Is it possible to cover the whole spectrum, high SPL, low distortion with a 2-way?

Just for fun, the biggest OSWG ever...

Horizontal coverage angle: 70°
Vertical coverage angle: 50°

Width: 2002.66 mm
Height: 1471.66 mm
Depth: 1000 mm
 

Attachments

  • Prodigium_70x50_2.png
    Prodigium_70x50_2.png
    240.7 KB · Views: 316
  • Prodigium_70x50.png
    Prodigium_70x50.png
    176.2 KB · Views: 315
  • Prodigium_70x50_3.png
    Prodigium_70x50_3.png
    172.1 KB · Views: 303
There's no substitute for a big horn.
This also applies to OSWGs, as illustrated by Marcel Batik in the sims below of a 52cm (diameter) OSWG.


Now that he has released his tool to the public, I guess it's permitted to show some sample waveguides.

If that polar map is of an OSWG it's probably not accurate as I see no axial aberrations from the mouth that always occur in a circular device.
 
I've seen this in every one of my designs. The upper end of the tweeter sets the limit of system SPL.

This is why I couldn't use a DE500 in my NS-15. Because the DE500 had a few dB lower output at 10k I could not match it to the higher efficiency 15" woofer. In the NA-12 the match was fine, but not the larger woofer.

However, simple solution arrived. Pad out the woofer instead of the usual tweeter. Not a common solution, but it does work just fine (especially in a closed-box system.)


It's well known you rely on B&C drivers (as I do to some extent).
However, this driver might solve the issue and likely also sound better at the low crossover point of the NS-15.

HF10AK_response_8.gif


I've heard both the DE500 and the HF10AK and honestly; the Faital sounds better down low (<1500Hz).
The DE550 is better suited to the crossover of the NS-15 due to its 2" VC, but it doesn't quite make it to 20kHz.
 
Last edited:
If that polar map is of an OSWG it's probably not accurate as I see no axial aberrations from the mouth that always occur in a circular device.

These aberrations?

I'll leave it at that, because I won't take credit for Marcel's (huge amount of) work.
The point of these ABEC sims was to illustrate that 'bigger is better'.
 

Attachments

  • OSWG-2-SPL.png
    OSWG-2-SPL.png
    34.6 KB · Views: 355
  • OSWG-2-SPL-pmap.png
    OSWG-2-SPL-pmap.png
    55.1 KB · Views: 355
  • OSWG-2-on_axis_4,8kHz.png
    OSWG-2-on_axis_4,8kHz.png
    56.6 KB · Views: 353
Last edited:
Hello Gedlee
Thank you for joining the conversation, it is an honor! As you can see this topic has gone viral. Predictable I think, since the 2-way is the "coaxial" we never had. Make that make sense....anyway...
Do you have any ideas to help me produce a better final product?
I'm aiming to put the area between the top woofer and horn at ear level. The horn can be angled. Me sitting with feet flat, makes the enclosure about 47" tall
That would put the center of the bottom woofer at ~23.5"
With a xover of 630hz, I wonder what is the most dramatic listening angle I should allow from the 15"s
I forget what KA I'd be at. Though I intend to use room correction at the sweet spot, the polar shape ultimately will affect the rooms energy, Changing the eq for my listening position affects everything else and being that I can't seem to get in the middle of that polar (close listening distance).....wait....thats it!.....I need to be able to angle the woofers as well........back to the drawing board!
Thanks so much Gedlee!

greetings from Wyoming Mi!
 
Sometimes you have to improvise.....My chair is adjustable, I can always lower my chair, thus lowering the intended sweet spot. 47" inches tall has its merits.
Angling the speakers up would just cause more vertical reflections....thought we were trying to avoid this.
I read that comb filtering is product of horizontal array and not so much vertical. Otherwise I just might consider horizontal even after all that discussion we just had.
Its either really tall and wide or really wide and tall. I'm trying to keep the depth down to keep the resonant note up high on those walls.
Bare with me folks.
 
Member
Joined 2008
Paid Member
I like how these big horns have similar/aligned width to the width of the bass cabinet. Makes the design very neat looking to me. As opposed to circular based mid horns (like avantgarde, etc.) I think it even provide more integrated sound near field as the horns are physically closer to the bass driver? Is there much sonic benefit that circular horns provide over the rectangular styled ones ?

I have a pair of 204hz azurahorn horn (uses JMLC profile) for 8" driver, but the flare has been cut down. I find it difficult to find a way to mount it to so it is close to the woofer and mounted in some stable platform.