Hello everyone,
I'm very happy to have recently started my carreer in live sound. I already know a thing or two about speakers and sound obviously but I'm curious to learn everything technical about live events the coming couple of years. My goal is to, when I'm confident in my knowledge and network in the business, build my own custom PA system to then rent out and offer my own live sound services for small to medium scale events/stages at festivals.
The cabinets will be designed with cool looks to stand out and be part of the cosmetics of the stage, instead of like simple black boxes. They will also have a unique party trick up there sleeve that I myself have never seen at any event but I think would be very very cool. This I will keep secret.
Apart of just looking cool the main goal of this system is to produce high-end level sound quality with very wide dispersion but in a PA setting.
My idea for the main speakers:
A line array of direct radiating dome tweeters with a single line array (just on one side of the tweeters, not both sides like most LAs) of direct radiating 5" midranges. I can already hear the PA snobs rushing to their keyboards to tell me that this is stupid and is a waste of amp power compared to just uring compression drivers and waveguides. But these are exactly what I want to avoid for this system because I want to get away from the distortion and coloration that come with them. This line array will be mounted on a as shallow as possible baffle with rounded over edges and maybe even felt or other foam material inbetween and around the drivers to minimize diffraction. Behind this ~90 cm tall line array compartment will be two 15" mid woofers which are horn loaded. The horns sweeps around the back and the sides of the main cabinet and exit out the front. Inspired by the Void Acoustics air array.
The drivers I had in mind:
Tweeters
-8 x SB-Acoustics Satori TW29TXN-B
Or (preferably)
-6 x BlieSMa T34A-4
Midranges
-6 x FaitalPRO 5PR120
Mid-woofers
-2 x FaitalPRO 15FX560
I have experience with both of these brands of tweeters and also when looking at measurments these two are the best (non-beryllium) options on the market IMO. I don't want to use beryllium drivers because of cost and fear of breaking them. Even though these not compression drivers they've got what it takes to keep up with the rest of the drivers and are rather sensitive at 96 dB for the Satori and a whoping 99 dB for the BlieSMa. I would prefer to use the BlieSMa because they have high enough senitivity to be able to play with 6 and because they have the edge on the Satori in terms of distortion, dispersion and transient response. The thing is though that recently all BlieSMa drivers have went out of stock and marked as "end of life" on the website of the Dutch distributor. I'm hoping BlieSMa and the distributor simply broke bonds. It would be a great shame if the best tweeter manufacturer on the planet went bankrupt. Even if this is the case, the Satori is still one of the very best dome tweeters on the market currently.
I compared measurments of a couple of different mid drivers from for example B&C, SB-Audience and FaitalPRO. After comparing the FaitalPRO 6PR160 to the SB-Audience NERO-6MRN150D I came to the conclusion that FaitalPROs mids perform the best overall. The SB-Audience has lower distortion but the FaitalPRO has slightly better dispersion and cleaner decay. However even the 6PR160 doesn't have the dispersion to match very well with the dome tweeter without needing a waveguide at a crossover point that they can handle, so I want to use a 5". The 5PR120 is advertised by FaitalPRO as their flagship 5" mid and looks the most advanced. However I can't find any measurments online. Anybody have an opinion?
For the mid-woofers I choose the FaitalPRO 15FX560. Honestly I din't compare it to any other brands but because I will most likely be using the FaitalPRO mid and it looks like they are one of the best manufacturers of pro woofers so why not just use them for mid bass too. Also having a bigger order of one brand of drivers might have some financial advantages. I simply compared a couple of different models in a sealed enclosure simulation to get rough an idea of the SPL, F3 and transient response of different models. I picked the 15FX560 because it is the most efficient and quickest of their 15" options. It also has the highest F3 but this doesn't matter much because this system will always be accompanied by subs.
Now I will get to my question. How do I get started designing these horns. I know there is a lot of info out the but I got overwhelmed and don't feel like reading the 740 pages of "hornresp". Can you recommend me some pages where I can read a good summary about the principles. And how about modeling software? Maybe some tips?
I quickly found out there are many different types of horns so to save myself some time I would like to hear your opinions on what the best type of horn would be for this mid-bass enclosure. It doesn't have to go very low, a F3 of ~100 Hz would be fine. The main objective for the mid-bass enclosure is quality. Transient speed, tightness and articulation. I know you can do different things with the back chamber of the woofer. How does having a sealed/ported/open back chamber affect the performance. If it does in a similar way to how it does in direct radiating I would go for a sealed back chamber.
Then there will be the subs. I'm still quite indecisive about what driver to use since there's many great options. I was thinking about one of the 18XL models from FaitalPRO, the SB-Audience NERO-21SW1100D or the B&C 21SW152. The main goal for the subwoofers (obviously) is to have best of both worlds with high quality and fast bass while extending very deep. Preferably F3 in the mid 20s. Which driver would you pick and which type of horn?
Now obviously the system will have DSP capabilities. Would it be possible to use a sealed back chamber and boost the lows to get it to go very deep? Or is a ported back chamber mandatory for deep extension?
I am curious to hear what you have to say.
I'm very happy to have recently started my carreer in live sound. I already know a thing or two about speakers and sound obviously but I'm curious to learn everything technical about live events the coming couple of years. My goal is to, when I'm confident in my knowledge and network in the business, build my own custom PA system to then rent out and offer my own live sound services for small to medium scale events/stages at festivals.
The cabinets will be designed with cool looks to stand out and be part of the cosmetics of the stage, instead of like simple black boxes. They will also have a unique party trick up there sleeve that I myself have never seen at any event but I think would be very very cool. This I will keep secret.
Apart of just looking cool the main goal of this system is to produce high-end level sound quality with very wide dispersion but in a PA setting.
My idea for the main speakers:
A line array of direct radiating dome tweeters with a single line array (just on one side of the tweeters, not both sides like most LAs) of direct radiating 5" midranges. I can already hear the PA snobs rushing to their keyboards to tell me that this is stupid and is a waste of amp power compared to just uring compression drivers and waveguides. But these are exactly what I want to avoid for this system because I want to get away from the distortion and coloration that come with them. This line array will be mounted on a as shallow as possible baffle with rounded over edges and maybe even felt or other foam material inbetween and around the drivers to minimize diffraction. Behind this ~90 cm tall line array compartment will be two 15" mid woofers which are horn loaded. The horns sweeps around the back and the sides of the main cabinet and exit out the front. Inspired by the Void Acoustics air array.
The drivers I had in mind:
Tweeters
-8 x SB-Acoustics Satori TW29TXN-B
Or (preferably)
-6 x BlieSMa T34A-4
Midranges
-6 x FaitalPRO 5PR120
Mid-woofers
-2 x FaitalPRO 15FX560
I have experience with both of these brands of tweeters and also when looking at measurments these two are the best (non-beryllium) options on the market IMO. I don't want to use beryllium drivers because of cost and fear of breaking them. Even though these not compression drivers they've got what it takes to keep up with the rest of the drivers and are rather sensitive at 96 dB for the Satori and a whoping 99 dB for the BlieSMa. I would prefer to use the BlieSMa because they have high enough senitivity to be able to play with 6 and because they have the edge on the Satori in terms of distortion, dispersion and transient response. The thing is though that recently all BlieSMa drivers have went out of stock and marked as "end of life" on the website of the Dutch distributor. I'm hoping BlieSMa and the distributor simply broke bonds. It would be a great shame if the best tweeter manufacturer on the planet went bankrupt. Even if this is the case, the Satori is still one of the very best dome tweeters on the market currently.
I compared measurments of a couple of different mid drivers from for example B&C, SB-Audience and FaitalPRO. After comparing the FaitalPRO 6PR160 to the SB-Audience NERO-6MRN150D I came to the conclusion that FaitalPROs mids perform the best overall. The SB-Audience has lower distortion but the FaitalPRO has slightly better dispersion and cleaner decay. However even the 6PR160 doesn't have the dispersion to match very well with the dome tweeter without needing a waveguide at a crossover point that they can handle, so I want to use a 5". The 5PR120 is advertised by FaitalPRO as their flagship 5" mid and looks the most advanced. However I can't find any measurments online. Anybody have an opinion?
For the mid-woofers I choose the FaitalPRO 15FX560. Honestly I din't compare it to any other brands but because I will most likely be using the FaitalPRO mid and it looks like they are one of the best manufacturers of pro woofers so why not just use them for mid bass too. Also having a bigger order of one brand of drivers might have some financial advantages. I simply compared a couple of different models in a sealed enclosure simulation to get rough an idea of the SPL, F3 and transient response of different models. I picked the 15FX560 because it is the most efficient and quickest of their 15" options. It also has the highest F3 but this doesn't matter much because this system will always be accompanied by subs.
Now I will get to my question. How do I get started designing these horns. I know there is a lot of info out the but I got overwhelmed and don't feel like reading the 740 pages of "hornresp". Can you recommend me some pages where I can read a good summary about the principles. And how about modeling software? Maybe some tips?
I quickly found out there are many different types of horns so to save myself some time I would like to hear your opinions on what the best type of horn would be for this mid-bass enclosure. It doesn't have to go very low, a F3 of ~100 Hz would be fine. The main objective for the mid-bass enclosure is quality. Transient speed, tightness and articulation. I know you can do different things with the back chamber of the woofer. How does having a sealed/ported/open back chamber affect the performance. If it does in a similar way to how it does in direct radiating I would go for a sealed back chamber.
Then there will be the subs. I'm still quite indecisive about what driver to use since there's many great options. I was thinking about one of the 18XL models from FaitalPRO, the SB-Audience NERO-21SW1100D or the B&C 21SW152. The main goal for the subwoofers (obviously) is to have best of both worlds with high quality and fast bass while extending very deep. Preferably F3 in the mid 20s. Which driver would you pick and which type of horn?
Now obviously the system will have DSP capabilities. Would it be possible to use a sealed back chamber and boost the lows to get it to go very deep? Or is a ported back chamber mandatory for deep extension?
I am curious to hear what you have to say.
Attachments
I've thought about a system like this for years and messed around with prototypes here and there.
In theory, the comb filtering from the wide spaced tweeters might be too much of a compromise. This will be up to you to decide what's acceptable. You can low pass(and level shade) the outer tweeters to minimize this if necessary. Creative use of foam can help as well.
The Bliesma really impressed me with its output capabilities and sound quality when paired with a 10" midbass at high spl's.
Any of the better prosound mids will get the job done but yes, the smaller mids will obviously be easier to blend with the domes. I have a pair of 5PR120 on order to mess around with. Currently backordered.
Tons of options for midbass. I would keep it relatively simple and go for a stack of 10's or 12's in well damped ported boxes tuned around 60hz. Give each driver its own internal airspace. You'll have a lot of flexibility and sound quality with this approach.
Also gives you the option of a lower crossover to the subs while still having clean low mid extension.
You can arrange the drivers in a V shape baffle to create a shallow horn. Won't make a huge difference in output but it'll give the look and arrangement you're going for.
Any of those 18's and 21's in ported boxes will work well. I would use 4 as a minimum. Horns that go that low are huge.
Tapped horns can get there in a reasonable size. Not necessarily "hi-fi".
In theory, the comb filtering from the wide spaced tweeters might be too much of a compromise. This will be up to you to decide what's acceptable. You can low pass(and level shade) the outer tweeters to minimize this if necessary. Creative use of foam can help as well.
The Bliesma really impressed me with its output capabilities and sound quality when paired with a 10" midbass at high spl's.
Any of the better prosound mids will get the job done but yes, the smaller mids will obviously be easier to blend with the domes. I have a pair of 5PR120 on order to mess around with. Currently backordered.
Tons of options for midbass. I would keep it relatively simple and go for a stack of 10's or 12's in well damped ported boxes tuned around 60hz. Give each driver its own internal airspace. You'll have a lot of flexibility and sound quality with this approach.
Also gives you the option of a lower crossover to the subs while still having clean low mid extension.
You can arrange the drivers in a V shape baffle to create a shallow horn. Won't make a huge difference in output but it'll give the look and arrangement you're going for.
Any of those 18's and 21's in ported boxes will work well. I would use 4 as a minimum. Horns that go that low are huge.
Tapped horns can get there in a reasonable size. Not necessarily "hi-fi".
Last edited:
That's an ambitious project. There are four main problems there though.
- The choice of tweeters. Both of your options are - no doubt about that - top notch HIFI tweeters. For a line array, they don't provide the attributes needed for a line-array. A LA is used to provide a controlled and evenly sound dispersion for a large area. Horns and waveguides are used in LAs mainly to provide a precise dispersion. Your proposed dome tweeters (or similar ones) can't match that because they radiate about ~150° at 2kHz but at 15kHz they narrow down to ~<90°. In an open air situation that doesn't matter (much) but realisticly, the most use of the small sound system will be in smaller spaces or (more likely) indoors. The problem with that is, what's hitting the walls and gets back as short reflecitons muddies the sound and dimishes the intelligibility and details/resolution vastly. Because of that, a controlled dispersion setup (very cheap, about 50 bucks horn + driver combination) easily outperforms your proposed tweeters indoors. Waveguides and horns are used for a reason.
- Both tweeter alternatives got a large diameter (for a LA), which means, the center of the source of the sound (next tweeter) to the next will be over 10cm (or ~8cm if you modify/cut the mounting plates), which means you'll get comb filter interference which results in lobes and dips in the FR if you move. If you want to keep the direct radiating tweeters instead of WGs or horns, you need tweeters which are much, MUCH smaller. That means, ND is obligatory, a bunch of i.e. Monacor DT-28N (or similar, doesn't have to be the Monacor ones, they just got a small WG) will outperform them in every possible criteria alone from the physical properties and sheer number at a fraction of the cost. TB, SB and many others got viable alternatives. BTW, your tweeters do not have 99dB, they got 96 - at 2,83V they are running at or over 2W because of the low impedance.
- A LA with such short dimension (vertically) doesn't really work as a LA. That doesn't mean the speakers can't be used but you get practically none of the advantages of a LA. There are more problems though. The 15" driver is great for very compact fullrange tops and performs top notch there. Not so much for horns though. The problem is the large VC overhang. In such a horn it will never even close reach its Xmax, at high power use the VC can't dissipate the heat to the pole plate/magnet, the ends of the VC will burn up way before the normal max power is reached. The midrange drivers are excellent but you can realistically use them from ~500 Hz up but a folded Horn like that will stop sounding good absolutely max at 200 Hz. The gap between that can't be covered and the low mids are crucial for SQ. To use several smaller drivers (8-10") in the upper bass - and a non-folded horn - will sound a lot better. Aside from that, you'd realisticly need a DSP and 3 amp channels per side, Plus DSP and amping for the subs. I doubt a random renter will be able to handle any of that setup.
- Such a pseudo-LA will be heavy, around ~50kg? To rent out something like that is a liability. Someone renting it likely doesn't know anything about about rigging and to set up a truss for 'flying' it is out of the question. Aside from the problematic handling, it would require a very large tripod which can still be toppled and is dangerous for audience members (even if they cause it themselves).
My thoughts about the subwoofers are also a bit ..difficult.. You aim for 20 Hz but that's very difficult to reach and completely impractical. I know, all HIFI brands lay emphasis on the 20 Hz bottom end in their specs but actually only about ~0,1% of all music material contains such low frequencies. And that is not always actually music but often just errors in the production chain such as vibrations or bumps on microphones, noise of the gear etc which was overlooked. The only music material (aside from test-CDs) which goes that low is church organ concerts. To cover that all completely you'd have to go down to 16 HZ though. You'll throw away tons of performance (6-10dB max spl) by that and your subs will become a lot larger without gaining any relevant performance by that.
I'd rather suggest going for 30-35 Hz, which is still extremely low. Or, alternatively, build 'standard' high performing subs which go down to ~40-45 Hz and add infras in the rare cases you really, really feel it doesn't go low enough. Again, that's truck space you're saving and you'll be much more flexible with smaller subs.
That's the next problem. 21" subs look impressive but someone who rents it has to get it to the location. Bigger subs are less likely to fit into the van. The NERO-21SW1100D needs a 210l BR enclosure for a (flat) f3 of 40 Hz (and doesn't go much lower than that), two 15" subs got the same membrane surface as a 21", need half the enclosure volume and two of them are so much better to handle, weight, carrying, fitting in the van etc are so much easier.
BTW: The B&C 21SW152 only needs half the Size (~100l) but is a bit quieter and does not go flat much below 45 Hz. You can tune it a bit lower and EQ it on the tuning frequency to get it to the 30s but there's no way you can reach the 20s with either of them.
The numbers game is easy for subs: Don't get the biggest driver, just bring more. My tip is to get 18" and plan for 2 -3 per side to match a good top and double that for open air because that eats bass like hell. Even if you don't need the max spl, it's better to have it than to need it (and don't have it). The more cone surface, the better the SQ, esp. for punch but it doesn't have to be 21" or more, and for small events just bring one or two subs.
I'd rather suggest going for 30-35 Hz, which is still extremely low. Or, alternatively, build 'standard' high performing subs which go down to ~40-45 Hz and add infras in the rare cases you really, really feel it doesn't go low enough. Again, that's truck space you're saving and you'll be much more flexible with smaller subs.
That's the next problem. 21" subs look impressive but someone who rents it has to get it to the location. Bigger subs are less likely to fit into the van. The NERO-21SW1100D needs a 210l BR enclosure for a (flat) f3 of 40 Hz (and doesn't go much lower than that), two 15" subs got the same membrane surface as a 21", need half the enclosure volume and two of them are so much better to handle, weight, carrying, fitting in the van etc are so much easier.
BTW: The B&C 21SW152 only needs half the Size (~100l) but is a bit quieter and does not go flat much below 45 Hz. You can tune it a bit lower and EQ it on the tuning frequency to get it to the 30s but there's no way you can reach the 20s with either of them.
The numbers game is easy for subs: Don't get the biggest driver, just bring more. My tip is to get 18" and plan for 2 -3 per side to match a good top and double that for open air because that eats bass like hell. Even if you don't need the max spl, it's better to have it than to need it (and don't have it). The more cone surface, the better the SQ, esp. for punch but it doesn't have to be 21" or more, and for small events just bring one or two subs.
No idea what your idea of a small to medium size crowd is?
Some festivals may not endorse or allow the use of your home built sound equipment, instead they may demand brand name equipment. Also, if you do any sort of tall ground stacking or rigging of cabinets, that is a liability that you may not want to have. If anyone is injured ( unlikely, but it could happen ) you may be the subject of a lawsuit.
It would be best to talk with a lawyer to get informed before embarking on such a project.
Some festivals may not endorse or allow the use of your home built sound equipment, instead they may demand brand name equipment. Also, if you do any sort of tall ground stacking or rigging of cabinets, that is a liability that you may not want to have. If anyone is injured ( unlikely, but it could happen ) you may be the subject of a lawsuit.
It would be best to talk with a lawyer to get informed before embarking on such a project.
Hi evryone and thanks a lot for all your input! First of all I want to clarify that my plan is not renting it out to randoms. I would never let anyone touch those speakers. By renting out I mean i myself will offer AV services for events, and do everything by myself (probably not alone but I mean as my own boss). So I will be handling these speakers by myself always. You did make a good point about the weight, I was also already thinking about this. In the end I'll probably split the cabinets up in stackable units half the proposed number of drivers. And I know what you are saying about the impractical size these speakers will be. But I'm an idiot, and I'm willing to make some practical sacrifices for better sound. I'll deal with it. Both to try and set myself appart in the market and for my own enjoyment, lol. When I get to it for real I will thoroughly develop the design also in terms of usability. I understand your concern about the mounting of the top cabinets. I will design a custom super heavy duty adjustable mounting system that is bolted securely to the top of the sub cabinets. If necessary I might even put stabilizing feet under the sub cabinets. I wouldn't dare to use the system at events if I'm not 100% confident the speakers will never tip over.
I get what you are saying about the dispersion issue. I'm used to hifi where the wider the dispersion the better if you know how to setup speakers. I was looking at Funktion Ones website and looked at there supposed flagship model the EvoX. In the description they seemed very proud of the supposed "wide" 90 degree dispersion. So I thought they were also trying to get wider dispersion so why not just use DR domes. Now I think of it some home audio brands including some very good ones like Vivid also actually use wave guides in certain models to perform better in suboptimal spaces.
Now I wonder, you said that these widely spaced DR domes will suffer from comp filtering on which I agree with you. For example a BlieSMa T25 would be much better (if they still exist). Now because of the issue described above I will most probably use waveguided tweeters anyway. Preferably still a line array But I wonder, wave guided tweeters would be spaced even much further appart. And I see this in some branded line arrays. Do waveguides do something to mitigate this or do they make a sacrifice? Does this (somewhat) resolve the issue of comp filtering? Or does it still take a especially designed waveguide with many domes very close together? Forgive my lack of knowledge about waveguided and horn speakers.
If not. I would think the SB-Acoustics Satori TW29BNWG-4 would be a fantastic candidate? I know I said I want to stay away from beryllium tweeters earlier but in case it's in a deep waveguide I would actually dare to have them. Otherwise I think I will switch to a smaller number of AMT/ribbon tweeters. Mundorf made some high efficiency, high power handling pro AMTs with waveguide. The 197PP27F2-7-H or 197PP27R-7-H would seem like great options. Or perhaps even a ribbon like the RAAL 140-15D or even the 210-10 or Fountek NeoPro 5i or 10i in a custom waveguide.
If I'm gonna switch to a waveguided tweeter I would probably also switch to the 6" SB-Audience NERO-6MRN150D. Or maybe even an 8" if there is one with even better midrange performance that still has good enough dispersion. I doubt it though. As far as I could find measurments the NERO seems to be the lowest distortion PA mid out there.
Thanks alot for the comment on the mid bass. Would it be the best for the mid woofers to also cover top to bottom for best performance? The 6" SB mid would have an F3 of ~303 Hz in a sealed enclosure. I will stick to a sealed midrange enclosure. The internal volume will be relatively big, probably around 30 L to allow some movement (and in my oppion allround better midrange performance with bigger, proparly damped midrange chamber). Is it possible to make a horn mid bass to meet this frequency? And about the back chamber of the mid bass. Would you say it's mandatory for it to be ported to resolve the excursion/overheating issue? Or is it more a matter of driver selection? If so which would you suggest as the absolute best driver for this application? Any of the 8" from FaitalPRO? What about the 8PR320? 119 Hz F3 in a regular 40 L sealed box model. And in this 40 L does some good excursion at high power. Or should i still go with a ported box? It has gets a 60 Hz F3 in a 39 L box tuned to 66 Hz. And would it still be possible to have te horn go around the mid/tweeter array in a smooth matter and exit out both sides? Or does the exit have to be on one side and the throat as straight as possible to sound good? Function One uses a 15" seemingly folded horn in their EvoX to 280 Hz.
And by the way, yes this will absolutely be a fully DSP controlled system with active crossovers. I am considering something like the Linea Research 44M06 for the mids/tweeters and a 44M20 for the mid bass/subs. I'm not even gonna bother designing passive crossovers. And anyway I would never settle with a DSP-less system. I absolutely love the sound of my home active system.
About the subs. I kind of want to use horn subs because of easthetics. And don't horn subwoofers have performance advantages? Not only in terms of efficiecy but also in bass quality? And can't the potentially give deeper extention? If none of these are true I would consider BR. But still the horns are the main subject in the design looks-wise. My idea is to coat the inside of the horns in for example a matt silver type paint that nicely reflect light, and then install DMX controlled LED strips in the back of the horns throats to create a cool glowing effect. I think this would look absolutely awesome on a small techno stage/event. Making the speakers the main easthetic of the stage instead of the opposite. And provide part of the light show while doing so. So i would prefer to stick with a horn. preferably where two drivers are mounted opposed, for force cancellation.
Maybe you're right and aiming for the 20's is overkill. But I still want to aim for maybe slightly above 30 Hz. I mentioned the 21" subs, especially the NERO-21SW1100D because it was more efficient and goes slightly deeper than other drivers I compared while steel having good transient response in a model. But now that you say it, if it requires a similar back chamber volume as it does without a horn i think the requered box volume plus the size oh the horn would become very very big. But then I wonder. Funktion One (again) claim 30 Hz from their twin 21" sub. How do yout think they do it? How much could I extend the bass response with the DSP. If something in the direction of 30 Hz is possible with smaller subs I would obviously prefer that. Please do a suggestion on driver and enclosure type you would think would be best if you have any. The SB NERO-18SW1900D seems great.
I get what you are saying about the dispersion issue. I'm used to hifi where the wider the dispersion the better if you know how to setup speakers. I was looking at Funktion Ones website and looked at there supposed flagship model the EvoX. In the description they seemed very proud of the supposed "wide" 90 degree dispersion. So I thought they were also trying to get wider dispersion so why not just use DR domes. Now I think of it some home audio brands including some very good ones like Vivid also actually use wave guides in certain models to perform better in suboptimal spaces.
Now I wonder, you said that these widely spaced DR domes will suffer from comp filtering on which I agree with you. For example a BlieSMa T25 would be much better (if they still exist). Now because of the issue described above I will most probably use waveguided tweeters anyway. Preferably still a line array But I wonder, wave guided tweeters would be spaced even much further appart. And I see this in some branded line arrays. Do waveguides do something to mitigate this or do they make a sacrifice? Does this (somewhat) resolve the issue of comp filtering? Or does it still take a especially designed waveguide with many domes very close together? Forgive my lack of knowledge about waveguided and horn speakers.
If not. I would think the SB-Acoustics Satori TW29BNWG-4 would be a fantastic candidate? I know I said I want to stay away from beryllium tweeters earlier but in case it's in a deep waveguide I would actually dare to have them. Otherwise I think I will switch to a smaller number of AMT/ribbon tweeters. Mundorf made some high efficiency, high power handling pro AMTs with waveguide. The 197PP27F2-7-H or 197PP27R-7-H would seem like great options. Or perhaps even a ribbon like the RAAL 140-15D or even the 210-10 or Fountek NeoPro 5i or 10i in a custom waveguide.
If I'm gonna switch to a waveguided tweeter I would probably also switch to the 6" SB-Audience NERO-6MRN150D. Or maybe even an 8" if there is one with even better midrange performance that still has good enough dispersion. I doubt it though. As far as I could find measurments the NERO seems to be the lowest distortion PA mid out there.
Thanks alot for the comment on the mid bass. Would it be the best for the mid woofers to also cover top to bottom for best performance? The 6" SB mid would have an F3 of ~303 Hz in a sealed enclosure. I will stick to a sealed midrange enclosure. The internal volume will be relatively big, probably around 30 L to allow some movement (and in my oppion allround better midrange performance with bigger, proparly damped midrange chamber). Is it possible to make a horn mid bass to meet this frequency? And about the back chamber of the mid bass. Would you say it's mandatory for it to be ported to resolve the excursion/overheating issue? Or is it more a matter of driver selection? If so which would you suggest as the absolute best driver for this application? Any of the 8" from FaitalPRO? What about the 8PR320? 119 Hz F3 in a regular 40 L sealed box model. And in this 40 L does some good excursion at high power. Or should i still go with a ported box? It has gets a 60 Hz F3 in a 39 L box tuned to 66 Hz. And would it still be possible to have te horn go around the mid/tweeter array in a smooth matter and exit out both sides? Or does the exit have to be on one side and the throat as straight as possible to sound good? Function One uses a 15" seemingly folded horn in their EvoX to 280 Hz.
And by the way, yes this will absolutely be a fully DSP controlled system with active crossovers. I am considering something like the Linea Research 44M06 for the mids/tweeters and a 44M20 for the mid bass/subs. I'm not even gonna bother designing passive crossovers. And anyway I would never settle with a DSP-less system. I absolutely love the sound of my home active system.
About the subs. I kind of want to use horn subs because of easthetics. And don't horn subwoofers have performance advantages? Not only in terms of efficiecy but also in bass quality? And can't the potentially give deeper extention? If none of these are true I would consider BR. But still the horns are the main subject in the design looks-wise. My idea is to coat the inside of the horns in for example a matt silver type paint that nicely reflect light, and then install DMX controlled LED strips in the back of the horns throats to create a cool glowing effect. I think this would look absolutely awesome on a small techno stage/event. Making the speakers the main easthetic of the stage instead of the opposite. And provide part of the light show while doing so. So i would prefer to stick with a horn. preferably where two drivers are mounted opposed, for force cancellation.
Maybe you're right and aiming for the 20's is overkill. But I still want to aim for maybe slightly above 30 Hz. I mentioned the 21" subs, especially the NERO-21SW1100D because it was more efficient and goes slightly deeper than other drivers I compared while steel having good transient response in a model. But now that you say it, if it requires a similar back chamber volume as it does without a horn i think the requered box volume plus the size oh the horn would become very very big. But then I wonder. Funktion One (again) claim 30 Hz from their twin 21" sub. How do yout think they do it? How much could I extend the bass response with the DSP. If something in the direction of 30 Hz is possible with smaller subs I would obviously prefer that. Please do a suggestion on driver and enclosure type you would think would be best if you have any. The SB NERO-18SW1900D seems great.
I have already got a couple of contacts in the industry including two owners of event organisations and my network will grow as I work in the industry. I will soon start at a company who do AV services with Funktion One systems for events. My plan is to learn everything I need to know the coming couple of years working there and maybe at some other companies. When I'm confident I have all the knowledge I need I want to start my own company with this self built system. When I get there I will of course talk to as many organizers as I know by that time to know if they would be interested to work with my and to reel in my first couple of jobs before I invest in the system. Of course I will also discuss issues like that mentioned above. I've already talked about my idea to a few people in the industry and they told me they are quite confident there would be a market for my system because of its uniqueness.
My idea of a small event/stage is about 2k people max? Something like in this video. They were running this stage just with three medium size top units and two subs per side. https://photos.app.goo.gl/sefbweHUXznqh9cg9
8 dome tweeters a side for 2K people?
The TW29TXN-B is 95 dB averaged over 1.1khz to 21khz ( measured by HifiCompass ) with 2.83v, but is a 3 ohm Re ( 4 ohm nominal ) tweeter, so 2.83v applied is 2.66w.
8 non-correlated sources will add 9 dB compared to one source. They can't physically be close enough to be within 1/4 wavelength over their passband, even trimming the faceplates.
Call it 92 dB + 9 = 101 dB/w. With an 80 watt IEC 268.5 power handling.
What the data sheet does not specify is which test under the IEC 268.5 framework is used.
I found some data that Scan-speak put out for their in house testing, and shows different tests under that IEC 268.5
https://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/tech/Scan-Speak_Technote02_Powertest.pdf
Ask yourself is it the short term power test ( IEC 268.5 18.1 ) which is signal for ONE second, pause for one minute ( total time one hour )
Or is it the long term power handling test ( IEC 268.5 18.2 ) which is signal for ONE minute, pause for two minutes.
Or would it be the 100 hour RMS noise test ( IEC 268.5 18.4 )
These are radically different realities.
Maybe an email to SB Acoustic can clear that up. Likely best to keep the total power for each tweeter to no more than about 16w RMS. That would give you about 113 dB for the array ( safely ) at 1meter.
The TW29TXN-B is 95 dB averaged over 1.1khz to 21khz ( measured by HifiCompass ) with 2.83v, but is a 3 ohm Re ( 4 ohm nominal ) tweeter, so 2.83v applied is 2.66w.
8 non-correlated sources will add 9 dB compared to one source. They can't physically be close enough to be within 1/4 wavelength over their passband, even trimming the faceplates.
Call it 92 dB + 9 = 101 dB/w. With an 80 watt IEC 268.5 power handling.
What the data sheet does not specify is which test under the IEC 268.5 framework is used.
I found some data that Scan-speak put out for their in house testing, and shows different tests under that IEC 268.5
https://www.scan-speak.dk/datasheet/tech/Scan-Speak_Technote02_Powertest.pdf
Ask yourself is it the short term power test ( IEC 268.5 18.1 ) which is signal for ONE second, pause for one minute ( total time one hour )
Or is it the long term power handling test ( IEC 268.5 18.2 ) which is signal for ONE minute, pause for two minutes.
Or would it be the 100 hour RMS noise test ( IEC 268.5 18.4 )
These are radically different realities.
Maybe an email to SB Acoustic can clear that up. Likely best to keep the total power for each tweeter to no more than about 16w RMS. That would give you about 113 dB for the array ( safely ) at 1meter.
Okay I did some exntensive comparing and I'm pretty sure I've made my decision for the tweeters and mids. The tweeters are gonna be Mundorf 197PP27R-740-CDH. I believe the 740 series "R" has the best frequency response, transient response and lowest distortion of all their models. It also has low crossover capabilities. I actually went to see if I could find a potentially better 8" mid but I couldn't. The only real competitor I could find measurments of was the B&C 8NSM64, but it is way less efficient and has way more distortion. Also worse decay. Other 8" B&C models were only worse. I can't find measurments of any 8" Faitalpro though. Their 8RS340 or 8PR320 would seem most promising. Upon second comparison the 6" 6RS140 actually looks very promising. It has better polar response and decay than the SB. It also has much lower distortion below 600 Hz than the SB. Because the SBs distortion starts rising alot below 500 Hz actually. Might even want to aim for 400 Hz crossover if possible. The only drawback to the 6RS140 however is that the distortion peaks quite a bit right at 1,5 kHz. The SB has a similar peak but it is pushed above 2 kHz so the crossover would start to roll off right where the distortion starts rising.
Which would you pick? slightly better decay and lower distortion in lower mids at the cost of a distortion peak at 1,5 kHz? Or stick with the SB with possibly a somewhat higher crossover for lower overall distortion. I believe the distortion would be more noticeable in the mids than in lower mids.
Which would you pick? slightly better decay and lower distortion in lower mids at the cost of a distortion peak at 1,5 kHz? Or stick with the SB with possibly a somewhat higher crossover for lower overall distortion. I believe the distortion would be more noticeable in the mids than in lower mids.
Putting it this way you have a good point. Maybe the Satoris aren't up to the task SPL wise alone. Other than their other issues. I agree with you they aren't suitable. I suppose the mundorf are much more suitable. They are also designed as PA drivers for line arrays.
The 8NSM64 is designed for horn loading, not so much as a direct radiator, although it could be used as such with EQ I suppose, but there are better options for a direct radiator, in my opinion.
With a BL^2/Re of 84, it's got a STOUT motor on it, along with a 2 hour continuous pink noise AES power handling of 250W, from 245 hz - 2450 hz ( Fs - 10Fs ) as well as a 100dB/w sensitivity.
Also of note, it's 4.5% eff.
With a BL^2/Re of 84, it's got a STOUT motor on it, along with a 2 hour continuous pink noise AES power handling of 250W, from 245 hz - 2450 hz ( Fs - 10Fs ) as well as a 100dB/w sensitivity.
Also of note, it's 4.5% eff.
Just realised 8" mids will start comp filtering at ~1550 Hz. Probably better to stick to 6" for the line array.
The way I see it there are only a few reasons to use a line array:
1) If one device isn't loud enough
2) To give a wider dispersion in the horizontal plane, assuming the array is a vertical arrangement.
3) To change the distance from near field to far field transition ( from -3dB / distance doubling to -6dB / distance doubling )
Problems inherent to a line array:
1) Driver costs and count increase over other solutions
2 ) Windy conditions or temperature changes ( ground warmer or colder than ambient air ) make HF response unpredictable
3 ) Complexity - wiring, set up time
At 100 hz, you would need an 8 meter high array to give you a 10 meter transition distance from near field to far field.
Search out and read James Griffin's Line Array Whitepaper from 2003, it has some good information on arrays.
1) If one device isn't loud enough
2) To give a wider dispersion in the horizontal plane, assuming the array is a vertical arrangement.
3) To change the distance from near field to far field transition ( from -3dB / distance doubling to -6dB / distance doubling )
Problems inherent to a line array:
1) Driver costs and count increase over other solutions
2 ) Windy conditions or temperature changes ( ground warmer or colder than ambient air ) make HF response unpredictable
3 ) Complexity - wiring, set up time
At 100 hz, you would need an 8 meter high array to give you a 10 meter transition distance from near field to far field.
Search out and read James Griffin's Line Array Whitepaper from 2003, it has some good information on arrays.
Thanks for your informative points. The points you bring up actually sound very good to me. Because my goal using many drivers is indeed for higher SPL. Monitors with single tweeter/mid/midbass I know won't meet the requirments for the kind of events I have in mind. To be honest I'm not really worried about the costs of the many drivers. Even if I select all top notch drivers, it is still much cheaper than buying manufacturer speakers that will give comparable performance. If there are any when I finish this system 🙂. I know a few people who I know would be willing to invest when I come with a thoughtout plan. And I think the initial investment won't be THAT hard to earn back once business is going. I'm already looking into other hardware too like amps and mixing consoles. Because my system isn't that big or complicated like the real big flying line array systems and such. I can do just fine with just a few amplifiers, a compact mixing console and other electronics. I think even if i go for top notch electronics like Linea Research amps and Allen & Heath Aventus Solo and maybe even some quality cables (I'm not talking crazy high end OBVIOUSLY but just not simple cheap trash) the total system cost would be around 100 k. If I see what kind of prices AV rental companies are charging I think it's not that bad to earn back if you have consistent jobs.
The short throw/long throw issue to me sounds like it kind of just depends? The kind of crowds I have in mind aren't that big right. Eventually I will build a second pair of top to stack two units per side. Which would make them a total of 1,3 m high. And even with such a setup the stages this system will power are probably still only small ones. So I think this isn't much of a problem. I see small stacks of line arrays standing often enough at smaller stages. So I think it should work just fine for what I have in mind.
I will for sure use that paper!
The short throw/long throw issue to me sounds like it kind of just depends? The kind of crowds I have in mind aren't that big right. Eventually I will build a second pair of top to stack two units per side. Which would make them a total of 1,3 m high. And even with such a setup the stages this system will power are probably still only small ones. So I think this isn't much of a problem. I see small stacks of line arrays standing often enough at smaller stages. So I think it should work just fine for what I have in mind.
I will for sure use that paper!
They do it with marketing 😉
The -3dB response is at 40Hz, which is likely -10dB below the 100Hz level.
Being a FLH, you can extend the LF response as far down as you would like, but below 40Hz the horn does almost nothing- it's response is basically that of two 750 watt 21" in small sealed enclosures the volume of the F221 back chambers, probably no more than ~100L per driver to control excursion.
You could get more low frequency output per driver from a tapped horn design of similar size.
The term is "comb" filtering, the off axis peaks and dips look like the teeth of a comb.
If you are crossing at ~1550 Hz the diameter of the driver is of little consequence, the off axis comb filter will change in depth and cancellation frequency dependent on the line length.
The near field cancellation the comb filtering causes is why they are not as loud in the near field.
The near field changes with frequency, the lower the frequency, the less distance the near field is.
A total of 1.3 m high is a dash, not a line.
If you are serious about providing event sound, $100,000 is a drop in a bucket. A few large Crest, Lab Gruppen, Crown or QSC amps can run you $ 15G or more.
Don't forget about power distribution, amp racks, cabling, etc. That is over and above what any base enclosure costs will be. For obvious reasons, you will want to locate the amplifiers near the speakers to cut down on line losses. 8 conductor speakons are about CDN $38 per connection, without considering the Faston costs. 8 conductor 12AWG ProX wire is over $ 3 CDN per foot.
If you are transporting enclosures often, I'd consider epoxy and glass fiber reinforced baltic birch ( or epoxy and carbon fiber reinforced ) covered in a spray polyurea coating ( Line-X )
Don't forget about power distribution, amp racks, cabling, etc. That is over and above what any base enclosure costs will be. For obvious reasons, you will want to locate the amplifiers near the speakers to cut down on line losses. 8 conductor speakons are about CDN $38 per connection, without considering the Faston costs. 8 conductor 12AWG ProX wire is over $ 3 CDN per foot.
If you are transporting enclosures often, I'd consider epoxy and glass fiber reinforced baltic birch ( or epoxy and carbon fiber reinforced ) covered in a spray polyurea coating ( Line-X )
Wow should have better checked those specs. I bet it's possible to beat those then. I'm gonna do a lot of research on horn design tomorrow and try figuring out how to model them. Got any recommendations for sources?
So when it comes to the midrange does that mean that more 6" mids will have a better distributed near field overal or would 8" drivers give more output further away because they are slightly more directive?
I know there will be a lot more costs. I will figure out all things I need over time and see what the total costs will be with what I have in mind so far. If it's more than expected in the end I will see where I can do with a cheaper option to start off with at least. Still though. I'm sure buying manufactured speakers with similar performance will be much more expensive. And would anyway take away my plan for a unique system. The are people who have done this before.
I find it hard to find real reviews of top brand PA equipment. But as far as I could find people seem just as positive about Linea Research as about Lab Gruppen. Yet the are less than half the price of a comparable model Lab Gruppen. Are they that significantly better? Anyway I actually like seeking out stuff that isn't the MOST expensive but performs almost as good as the more expensive options. I do the same with my home system. I found electronics that perform amazingly for their price and then added a lot of tweaks to the system which really make it work in harmony. Stuff like high quality cables, netfilters, linear power supplies. Making sure all electronics are plugged in in the correct phase. Taking care off those sorts of details go a LONG way in getting amazing performance even from bang for the buck devices. Especially keeping electrical noise out of digital devices is a big one. I want to try and do this to this system too.
There's nothing wrong with 90° but nothing to be proud of either, you need a dispersion that fits your location. 90x50° for short throw, 60x40 for long throw (but you usually need a near fill then too). As simple as that sounds, the direct radiating domes do not have a uniform dispersion, bottom wide, top narrower. The FO keep their 90° pretty evenly and that is great but on the other hand, that's expected in that price range.
WG do help a lot - but only if you don't introduce additional problems by that.
That's the additional problems I've mentioned above. They still need to come very close together. A circular WG will always spread them further apart which is exactly what should be avoided! That's why I posted the Monacor DT-28N link, they ~halve the distance of the sound sources (5,5cm). Plus, they allow for much more dynamics, instead of 6 tweeters you can place 15 of them in the same space (5,5x15=82,5), which results in a power capability of 750W RMS instead of 480W. I calculated with the RMS but the Monacor are rated 50W at 2kHz, the Bliesma 80W at 2,5kHz. Plus, they got a lot more active membrane surface (117,6cm² vs. 69,36cm²). That's a TON of more dynamics and headroom you're gaining!
You can fit the row of DT-28N in a simple self-made straight WG.
No, the problem is still the same. Actually, it's a ton worse! It's got a diameter of 17cm, the lobing will be horrible. For a WG the dispersion is actually not impressive and they still beam even more. You can fit only 4 in the same space, the power capabilities are much lower (240W, if you want to believe the 80W). They are 97dB at 2,83V which makes their 3 Ohm -3dB (actually more quiet, too lazy to calculate now), which results in 94dB - which is the same as the Monacor. So no kind on improvement in any aspect.
AMTs got amazing resolution and dynamics. The 197PP27F1 is the one you'd want from Mundorf because it's the only one which can stack the WG okay (short distance between tweeters. Or the 197PP27F1 if you will build the WG yourself. The large AMTs don't measure that well in fr, you can fix the fr in the dsp, the resonances stay though.
I'd suggest you use the BEYMA TPL-150 instead and build a WG yourself. The Beyma can be crossed over even lower and can take more power (100W RMS vs. 75W) than the Mundorf except if you use a fan on the Mundorf (but you could do the same with the Beyma). And the fr is so much nicer!
A port above 100 Hz sounds terrible, at 300 Hz you'll have nasty phase problems. Sealed is the way to go. Don't mind if the Qtc goes up because the midrange (not mid-bass) should always be used above the resonance frequency.
A 8" is way too big and if you give them 40l each then your top will break the 100kg line easily.
I am not completely familiar with all actual 5-6" high performance midrange drivers. A mid-bass could be used if you want to but they will have much lower spl.
For a midrange the 18S 6ND410 seems nice and is surprisingly cheap.
The Function One 15" horn is bent, not folded. 😉
E: and it only has one bend, not two 90° turns.
Last edited:
I meant 40 L total. I think that's doable.
Good call on the beyma AMT! In terms of FR it actually looks very similar to the Mundorf. But it definately has more SPL capabilities. The Radian LT6 also looks promising. It has slightly lower distortion and especially cleaner decay. The Beyma seems to have a decay problem around 3 kHz which is a shame. The LT6 however also has a problem which is that the off axis response completely disappears at 15 kHz. The Beyma also does this but less so. I think this is an artifact of the WG and could be mitigated by a slightly different design? I actually noticed. The Beymas have such SPL capabilities that the midranges and mid-woofers can't keep up. The Beymas have a max SPL of about 124 dB each. The SB NERO only 118 dB. So they already can't keep up.
I'm puzzling around with either three or four tweeters+mids per unit in relation to the number and size of mid woofers can fit in the cabinet height. The tweeters and SB mids are practically the same height so they will simply be equal numbers. For the mid woofers though. With three tweeters high cabinet. Only two 8" mid-woofers would fit. With four tweeters high cabinets. Either two 10s or 12s would fit. Just not triple 8s though. I also can't find a 8" that has a sufficient F3 in a sealed enclosure. Of course some can be helped with DSP. But the 8" drivers kind of stop at 200 Hz F3. I also can't find 10s that would be able to keep up. There's only a handful of 12s that would come closest with two of them. But then Again. the midranges won't keep up to begin with.
The Radian actually is a better match to the mids SPL wise. And I think it actually has slightly better performance than the Beyma except for the off-axis response issue which can probably be mitigated by a different WG. What do you think? The Beyma is cool but I think it actually offer unmanageable SPL relative to any midrange/mid-woofer option. The only mid that could keep up SPL would be the B&C 6NSM51. I can't find measurments of it though. There are measurments of the 8NSMC64 which look very good except for the waterfall plot.
https://audioxpress.com/article/tes...eering-s-lt6-horn-loaded-ribbon-planar-device
https://audioxpress.com/article/tes...a-tpl200-h-pro-sound-air-velocity-transformer