I never worked for the BBC but did some projects with them including the redesign of the LS3/5a.
The Karlson was a wonderful example because it is a Litmus test differentiating between those that understand the basics of acoustics and cabinet design and....
It was claimed to do everything and have the best aspects of horns as well as bass reflex. Recently some have tried to explain it as a double tuned system with a back cavity and front cavity (the baffle area under the exponential slot). I think the front volume is too wide open to work as a second cavity and think the cabinet basically works as a bass reflex cavity with an extra resonance(s) chamber.
There are plenty of measurements on the web. I'll attach three. One is from a Jullian Hirsch review. You can tell from his tone that he wasn't impressed by the many claims made about the speaker. (It was nothing if not well marketed.) Note that all three curves show the same basic profile: two deep dips close together and then a third major dip further up the spectrum. These are the resonances of the chamber between the inner baffle and the front exponential surfaces. The Klipsch curve (I think taken by Paul himself) shows the same basic profile. The extra hash on the curve appears to me an in-room measurement. The third set compares it to another reflex cabinet. It shows the same resonances. The LF response looks like the typical differences between different cabinet volumes and tunings.
A cabinet with a series of holes is a reflex cabinet. The holes aren't ideal vents because port resistance will be high and port output will be nonlinear, but it is still a reflex cabinet. An exponentiall shaped slot is not an exponential horn, it doesn't determine area growth. It is decoration. Having an undamped cavity beneath will clearly lead to resonances, as all the curves show. Cut off the front wings and sides forward of the baffle and you will have a decent reflex cabinet.
The BBC monitor with the slot loading of the woofer is nicely done. The volume under the wings is small and the impact on frequency response is minimal. It acts like the diffraction slot on a lot of CD horns, reducing effectiive width and improving dispersion.
Regards,
David S.
Attachments
Can't say I (ever much) disagree with David S, but....
in 1956 my dad and I went shopping for component hi-fi on Leonard Street in New York City (later the whole area disappeared under the World Trade Center). At Airex, a major dealer in the district, they had every driver housed in a Karlson - all the different sizes - a few dozen at least. Quite a sight lined up high and low along the length of the second floor showroom.
I don't think Karlson's marketing was any more egregious than anybody else's. And Airex sure thought they were special. So did we because we bought a 15 inch model which was pretty great with a Norelco (Philips) 12-inch with whizzer cone.
Nothing then or now could sound as much like a cello. But not sure as it has more to offer in today's market.
in 1956 my dad and I went shopping for component hi-fi on Leonard Street in New York City (later the whole area disappeared under the World Trade Center). At Airex, a major dealer in the district, they had every driver housed in a Karlson - all the different sizes - a few dozen at least. Quite a sight lined up high and low along the length of the second floor showroom.
I don't think Karlson's marketing was any more egregious than anybody else's. And Airex sure thought they were special. So did we because we bought a 15 inch model which was pretty great with a Norelco (Philips) 12-inch with whizzer cone.
Nothing then or now could sound as much like a cello. But not sure as it has more to offer in today's market.
Sorry if I've stepped on anybodies toes or beliefs. If you have a Karlson system or fondly remember one, then great. Resonances aside you can probably make a decent sounding system with such a cabinet. (but an even better sounding with the same drivers and a conventional bass reflex cabinet.)
Here is what Floyd Toole had to say on the subject:
In those days, loudspeaker manufacturers routinely made tremendous leaps of faith. They sold woofers, midranges and tweeters to customers who combined them in any mixture of brands, using a crossover network that was not designed for any specific units. All of this might be put into a homemade enclosure following a design that was published in one of the monthly audio/electronics magazines. Back in the late 1950’s my father and I built several of these horrors, not knowing any better. One, called the “fold-a-flex” was an ingenious design that, by operating doors and sliding panels could be converted from a closed box, to a reflex, to a folded horn! Another, the “Karlson”, survived long enough for me to be able to properly test it, after I matured, acoustically. It could best be described as an “acoustic meat grinder”, guaranteed to make mincemeat from any drivers put into it! Those were the days when the quality of the sound increased in direct proportion to the effort expended in the hand-rubbed finish on the box.
From Why Loudspeakers Sound the Way They Do
Regards,
David S.
Here is what Floyd Toole had to say on the subject:
In those days, loudspeaker manufacturers routinely made tremendous leaps of faith. They sold woofers, midranges and tweeters to customers who combined them in any mixture of brands, using a crossover network that was not designed for any specific units. All of this might be put into a homemade enclosure following a design that was published in one of the monthly audio/electronics magazines. Back in the late 1950’s my father and I built several of these horrors, not knowing any better. One, called the “fold-a-flex” was an ingenious design that, by operating doors and sliding panels could be converted from a closed box, to a reflex, to a folded horn! Another, the “Karlson”, survived long enough for me to be able to properly test it, after I matured, acoustically. It could best be described as an “acoustic meat grinder”, guaranteed to make mincemeat from any drivers put into it! Those were the days when the quality of the sound increased in direct proportion to the effort expended in the hand-rubbed finish on the box.
From Why Loudspeakers Sound the Way They Do
Regards,
David S.
I've many cello cds and those and Gary Karr's bowed bass do sound excellent with the large Karlson-coupler. My K-horns sound like a bandpass box in that region. Harpsichords imo are attractive with the Karlson and very bad with K-horn.
G.A Briggs was affiliated with the RJ but to my limited knowledge never brought up the Karlson enclosure.
LS3 5A are cool but have gotten very pricey
sorry to eat into the waveguide thread
RJ & Eliptoflex
RJ compared to Karlsons and Elliptoflex, and even BBC slots?
like the BBC slot there was very little cavity volume in front of the RJ's speaker
RJ15 - input Z with EV SP15's control fully clockwise
Response ~3ft in-room-on-axis EV SP15 (control fully clockwise)
RJ 15 cabinet's aperture
G.A Briggs was affiliated with the RJ but to my limited knowledge never brought up the Karlson enclosure.
LS3 5A are cool but have gotten very pricey
sorry to eat into the waveguide thread
RJ & Eliptoflex
RJ compared to Karlsons and Elliptoflex, and even BBC slots?
like the BBC slot there was very little cavity volume in front of the RJ's speaker
RJ15 - input Z with EV SP15's control fully clockwise
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Response ~3ft in-room-on-axis EV SP15 (control fully clockwise)
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
RJ 15 cabinet's aperture
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Last edited:
Some enclosure concepts traffic in resonances (Karlson, tapped horns) and so depending on the driver, you can get awful or good results. Today, I steer clear of anything that that is tuned.
Some hifi concepts are exemplary in some aspect or another but might be a "meat grinder" in other aspects... ask any ESL devotee (like me). A Karlson makes for very lively, wood-instrument sound and you might like that so much you couldn't care less about other aspects like extended bass, dispersion, or whatever. I say you are entitled to feel that way even if you believe your speaker would be unpopular in mass audience listening tests.
Some hifi concepts are exemplary in some aspect or another but might be a "meat grinder" in other aspects... ask any ESL devotee (like me). A Karlson makes for very lively, wood-instrument sound and you might like that so much you couldn't care less about other aspects like extended bass, dispersion, or whatever. I say you are entitled to feel that way even if you believe your speaker would be unpopular in mass audience listening tests.
Could some of you address the T15 as a bass cabinet and comment on Metro's analysis of the concept?
Wave Guiding
The fact that a horn guides waves is incidental to the duality of its principal functions as a projector of acoustic energy and as that of a acoustic impedance transformer. Inherent in these roles, is the trade-off to be made between pattern control and efficiency; not one to the exclusion of the other.
One example of the use of the phrase "Acoustic Waveguide", in connection with loudspeaker systems, was made by Olson in 1963. It was not, however, a characterization of an Acoustic Horn.
The standard definition of the term "Acoustical Waveguide", and its associated design regimen, are well known to the acoustical engineering community. Let the mess and confusion remain with the novitiates.
Regards,
WHG
Title: Unitized Stereophonic Loudspeaker with Acoustically Augmented Separation of the Sound Sources
Author: Harry F. Olson
Affiliation: RCA Laboratories, Princeton, NJ
Publication(1): AES-P, No. 291, Cnv. 15, (Oct-1963)
URL(1): AES E-Library: Unitized Stereophonic Loudspeaker with Acoustically Augmented Separation of the Sound Sources
E-Library(1): (CD aes7) /pp5768/pp6310/0266.pd
Publication(2): AES-J, Vol. 12, No. 1, p. 40 (Jan-1964)
URL(2): AES E-Library: Unitized Stereophonic Loudspeaker with Acoustically Augmented Separation of the Sound Sources
E-Library(3): (CD aes2) /jrnl5367/1964/6505.pdf
Abstract(1): A unitized stereophonic loudspeaker has been developed with the following features and characteristics:
Abstract(2): A single cabinet of small dimensions; loudspeaker mechanisms mounted in the ends of the cabinet which increase the effective distance between the virtual sound sources of the loudspeakers by a distance of twice the diameter of the loudspeakers as compared to mounting the loudspeakers in the front of the cabinet; acoustic waveguides which direct the sound radiations from the end-mounted loudspeakers in a forward direction.
The fact that a horn guides waves is incidental to the duality of its principal functions as a projector of acoustic energy and as that of a acoustic impedance transformer. Inherent in these roles, is the trade-off to be made between pattern control and efficiency; not one to the exclusion of the other.
One example of the use of the phrase "Acoustic Waveguide", in connection with loudspeaker systems, was made by Olson in 1963. It was not, however, a characterization of an Acoustic Horn.
The standard definition of the term "Acoustical Waveguide", and its associated design regimen, are well known to the acoustical engineering community. Let the mess and confusion remain with the novitiates.
Regards,
WHG
Title: Unitized Stereophonic Loudspeaker with Acoustically Augmented Separation of the Sound Sources
Author: Harry F. Olson
Affiliation: RCA Laboratories, Princeton, NJ
Publication(1): AES-P, No. 291, Cnv. 15, (Oct-1963)
URL(1): AES E-Library: Unitized Stereophonic Loudspeaker with Acoustically Augmented Separation of the Sound Sources
E-Library(1): (CD aes7) /pp5768/pp6310/0266.pd
Publication(2): AES-J, Vol. 12, No. 1, p. 40 (Jan-1964)
URL(2): AES E-Library: Unitized Stereophonic Loudspeaker with Acoustically Augmented Separation of the Sound Sources
E-Library(3): (CD aes2) /jrnl5367/1964/6505.pdf
Abstract(1): A unitized stereophonic loudspeaker has been developed with the following features and characteristics:
Abstract(2): A single cabinet of small dimensions; loudspeaker mechanisms mounted in the ends of the cabinet which increase the effective distance between the virtual sound sources of the loudspeakers by a distance of twice the diameter of the loudspeakers as compared to mounting the loudspeakers in the front of the cabinet; acoustic waveguides which direct the sound radiations from the end-mounted loudspeakers in a forward direction.
Attachments
Enclosures like the Karlson have their own character and are a whole lot of fun to play around with different drivers. I would love to try an RJ sometime.
The Karlson might not do everything as it was advertised, nor would I ever expect it to, but it does work as a "coupler" IMHO. The fact that cone motion stay quite low for high SPL's makes for a very clean sound. I EQ'ed some peaks and dips on mine, but not 100% as not to lose all of the character.
IG
The Karlson might not do everything as it was advertised, nor would I ever expect it to, but it does work as a "coupler" IMHO. The fact that cone motion stay quite low for high SPL's makes for a very clean sound. I EQ'ed some peaks and dips on mine, but not 100% as not to lose all of the character.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
IG
Last edited:
By this statement Dave S implies that he has never heard one. I suspect that by the same reasoning that he reckons that SET are absolutely the pits too.
I suspect he never listens to music and only listens to the system. Such are the ways of those who are afflicted with measuritis.
There are plenty of systems that look "fabulous" on paper yet sound horrible in real life but hey they cannot be horrible because the measurements tell me something else.
A sine test does not tell anything about intermodulation, transient response, dynamics. Neither does a simple impedance test. A sound system is a synergy of the different components.
Same thing that the scientists reckon that the bumblebee cannot fly either.
If you are a true scientist then I would think that you would first verify the test results for yourself before relying on hearsay and someone else's interpretation.
Since you have never ever build one or tested one we can safely ignore your "hearsay knowledge".
Have a nice day.
Edit: PS: IF (as you state) it was a bass reflex then changing the port size would make a tremendous difference in test results, clearly visible in impedance curve etc. However no such things happen, now that's a bit strange isn't it? It makes the rest of your arguments really look believeable (NOT!).
Last edited:
PPS
I always thought that scientists give references made by impartial third parties....
Hearing names as Klipsch and Toole? Are those impartial third parties? Can you really expect a (competitor) speaker manufacturer say: "Well, this Karlson box is better than what we are making?" No they'll do anything to diss a competitor's product.
Not the behaviour of a scientist and even less credibility of the argument imho....
I always thought that scientists give references made by impartial third parties....
Hearing names as Klipsch and Toole? Are those impartial third parties? Can you really expect a (competitor) speaker manufacturer say: "Well, this Karlson box is better than what we are making?" No they'll do anything to diss a competitor's product.
Not the behaviour of a scientist and even less credibility of the argument imho....
Last edited:
well what a rukus
im frankly ashamed of the lot of you.
i asked a simple question (maybe a very dumb one), about the horn/acoustic lens/whatever. ffs whats in a name anyway! i certainly didnt expect Karlsons to come up.
since im interested in the HF loading of a tweeter HORN/whatever, karlson couplers K-horns and the like are simply irrelevant. I dont wish to be rude, but if no-one has anything relevant to post in reply to my question, and just insist on troll festing all over the thread, then dont post.
2nd thoughts
PLanet10/some other mod: please close this thread, ill seek some answers outside of kindergarten
making tracks
im frankly ashamed of the lot of you.
i asked a simple question (maybe a very dumb one), about the horn/acoustic lens/whatever. ffs whats in a name anyway! i certainly didnt expect Karlsons to come up.
since im interested in the HF loading of a tweeter HORN/whatever, karlson couplers K-horns and the like are simply irrelevant. I dont wish to be rude, but if no-one has anything relevant to post in reply to my question, and just insist on troll festing all over the thread, then dont post.
2nd thoughts
PLanet10/some other mod: please close this thread, ill seek some answers outside of kindergarten
making tracksBlame Game
I posted relevant references for you to study. I take exception to your comments as you applied them to me as well. Apparently you set up the venue for the trolling you are now complaining about. The shame is on you as well.
WHG
im frankly ashamed of the lot of you.
I dont wish to be rude, but if no-one has anything relevant to post in reply to my question, and just insist on troll festing all over the thread, then dont post.
2nd thoughts
PLanet10/some other mod: please close this thread, ill seek some answers outside of kindergarten
I posted relevant references for you to study. I take exception to your comments as you applied them to me as well. Apparently you set up the venue for the trolling you are now complaining about. The shame is on you as well.
WHG
Khorns work great to load a tweeter. The Transylvania tube is one of my favorite "wave guides" - probably the best I have for nearfield.
Your question was answered several times. Maybe you need to reread the responses a few times. Also why would anybody care whether it's called a horn or a waveguide? They both describe the same thing unless the marketing department wants to try and be different or "new"
WHG- This whole thread was a troll.
Your question was answered several times. Maybe you need to reread the responses a few times. Also why would anybody care whether it's called a horn or a waveguide? They both describe the same thing unless the marketing department wants to try and be different or "new"
WHG- This whole thread was a troll.
With due respect: You mentioned waveguide which is as far as I know something coined for the first time for audio use by the late John Karlson or his salesman, Wayne Green.
Then someone starts without any explanation to diss the Karlson, well what do you expect? I would expect the least that this is being backed up by solid first hand research which he obviously has not done. I have no time for those .... (fill in the blank).
By the way, the Karlson waveguides work fine.
Last edited:
I believe Wayne Green may have been out of the Karlson Associates picture sometime in 1957 or 58. The 1965 X15 featured the slotted pipe. Transylvania Power Company had a nice product. I use B&C compression drivers on "The Tube"
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Gentlemen. Keep it civil or the thread will be closed. Points have been given for disrespectful behavior.
this thread was not a troll in the first instance. I was not inviting a debate about the merits of k-couplers and the like. im sure theres a thread about those already, which i could read, should i be interested. the k-tubes looked a little interesting, although if i were limiting dispersion, i would want to control the directivity in both the vertiucal and horizontal plane, and i think im correct in the assumption that the k-tube will not do this. so Karlsons aout of the question sorry lads, no offence. but to me, loading a woofer with a Karlson, is a bit too similar to just mounting the woofer in a cello........
moving on:
I, to put it clearer than clear, know NOTHING(from personal experiance) about horns really. sure i can find the math and calc a exp, or hyp curvature. Thats easy.
I also was unsure if this type of horn could benefit from a foam plug, or other type. my only real question is how id expect this horn-guide to perform, say compared to the 'horns' i am more familiar with. these being HF too, either bullets hornloaded, or 'wide dispersion' type, or the louvred types.
its up to ppl if they want to contribute something relevant, than by all means do, and thank you to those who did at the beginning of the thread. oh and thanks freddi for the tube info, it helped make my decision.
i didnt post this question to create agro, might just as well close it Pano.
peace.
moving on:
I, to put it clearer than clear, know NOTHING(from personal experiance) about horns really. sure i can find the math and calc a exp, or hyp curvature. Thats easy.
I also was unsure if this type of horn could benefit from a foam plug, or other type. my only real question is how id expect this horn-guide to perform, say compared to the 'horns' i am more familiar with. these being HF too, either bullets hornloaded, or 'wide dispersion' type, or the louvred types.
its up to ppl if they want to contribute something relevant, than by all means do, and thank you to those who did at the beginning of the thread. oh and thanks freddi for the tube info, it helped make my decision.
i didnt post this question to create agro, might just as well close it Pano.
peace.
this was the original post, with the daft horn or waveguide question removed. im now aware the horn is for pro use, and i was mainly interested in finding out if anyone out there has used it, and what their opinions are.
ta ta
- Status
- Not open for further replies.