the best solution. In reggae soundsystems they use scoop horns for this, but they only go low in groups of 4, and not that low. With the right driver both systems can work in that bandwith on high power.
Something like a Beyma 18OXB1000FES in a oversized 400L ported cabinet tuned to 25Hz can do that. It's not an F3 of 20Hz (very hard to get that on high volume) but 24Hz F3 and 20Hz at -8dB is what you get with it. The response is relative flat to way above 250Hz. So as long as the speakers is also a direct radiator or a front horn you will get those frequencies. Split it in 2 bands may be better, but it's surely doable.
I know people who use it like that with an B&C 464 horn and compression driver crossed at 350Hz with dsp and it sounds great that way. They use it for private parties with mostly technodj's. Two towers is enough for 2-300 people in a small hall like that. The whole hall shakes when you play music trough it with very low bass at high volume...
Something like a Beyma 18OXB1000FES in a oversized 400L ported cabinet tuned to 25Hz can do that. It's not an F3 of 20Hz (very hard to get that on high volume) but 24Hz F3 and 20Hz at -8dB is what you get with it. The response is relative flat to way above 250Hz. So as long as the speakers is also a direct radiator or a front horn you will get those frequencies. Split it in 2 bands may be better, but it's surely doable.
I know people who use it like that with an B&C 464 horn and compression driver crossed at 350Hz with dsp and it sounds great that way. They use it for private parties with mostly technodj's. Two towers is enough for 2-300 people in a small hall like that. The whole hall shakes when you play music trough it with very low bass at high volume...
I acknowledge the usefulness of the V slot. Given that I can manifest real measured results, The PPMSL seems promising.
@weltersys I don't doubt @mark100 Hornresps skills or viewpoint but I think HornResp can only do so much. The "driver" in the slot, seems to perform as a point source emanating from the center of the driver only. So when you change the Sd, the FR doesn't move though the source should move accordingly. With that knowledge you can start to use HR to figure things out a little deeper or at least respect the limitations. With that being said, the damping material modeling gives clues that the concept is grounded in reality. The reflections were not significantly deadened until about 10" deep worth of material which seems logical. This is while low balling the MKS rayls/m spec for rock wool.
BP1, my Woofers are rated 20-1000hz...so stop trying to hold my Sub/Mid woofer back.😝
And Mark I knooooow you aren't talking.... Mr. - "Sounds awesome...such clarity and dynamics. It's interesting hearing a low freq all the way down to 30Hz coming out of this thing." This? Thing? Oh you mean your tweeter horn that has a pair of 18"s on it??? I wish people would just let tweeters be tweeters eyerollsohard 😊
So when I use literally the same approach, ie, combine multiple drivers into one single acoustical axis in order to increase bandwidth, now you are up in arms? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
For no different reason than any other synergy, Combining multiple drivers into a single acoustical axis, is a benefit to Sound Quality. Rather then trying to trick your mind that the sound is coming from a centralized, acoustically singular point.... we've been creating, centralized, acoustically singular points. Sorry not sorry for covering the sub frequency and mid range. I have covered Sub to 200hz Xo successfully with one cabinet. Where is the crime in creating even more headroom?
Its just math isn't it? At <2mm excursion what isn't possible? Speaking of math, let me correct mine.
Lets say I had 8 of my 18's in a MTM, This isn't horrible at all.
]
8 of my 15"s isn't a bad deal either. Especially if you let go trying to reach 20hz at 2mm. 30hz at 2mm ain't bad either.
Not for the conservative, unless you are very conservative on excursion. 😈
@weltersys I don't doubt @mark100 Hornresps skills or viewpoint but I think HornResp can only do so much. The "driver" in the slot, seems to perform as a point source emanating from the center of the driver only. So when you change the Sd, the FR doesn't move though the source should move accordingly. With that knowledge you can start to use HR to figure things out a little deeper or at least respect the limitations. With that being said, the damping material modeling gives clues that the concept is grounded in reality. The reflections were not significantly deadened until about 10" deep worth of material which seems logical. This is while low balling the MKS rayls/m spec for rock wool.
BP1, my Woofers are rated 20-1000hz...so stop trying to hold my Sub/Mid woofer back.😝
And Mark I knooooow you aren't talking.... Mr. - "Sounds awesome...such clarity and dynamics. It's interesting hearing a low freq all the way down to 30Hz coming out of this thing." This? Thing? Oh you mean your tweeter horn that has a pair of 18"s on it??? I wish people would just let tweeters be tweeters eyerollsohard 😊
So when I use literally the same approach, ie, combine multiple drivers into one single acoustical axis in order to increase bandwidth, now you are up in arms? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
For no different reason than any other synergy, Combining multiple drivers into a single acoustical axis, is a benefit to Sound Quality. Rather then trying to trick your mind that the sound is coming from a centralized, acoustically singular point.... we've been creating, centralized, acoustically singular points. Sorry not sorry for covering the sub frequency and mid range. I have covered Sub to 200hz Xo successfully with one cabinet. Where is the crime in creating even more headroom?
Its just math isn't it? At <2mm excursion what isn't possible? Speaking of math, let me correct mine.
Lets say I had 8 of my 18's in a MTM, This isn't horrible at all.
]
8 of my 15"s isn't a bad deal either. Especially if you let go trying to reach 20hz at 2mm. 30hz at 2mm ain't bad either.
Not for the conservative, unless you are very conservative on excursion. 😈
Attachments
The V slot sub was thrown in as a contender, not due to the slot, but due to the fact it is basically a simple bass-reflex build.
The V slot is a compromise outward facing drivers (which I prefer for sound), and opposing facing drivers (which i prefer for cabinet vibration reduction.)
Personally, I think a slot is a pain in the butt, that adds nothing to sound quality, other than reducing box vibration which is a big benefit when cranking.
If I did want to run a sub from 20-200Hz, a standard type reflex would be my choice.
And definitely not a slot...which is problematic at best trying to reach higher in frequency.
And Mark I knooooow you aren't talking.... Mr. - "Sounds awesome...such clarity and dynamics. It's interesting hearing a low freq all the way down to 30Hz coming out of this thing." This? Thing? Oh you mean your tweeter horn that has a pair of 18"s on it??? I wish people would just let tweeters be tweeters eyerollsohard 😊
So when I use literally the same approach, ie, combine multiple drivers into one single acoustical axis in order to increase bandwidth, now you are up in arms? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
I'm of course all for combining multiple drivers into one single axis.
But I'm also about limiting the bandwidth spanned by each driver section.
So I like your first goal, but I think the idea of a sub going from 20-200Hz is a bad idea for the intermodulation reason Art spoke of above.
Just as I think taking a single CD down to reach the sub is a bad idea.
In the pict of my syn11 you show above, you do realize that is more than a tweeter horn with a pair of 18"s on it don't you?
That there are 4" mids, and 12" lows spanning between the CD and the 18"s?
That the combined speaker with its coaxial is a 5-way?
You realize all that, right?
Hope so, because it's all about reducing the span each section is required to handle...which is opposite what I think you are trying to do.
BTW, I ended up using the 18"s in syn11 high passed between 40-50Hz....so only from there up to 100-120Hz, where low-mid 12"s took over.
The horn still needed real subs to go with it....ones that know let subs be subs !
Here's a trace of how the 5 sections were tuned for when used with sub.
Same goal, combined output into one source....but a Long way from a two-way, huh?
🤣😂, I think most audio enthusiasts do not want to listen or hear a SUBwoofer play 1Khz.
Is ‘inter-modular’ distortion like the Doppler effect? The cone is moving huge amounts to make the low frequencies, and then tries to vibrate at the higher frequencies in between that motion, and they get tossed around like a salad of 1/4-1/2-etc wavelength intervals? 😝?
The Doppler effect is a pitch shift, a change in frequency, frequency modulation (FM).
The pitch shift from a Leslie rotating HF horn (only one of the two horns is actually used), rotating about a 20" circle at 360 RPM can be heard as about a half a semitone, about half the distance in pitch from, say, C to C#.
The FM which would occur with a 38mm peak at 20Hz while simultaneously playing 210Hz would be too short and too small to be humanly detected.
"Modular" is something involving a module.
Audio intermodulation distortion (IMD) results when two or more signals of different frequencies are mixed together and additional signals are formed at frequencies that are not, in general, at harmonic frequencies (integer multiples) of either source signal.
IMD frequencies are generally sum and difference frequencies, more objectionable than harmonic distortion, as the generated frequencies are not musically related.
For example, a 20Hz (F1) signal modulating 210Hz (F2) would result in 170, 190, 230, 250Hz tones, none of which are harmonics of either 20Hz or 210Hz. They sound "rough".
Thanks🙏🏻 almost sounds like a strange variety of ‘beat’ frequencies so far apart they just sound ‘rough’?